Controlled Round Feed, thoughts...

Status
Not open for further replies.
I select and shot I take would be enough.
Click to expand...

Probably so. The cheapest rifles can do the job most of the time, and the most expensive customs can fail. Almost any rifle can out shoot the shooter under field conditions; so it falls under luck, and design.

We have no control over luck, so if we do the best with design we keep the odds more in our favor!
 
Just curious. What do you think the disadvantages are?
__________________
Click to expand...

As taylor noted, some CRF extractors won't snap over a chambered round- thus that gun MUST feed from the magazine. Because of this, you get one less round in the gun ...... you can't load the magazine and push the rounds down, advance the both enough to hold them down, drop one in the pipe, close the bolt .......

CRF extractors that will snap over a chambered round may well snap over the rim going the other way (going rearward), as well- so much for 100%reliability....

They cost more to make, being more complicated ..... and are impossible to completely disassemble with out a gunsmith ......

There are probably other reasons...... anybody else think of them?

Uncle Sugar picked the Remington 700/40X over the Model 70 ..... I'm sure he had his reasons, as well ......
 
I have to RESPECTFULLY disagree with JIMBO on the extractor that will jump the rim of an extracting case. In 50 years of working with guns I have never heard of this. That doent mean it hasnt happened but I have never heard of it or experenced it. I have worked on guns so locked up that a mallet was required to open the bolt and then had to drive the bolt rearward to extract the heavily overloaded case. Never had the extractor fail on long non rotating extractors. As for Uncle Sam choosing the 700, all I can say is to read an article written by LAND, the father of modern sniping, written for American Rifleman a few years ago. It explains the government requirements, expectations, and experences. It was a real eye opener. It has been too long to remember the details but well worth the read.
 
Here is something about a famous Marine

In 1967 Hathcock set the record for the longest combat kill. He used a M2 Browning machine gun mounting a telescopic sight at a range of 2,500 yd (2,286 m), taking down a single Vietcong guerilla.[21] This record was broken only in 2002, by Canadian snipers from the 3rd Bn. PPCLI during the War in Afghanistan. Hathcock was one of several individuals to utilize the M2 Browning machine gun in the sniping role. This success led to the adoption of the .50 BMG cartridge as a viable sniper round. Sniper rifles have since been designed around and chambered in this caliber since the 1970s. The Canadian Army snipers from the PPCLI also used the .50 BMG round in their record-breaking shots.

Springfield Armory designed a highly accurized version of their M1A Supermatch rifle with a McMillan Stock and match grade barrel and dubbed it the "M-25 White Feather". The rifle had a likeness of Hathcock's signature and his "white feather logo" marked on the receiver.[22]

Turner Saddlery similarly honored Hathcock by producing a line of leather rifle slings based on his design. The slings are embossed with Hathcock's signature.[23]

On March 9, 2007 the rifle and pistol complex at Marine Corps Air Station Miramar was officially renamed the Carlos Hathcock Range Complex.[24]
[edit] Books

Hathcock was the subject of a number of books including:

Chandler, Roy F. (1997). White feather: Carlos Hathcock USMC scout sniper : an authorized biographical memoir (1997 ed.). Iron Brigade Armory Publishing. ISBN 978-1-885633-09-5. - Total pages: 277
Henderson, Charles (2001). Marine Sniper: 93 Confirmed Kills (2001 ed.). Berkley Books. ISBN 978-0-425-18165-2. - Total pages: 315
Henderson, Charles W. (2003). Silent Warrior (2003 ed.). Berkley Books. ISBN 978-0-425-18864-4. - Total pages: 336
Sasser, Charles; Roberts, Craig (1990). One Shot, One Kill (1990 ed.). Pocket Books. ISBN 978-0-671-68219-4. - Total pages: 288

[edit] Weaponry

Hathcock generally used the standard sniper rifle: the Winchester Model 70 .30-06 caliber rifle with the standard 8-power Unertl scope. On some occasions, however, he used a different weapon: the M2 Browning machine gun, on which he mounted a 10X Unertl scope, using a bracket of his own design.[4] Hathcock made a number of kills with this weapon in excess of 1,000 yards, including his record for the longest confirmed kill at 2,500 yards.[4][25] Hathcock carried a Colt M1911A1 pistol as a sidearm.[9].
 
You guys were talking about an extractor jumping the Rim.
I know that on my 1903A3 can be single fed and the Mauser style extractor will jump the Rim and the bolt will close.

On my Yugo 24 47 It must feed from the Magazine, if you try to drop a cartridge in the chamber the bolt wont close.

I dont know if this qualifies or helps in any way, but both Rifles feed and extract with precision, I would trust either one If I was face to Face with a Vicious Animal.
 
