Most semi auto rifles are in essence straight pulls, with the pull supplied by the gas bleed. Disconnect the gas, and voila! In some countries where semi autos are prohibited, the same gun w/o gas tube or piston is OK.
Let's talk straight pull bolt actions
- Thread starter DannyLandrum
- Start date
- Status
As Loonwulf says above, the key is practice, practice, practice. Due to the loading drill and more limited magazines, two individuals equally trained on their platform, will be able to perform roughly similarly. For those criticizing the poor Ruk-Zuk, m95, remember that the original issue cartridge was an 8x50r which is pretty much extinct. From all accounts, this round did not have the vicious recoil of the 8x56 that came after. Second, most of the original WWI rifles were long musket type barrels that lessened recoil even more in 8x50r. The combination in chopping the barrel/stock and upgrading the 8x50r to the 8x56r gave this rifle its bad reputation. The Lebel m35 has a similar bad reputation for vicious recoil as the French simply chopped the barrels, mags, and stocks to make carbines from long rifles.
Using Slip 2000 to lubricate the internal workings of the bolt after a thorough cleansing. you can achieve a pretty good speed with an M95 but it does still take a lot more strength to manipulate than Swiss straight pulls. The takedown on the bolt though is pretty complicated as with the Swiss and Ross rifles (which are notorious in being able to screw up in reassembly). I've found for range use keeping a straight pull bolt well oiled makes for a better experience in manipulating and shooting a straight pull.
For those interested in speed shooting the Lee Enfield,
http://www.enfield-rifles.com/the-leeenfield-mad-minute_topic7892.html
Using Slip 2000 to lubricate the internal workings of the bolt after a thorough cleansing. you can achieve a pretty good speed with an M95 but it does still take a lot more strength to manipulate than Swiss straight pulls. The takedown on the bolt though is pretty complicated as with the Swiss and Ross rifles (which are notorious in being able to screw up in reassembly). I've found for range use keeping a straight pull bolt well oiled makes for a better experience in manipulating and shooting a straight pull.
For those interested in speed shooting the Lee Enfield,
http://www.enfield-rifles.com/the-leeenfield-mad-minute_topic7892.html
Random 8
Member
I've fired 2 different straight pulls... K31 and Gew 1911, as well as 2 different turnbolts...M96 and M39 in CMP competitions involving sitting and prone rapid strings. I've found both Swiss rifles to be significantly faster to get accurate follow up shots with. The advantage isn't so much speed of the bolt throw, it is maintaining position and alignment of sights in proximity of target. These 2 factors are greatly improved vs a conventional turnbolt, allowing a faster recovery time between shots. The turned down bolt handles on the Springfield, Enfield (SMLE and P14/17), and K98 were attempts to improve on recovery vs. the continental style straight bolt which is correctly worked with the palm rather than a finger/thumb grasp. It does improve recovery somewhat, but not as much as the straight pull. I find when firing a rapid string with the K-31, my NPOA is preserved, after cycling the action and settling back into the sights, very minor if any correction is required, similar to firing a gas gun. Not so after rocking a bolt up, back, forward and down. Significant correction required.
As for why a straight pull is not available commercially at an affordable price, they are complicated and expensive to produce. Also, I don't think they'd sell well to the American market, giving companies little incentive to attempt this feat of engineering and marketing. I would, however, not be surprised to see a specialty PRS rifle come out on a straight pull action. I could see the benefits of the breed for that game.
As for why a straight pull is not available commercially at an affordable price, they are complicated and expensive to produce. Also, I don't think they'd sell well to the American market, giving companies little incentive to attempt this feat of engineering and marketing. I would, however, not be surprised to see a specialty PRS rifle come out on a straight pull action. I could see the benefits of the breed for that game.
JONWILL
Member
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2017
- Messages
- 938
The 6mm Lee was way ahead of its time. With a 70 grain bullet is was around the same ballistics as the 5.56x45. The metallurgy at the time wasn't conducive to barrel longevity
Bannermans used to convert them to 257 Roberts which was much cheaper and easier to find than 6mm Lee.
deadin
Member
Talking about semi-auto being a version of a straight pull and pump action being another, check out the Standard Arms Model G which was both.... (It had some design problems so never caught on, but it was a very early gas operated semi auto.)
