How Important Is Controlled Round Feed For Dangerous Game?

M

Milehi

New member
I have found a good deal on a used Remington 700 in a .416 Rem Mag that I would like to take to Africa in a couple of years from now and on a brown bear hunt next fall. My question is how important is a controlled round feed(ie:Winchester,Ruger,Mauser)bolt action compared to a non-controlled round feed like the Remington when dealing with dangerous game? I've also heard that the weakest part on a Remington action is the extractor, though I've never had a failure nor have any of my shooting buddies. A friend said if he was going to use a Remington on dangerous game he would have a gunsmith install a Sako extractor......comments???
Yeah Yeah.... I know the traditional purest will say use a double rifle on dangerous game, but if I buy a double rifle I'll be so broke I can't afford to go to Africa
 
The benefit of controlled feed is greatly exaggerated. Look at it this way the US military hunt the most dangerous game on earth with Rem. Rifles . When I designed the Marine M40A1 we considered replacing the extractor but when we researched extractor failure we found it so incidental it wasn't worth considering . The problem with installing the a M16 or Sako extractor is when you blow a primmer it turns to shrapnel
 
Sorry Gale, but I repectfully disagree, the Remington used to hunt the world's most dangerous game is likely used at very long range.
Four legged dangerous game are more likely to be met at considerably closer ranges, especially in Africa, they move a mite faster too.
Now I admit that I've never had extracting problems with my Rem 788, even though I had to hammer (nylon hammer) the bolt to get out some hotly loaded cartridge cases, the bolt handle bent, but the extractor held on.

However, with dangerous game, you don't want Murphy's Law intervening, so I try to eliminate any possible weak link.
IMHO controlled extraction is important when hunting dangerous game. I also like the psychological value of a big controlling claw extractor.
 
Tabing the claw extractor is not the advantage or controlled feed. The claim to fame is the round won't fall out of the action as the bolt pushes it forward. Have you ever had that happen? In 50 years I haven't but I never laid the rifle on it's side to load it. I have had more Mauser and Mod 70s have extractor trouble than I have Remingtons. Also why panic you have a guide that is prepared to save you're a-if you get in trouble
 
I have a bit different understanding of the CRF feature.

I do not think that is enourmously advantageous, but I like having it. I see no down side, so it's my choice.

Ross Seyfried has backed off on the issue also. He was a CRF diehard and seems to have mellowed a bit.

The problem that I have witnessed with push feeds is folks short stroking the bolt. That results in a dandy double feed.

It's interesting to note that Jeff Cooper waffles on the issue also. His heavys have CRF, but the rest are a mixture.

Milehi - If you can get the 700 at a good price, I'd grab it. 416 is a great cartridge and if you train a bit (get Cooper's book Art of the Rifle) you'll do fine.

Gale - after my military career, I have no trust in anything that the military recommends. These are the same folks that bought the M16, ammo with the wrong powder, cotton uniforms for the Artic, boots that can't be resoled, uniforms that shrank, amphibious vehicles that can't swim, rations that you can't heat up, bivvy bags that leak by design (!) and other assorted blunders.

Remember - a Camel is a horse designed to military specs.

Giz

------------------
"I don't make enough money to buy cheap stuff" - Mark Manning
 
Speaking of controlled rounds, what's the challenge in shooting such a large animal at such a close range, in a controlled environment, with a professional guide saving your butt?? I love to hunt, but would feel like I was being about as sportsmanlike shooting large game in Africa on a contrived hunt as I would in setting up my rifle at the Kentucky Derby.

At any rate, I'd think that Gale's opinion would be worth at least as much as anybody else's on this board, when rifle design is concerned.

------------------
Shoot to kill; they'll stop when they're dead!
 
Not sure where you hunted in Africa Walter, but the hunts I've had were not contrived. I guess if you hunt herbivores exclusively it may seem that a guide with a rifle is not needed.

Hunt a predator and things look very different.

The challenge part is being in the same time zone as a lion or buff.

Giz
 
CRF is a selling point mostly. The push feeds work fine if you learn to work the bolt with a full authoritative stroke under pressure. The mauser-type extractor leaves a considerable amount of the head of the cartridge unsupported and, in event of a case failure, can be fatal or injurious to your health.

------------------
Be mentally deliberate but muscularly fast. Aim for just above the belt buckle Wyatt Earp
45 ACP: Give 'em a new navel! BigG
 
CRF is a nice selling point.. and the "unsupported" case head is mostly myth.. most Dangerous game loads are relatively low pressure, and modern metalurgy has caught up with higher pressure cartridges.

Still, its HARD to find a reasonably priced .375, though i'm looking at a CZ 550 magnum with CRF.

I've read a LOT of guides saying a 375 is a bit light for buff, that a 416 or 458 is much better... other :"dangerous" game like lion and leopard could easily be taken with a 30-06, but the requirement for a 375 minumum remains in most countries. Take a rifle that can knock down a kudu a gemsbok a dukier AND a buffalo.. the most versatile rifle of all the 375.

good luck and happy hunting..

