I'm old to rifles, but new to the newer Rugers (the CRF ones, 1999 vintage). Am I wrong to expect, during feeding, the mag-to-extractor exchange to be exactly like the pre-64 model 70 exchange? Thus allowing one to avoid the short-stroking of the action, etc.

Thanks...

Seems about the same to me. I think the new Rugers are a little better at this than the last couple new M70s I shot.

I think the feedramp is a bit longer on the 77, thus the claw doesn't fully engage the case until a bit farther forward on the bolt stroke. Maybe it is just that my pre-64 model 70s are so much smoother...

The old M70s are definitely smoother. M77s hang on to the cartridge ok though, at least in my experience.

I'm really just trying to learn about this CRF
thing, and anything i've written in the past
hasn't sturred up anyone with some facts/opions
to beat me over the head with.
As far as I know it's old hat, going back to the
early mausers?
A true CF starts immediatly the bolt starts moving the cart.?
A short stroke will then likely eject your cartridge?
The first CF's wouldn't allow the extractor to ride over the rim when in the chamber?
Why the rush to CF, were there problems with
push feed we just found out about?
All genuine questions, no barrow to push.
John L.

The first Mauser turn-bolt rifles were push feed, dating back to the 1860's. Mauser saw that the design was not foolproof, and by 1893 had deveoped the controlled feed, eventually with a self-locking extractor.

It wasn't until the major militaries stopped using turnbolt rifles that most arms manufactures turned to the inexpensive push feeds as a way to promote civilian sales.

A proper CRF simply means two things:

1. The cartridges are constantly "controlled" by at least two opposing surfaces. Follower, rails, bolt face, extractor, chamber. As soon as a cartridge leaves the control of a set of surfaces, it must instantly be under the control of other surfaces. No loose cartridges flopping about the breech.

2. You must not be able to double-feed the chamber. When a cartridge is being pushed all the way forward, you must not be able to access the next cartridge if you pull the bolt all the way to the rear.

Then the Ruger is not a true CRF as there is a brief part of the feed stroke where it is neither in the control of the mag or firmly in the grip of the claw.

quote:

Originally posted by 9.3x62:
I'm old to rifles, but new to the newer Rugers (the CRF ones, 1999 vintage). Am I wrong to expect, during feeding, the mag-to-extractor exchange to be exactly like the pre-64 model 70 exchange? Thus allowing one to avoid the short-stroking of the action, etc. Thanks...

Yes. The new Ruger should feed just like a '98 Mauser or an 03 Springfield.....

I've seen some of the Rugers that don't CRF all the way, and they acted this way only with cartridges loaded on the left side of the magazine. Some will work like a true CRF. I also have a CZ that won't catch the left cartridge with the extractor until it's about halfway in. My .416 Ruger works CRF all the way.

Thanks KurtC.
Now anyone, any disadvantages to Cont.feed.
I have owned a Springfield 03 and a 96 Swedish Mauser, which may have been CRF, others wern't
and vertually all the others were reliable.
But I didn't think to try them upside down or such.
JL

All bolt actions are reliable when operated properly.

CRF was initially a military design to ensure the rifle would operate reliably even when the shooter was doing everything wrong. It was created in a time period when many troops did not even recieve their rifles until they were on the front line. BRM might be 15 minutes at best. ARM usually involved pop-up, shoot-back targets.

I can think of several disadvantages to CRF in the modern hunting era:

1. In order to function properly, a CRF action must be fine tuned to the specific cartridge. This requires knowledge and skill, which is expensive.

2. Without a lot of hand polishing, a CRF action can be rough on brass. Most serious shooters like to reuse their brass, and don't appreciate the extra marks in what are often expensive cases.

quote:

Originally posted by 9.3x62:
I'm old to rifles, but new to the newer Rugers (the CRF ones, 1999 vintage). Am I wrong to expect, during feeding, the mag-to-extractor exchange to be exactly like the pre-64 model 70 exchange? Thus allowing one to avoid the short-stroking of the action, etc.

Thanks...

My Ruger M77 MK-II works as follows: I push the bolt forward, and almost immediately the case's rim slides between the extractor and the bolt's face.

However, when I bought this rifle in 1992 (or so), it was not a true CRF action. It had the claw (extractor), but the bolt was a "push-feed." The bolt had a rim all the way around the edge of the bolt's face, and the case would be centered inside this rim as it was pushed forward.

Shortly after, I sent the rifle to Ruger, and they did some work on the feeding rails, and right above the magazine. They also replaced the bolt with a CRF one, but returned the push-feed bolt, too.