Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Express Rifles and Big Bores Only Kimber Caprivi .375 H&H--Any Improvement?

It is valid because it is a design issue.

It is the same as saying you have to exclude crap ammo or varying rim and/or extractor groove dimensions. By its very nature the CRF needs a lot going for it and that is a design fault.

That's an interesting observation...............perhaps you could enlighten us as to how to improve it? If you can, I know some good patent attorneys in the states,and some overseas firms. You could make a lot of money after you redesign the Mauser 98;after all,, I think there are what?...only 8 maybe 10 million Mausers that have been manufactured? You should be able to beat that....

Well of course the improvement is PF and especially an inline feed PF.

But where this whole argument is flawed is not taking into account varying conditions.

The basic design fault with CRF is its need for good ammo and the rifle being setup correctly. But of course if someone is going to Africa they will only shoot a few rounds and thye can make sure all is OK, no protruding primers, different dimenstions, nicks on case rims etc. But if you are pro roo shooter that shoots every night and you milk the very last shot out of your brass CRF is not good. I grew up with M17s in Australia that were rebarreled to 270. We would have different 30/06 necked down, usually ex military and European [bleep] like Hirtenberger. Plenty of stuff that at one end would not slide under the extractor and at the other end the case would be left sitting on the follower.

Stick 5 round of 270 with protruding primers in a PF M70 and you get 5 bangs. A CRF M70 is out of action.

Personally, what I like about CRF is being able to run cartrdiges through a magazine without closing the bolt and also have the rifle ready with bolt forward but not turned down. Only need to pull the bolt back. I also think some calibres if the rifle is expensive just go with CRF, 375 and 416 Rigby being two obvious examples.

But if my life depended on repeat fire I would want an inline PF.

As a side note if you would like some new gun forums to look at just use Google for CRF Vs PF and that will get most guns/hunting forums

Now I've heard everything...jorge

PS: But seriously, arguably just as important as the feeding is the extraction and PFs with those puny extractors don't stand up to CRFs. Still, the "P-effers" haven't been able to address the central question; If Pfs were better, how come hardly any PHs use them?

I think availability and price would be the issue. Why don't they use Echol's rifles.

But you have one PH on this forum that uses a 416 Wby Mark V converted 500 Jeffery. I think Saeed said Roy Vincent uses 416 Wby Mark V

But if PH's rifles are to be the guide as to what's best then why waste money on fibreglass guns put out by blokes like Echols and others.

And by the way, next time you look at your CRF examine just how much of the extractor hook has a full grip on the case rim. I don't have either in front of me but I think Howa would be close to the same.

Starting to sound like a religion. . .

Seems like going bang under bad conditions and extreme duress would be most desirable for a bolt gun used for dangerous game. I'm curious as to whether the Germans or Russians would have traded guns at Stalingrad.

Push feed vs. controlled feed for dangerous game ??

Problem solved !!!

Get a Double Rifle (bang-bang ) and your face never leaves the stock !!

On the actual subject I was planning on buying a Caprivi rifle and after handling one I was disappointed in the gun. I thought the stock dimensions were off and very bulky and the gun did not come up well for me as well, that happens not all guns fit everyone. I was really disappointed in the action, I thought it felt sloppy. If your going to build a dangerous game rifle start from scratch don't just through an action into a fancy piece off wood and give it an African name.

Dino

Mike: I get it now....if we are using handloads of indifferent quality,necked down from other brass,with poorly seated bullets and banged up rims with protruding primers,then PF's are the ticket,cause a PF will make them go "bang"......OK....got it.

I've jammed some lousy ammo "home"by cramming the bolt on a tough case and lit the spark myself once in awhile....anybody to his own notions under those circumstances....

Ever see those dinky PF extractors tear through those banged up rims and leave them in the chamber after firing on a hot day in OZ?.....just curious....

I assume from your handle you shoot the big Weatherby 378,416's etc.I guess Roy hadda go to inline feeding because he could not build a rifle with magazine box to handle those big cases in a staggered row, Brevex Mausers being scarce and expensive back when the Mark V came out...that said,doesn't the CZ accomodate such large rounds today?At affordable pricing?

