CRF vs Push feed

[62flint]

If a CRF is so much better, why are most of the tactical rifles push feed?

 

[CoElkHunter]

Military rifles/machine guns too? Speed of cycling maybe?

 

[Hunter-Habib]

If a CRF is so much better, why are most of the tactical rifles push feed?

Some thoughts:

A) There is a world of difference between shooting a fellow human being from distance and shooting a 200LB-6 ton dangerous game animal charging at you.

B) The world’s first “Tactical” rifles were all control round feed (Mauser Model 98, Springfield Model 1903, Lee Enfield, Pattern 14 Enfield, Enfield Model 1917, Mannlicher Schoenauer, Dutch Mannlicher)

C) There any many push feed rifles which are actually just as reliable as control round feed rifles.

Expanding More On Point C)
Not all push feed rifles are created equally. When I first began big game hunting in the early 1970s (with my first African safari being to Kenya in 1974), push feed rifles were everywhere and only two CRF rifles were being produced at the time (the Czech BRNO ZKK series and the Serbian Interarms Mark X series).

The negative press associated with push feed rifles, actually stems from extraction issues with two very specific rifles: the Remington Model 700 and the post ‘64 Winchester Model 70. And yes, these rifles actually DID have extraction issues. I personally had a Remington Model 700 (in .375 Holland & Holland Magnum) fail to extract a spent cartridge (a 300Gr Remington round nosed steel jacketed FMJ solid) after the extractor broke, while on safari in 1979. It's also been documented to occur on multiple occasions with the Remington Model 700 rifles chambered in .416 Remington Magnum. The extractor is simply too small for cases as large as the .375. The small extractor of the Remington Model 700 and big cases such as the .375 Holland & Holland Magnum, are NOT a good combination. Especially in hot weather conditions. No less than three of my white hunters also reported extraction failures with push feed Winchester Model 70 rifles (mostly in .375 Holland & Holland Magnum, but also .458 Winchester Magnum) in dusty conditions. Another push feed rifle which was ill reputed for being plagued with extraction issues, was the Mauser Model 66.

One of my white hunters (Mr. Con Van Wyk) was actually badly mauled by a wounded lion in 1988 when he had decided to spoor it with is post '64 Winchester Model 70 in .375 Holland & Holland Magnum (loaded with 300Gr Winchester Silver Tip soft nosed cartridges). The first 2 shots did him no good. One of those beastly Silver Tip bullets had actually disintegrated upon striking one of the lion's front teeth. When he attempted to cycle the bolt in order to give the cat a 3rd shot, the extractor failed and the lion began to maul him. Fortunately the lion's jaw had been broken by Mr. Wyk's client's bullet, which prevented the creature from being able to seriously wound Mr. Wyk. One of his trackers was able to save him by shooting the lion in the back of the head with another rifle (a .300 Holland & Holland Magnum pre '64 Winchester Model 70).

Now, let’s talk about another push feed rifle action with a reputation for immense reliability: The old British B.S.A Majestic. It had a rather small looking extractor on one side of the bolt face, operated by a coil spring. The B.S.A Majestic bolt had a good sized extractor, rimming nearly a third of the bolt face circumference … spring loaded but able to move outwards and over the cartridge head when pushed against it in the chamber. The ejector was a plunger type in the bolt face. Despite being a push feed, these rifles extracted EXTREMELY reliably under all circumstances. Good old British engineering, perhaps. The B.S.A Majestic (in .458 Winchester Magnum) was the backup rifle of choice of my life’s first white hunter (Joe Cheffings) and he had an immense amount of confidence in the reliability of the rifle. It was also the backup rifle of choice of Lionell Palmer. Unfortunately, B.S.A manufactured these rifles with beastly muzzle brakes and only in five calibers (.243 Winchester, .270 Winchester, .308 Winchester, .30-06 Springfield and .458 Winchester Magnum).

Modern push feed rifles such as the German Blaser R-8 or the Danish Schultz & Larsen Ambassador are also extremely reliable.

So, yes. It depends on the TYPE of push feed action being used, rather than whether or not the action is a push feed. Making blanket statements that all push feed actions are unreliable, is definitely not accurate.

