The old crf vs prf debate....

[Fastrig]

Thanks Ray and now I am also pigheaded for revealing a TRUE STORY that they just refuse to accept. It happened and I am attacked just for revealing it. Ridiculous.

I don’t see where anyone has said your story about the attack isn’t true. However, some of your statements appeared to not hold water and objective and logical questions were posed. When that happened you got defensive and did just a little attacking yourself. You originally blamed the entire incident on PF rifles and how CF riles would have saved the day, then admitted it wasn’t a feed issue but rather a bolt failure. It certainly appears like any functioning rifle, with a functioning bolt, regardless of feed type, would have helped your friend.

Oh, and for the record, I’ve got a CF rifle I took to the range yesterday, and guess what, it’s not feeding properly, keeps hanging up when trying to cycle a new cartridge. The other rifle I took, my Mauser M12, which is a PF, worked flawlessly. So based on your assessment style I guess I should condemn all CF rifles as being inferior to PF rifles....as another poster said, that would be hogwash if I did.

 

[Scott CWO]

I don’t see where anyone has said your story about the attack isn’t true. However, some of your statements appeared to not hold water and objective and logical questions were posed. When that happened you got defensive and did just a little attacking yourself. You originally blamed the entire incident on PF rifles and how CF riles would have saved the day, then admitted it wasn’t a feed issue but rather a bolt failure. It certainly appears like any functioning rifle, with a functioning bolt, regardless of feed type, would have helped your friend.

Oh, and for the record, I’ve got a CF rifle I took to the range yesterday, and guess what, it’s not feeding properly, keeps hanging up when trying to cycle a new cartridge. The other rifle I took, my Mauser M12, which is a PF, worked flawlessly. So based on your assessment style I guess I should condemn all CF rifles as being inferior to PF rifles....as another poster said, that would be hogwash if I did.

Go ahead and use your PF rifles for DG. That’s your right. I have a different opinion. I stand behind my posts.

 

[Standard Velocity]

Any war historians here? Seems to me CRF Mausers have been used in battle for a very long time. Surely there are documented instances of failure somewhere.

The Rem 700 was a US sniper rifle for some time as well. Any chance of a documented failure there as well?

 

[Fastrig]

Any war historians here? Seems to me CRF Mausers have been used in battle for a very long time. Surely there are documented instances of failure somewhere.

The Rem 700 was a US sniper rifle for some time as well. Any chance of a documented failure there as well?

Sure there any number of articles on that out on the web somewhere; mechanical devises fail, nature of the beast. The rifles that fail the least, often those "over designed" for a given task, are the ones that most people then say are the best. There are problems with using reported failures though since what you really want to know is how many failures per X number that were manufactured. 10 failures out of 100 rifles is unacceptable, 10 failures out of 100,000 rifles is, as that's a very low percentage, though granted no one wants to be part of that 10.

 

[Fastrig]

Go ahead and use your PF rifles for DG. That’s your right. I have a different opinion. I stand behind my posts.

Wouldn't hesitate to use a quality PF rifle, a Blaser R8 for example, on a DG hunt. The operative word there is "quality", and that would apply to a CF rifle for the same kind of hunt. I also stand by my posts, and "opinion" is the correct word here. We can cordially agree to disagree.

 

[mark-hunter]

Question:
What were push feed rifles before ww2 used in Africa, in times when mauser legacy was created? Push feed rifles of that time in calibers like 9.3, 375 and up? Note, speaking only in pre-ww2 period?

 

[Standard Velocity]

 

[Standard Velocity]

 

[postoak]

Just out of curiosity, what was the first push-feed rifle and what was the first popular U.S. push-feed sporter?

When I was having what I first thought was a feeding problem with my Model 70, but turned out to be a user loading issue (maybe), I was watching some WWI training films and in the background were several soldiers practicing rapid fire shooting with their Springfields and I almost laughed when I stopped listening to the narration and looked at the action in the background and I noticed how much trouble one soldier was having getting his bolt to go forward.

 

[Major Khan]

Just out of curiosity, what was the first push-feed rifle and what was the first popular U.S. push-feed sporter?

When I was having what I first thought was a feeding problem with my Model 70, but turned out to be a user loading issue (maybe), I was watching some WWI training films and in the background were several soldiers practicing rapid fire shooting with their Springfields and I almost laughed when I stopped listening to the narration and looked at the action in the background and I noticed how much trouble one soldier was having getting his bolt to go forward.

