quote:

Originally posted by willmckee:
what i gather from olsens book, that was mausers original intent in changing the extractor design from the pre-'92 mausers. there was an issue of soldiers in battle causing jams with a double feed and controlled round feeding insured that if a round had been fed from the magazine, regardless of whether the firer completed the cycle, if he retracted the bolt the round was ejected. it was not so much - or at all - that he thought the earlier designs inadequate for extraction. and it's not hard to extrapolate that the same logic would apply to a DGR. but it doesn't mean that other extractor designs won't extract reliably - witness that pathetic excuse that remington has used successfully for 6 decades which apparently works just fine.

quote:

Originally posted by dsiteman:
Hello,
For single loading a CRF/Mauser/Springfield(Mauser) etc., simply insert in mag and shove it in the chamber. Can be done very quickly and no problem. However, single loading NOT from the magazine is not suggested. If you must, squeeze the long claw extractor, push in middle toward bolt body, the weapon can be single loaded smoothly and quietly.
As someone mentioned whether push feed or crf, shooter should become very familiar with the rifle in all respects and that will help eliminate any supposed "design flaws..." either real or imagined.
Favor Center!!
dsiteman

quote:

Originally posted by rugeruser:
I'm with JAL on this one - I've owned SMLE's, Ruger 77 with the tang safety, Rem700and 788, and now a 77MkII with the quasi CRF, CZ 527 and in my opinion, the CRF stuff is BS.

I've been shooting hunting for near 45 years, bit as a civvy and in teh military, and NEVER had a problem with push feed, even when used upside down (confuses the enemy/game).

If you get so bloody nervous that you double cycle and jam the rifle, I'd say you haven't done enough practice to know your rifle, and shouldn't be there in the first place!

JMHO

quote:

Whether or not the extractor of a M70 Classic in a WSM can be modified similarly, I don't know, but I would like to know

quote:

Originally posted by willmckee:
somewhere i actually stumbled across the crux of the matter of single loading a CRF NOT from the magazine, i.e the extractor snapping over the rim. i believe it was in somebody's comments in a book on the brevex. i'd always assumed had to do w/ the grind or bevel angle of the extractor itself - and in some cases probably does. but at least as described in this instance the problem was the r/h raceway was not machined w/ enough clearance to allow the extractor to spring out period in order TO snap over the ctg rim. have not checked any of my mausers as i really don't care; i always load from the magazine but someday i mean to get some shim stock and check for this.

quote:

Originally posted by wildcat junkie:

quote:

Originally posted by willmckee:
somewhere i actually stumbled across the crux of the matter of single loading a CRF NOT from the magazine, i.e the extractor snapping over the rim. i believe it was in somebody's comments in a book on the brevex. i'd always assumed had to do w/ the grind or bevel angle of the extractor itself - and in some cases probably does. but at least as described in this instance the problem was the r/h raceway was not machined w/ enough clearance to allow the extractor to spring out period in order TO snap over the ctg rim. have not checked any of my mausers as i really don't care; i always load from the magazine but someday i mean to get some shim stock and check for this.

I am definately not what you would call a "gunsmith" other than perhaps the "shadetree" type and I have been able to easily modify several M98s extractors to "snap over" the rim of a round in the chamber. And no I have never had one break after modifying thus. Beveling the face of the extractor to snap over the rim in no way weakens it as the maximum point of stress is @ the root (inside corner) of the claw, and that is not modified in any way.

I have never modified the "raceway" either.

A little common sense with this procedure goes a loooong way. I only bevel (and polish) the face enough to accomplise the desired result and never bevel the claw to a knife edge.

quote:

Originally posted by gixxer:
Having a Sako is like standing in the neighbor's front yard. You are no closer to getting in the front door with the Mauser, but you are not standing in your own front yard with the Remington.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike375:
I think there are a few generalisations that can be made about about CRF and PF.

PF is more reliable at getting the cartridge into the chamber. PF that is a vertical stack in line feed is the most reliable of all for getting a cartridge into a chamber.

CRF (when it is working) is good for cycling cartidges through the magazine as you don't need to turn the bolt down and "load" the rifle. Also CRF is good for having a round in the chamber with the bolt handle up.

CRF looks much nicer when cartridges are being cycled through the magazine and I think that carry somes points on an expensive custom rifle.

PF deal much better with ammo that has crappy case rims. In general, ammunition quality is more important for CRF to work. Case rims that are too thick or burred will stop CRF and extractor grooves on the case that are to deep will allow a CRF to just leave the case sitting on the follower when the case extracted, unless the bolt is pulled back quickly. Problems in these areas often manifest themselves when CRF is converted to another calibre.

I think on average a PF has stronger extracting power because the extractor is also trying to twist the case at the same time as pulling on the case. CRFs that have been poorly altered by gunsmiths so as to allow the extractor to easily go over the case rim for single loading and especially if combined with cases that have been loaded a few times are very inclined to simply jump over the case rim on a tight case.

CRF being double feed proof depends on the rifle. A lot of CRFs are not double feed proof because the cartridge is pushed to far forward in the magazine before the extractor has grabbed it.

The idea that PF is done for cheapness tends to be contradicted by the rifles that are most commonly sold. Sako, Weatherby, Sauer and Blaser for example are all more expensive than the CRFs are that generally purchased.

One last point, if we needed bigger extractor "bite area" on the case rim that would need to be done with PF. The amount of case rim that CRF can engage will always be limited because the case rim must slide up under the extractor.

This forum itself illustrates that CRFs are the rifles most likely to have feeding problems. Of course one of the problems is that CRF was originally meant for a very tapered case and with a small shoulder diameter. The very parallel cases add a problem to a CRF because of the angle the case rim must enter under the extractor.

From what I have observed, Rugers seem more reliable than the M70 CRFs when it comes to feeding.

Mike

quote:

Originally posted by Mike375:
But then you have to consider the 303 SMLE.

Mauser's design, as I mentioned was for a cartridge that was a long way in design from something like a 7mm Rem, 300 Win or 458 Lott.

Mike