Many times there are misconseptions resulting from limited experence. Many push feed guns are great performers, some are clunkers. The 700 has a sterling reputation for accuracy and long service. One misconception is the tools reguired to disassemble a mauser, Springfield 1903, Winchester model 70. The only tool required to completely disassemble and reassemble the bolt, firing pin, extactor, ejector, bolt stop, trigger, magazine box, and floorplate is a single screwdriver. As I understand it the 700 requires quite a number of tools to accomplish the same disassembly. Am I correct? I am not sure, but have seen a special tools to remove the firing pin and extractor. The ejector requires additional tool. The trigger system is a nightmare if a gunsmith I talked to is telling the truth. Then there is the 336 Marlin, a push feed gun that can be mostly disassembled with a single screwdriver. Nothing ever built wont fail. Some fail easier than others. While the question of the op was controled feed reliability, another factor to consider in reliable performence is the ejector. I have always has a preference to the fixed blade ejector. Has anyone had ejector failures?
 
OLD ROPER, you are correct about Hathcock. My memory fails me as I get older, but there was another sniper in Vietnam with a higher body count, 114 IIRC. His name escapes me now but if I recall correctly he used a Remington 700, standard equipment at the time during his tour of duty.
 
30-30remchester, I left Da Nang in 1965 and you could see the changes being made and I'm sure had the ground troops had a choice in weapons vs what was chosen for them things may of been different.
 
Old Roper

Its my understanding that the ground troops wanted the M14 but were forced to use the M16.
At the Start of the Vietnam War, 1903A4s were the Sniper Rifle, but the scopes fogged up in the high humidity, The Government started buying high quality comercial hunting rifles for sniper rifles.
That was before my time but I have read up on it.
I guess the Government stuck with the 700 after Winchester lowered its standards after 1964. Anyhow the Remington 700 has served well, It was still in use when I was in the Marnine Corps in the early 90s. It is still in use today, but I hear that the cartdige is about to be changed from the 7.62X51 Nato to something else, but Im not sure what.
 
Uncle Sugar picked the Remington 700/40X over the Model 70 ..... I'm sure he had his reasons, as well ......
Click to expand...

YES HE DID, THE GOVERNMENT ALWAYS GOES LOW BIDDER ... IT IS THE COST and less time to make more, NOT IF IT IS WORTHY IN THE LAND OF THE FED!!!
 
a higher body count, 114 IIRC. His name escapes me now but if I recall correctly he used a Remington 700, standard equipment at the time during his tour of duty.
Click to expand...

A sniper rifle is not necessarily a good defensive rifle for real world use ... two different missions!

Push feed rifles are more accurate in most cases!

A charging bear or lion doesn't need five minute per shot groups, it needs one or two that works now, groups do not matter!
 
I could not agree with WildBill45 more!

I have a friend who is a Brown Bear Guide on Admiralty Island,,,he has a friend also a Guide whose client wounded a brown bear on Admiralty,,,there were three of them the Guide, the Client and an Assistant Guide. The Guide insisted the Assistant Guide stay with the Client and he the Guide went into the brush to find the brown bear alone.

He found the brown bear or the brown bear found him and he killed it with one shot from his .416 rifle,,,unfortunately the bear did not know it was a killing shot and continued coming while the Guides rifle a push feed jammed on the try for a second shot,,,whether it jammed from extraction or ejection or feeding I do not know...The Assistant Guide heard the Guides screams as he was being mauled and ran through the brush and shot the bear killing it.

The Guide after getting out of a long recovery and stay in the hospital went back to guiding and bought a controlled round feed bolt action heavy rifle and then thought better of it and went out and bought a second rifle a double rifle.

I could be wrong but I believe most of the Professional Hunters in Africa use a controlled round feed bolt action rifle or a double rifle,,,there must be a reason for it.

If I were going back into combat give me a machine gun and a radio to call in fire missions...

If I were hunting non dangerous game or dangerous game with a Guide backing me up give me any old push feed rifle that is accurate.

If I were hunting dangerous game on my own with no backup or if I were a Guide protecting my Client only a Controlled Round Feed Bolt Action Rifle or a Double Rifle would do.
 
Not all controlled feed actions are created the same.
The Springfield is controlled feed FROM THE MAGAZINE, but the extractor is beveled on front and has enough clearance to snap over a pushed single round because it was designed to do so, being equipped with a cutoff to encourage single shot firing until the enemy charged. Riight.

The '98 Mauser was designed not only with controlled feed out of the magazine but with a cam cut that seated the extractor tighter against the bolt head and cartridge rim as it was pulled back to eject. Do the knockoffs from Springfield and Winchester? I don't remember and my rifles of those makes are out of reach.

If the US Army hadn't gotten sidetracked with the Norwegian Experiment, we might have had a plain Mauser and things would be different now. Or a Remington Lee.
 
Looks to me that for those few who might have to play Dodgem with nasty critters and maybe have to reload and shoot while in an awkward position, the CRF would definitely be preferred.

Since I've never had that problem, and likely never will, CRF or PF is a matter of indifference to me. I've used both types in several examples of each, and have never had a problem.

But I reckon that folks oughta do whatever they think is right...
 
Since I've spent the last 42+ hrs. in a Dodge City Motel waiting for weather I've had a ton of time to research this. What I can find by most PH's on other forums that talk about CRF vs. other types of rifles is the problem with short stroking a rifle bolt. To some of the hunters this meant not fully pulling the bolt to the rear and picking up the next round from the magazine.