In measuring speed, one has to also account for the length of the action. A swedish mauser has a long action as do the U.S. service rifles using .30-06. One of the advantages of both the Swiss GP 1911 and the old British .303 is that these rounds are a bit shorter which allows for quicker manipulation of the bolt. The French MAS 36, while being a bolt action, is also very fast in action as was the No. 4, Mk. 1. However, both used peep sights for fine shots but the No. 4 also had a battle sight built into a micrometer sight which also gave both rifles longer sight lines than carbines from other countries. In addition, the old British No. 1, Mk. 3 had a bit better sights than even the Swiss in allowing L to R windage adjustments to the rear sight without a tool (they dropped this feature mid-WWI in the No. 1 Mk. 3*. I give the Swiss overall style points in consistent quality construction and finish, however the Brits did it where it mattered and did not where it didn't. Then we get into difference in stripper clips, magazines, operation of the safety, relative recoil differences between rounds, resistance to mud,sand, crud, etc.
All of the design package for a particular rifle has to be considered and expert military riflemen from the various nations probably did not differ that much on speed and accuracy in battle operation once trained on their particular rifle's quirks.
Which leads to generally speaking, someone who concentrates on superior handling of one rifle action does a bit better than someone who uses multiple rifle actions. That is the basis for the old saw--beware of the man with one gun as he probably knows how to use it extremely well.
All of the design package for a particular rifle has to be considered and expert military riflemen from the various nations probably did not differ that much on speed and accuracy in battle operation once trained on their particular rifle's quirks.
Which leads to generally speaking, someone who concentrates on superior handling of one rifle action does a bit better than someone who uses multiple rifle actions. That is the basis for the old saw--beware of the man with one gun as he probably knows how to use it extremely well.
Jessesky
Member
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2016
- Messages
- 981
I’ve had a few straight pulls, k31, 1896, m95. I love them from a mechanical standpoint. Cost to manufacture is prohibitive. Mauser made the 1996 and they regularly sell around $600. Practicality wise, there are timing issues and I don’t think there’s any advantage until you get up to the higher end ones.
I just looked at a couple of Blazer R8 videos, and that action is a very clever design. The switch barrel feature was probably designed for those countries that limit gun owner ship by number of receivers. With that action you could own one receiver, but multiple calibers, by changing barrels.
However, I expect the cost of the thing is what made it unpopular in the US. You can look at any of the historic straight pulls, and they are too expensive to manufacture and be cost competitive in today's market.
This may stir thing up, but whatever speed advantage a soldier might have had with a straight pull, it was a complicated weapon compared to a turnbolt, I doubt it was any cheaper to build, and, the vast majority of infantry men were not trained to a level where they could take advantage of its speed, or even, trained to the level where they could engage at distance, and hit, with any rifle. You know, I can't remember seeing any combat footage where the soldier reloaded his bolt gun on his shoulder. Every film I have seen, the soldier drops his rifle to his waist, and then manipulates the action. If shooting skills deteriorated this much, I can't see how a straight pull has any fire power advantage over a turnbolt.
However, I expect the cost of the thing is what made it unpopular in the US. You can look at any of the historic straight pulls, and they are too expensive to manufacture and be cost competitive in today's market.
This may stir thing up, but whatever speed advantage a soldier might have had with a straight pull, it was a complicated weapon compared to a turnbolt, I doubt it was any cheaper to build, and, the vast majority of infantry men were not trained to a level where they could take advantage of its speed, or even, trained to the level where they could engage at distance, and hit, with any rifle. You know, I can't remember seeing any combat footage where the soldier reloaded his bolt gun on his shoulder. Every film I have seen, the soldier drops his rifle to his waist, and then manipulates the action. If shooting skills deteriorated this much, I can't see how a straight pull has any fire power advantage over a turnbolt.
True!
can't stick 33s on a Blaser. Now a Blazer....
I could see spending 5-10k on a spiffy straight pull rifle if I had it.
Last edited:
deadin
Member
I would opine that the Blaser and the Mauser 1996 might fall into the same category as the Lee Navy in that the action isn't 100% linear. (The bolt handle pivots to unlock the action....)
LRDGCO
member
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2018
- Messages
- 689
The reason that the straight pull bolt action is not widely produced is that it is a technology solution to a regulatory problem not (yet) widescale in the world's largest sporting arms market. There is also the matter of style of hunting/shooting.
The Blaser straight pull and Mauser 1996 are designed for battue or driven hunting, a style very rare in North America, in which game is driven onto shooters in fixed stations, such that multiple hogs or deer will run past a shooter and require rapid fire. Were that style of hunt common in the US, the Modern Sporting Rifle with its semi-automatic action, would be ideally suited. Since regulation in much of the rest of the world precludes semi-automatic actions for civilian sporting arms, the straight pull bolt action offers a technological solution to this regulatory problem.
