Why the lack of pump action rifles?

Reynolds357 speed loading is a quality not the purpose of a pump action rifle.. All firearms share the same purpose.. I do not shoot pumps because they are faster loading then other actions. I shoot them because in my experience they have the best qualities I look for in a rifle. The only drawback that I could agree with is the rattling forend. However this is such a minor thing it is easily adjusted to. Part of hunting for me is enjoying the overall experience... Pumps add to that experience not take from it..
 
The early series Remington pumps (14 /141) competed against the Winchester and Marlin lever guns. They had an ingenious tube magazine that allowed the safe use of pointed bullets.

Remington had a line of cartridges that were, essentially the rimless equal of the .25-35, .30-30, and .32 Special. Remington had a big one that Winchester didn't, the .35 Remington. However, Marlin put the .35 Rem in their rifle, and competed, successfully.

When Remington brought out its new pump rifle after WWII (the 760 series,), it was chambered in more modern calibers. The new generation of Remington pumps competed against the Rem 700 series bolt guns and 740 series semi autos, firing the same rounds. The pump lost.

Outside of areas where the semi auto is restricted by law, the pump ("Amish Machine gun") never sold well. They are good guns, but like everything, have their own quirks and drawbacks. Given the choice, most buyers will not choose the pump over the bolt or the semi auto.
 
While I have a couple of pumps I don't favor the type.

The M61 Winchester 22, while it's grooved for a scope and shoots ok is only just good enough. Same for the Ithaca Deerslayer I have.

If I were to replace them it would not be with a pump.
 
the rem760 was very popular over here in Sweden for the shooting sport of running deer

100 meters and a deer siluette on a track, I enve think it was an olympic event at some point?

this was way back in the day but most of the old rifles you see here have a 6,5x55 barrel but was it sold with that or was that a Swedish company that made them?
 
As a younger guy: I really don't understand the purpose of a pump rifle or it's place in the world of rifles.

It's slower than an autoloader...

It's heavier and has a worse trigger than a bolt gun...

and it's more awkward than a lever gun...

I remember handling one of these at Cabela's once and just thinking it was the strangest thing I had ever seen.

I guess my question is: why would you buy a Pump rifle over other options which perform better?
 
8 Mauser, that is why the pump has all but disappeared. In its early days, the pumps had a noted reliability advantage over the semi autos. That is no longer the case. Now you have the Super X, Fn-Far, Ar-10 which are all every bit as reliable as a pump. Probably more reliable in the case of the FN-Far and the AR-10.
 
For those who say the the pump is inferior to semi-autos, what about for the hunter or reloading who wants to shoot everything from a 168-grain bullet for deer or elk down to a 125-grain bullet for varmints from the same gun (a 308 or .30-60 for example). Can modern semi-autos would well with that wide a range of ammo?

I'm not trying to make any specific point. I genuinely don't know and am just asking for information.
 
Semi autos, of all types, will function with all standard bullet weights, provided the ammunition is loaded to the pressure curve proper for the rifle.
 
I started shooting with a 760 Wingmaster 20ga. When I was old enough to hunt with the club my Dad bought me a 7600 Game master 30-06. It made a lot of sense since I was used to the action. Its a shame because I never needed a second shot with the -06. But, if I did it would be quick.
When your used to pump you dont dip the barrel to work the action. To me I would rather have my trigger finger stay in position.
 
If you want to (and often, you do) there is a way to work every action type without taking the gun from your shoulder. Even single shots (although its is rather pointless with a break action).

Its a matter of the shooter, not the action type.

The same goes for dipping the barrel, etc.
 
"There was a company back in the early 1990's which built a short pump action rifle. I think it was named Wolf. But it failed in the marketplace due to high cost for what it was."

Timberwolf, I believe, made my IMI.


When I was still hunting in Pennsylvania in the 1980s pump rifles, as noted, were quite popular.

When I went to American Rifleman magazine in the early 1990s a Remington rep told me that Pennsylvania accounted for the lion's share of pump rifle sales, and that most of them were in .270.

When I worked for the newspaper in Pennsylvania we had a hunter's contest every year, and first prize was a Remington pump in .270.

At my hunting camp Remington pumps were well represented. A couple of guys even had Model 14s.
 
"I started shooting with a 760 Wingmaster 20ga."

I never knew Remington made their pump rifle in 20 gauge. :D



"When your used to pump you dont dip the barrel to work the action."

The entire concept of "dipping the barrel while working the action is kind of odd to me, because you're most likely to be bringing the muzzle down from recoil while working the action... Meaning that dipping the barrel would be, at worst, a null.
 
Just went to the Remington website...

The listed weight of a Remington 700 BDL (wood stock) in .30-06 is 7.375 pounds, or about 7 pounds 6 ounces.

The weight of a 7600 (wood stock) is an incredibly ponderous 7.5 pounds...

What a difference 2 ounces makes.

Granted, you could save about a pound if you went to a Model Seven in one of the short action cartridges...

Or, if you went with a 770 in .30-06, you can tack an extra pound on top of the 7600's weight...

Granted, you could go to another manufacturer and get a featherweight...

But the argument that pumps are a lot heavier naturally isn't really true unless you define some parameters.
 
"Remington had a big one that Winchester didn't, the .35 Remington."

Winchester did have a .35 caliber round -- the .35 WCF, which was chambered for the Model 1895 and introduced in 1903.

It was somewhat more powerful than the .35 Remington.

It is odd that Winchester never formalized the .35-.30 wildcat that sprang up to salvage shot-out barrels.
 
Pump action rifles are ugly too. Don't forget that. I know none here would admit to buying a firearm based on appearance, but I've been told that it happens once in a while.
 
Well, beauty is obviously in the eye of the beholder, but the Remington pump rifles don't look that very much different from that company's semi-autos. I think were you to take the forearms off both rifles it would be kind of hard to tell the difference between them.

Truth be told, the general lines for both are very similar to the Remington 700 series of rifles.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top