Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 11/11/2002 4:35:46 PM EDT
Kind of ignorant about bolt action rifles.Can you give me pros/cons on each?
Link Posted: 11/11/2002 5:20:38 PM EDT
Controled round feed is the old mauser type extrator where the round is cotroled while chambering ie you can half way chamber decide not to and eject the round the bolt holds the round used on pre64 winchesters some rugers and new classic winchesters preferredby DANGEROUS
game hunters along with doubles
push feed means just that you hafta tilt the rifle or reach in with you fingers when half way chambered
hope I got it for you
SEMPER FI
Link Posted: 11/11/2002 8:57:48 PM EDT
well said JPC...

BTW welcome aboard
Link Posted: 11/11/2002 9:03:51 PM EDT
To follow up a bit.
A controlled feed rifle has the round under control at all times. When the round is stripped from the magazine it is immediately caught and held by the extractor until the round is extracted and ejected. At no time is it free of control.

A push feed strips the round from the magazine, but the round is just loose in the action until it is pushed into the chamber when the extractor snaps over the rim. The only time the round is actually under control is after it's chambered.
Link Posted: 11/12/2002 6:56:28 AM EDT
Some controlled extractors (Mauser, Winchester) also have more steel in contact with the brass, so when extracting a stuck case you are more likely to pull the case out.
Link Posted: 11/12/2002 7:53:38 AM EDT
A friend told me controlled feed actions are more accurate than push feeds. Isn't that a myth? Why are there so many precision rifles built off the Rem 700 action, a push feed design?

I read articles stating that the pre-64 Winchesters are more accurate than the later designs, but I think that's probably a production issue, not a design issue. When Winchester reintroduced the claw in the mid-90's, I can't remember them making that claim either.
Link Posted: 11/12/2002 8:12:28 AM EDT
Link Posted: 11/12/2002 9:02:14 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Moondog:
A friend told me controlled feed actions are more accurate than push feeds. Isn't that a myth? Why are there so many precision rifles built off the Rem 700 action, a push feed design?


I think there is maybe a theoretical advantage to the push feed, but in the real world there seems to be no difference.

I read articles stating that the pre-64 Winchesters are more accurate than the later designs, but I think that's probably a production issue, not a design issue. When Winchester reintroduced the claw in the mid-90's, I can't remember them making that claim either.
My experience is exactly the opposite. My pre-64s are pretty mediocre as far as accuracy, while my recent production 70s have been very good. From what I have read, the pre-64 barrels were not very consistant. Some were bad, some were good, a few were excellent. The new production method produces consistantly good barrels, with fewer either really bad or really good ones.

I can't speak to the 1964-1990 period, but have heard horror stories.
Link Posted: 11/12/2002 3:38:55 PM EDT
Thanks for the input guys! I keep telling my friend it doesn't matter when the bolt is closed if it has a claw or not. Old legends die hard.

I do agree about the utility of a claw. The last thing I want to do is have a round misfeed after pissing off a cape buffalo!
Link Posted: 11/12/2002 6:28:45 PM EDT
Here's some GREAT reading on this subject:

talk.shooters.com/room_50/15412.cfm

This is what I wrote to a friend about it:
Since you love a good argument, you'll love this thread about the CRF vs. pushfeed, etc. that I mentioned before.
KINGPIN is the MAN. Read through this long-ass thread for some serious fun! It's educational as hell. Talk about a pissing match.
Watch who says what and who backs down. It's pretty good. I'm happy with my Remington rifles, as I've said. You'll have fun with this, I'm sure.

talk.shooters.com/room_50/15412.cfm

READ the first 5 or 6 exchanges, and, more if you like it.
Have FUN.
Link Posted: 11/13/2002 4:34:28 AM EDT
I bumped this up for folks to read about the 'controversy'.
Link Posted: 11/13/2002 6:13:50 AM EDT
I dont understand this "dangerous game" use thing. I mean humans armed with rifles are more dangerous than a cape buffalo and we dont see "controlled feed" being preached there do we? So is the controlled feed better for combat? Was the M24 and M40 based on the Remington 700 due to the parts availability? Would the Army and Marine Corp be better served by custom, controlled feed Model 70 rifles?
Link Posted: 11/13/2002 6:39:29 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/13/2002 6:41:02 AM EDT by Aimless]
Link Posted: 11/13/2002 11:40:51 AM EDT
Thanks for all the responses.This seems like a subject that really doesn't matter either way.I can't forsee myself hanging upside down to take a shot at a charging rhino here in FL.
Top Top