Another obvious answer to the regulatory problem and need for rapid fire in battue hunts would be a lever action.
The Blaser straight pull and Mauser 1996 are designed for battue or driven hunting, a style very rare in North America, in which game is driven onto shooters in fixed stations, such that multiple hogs or deer will run past a shooter and require rapid fire. Were that style of hunt common in the US, the Modern Sporting Rifle with its semi-automatic action, would be ideally suited. Since regulation in much of the rest of the world precludes semi-automatic actions for civilian sporting arms, the straight pull bolt action offers a technological solution to this regulatory problem.
Another obvious answer to the regulatory problem and need for rapid fire in battue hunts would be a lever action.
Very correct,
The amount of mis information that is floating around and puked up on these boards is just amazing, I would say for every nugget of correct info, there is a 5 pack of pure garbage.
As you said the 6mm was WAY ahead of its time...it was a real fast mover. The navy wanted something to deal with the new motor torpedo boats that are coming on the scene...something with enough zip to punch through the thin armor on those boats. It also was a very flat shooting cartridge, read some of the accounts of the marines in china around this time during the Boxer uprising.
Straight pull rifles are going to be faster then any turn bolt, there is less motion, all other things being equal. They are also more expensive to just make all the way around....and really just not worth the added expense for the little gain they give you.
None for me, thanks. I don't see the point, not when I can buy a faster semi-auto for $1000. Or, sacrifice maybe 1 or 2 seconds during the followup shot by getting a good conventional turnbolt for even less that will shoot as well or better than the Blaser..
While I think straight pull bolt actions are interesting, in my opinion they are a complicated and expensive answer to a problem that doesn't really exist anymore, at least not in the U.S. Straight pulls may have offered some slight advantage in the age of the bolt action battle rifle but the advent of auto loaders made the idea militarily obsolete. In the hunting field the slight advantage generally isn't needed and if it is there are other faster, cheaper options....
I agree with LRDGCO that there is probably much more of a market for straight pulls in Europe with their generally more restrictive gun laws regarding semi-autos and less of a tradition of pumps and levers.
Jessesky
Member
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2016
- Messages
- 981
True, but the motion is linear more or less, and the Blaser is arguably the most popular and well known modern straight pull rifle. I’d say it has to fit into that category
PWC
Member
Only straight pulls mfg'd today that I know of are the smallbore biathlon rifles. Not really strong but faaasssttt
FL-NC
Member
I fired a blaser in 338 LM suppressed a few times that an allied unit was using overseas. Very nice & accurate rifle, it just seemed weird not turning the bolt. I guess I could get used to it if it were my standard issue and I trained with it a while.
Jim Watson
Member
I am totally ignorant on the topic.
theotherwaldo
Member
Many years ago I converted a couple of bolt action shotguns to straight-pull by bobbing the bolt and cutting it down to a stud that engaged a sleeve/bolt cover (similar to those on an Arisaka Type 38, but with a slanted bolt handle cut-out for leverage).
Once I got that to work I riveted on an operating rod that led forward to a pump grip.
This worked pretty well.
My attempt to install these actions into a bullpup-style stock, however... .
Anyway, the first part of the conversion should work fine for most bolt-action rifles.
Just roll your own.
Once I got that to work I riveted on an operating rod that led forward to a pump grip.
This worked pretty well.
My attempt to install these actions into a bullpup-style stock, however... .
Anyway, the first part of the conversion should work fine for most bolt-action rifles.
Just roll your own.
Joshua M. Smith
Member
Can't speak for Alexander a but the action requires significant force to operate and most of these rifles were shortened into carbines. In addition these were also converted to a more powerful round, the 8x56r, during the 1930s and recoil is brutal. Trigger pull is pretty bad too.
Coal Dragger
member
The R93 had a reputation for trouble with over pressure loads since the expanding collect locking lugs engaged the integral barrel extension at a 45 degree angle. So in a few instances supposedly they slipped.
The new R8 addressed that issue and lockup as at a 90 degree angle and the action is a bit larger. When considering the amount of steel used for lock up comprising 360 degrees around the barrel extension lock up should be very secure.
I don’t see how the R8 action is a gimmick, it’s been around for awhile now and I’ve had the chance to handle a few. If I were a more dedicated hunter I’d buy one and sell off my other hunting rifles. Once you get a few barrels the overall cost isn’t as horrendously high compared to buying several complete high end rifles.
Who really wants to change a barrel and re-sight in every time they want to shoot a different cartridge? I recall hearing that the ability to change barrels, which has long been a more popular idea in Europe, is driven more by their gun laws and licensing than by practicality.
- Status