Dr.Rob
 
Well I guess I'll jump into this with both feet, probably putting them in my mouth, but what the hell.
If I were fortunate enoght to be able to hunt Africa, regardless of the game, I'd want controlled feed.
Let's look into the history of controlled feed a bit. I'm not 100% sure Paul Mauser was the inventor of CF, but he sure used it on a lot of rifles from the Model 93 to his best effort the Model 98. Why? Because he wanted to design the most "GOOF-PROOF" rifle that he could make for the military. You know, the grunt in the field. He was the one in combat. He was the one, liable to panic and short stroke his rifle, creating a jam that would, in all likelyhood, get him killed.
Yes, the CF extractor can give problems. The only one I've seen is when they try to chamber a round without feeding it through the magazine.
The sniper will usually try to evade a combat situation so CF is not as important.
As to the Remington extractor? Well after around 5,000 some odd rounds, the extractor on my Remington 660 wore out and had to be replaced.
I use both kinds of rifles, but I believe that if I were in an area that had dangerous game, CF would be my first choice.
Paul B.
 
you could always buy a barret 50 and head to the weight room(a lot).
I don't imagine the Rem 700 would be so bad but the bolt for the 416 has gotta be pretty long, you to make sure you stroke the bolt all the way back.
I agree with the purists about the double rifle, get one where one chamber doesn't have an ejector and if you need another round while you are trying to replace the one you fired just slam it back shut.
i'd say make sure if you do go, you get the bolt of the rifle and the whole rifle for that matter clean because the rem 700 is said by some people to have problems with its extractor filling with brass shaving. I wonder if it would help to have any rough edges in the action smoothed out to take away anything might mess up sliding another round in the chamber. But, hell i could be wrong.
 
Milehi,

Several years ago I bought a Remington 700 Safari in 416 new. I liked both the rifle and the cartridge quite a lot. After a short while, it developed an extraction problem. A trip back to the custom shop revealed it had left the factory without the rivet in the head of the bolt that opposes the extractor. I forget the exact details surrounding the omission of the rivet, whether it was intended or not. At any rate, the rivet was installed and the rifle was returned to me with the assurance that it would fix the problem. The first shell chambered and fired failed to extract. Needless to say, this gun no longer resides in my collection. I have nothing against Remington, as a matter of fact, my three main centerfire bolt guns today are Remingtons. I only provide this information for your consideration. Perhaps I got the one M700 out of a 100,000 that had this problem, I don't know. I do know that I would not hunt dangerous game with a gun that I did not trust implicitly. I've always thought when it comes to function in this context, the question is: are you willing to bet your life? JMHO/HTH
 
To me the CF is a pain in the arse.
Especially when your at the range and want to just drop one in and fire. My gunsmith also swears when he has to work on them. As Gale said it ..."wasn't worth considering" and I even think it's worse.
YUP! I feel better!
 
This CRF vs Pushfeed point is currently being ridden to death on several forums and seems to come up fairly regularly. It's more than just advertising puffin, but it seems alien to many current enthusiasts who have grown up as shooters with the push feed action as the norm. Many who speak so highly of the push feeds seem to be more concerned about bench rest accuracy than reliability and truth be known, most of us don't really find ourselves in scenarios where rating that "reliability" quotient is a serious factor.

Personally, I don't and wouldn't own anything but a Mauser 98 derivative action in anything in calibre 338 up for sure. As for a rationale, I think the most eloquent and soundly based description of the value of the controlled feed Mauser 98 type action is found in several of Finn Aagaard's articles collected by the NRA in HUNTING RIFLES AND CARTRIDGES.

BTW, speaking of doubles as the ultimately reliable stopping rifle, if you've ever hunted in the rain forest, you might see the same advantages accruing to the well made bolt gun that such diverse authorities as WDM Bell and Tony Sanchez-Arino have pointed out.

Cooper's original specs for the "Scout Rifle", BTW, specified a CRF action, but this seemed to get lost when Steyr elected to actually produce the piece on their own actions. The good Reserve colonel's favoured and heavily publicized heavy bore IS, of course, based on a BRNO controlled feed action.

Most commercial 98 derivatives BTW are produced with beveled extractors to permit loading directly into the chamber though for my own use, I see no inconvenience at the bench in loading from the magazine which I do as a matter of course with my heavy bores.

I'd certainly place a lot of credence in anything Mr. McMillan has to say, but I've never heard anything good about after market extractors and push feeds. Have never seen any reason to try one since if it's important to you, start with the CRF action to begin with.

Surely agree with the basic point about not using the military bureaucracy's choice of gear as being the definative statement of quality or merit.

Another 2 kopeks or so for fuel........
 
Hooboy, lots of point missing.

Many of the early rifles, including the early Mausers, had push feed. Controlled feed didn't become necessary until the military forces of the world went to jacketed bullets with more or less of a point. When they did so, a potential problem was recognized.

If a cartridge was pushed partly into the chamber and the bolt not fully closed and locked, the extractor of a push feed rifle would not catch. If the bolt was then withdrawn and pushed forward to pick up another round, the point of that bullet could dig into the primer of the chambered round.

The result was rather unpleasant. So, the rifle designers tried to make sure that a partially chambered round would always be extracted if the bolt were drawn back, and "controlled feed" was the answer. Any other benefits are secondary.

Jim

P.S. This is why it is not a good idea to rework a push feed rifle to another caliber unless you know what you are doing. The cartridge guides are designed to keep the bullet point away from a primer, and messing with them could have unintended consequences.

JEK
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top