Push Feed Bolt Actions

[elktrout]

It seems a little amusing that the discussion of Winchester Model 70 rifles brings such polarization between the proponents of the two extractor/bolt types. One camp says that their push feeds were/are great rifles and very reliable. The other camp rebuts that position and posits that the CRF action with claw extractor is the only type bolt action even worth consideration.

Yet, when I review various posts here and on other forums, no one seems to gripe that Remington, Browning, Savage, Weatherby, Sako, and others are all push feeds or predominately so.

A local gunsmith, who grew up in New Haven and used to wander through the factory as a kid, watching the Winchester craftsmen build rifles, told me that the push feed is the best Model 70, in his opinion.

Why do so many riflemen vilify the Winchester push feeds yet exonerate the push feeds from the other manufacturers?

 

[adelbridge]

Push feed symbolizes the cheapen ing of Winchester just like the 1964 Line In the sand.
In modern times it would be like the internal lock or M I M on certain revolvers or Coke I I

 

[Speedgoat]

Granted most of this took place before my time. But to this Winchester guy it's because we had our beloved claw, and then it was taken away from us for some 30-35 years and put the rifle with the rest of em. I do recognize that the pushfeeds were a good rifle, I just line my claw. I had one of their CRPF jobs and despise that style. Selling that 2 weeks ago to fund my M70 30-06 build was a joyous day. Pre 64 or the newer FN's are my cup of tea. Just like some other people like the 700's, A Bolts, etc...

 

[Kachok]

I have both and I really do like the CRF action. My CRF Winchester feels better and is vastly more accurate then my push feed, though I are pretty sure the extractor claw has nothing to do with that itself.
Admittedly I always have been a sucker for a Mauser 98 style action, and always will be.
BTW the Sako 85 is technically a CRF I think, not a push feed though it only "controls" the feed for the last half inch or so.
I do absolutely love my new FN Winchester 70 Featherweight, it rivals my Tikka for my favorite rifle, and that is the highest of complements coming from me.

 

[planetmobius]

Unless you are hunting dangerous game or hanging upside down from your tree stand, there is nothing wrong with push feeds. The afinity to CRF is largely psychological for most shooters. Like wanting that swiss army knife with the 20 blades even though you don't need 18 of them. Since the M70 once had CRF, it serves as a comparison for those that don't. In contrast, the 700 is Remington's flagship and it was never a CRF so the push feds represents the top of the line. I own a lot of rifles in both configurations and love some of my push feeds. My Remington 788's are among the most accurate and they are PF with rear bolt lugs. Interestingly, I own several Browning Safari's from the 50's and 60's. All have CRF except for the 375 H&H which is a dangerous game round. In addition, the Weatherby Mk V is a PF and designed for the most powerful sporting rounds around. Mauser based actions are great. But, if you are hunting deer or anything else in North America and run into someone bragging about their CFR. You are dealing with a gun snob pure and simple. Enjoy your PF rifles.

 

[Kachok]

Unless you are hunting dangerous game or hanging upside down from your tree stand, there is nothing wrong with push feeds. The afinity to CRF is largely psychological for most shooters.

True, I like Mauser actions because that is what I grew up shooting, grandpa had the most wonderful collection of every old military rifle you could imagine (300+ guns no kidding) I guess Mausers remind me of a simpler time, grandpa was the one who introduced me to the 6.5x55 I remember him telling me "See that real long skinny bullet, it's not big but it will go through anything." Thus far he has been right.
The 98 CRF action my not be the advantage it once was due to more exact modern ammo, but it has no glaring flaws either, and to this day is one of the strongest actions ever produced.

 

[joed]

It seems a little amusing that the discussion of Winchester Model 70 rifles brings such polarization between the proponents of the two extractor/bolt types. One camp says that their push feeds were/are great rifles and very reliable. The other camp rebuts that position and posits that the CRF action with claw extractor is the only type bolt action even worth consideration.

Yet, when I review various posts here and on other forums, no one seems to gripe that Remington, Browning, Savage, Weatherby, Sako, and others are all push feeds or predominately so.