 

[BeeMaa]

If a CRF is so much better, why are most of the tactical rifles push feed?

Because push-feed is better.

Mostly because it's less expensive to produce. Same reason that CZ recently discontinued the CZ550 line in favor of their PF variant.

 

[Petey J]

If you go to the Midway USA YouTube channel, and watch Larry Potterfield’s videos on his “nearly perfect safari rifle,” you’ll see him use a push feed action. His reasoning is was that when he looked in his safe, most of his rifles were push feed. It’s what he knew, had experience with, and was comfortable using.

So maybe, in the modern age, it comes truly down to what you are comfortable operating? I don’t have the right answer, just an opinion. When I go to hunt DG, I want CRF, because I’ve used it and sometimes, I’m a control freak.

 

[sestoppelman]

I have used both, neither have let me down.

 

[pilar]

I have 3 buddies who did 9 tours of duty and thousands of hours/ rounds of of training
and All use and trust push feed in .300wm & .338 lupa ,
anouther buddy with 8 safaris with a mid 70’s m70 375 pusher, and never a problem
not saying it’s not going to happen with a PF , but a jam can happen with any type action, negligence of inspection and maintenance would be deemed my #1 concern in failure

 

[1dirthawker]

this is a revival of several old threads, but here goes:

my experience with using push feeds is fairly extensive. i had 2 malfunctions from them. one, a blued 416 rem mag in a model 700. at the range, after firing (factory loads) the rifle failed to extract the round. at home i pushed the case out with a cleaning rod. the extractor (a very small piece of steel) failed to grip the rounds and extract. that rifle was stolen soon after and i was saved the problem of selling it.

the second negative experience with a push feed of mine was a blued remington 700, 7mm magnum i bought as a young man, my first big game caliber. in that case, the button ejector in the bolt face had gotten wet, corroded (i lived in alaska then) and failed to pop out the case when the bolt was brought back. dis assembling the bolt, and a thorough cleaning fixed that problem, but at the wrong moment it could have been an issue. that rifle was stolen at the same time as my 416, so, another rifle i was saved from fooling with. (i bought a safe, camera's, etc after the theft)

anyway, full disclosure, i do own a couple of push feeds now, a stainless tikka t3 (runs like greased lightning) i trust that rifle. any rifles i own over .30 cal are CRF guns. for peace of mind.

 

[thriller]

I have never had an issue with push feed guns. I have one that will feed anything I have ever put in it. I think people get too hung up on this personally. Just make sure the rifle you own works well and you can cycle it quickly with the ammo you plan on using while hunting.

 

[roklok]

Individual issues with a rifle, push feed or CRF, and operator error are much more likely to cause issues than whether a rifle falls into a certain category. Plenty of CRF rifles have issues, and improper manipulation (user error) causes more issues that mechanical problems. No matter the type of rifle, it is paramount that it is tested to run reliably, and the user do everything possible to build muscle memory to properly run the bolt. Short stroking can cause issues (sometimes more readily) with a CRF just like a PF. I think the whole argument is WAY overdone. Know your rifle and practice extensively with it.

 

[mauserhunter]

If you go to the Midway USA YouTube channel, and watch Larry Potterfield’s videos on his “nearly perfect safari rifle,” you’ll see him use a push feed action. His reasoning is was that when he looked in his safe, most of his rifles were push feed. It’s what he knew, had experience with, and was comfortable using.

So maybe, in the modern age, it comes truly down to what you are comfortable operating? I don’t have the right answer, just an opinion. When I go to hunt DG, I want CRF, because I’ve used it and sometimes, I’m a control freak.

Maybe it would have been a perfect rifle if it were crf.

 

[Ruraldoc]

Phil Shoemaker used a Remington 700 type rifle during the Vietnam war.

When guiding clients for brown bear, he uses controlled round feed rifles.

There is a difference in sniping at long range where accuracy is everything and dangerous game at point blank range where reliability is indeed everything.

Having said that I am utterly convinced of the reliability of my Steyr Rifles.

I have two rifles in 9.3x62, a CZ 550 and a Steyr SM 12. Both are very positive and reliable.

