Controlled vs push feed

I remember there was a fight between Remington and Winchester over the strongest extractor. There was a test done and the push feed extractor won. Really does not mean anything, because those two were always doing some kind of hokey advertising back in their day. I don't feel one way or the other about the type of extractor in the action. I guess if you had to nit-pick, the claw extractor has more going for it. It will even pick up the wrong cartridge and allow it to be fired, the push feed not so much. I have seen this many times over the years. As for blown primers, I have seen the result of quite a few (Myself included) and never saw an extractor blown off from it. There is usually something else involved once pieces start to depart your rifle.
 
i guess thats why they used those yard long bayonets in ww-1. i have seen german ww-2 98 mauser extractors with broken off tips in a gunsmiths shop that the gunsmith replaced and he said he beveled the tips on many a 98 mauser to single feed on guns he had sporterized in the crazy cheap mausers years. eastbank.
 
i don't really think that there is a definite winner. i believe that both certainly have advantages.

for example on my model 70 the case head is not completely enclosed where as on my Remington and browning push feed they are.

the only gripe i have ever had with a push feed is that browning x-bolt i have in 300 wsm. it just does not like to feed if the bolt is cycled quickly. CRF would be nice but is it necessary? No! I just don't try to cycle the bolt fast. aside from that particular gun i have never had a problem with a push feed. and i believe you would be hard pressed to actually make a determination that one were better than the other. although personal preference keeps me buying m77 and m70 rifles
 
Some Mauser 98's extractors slid over chambered case rims easier than others. My brothers Obendorf (BYF code) M98 did not. The M98 german commercial set-triggered sporter did so with extra force. Nor did my DWM M1909's. I don't think the M98 design intended rounds be chambered any way besides from the magazine. The M1903A3 sporter I had would let its extractor slide over a chambered case rim but only with a hard slam of the bolt into battery.
Click to expand...

Most military Mauser actions only allow feed from the magazine, this was to prevent double feeding. To make the Mauser extractor snap over the cartridge the bottom edge of the extractor has to be rounded.




This Pre 64 extractor has a wide bevel to snap over the cartridge rim.




The M1903 was designed to be fired single shot, the cut off prevented feed from the magazine, so the extractor has an aggressive bevel.


Something that the M98 action had, that I have not found on the M70, Arisaka, or the M1903, and perhaps is unique to the M98 action, is the angled section on the extractor that fits into the extractor groove. This angle mates with a corresponding angled section in the bolt and this has the effect of keeping the extractor from jumping off the rim of a tight cartridge. Lesser actions have a square ended extractor groove and I have had extractors jump off tight cartridges in the M70 and in the M1903. To get the case out I had to find a cleaning rod.










 
I remember there was a fight between Remington and Winchester over the strongest extractor. There was a test done and the push feed extractor won.
Click to expand...

Not exactly.

A brass rod was machined to have an extractor groove on each end, and an M70 bolt and Rem700 bolt were attached to each end, and then they played tug of war between the two.

The brass failed before either extractor failed, with steel being stronger than brass and all that shouldn't be too surprising to anyone.

Either way, the cartridge brass will fail before the extractor in either case. Walter Johnson, as recorded by Captstick, noted that a pitted chamber of a 318 Westley Richards m98 mauser would stick cases, but the camming action of extraction would rip the unstuck part of the brass away from the stuck part. Walter eventually replaced the 318 Westley Richards barrel with the barrel pulled from a 9.3x62 Mauser that had been fire damaged and got lucky on the headspace. At the time the 9.3.62 was much more common in Africa than the 318 Westley Richards, although that still holds true today.

The lesson learned here is that "it will always pull out something!" doesn't mean that you'll be able to load another round and continue the hunt, no matter if you use CRF or PF.

Jimro
 
It is hard to say which extractor is more durable. All extractors are thin pieces of steel and will in time, wear out.

I am on the third barrel of a M1a, same extractor. A shooting bud was on his 6th M1a barrel, the receiver developed a crack, but the extractor was still good. The M1a extractor is a push feed design.

I have heard of AR15 extractors wearing out, but never seen one. I helped replace a M70 push feed extractor on the firing line, if you have an extra extractor, it is simple to replace a M70 extractor. Just be aware of the spring loaded plunger that will jump out!

I heard the M700 was more delicate and wore out sooner than the M70 push feed extractor, but I never saw one fail.