A local gunsmith, who grew up in New Haven and used to wander through the factory as a kid, watching the Winchester craftsmen build rifles, told me that the push feed is the best Model 70, in his opinion.

Why do so many riflemen vilify the Winchester push feeds yet exonerate the push feeds from the other manufacturers?

Bingo, you hit the nail right on the head! Everyone makes push feed but not everyone makes CRF. Those that own CRF think they have the world, they don't. In my opinion it has been taught to them that CRF is superior.

I own both and prefer push feed.

 

[USSR]

I have both factory built and custom built Winchesters using both platforms. Doesn't make a dimes worth of difference in how the perform.

Don

 

[horsemen61]

I have used both and have no animosity to either style I do remember the first time I picked up a Mauser It was a sporterized k98 Mauser done the 50s and I fell in love right there.

 

[jmr40]

I'll say that I PREFER the CRF, but have PF rifles and don't feel terribly handicaped with them. Under NORMAL conditions PF is at least as good and might even feed slightly better.

But anybody who says PF is just as reliable as CRF simply has no clue as to how bolt rifles function. One of the biggest misconceptions is that CRF will feed better upside down or from odd angles. That's BS. A PF will FEED just as reliable as a CRF and do it from any angle just as reliably, maybe slighlty better. But feeding is not the issue. A CRF system is a far more durable and rugged system for extraction and ejection.

The way most people use their rifles this is simply never an issue. As long as quality, in spec ammo is used. And as long as the rifle is kept clean there will never be any difference. Most hunters take a clean rifle out of the safe, walk or ride their ATV to a tree stand and spend few hours sitting then go back home, clean their rifles and put it back in the safe.

Saying a PF is as rugged and reliable as CRF is like saying a Ford Explorer is as rugged and as depedable as a Military HumVee. The way most people drive the Explorer probably is just as good, but when pushed to limits most people never go to the Hummer clearly starts to show it is better.

Guys who hunt DG much prefer CRF, not because they feed better, but because the system is more rugged and is far likely to fail if the rifle has to function after being abused. No one plans on abusing their rifles, but many guys pack into remote areas where proper disassembly and cleaning is not possible. If the rifle falls out of a boat and has to be fished out of the mud it may be called on to stop a grizzly charge within seconds. I will assure you that a CRF rifle is much more likely to load and eject ammo when the action is covered in mud, sand, snow or ice than any PF.

I don't hunt DG. But I do packpack into remote areas and the bit of extra insurance a CRF rifle offers is good to have. And there is no downside. I may never need the CRF to make a difference. But I can buy a SS Ruger with CRF for less than a SS Savage with PF. I can buy a CRF Winchester for less than a comparable PF Remington. I can buy a CRF Kimber for less than half what comparable PF NULA rifle sells for. There is no difference in accuracy, so why spend more money for a PF that is less rugged.

 

[planetmobius]

Kachok, I really liked that story.

jmr40, John Taylor would disagree with you on PF vs CRF.

 

[Speedgoat]

Those that own CRF think they have the world, they don't. In my opinion it has been taught to them that CRF is superior. QUOTE]

I don't own the world? It's not superrior?

 

[twofifty]

jmr40 you certainly make a convincing argument that where the real advantage of CRF lies is in the ruggedness of the extractor.

I've seen a broken extractor on a friend's Rem M700 (in 223) and it certainly made me realize how useless a rifle is without an extractor...and how tiny the 700's extractor is. Not that the 700 has problems mind, in spite of its tiny extractor.

 

[HKGuns]

Unless you are hunting dangerous game or hanging upside down from your tree stand, there is nothing wrong with push feeds.

^This^ - There are plenty of push feed rifles being sold today from brands other than Winchester.

 

[Kachok]

^This^ - There are plenty of push feed rifles being sold today from brands other than Winchester.

??? The new Winchesters are not push feeds. My new one is very much a CRF. Or am I missing something?

 

[stubbicatt]

There are benefits and costs to each choice.