Paul Mauser's very 1st rifles , manufactured prior to 1892 were all push feed designs . Birmingham Small Arms ( B.S.A) made the push feed action popular in 1958 , when they replaced their control round feed " Monarch " lime of bolt rifles , with their push feed " Majestic " line of bolt rifles .
In 1962 , the Remington Model 700 was introduced and I do believe that it was the very 1st POPULAR American push feed action rifle to be commercially manufactured .
However , some American custom rifle makers were building custom bolt rifles on B.S.A Majestic push feed actions as early as 1959 . I have personally seen 1 such rifle , built by an American company named " Chaplin Arms " .

 

[Major Khan]

Question:
What were push feed rifles before ww2 used in Africa, in times when mauser legacy was created? Push feed rifles of that time in calibers like 9.3, 375 and up? Note, speaking only in pre-ww2 period?

Based on my personal experience in the 1940s 1950s, 1960s and 1970s , I believe that the push feed concept really caught on after 1958 , Mark Hunter .
Paul Mauser's very 1st rifles , manufactured prior to 1892 were all push feed designs. But these designs were all quickly scrapped . Birmingham Small Arms ( B.S.A) made the push feed action popular in 1958 , when they replaced their control round feed " Monarch " lime of bolt rifles , with their push feed " Majestic " line of bolt rifles .
In 1962 , the Remington Model 700 was introduced and I do believe that it was the very 1st POPULAR American push feed action rifle to be commercially manufactured .
However , some American custom rifle makers were building custom bolt rifles on B.S.A Majestic push feed actions as early as 1959 . I have personally seen 1 such rifle , built by an American company named " Chaplin Arms " .

 

[Fastrig]

Major Khan, your knowledge base never ceases to amaze me...thanks for sharing!

 

[Major Khan]

An an interesting side note , I was looking at my journals today and I noticed some thing about the Remington Model 700 bolt rifles brought by my clients to India for shikar .
While , I have seen a few Remington Model 700 bolt rifles experience extraction issues in the field ( less than 5 specimens in total ) , it dawned upon me today that they were all chambered in either .375 Holland & Holland magnum or .458 Winchester magnum ( .416 Remington magnum did not exist yet during our time . )
I have NEVER personally seen any of the Remington Model 700 bolt rifles , chambered in 7 mm Remington magnum or .30-06 Springfield or .338 Winchester magnum experience ANY extraction issues , even in the heat of Rajasthan .

 

[Major Khan]

Major Khan, your knowledge base never ceases to amaze me...thanks for sharing!

Why thank you so much , Fastrig ! In all honesty , however I cannot claim to be knowledgeable . I merely happened to live and guide clients during that era ( 1961 to 1970 ) , and even during my youth ... I always had a fascination for the rifles ( and shot guns ) brought to India by my clients for shikar .

 

[Red Leg]

Wouldn't hesitate to use a quality PF rifle, a Blaser R8 for example, on a DG hunt. The operative word there is "quality", and that would apply to a CF rifle for the same kind of hunt. I also stand by my posts, and "opinion" is the correct word here. We can cordially agree to disagree.

The R8. My favorite buffalo rifle. And I have several other choices.

What is amusing to me about this ridiculous debate is where the double rifle fits into the discussion. I own several, and three times as many double shotguns. Many, many others have come and gone over the years. With the shotguns (the vast majority of extremely high quality), I have fired many tens of thousands of rounds and with the double rifles many thousands over the last four decades. I have had hammer springs break, ejector springs break, and even sears (doubling) and safeties misbehave. Yet no one would think of questioning the double's role as a dangerous game option. As I noted earlier, the only bolt action that ever failed me in the field was a custom .375 built on a Belgian mauser action. The bolt release had a nasty habit of turning the bolt loose during a fast reload in sandy conditions. Potentially embarrassing with something large and hairy inbound.

A lot of writers have opined about the superiority of CRF for dangerous game. They are largely parroting other writers. It is rare to find actual witness accounts where the poor tracker or PH were stomped because the client's PF rifle malfunctioned. But virtually all will solemnly evoke the presumed virtues of the CRF.

And there are some questionable CRF choices out there. Apparently enough CZ's need work before they can be used reliably, that a cottage industry has grown up around "fixing" them.

My suggestion is to get a quality rifle, scope it with a quality piece of glass, use quality ammunition, and shoot until it is second nature. The rest is so much blather.

 

[Ray B]

The Remington 700 introduced in 1962 was just a modification of the 721/722. The bolt face of all three are virtually identical. The 721/722/725 was designed for resumption of civilian market rifles following WWII. The previous Remington bolt actions were based on the 1917 enfield and marketed as Model 30, 30S and 720.