To the PH's it meant not fully closing the bolt fully after reloading from the initial shot, before trying to work a third round and it caused two primary problems. Push feeds will either drop the unfired cartridge on top of the other rounds in the magazine causing it to try to double feed. The other was the unfired cartridge remaining in the chamber and the next round being jammed into the back of the cartridge and the hunter unable to close the bolt. So the CRF was preferred not for controlling the round from the magazine but for the extraction and not leaving the round sitting on top of the others.

There were several other issues the PH's touched on as well that they thought were more important than what kind or rifle you used. They had hunters showing up with several different kinds of ammunition that all shot different POI. Not shooting the rifle at all before the hunting trip. Showing up with expensive double rifles and not remembering that it had two triggers one for each barrel.

Plus then there are things that could happen that even with a CRF action isn't going to save your butt. Murphy is always in play and things could happen like a case head separation even with new cases. Other things like dud/squib or overpressure loads that can happen with factory ammunition as well as hand loads. That could either leave you with an obstructed bore or an action you need a hammer and a 2x4 to open. A perfectly maintained rifle that the firing pin breaks after the first shot or failure of mechanical nature, it has all happened to people and hopefully before the hunt took place and at the range.

To me and to put it into terms I'm familiar with is to view CRF as a control to mitigate risk. People are going to get hurt and/or die hunting dangerous game or else it wouldn't be called that. While you can do things to mitigate that risk such as practice handling drills with your rifle, having a CRF/double rifle, and using quality components to put everything together it is still at risk when the first shot doesn't make the animal dead when they have a tendency to fight back.
 
One Major CRF failure to extract story!`

I bought some custom .458 Lott loads, 500 grain, solid brass bullets, loaded by a famous custom loader. I set up my Oehler 35P to chrono the load, and when I fired the first shot IT WAS A DANDY! It read 2700 FPS Plus, a Weatherby .460 load for god's sake! It felt like it too!

The pressure was so high it discolored the action on my CZ 550 Lott!!! I had to use a piece of wood to beat the round back out of the chamber ... not good during a lion charge...


The CZ stood up to the shot after the round was beat out, and the primer fell out onto the ground. The stress was terrible on case, gun, action and me.

The Custom loader to remain unknown, did reload the rounds with Star Brass instead of the original brand; they worked as they should have, no problems.

THIS IS WHY YOU NEVER, AND I MEAN NEVER, GO INTO THE FIELD OF BATTLE--ANIMAL OR MAN--WITHOUT TESTING NEW LOADS AND THE RIFLE WITH THOSE LOADS, EVEN IF YOU HAVE ORDERED THEM BEFORE!!!

Brass, powder, and other things change, and you must know beforehand that there is no man made problem. No rifle is impervious to man made problems, and this is why I like the Mauser style action. With all that high pressure, the extractor being beaten with wood to open and get the round out, STILL PULLED IT OUT, AND WAS GOOD TO GO AFTER!

THAT WAS A SHOT I WILL REMEMBER. THE GOOD THING IS, IT WORKED, IF I HIT WHAT I WAS AIMING AT IT WOULD HAVE HAD AN ATTITUDE CHANGE.
 
"Plus then there are things that could happen that even with a CRF action isn't going to save your butt. Murphy is always in play and things could happen like a case head separation even with new cases. Other things like dud/squib or overpressure loads that can happen with factory ammunition as well as hand loads. That could either leave you with an obstructed bore or an action you need a hammer and a 2x4 to open. A perfectly maintained rifle that the firing pin breaks after the first shot or failure of mechanical nature, it has all happened to people and hopefully before the hunt took place and at the range."
Quote Taylorce1

"The pressure was so high it discolored the action on my CZ 550 Lott!!! I had to use a piece of wood to beat the round back out of the chamber ... not good during a lion charge..." Quote WildBill45

This is an excellent arguement that the Double Rifle is the best rifle for dangerous game,,,the almost assured availability of a life saving second shot. And even if one barrel or side goes bad you still have the other barrel or side to shoot as a single shot where if a bolt action controlled round feed or push feed rifle goes bad you have no rifle at all.

Then there is the age old arguement of the Professional Hunters that a Sidelock Double Rifle with sidelocks that can more easily be taken off, cleaned and possibly repaired in the field is superior to a boxlock double rifle. The sidelock versus boxlock action is another debate that rages on.

So I suppose the first choice in a dangerous game rifle would be a sidelock double rifle, the second choice would be a boxlock double rifle, the third choice would be a controlled round feed bolt action rifle and the last choice would be a push feed bolt action rifle.

For armchair dangerous game hunters and commandos such as myself with nothing more dangerous than a hot cup of coffee and a computer to attack me,,,my push feed rifles will work just fine!
 
While the Rem. 700 action was selected for the M40 military sniper rifle, it wasn't because it was superior to the Win. 70 one. Note that Winchester was in dire financial straits back then and the USA military folks didn't want to chance it going under. So they picked the flimsy, cantankerous Remington over the stiff, reliable Winchester.

Too bad the current Remington 700's aren't as good as those made a few decades ago. Their current accuracy's not what it used to be.
 
Not 'good' machinery. The bolt for the stamped out-economy person.
images
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top