The other day I was looking at Remmy 700, something I haven't messed with in 20 years. The bolt was sloppy in the raceways and gritty. It sounded hollow to me. I compare that to a CRF CZ550, and *to me* the bolt is just more precise, less gritty, it just seems higher quality to me. 'Course I've shot it and cycled it a few times and greased the bolt ways and cleaned it each time it was fired, so who is to say.

To some people different characteristics suggest quality than they do to others. I'm sure happy we have such a variety to choose from today.

 

[MCgunner]

I have two Remingtons and a Savage, push feeders. I don't feel I can't hunt with 'em. One of the Remingtons shoots 1/2 MOA, the other 3/4 MOA and the Savage is a 1 MOA gun. They all seem to feed without jamming, but then, I'm usually vertical shooting them.

I do a lot of single shots from the bench, can just drop the round in without pushing it into the magazine. That's a bonus. I've owned a Mauser in 7x57, old Milsurp. I can see why the dangerous game folks like CRF. By dangerous game, i mean the big African 5, perhaps bears on Kodiak Island. I don't consider hogs that dangerous. I'm usually hunting 'em from a stand or box blind, anyway.

 

[HKGuns]

??? The new Winchesters are not push feeds. My new one is very much a CRF. Or am I missing something?

Winchester only recently returned to CRF and I'm not certain but am pretty sure they still produce push feed models as well. But that wasn't the point anyway....There are a lot of OTHER rifle makers who sell a lot of push feed systems. CRF has its disadvantages as well, so let's not pretend it is the be-all end-all of rifles.

 

[Kachok]

I think they went back to CRF back in 09 I kinna doubt there are a bunch of NIB pushfeeds 70s laying around after four years, but I could be wrong.

 

[R.W.Dale]

I really don't have a preferred extractor style.

But I do prefer the ruger77mkII action for a number of reasons part of wich is the difference in FEEL it has over push fed guns.

Ar15's are push feed and yet NOBODY claims that's one of the myriad of internet perceived problem with the platform.




posted via that mobile app with the sig lines everyone complains about

 

[Kachok]

You prefer the MkII over the Hawkeye?

 

[HOOfan_1]

There are benefits and costs to each choice.

The other day I was looking at Remmy 700, something I haven't messed with in 20 years. The bolt was sloppy in the raceways and gritty. It sounded hollow to me. I compare that to a CRF CZ550, and *to me* the bolt is just more precise, less gritty, it just seems higher quality to me. 'Course I've shot it and cycled it a few times and greased the bolt ways and cleaned it each time it was fired, so who is to say.

To some people different characteristics suggest quality than they do to others. I'm sure happy we have such a variety to choose from today.

I have a 40 year old Remington 700 and a 3 year old CZ 550...the Remington's action is MUCH smoother.

I think they went back to CRF back in 09 I kinna doubt there are a bunch of NIB pushfeeds 70s laying around after four years, but I could be wrong.

US Repeating Arms brought CRF back 21 years ago, in 1992

 

[Kachok]

I don't think anyone can buy the rights to controlled round feed, any patent on that must have expired 50 years ago at leased. Besides there are several kinds of CRF actions on the market the M98 is not the only one, just arguably the best one

 

[Kachok]

I shoot quite a bit more then the average Joe, and I have used CRF actions for some years and had exactly one round fail to properly feed or extract (think the extractor claw itself pushed the round into the chamber without latching on, easy fix), in that same time frame I have had at leased 20 feeding/extracting issues with my push feeds, granted a few of which I am sure were my fault somehow but some were certainly not. If I had to give the edge to one or the other for reliable function, well that is a no brainer, will the casual shooter/hunter ever know the difference......probably not.

 

[stubbicatt]

I have a 40 year old Remington 700 and a 3 year old CZ 550...the Remington's action is MUCH smoother.

Wow that's great Hoofan!

I have a 40 year old Mannlicher Schoenauer whose bolt feel is without a doubt the finest I ever experienced, and arguably the best bolt actioned receiver ever produced. It too is CRF-- just different from the Mauser claw type extractor.

I feel it likely that the feel of the Remmy I was toggling the other day would improve with use and lubrication.