I am of the opinion that the Mauser type claw is the longest lasting type, but it requires you to feed from the magazine. If you require the thing to bend to the right to clear the rim of a cartridge, by placing a cartridge in the chamber, then it will break in time. Happened to me back in the 80's. I loaded a snap cap into a M1903. The M1903 was designed to be fed single shot, supposed to be able to place a round on top, or in the chamber, and close the bolt. I did that with a snap cap and my extractor broke. I guess it had snapped over too many rounds. That was the last I ever fed a round in a controlled round feed that way. Even with my pre 64's, all rounds are pressed into the magazine and fed from the magazine. It is just easier on the extractor.
 
Push feed jammed action.

Sauer 202 Forest Takedown

uYeSAT.jpg
 
Last edited:
As big a fan as I am of CRF.... I can make my winchesters and mauser jam like that too if I manipulate the bolt "properly"
 
PF extractors do break now and then, but they get stuck a LOT more often then they break. Plunger ejectors can also stick.
How do I know?
I am a gunsmith with over 4 decades of experience.

I have never had to repair a Mauser type extractor except for a very few that had been "bubba'ed" by people trying to open them up for a magnum and not knowing how.

I have never had to repair a Mauser fixed ejector. No Pre 64 Winchesters either. Or Springfield 1903s. I have had to replace a few 1917 Enfield springs bolt stop/ejector springs, but I have not had to repair an extractor on one of them either. And no Ruger M77 MK2s.
Not one in 46 years.

How many push feed action repairs have I done in the same time period on extractors and ejectors?

Maybe 200.
I did one this morning in fact. On a Mossburg MVP 223

So the idea that "there is no clear winner" is a statement from someone that was not at the game.
 
Twice now in my career I've had plunger ejectors fail on me, once with an issued M4 and once with an AR-15. Thankfully only in training and competition (thankfully the AR-15 was shooting in an F class match so it was single load anyways).

The M4 was fixed by flushing out the brass/carbon buildup with CLP and geting it moving again. The AR-15 failure was fixed by replacing the ejector spring which had split into five pieces.

As far as extractors, I've had cases fail to extract in M4s and M16s, but whether that was really an ammo related failure is debatable.

If I were going to hunt dangerous game that could kill me, I would pick up one of my Mausers. However when deploying into war zones where there are other humans seeking to actively kill me, I have no problems using an M4, despite a few failures to extract/eject reliably over the course of my career (getting closer and closer to two decades every day :P ).

Jimro
 
I have examples of both CRF and push feed rifles. Personally I prefer the CRF, but I cannot say one is better than the other. Just different.

I have had the button ejectors fail to eject before. I haven't had an ejection problem with the CRF ejecting ever. It is wholly dependent upon the speed of the bolt and how hard the case head hits the ejector.
 
I always found PF's to be more accurate than CRF's.
Click to expand...

That doesn't surprise me, everyone's experience is unique.

But every rifle is also unique, so there are plenty of CRF actions out there that were built into match winning target rifles that beat out the PF competition.

Sometimes it is the indian, and not the arrow.

Jimro
 
I don't think there's any two centerfire actions that's been used winning matches and setting records as often as the Springfield M1903A3 and Winchester 70.

Any action that's repeatable in its parts fit and function from shot to shot can produce best accuracy if the stuff attached to and shot in it has the same properties.
 
Last edited:
"I heard the M700 was more delicate and wore out sooner than the M70 push feed extractor, but I never saw one fail."

Could be. I had one wear out on a Remington M660 which uses the same type extractor as the M700. Dunno how many rounds went through that rifle but it was definitely a bunch. I'm thinking well over 3,000.
Paul B.
 
"I always found PF's to be more accurate than CRF's."

I'm not sure I can agree with that My custom Mauser .35 Whelen is quite accurate with probaly half or more of the groups running right at half inch.
I have a custom 30-06 on n FN Mauser that's good for .75" on a regular basis. My fairly new to me .280 Rem. on a 1909 Argentine is proving to be good for less than MOA so far. With that said, I also have two Winchester M70 PF, a .270 Win. and .300 Win. Mag. that groups in the same range as the CF rifles. However, my Remington M700's don't do anywhere near that well, a 1981 BDL only good for 1.25" and I've been playing with it since 1981. The two M700 Classics so far don't do any better. Accuracy is more than adequate for any hunting I'll ever to for the rest of my life.
Paul B.
 
If i were to buy a rifle now, I'd prefer it be a CRF. That being said, my go to long distance shooter(M70) is a push feed. I've had no issues with it and i would take that thing anywhere. I trust it completely.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top