IIRC Harry Selby's 416 Rigby was a M98;when the bore was worn out from killing stuff he needed something fast and wound up with a PF M70 458....there's that dreaded staggered magazine again!

I read over on AR but thanks for the tip.

Bob,

Yes it is true, I have had a bit to do with the 378 based Wby calibres as well as 300s. Although not as much as my preferred action which is M70. But in the big case calibres I think Wby is the best setup and especially in Australia as the importing is very efficient. The Wby custom shop is also excellent to deal with.

I have had quite a lot more M70s than Mark Vs and in fact my next rifles are likely to be base on the new M70 375 and customised and also as 300 H&H.

If all else is equal I prefer CRF as an action to use, just think they are nicer. But I did say if all else is equal and I don't consider that to be the case with a CZ and something out of Wby custom shop.

With Roy I guess his goal was to have his own action and also be different. Also at that time the rifle "blow up" was the fashion as evidenced by Remington and Wby advertisements at the time. Roy also wanted to keep some common ground on dimensions with Rem 700. Action and barrel thread the same, bases the same and length the same. Although with the US made Mark Vs there was a fouls up and the rear receiver ring is about .02� thinner so Mark Vs now have their own mounts.

If you look real close at a Mark V receiver you will see a Rem 700 hiding under and integral recoil lug and bedding platform.

One of the things the 3 rows of 3 locking lugs allowed for was a longer magazine than a Rem 700 could have. Reason being that in the locked position the two bottom lugs are at 4 and 8 O�Clock and so the action can be machined out without removing the bottom locking lug recess.

I was only about 5 when the Mark V was introduced and don�t know what the atmosphere was like with Mauser actions. I do know in Australia in the mid 1960s you only used a Mauser or M17 because is was cheap and the SMLE was no good for 243 and 270.

I think there is no doubt that the in line feed was easy for Roy and the 378 and especially given part of the Mark V design. Mark Vs don�t use action rails for feeding, they are like an SMLE and everything is handled by the magazine. When the 9 lug action was used for the 30/06 the only different to a 460 was length of bolt slot and magazine and follower. Thus Mark Vs are very easy to convert from calibre to another.

But I think most people who know will say inline feed is a problem solver. Push Feed is another problem solver and simply because you remove the action of having to get a case rim to slide under an extractor where the tension must be just right and not a big variation from standard in case dimensions.

If Winchester could have produced M70s for the big case and equal Wby in other areas then they would have been my choice. I regard Mark Vs as about middle of the road for bedding configuration and M70 as the top.

Oh and yes, I have seen extractor pull through plenty of times. Mainly back in the 60s and 70s when we were neck sizing and would finish with tight cases. But I can tell you the M17s would jump over the case rim and so would Pre 64s. However with M70 PF and Sako (the PFs I have used the most) the bolt would be often too hard to open and the extractor would hold.

Remember that one of the pluses of the PF is the extractor rotating with the bolt and as the extractor grabs you get a �twist the cork� action although the negative can be brass around the bolt face. It might also be a negative with a tight case as it would resist bolt rotation.

Having said all off that I have yet to see anything equal in line push feed. Sure you can have in line CRF but you still gotta get the case rim under the extractor.

As a side note the Mark V is not the best of the in line and if you have very fast hands and the spring tension is a bit weak you will jam one. The problem occurs because the bolt nose protrudes beyond the lugs and in the open bolt position there is a row of lugs on the bottom which of course mean the case rim is well below the bolt nose and has to jump up for the bolt nose to engage the case rim.

Probably no one here old enough to remember... but all the early 300 WMs were built on FN actions and when the 378 came out is was built on a Schultz & Larsen M54 with (horrors) rear locking lugs and no CRF either. back in the day, when I went thru the S&L collecting phase, I had 17 as I recall, and they always worked, were accurate, reloaded forever with neck sizing and had that wonderful low bolt lift and short bolt throw. Back then they were cheap (I got my 378 ANNB for $700), now try and find one in any caliber. Still think the 7x61 was the best 7 mag ever designed.

Contrary to the previous assertion I am STILL waiting for the first documented example of a PH or client being put in the morgue because of the push feed failure. The "experts" might also consider that most dangerous game cartridges are loaded to low pressures, thus making extraction far easier than any of the new short mags or even the good old 270 WCF that runs pretty hot.