I also have several Remington M700s, I deer hunt with them, I would not hunt dangerous game with a M700. The extractor is too flimsy, and the bolt handles can and do come off if the soldering is improperly done. You don’t know you have a bad one until the bolt falls off.

Larry Potterfield changed extractors, bolt handles and safeties on his M700 to make it more reliable for Africa.

 

[Scott CWO]

Most of us own both. I use CRF for DG and either type for everything else. Doesn’t the “C” stand for CONTROLLED and the “P” for PUSH? Words have meaning. Why mess around with something NOT controlled for DG when you have both? A good friend of mine and fellow guide was badly mauled by a wounded brown bear so I don’t take any chances. Probably 90%+ DG guides and PHs use CRF but don’t listen to us! Lol.



The exception to me is the Blaser R8. We had an R8 as a camp gun for brown bear clients at one outfit I worked for and I liked its operation. I have a camp gun on the AK Peninsula for bear clients now and it’s an upgraded AHR CZ 550 in 375 H&H.

 

[mauserhunter]

Crf gives you that warm fuzzy feeling when using a rifle with it, pf guys just don't understand that. Controlled extraction you get with the crf is about as important.

 

[PAUL_MAUSER]

As an owner of both types of rifles, I think the argument that CRF is better than PF is a load of bollocks. Also seems to be a bit of snobbishness abound even though there are far more PF rifles around and they likely have killed more dangerous game at this point than CRF rifles have just due to the sheer numbers of them out there.

Usually, it seems proponents of CRF like to tell us how surely the round being chambered from a PF will fall out of the action at the most inopportune times and you will be mauled or worse for using one.

You never know when you may need to chamber a round while hanging upside down out of tree to kill that angry animal. Truth is I bet if cared to climb a tree and hang upside and chamber a round from one of my PF rifles it would do it just fine.

Anyway, that's just my opinion and worth exactly what you paid for it. Flame away.

 

[pilar]

Don’t some CRF jam when you single feed one down the tube with out being magazine fed ?

 

[CBH Australia]

If a CRF is so much better, why are most of the tactical rifles push feed?

That's always going to be in debate.

 

[CBH Australia]

As an owner of both types of rifles, I think the argument that CRF is better than PF is a load of bollocks. Also seems to be a bit of snobbishness abound even though there are far more PF rifles around and they likely have killed more dangerous game at this point than CRF rifles have just due to the sheer numbers of them out there.

Usually, it seems proponents of CRF like to tell us how surely the round being chambered from a PF will fall out of the action at the most inopportune times and you will be mauled or worse for using one.

You never know when you may need to chamber a round while hanging upside down out of tree to kill that angry animal. Truth is I bet if cared to climb a tree and hang upside and chamber a round from one of my PF rifles it would do it just fine.

Anyway, that's just my opinion and worth exactly what you paid for it. Flame away.

Using the handle Paul Mauser I would have thought you were a CRF person.

 

[PAUL_MAUSER]

Using the handle Paul Mauser I would have thought you were a CRF person.

I have CRF rifles and Mausers and like them certainly, I just think the argument some use to try and say they are better than PF rifles is kind of a stretch and doesn't or won't apply to 99% of hunters out there.

 

[Scott CWO]

As an owner of both types of rifles, I think the argument that CRF is better than PF is a load of bollocks. Also seems to be a bit of snobbishness abound even though there are far more PF rifles around and they likely have killed more dangerous game at this point than CRF rifles have just due to the sheer numbers of them out there.

Usually, it seems proponents of CRF like to tell us how surely the round being chambered from a PF will fall out of the action at the most inopportune times and you will be mauled or worse for using one.

You never know when you may need to chamber a round while hanging upside down out of tree to kill that angry animal. Truth is I bet if cared to climb a tree and hang upside and chamber a round from one of my PF rifles it would do it just fine.

Anyway, that's just my opinion and worth exactly what you paid for it. Flame away.

I would disagree that PF has killed more DG. CRF bolts are way more popular in Africa than the USA.

I’ve only hunted DG areas and never in South Africa. I’ve been in camps with other hunters several times and nobody had a PF but I’m sure it happens.