 

[Standard Velocity]

The R8. My favorite buffalo rifle. And I have several other choices.

What is amusing to me about this ridiculous debate is where the double rifle fits into the discussion. I own several, and three times as many double shotguns. Many, many others have come and gone over the years. With the shotguns (the vast majority of extremely high quality), I have fired many tens of thousands of rounds and with the double rifles many thousands over the last four decades. I have had hammer springs break, ejector springs break, and even sears (doubling) and safeties misbehave. Yet no one would think of questioning the double's role as a dangerous game option. As I noted earlier, the only bolt action that ever failed me in the field was a custom .375 built on a Belgian mauser action. The bolt release had a nasty habit of turning the bolt loose during a fast reload in sandy conditions. Potentially embarrassing with something large and hairy inbound.

A lot of writers have opined about the superiority of CRF for dangerous game. They are largely parroting other writers. It is rare to find actual witness accounts where the poor tracker or PH were stomped because the client's PF rifle malfunctioned. But virtually all will solemnly evoke the presumed virtues of the CRF.

And there are some questionable CRF choices out there. Apparently enough CZ's need work before they can be used reliably, that a cottage industry has grown up around "fixing" them.

My suggestion is to get a quality rifle, scope it with a quality piece of glass, use quality ammunition, and shoot until it is second nature. The rest is so much blather.

Doubles are fascinating to me but I still don’t know that much about them. The inertia trigger resets and barrel selector safeties on shotguns seem like futzy mechanisms to me. Have only really used cheap to mid priced doubles. The few high end doubles I’ve shot were quite a step up.

With double rifles you mention a few things that can go wrong. Depending on what type of double you have, they are basically two single shots correct? If one completely breaks you are left with a single shot right?

Though it would have slower lock time do you feel exposed hammer doubles are more reliable?

It would be nice to have a primer on double rifles to better understand what is reliable and what’s not. Do you know of a “Doubles for Dummies” book or article?

 

[Wyatt Smith]

Silly question, is the Lee Enfield a CRF? I can’t remember if it has an enclosed bolt head or not.

 

[Major Khan]

Silly question, is the Lee Enfield a CRF? I can’t remember if it has an enclosed bolt head or not.

It is very much a control round feed action , Master Smith.

 

[Rule 303]

@Rule 303 who are you to question my truthfulness on a public forum? I have provided most of the details of the attack. Due to an agreement with the manufacturer, my friend does not want me to name the specific PF rifle that failed. Together, my friend who was attacked and I have several decades of faithful guiding service in this industry and have served several terms as board members for outfitter-guide associations as well as being stakeholders and committee members for several game agencies and public land management agencies. I am one of the largest outfitters in the USA and I didn’t get there by telling lies or distorting situations. If you don’t like the FACT that my friend had a PF rifle fail on him at the most critical time so far in his career, get over it and move on. He is not telling lies and neither am I. My gosh, I also own a few PF rifles and I don’t hate them or I wouldn’t own them. IN MY OPINION, I prefer a CRF rifle for DG due to my experience, critical thinking skills and the experiences of others (like my friend) whom I trust. If you have drawn different conclusions through your experience or study, that’s just fine with me and I wish you well. Good day, Sir.

I question anybody who exhibited a blind bloody minded attitude and I don't give a damn who you are or what station in life you hold. Plenty of my bosses will attest to that. What on earth makes you think you are so special that you can tell a story, that you were not there to see and think it is exactly as told. As has been said the rifle being PF is irrelevant if it was a manufacturing fault but you can not see or acknowledge this. So I am more questioning your rationality and clear thinking abilities. You mention your Critical thinking skills, well sir I see no sign of these skills what so ever. We or at least I have not asked for the make, just exactly what part of the rifle/bolt failed and why it failed. To say it failed as it is PF actually tells us very little.

I use to prefer PF as posted but now sided with CRF for DG but this does not blind me to the faults of all, like good yourself appears to be. I suggest that this PF failure you talk about, without describing why it failed due to the push feed operation, is suspect. That is, it could of happened to a CRF with the same faults. So I suggest you get over that, acknowledge you have been carried away with a story you that was told to you not seen by you. You probably feel a great sense of loyalty to your mate, no shame in that, however I would advise caution taking every thing said by a mate as gospel. All have a tendency to change a story, not necessarily done consciously. The other thing is peoples recall of stressful events is very rarely accurate in detail, sometimes in major parts as well. Not done deliberately just the way the human mind works.