Most of the "experts" holding forth have not even been to Africa, nor if they have, have not shot 100s if not 1000s of of ammo in that environment. So their status as "experts" is based on what they read or bias unsupported by any documented hard evidence. I claim not the "expert" status but I have run well over 1000 full pressure loads through push feed rifles in every caliber from 222 to 400 H&H with only one problem. A 244 H&H on a magnum 700 action needed a SAKO extractor to be 100% reliable.
The 244 H&H is a really hot round and frequently blows primers with factory ammo. (100 gr @ 3600). I am pushing 85 TSXs over 3700 and plan to try to reach 3800 with the new 80 gr TTSX. (long stainless barrel). These are VERY hot loads and pressures far exceed anything you are apt to take on a Buff with. Why? Because I wanted one, a 257 WM would have been far easier but I also have a 400 H&H because I wanted one. That defines "Gun Nut" I guess.
Here's the 400 and 244 as well as the H&H big boys.

Hope you'll accept a frog in this tread. If theorically a CRF is "safer" (i own sone pre 64 and 98 rifles)than a PF i think that the best PF are as good and safe as the best CRF, and Sakos have the advantages of both. Better have a good rifle you trust, learn to shoot it in all field position, train not to short stroke the bolt, if you're prone to that, choose a short cartridge and train more again. Lot of DG is killed by R93 i don't even want to hunt wild boars with so there must be something. A wealthy friend of me, born and living in Western Africa has hunt and shot everithing with his R93 416REm and 300Wm even in non guided hunts (buffalos). In 2009 he bought a Remington 700 Christensen with carbon fiber barrel in 416 Rigby, a fuc....g PF, and went to hunt grizzly bear, giant moose, goat and sheep in Alaska. Came back alive, then shoot one more lion in Burkina (very few to hunt each year there) and to equinoxialis buffalo in Cameroun. So the push feed must be ok even in not so well made and expensive rifle as the Christensen (magazine need to work on to feed). I also know a lot of guys using Steyrs and Sauers to hunt DG with no problems as some do with pre 64 or 98 action rifles.
This morning i zeroed a CZ550mag for a wealthy french "hunter" (bad name for such guy) who's going to Africa after PG and Buffs. Used 350grs African PH 375 from Norma 375H&H, 120 euros x 10. Shot better than MOA. This fool has never shoot a cartridge with his new CZ. Do you think it will be safer than a guy who train and use a PF Rem 700 or my friend with his Blaser?
Note also that the guys who hunts the most dangerous game (men) and on whom sometimes the future of an action lays on (snipers)use damned push feed rifles sometimes even semi autos...

Never a machine or a mechanical object will be better than the guy behind him.

Hope not to have bothered you friends.

about rem 700s the only drawback i have and this is the only kind of rifles with problems every year for two subjects : double stroke on the reloading action at least one incident every year and the safety ... the safety is not that good as if any moisture or snow get in it froze (it happens if temp go down -10�c and it happens more often than you can imagine) and it not happens with other brand if it tell to users something.

but that s not my experience as user but only as a guide.

Well the "experts" you quoted were the same ones on the article you mentioned and you conveniently forgot to mention what they thought of the 700 action with it's puny sheet metal extractor, glued on bolt handle and fail on fire safety. At least you got one thing right, you ain't no expert....jorge

Not trying to pick a fight here, cause it matters not the least to me folks' preferences. I'm pretty sure the Remington handle is brazed on and unless there's a dot of silver solder I didn't see, it looks like the new 70's are press fit just like the later NH guns. . .

Hi Jorge,

Never claimed "expert" status but i think the small extractor of the 700 works, and i you're affraid of it being broken it does'nt cost a lot to modify it to Sako's one.
Lot of dangerous game is taken with such rifles without any problem. Just need to look copper fouling or dirt accumulate behind that small piece of metal. Armies use it for long time now it it was so bad they would have gone to Mauser's type. Note that i have both type of rifles CRF and PF plus Sako's.
Have a good day and good flight maybe, looks you're fighter pilot. Nice job!

Marseille: No offense taken. I just have issues with the 700 extractor. Yes it can be upgraded by why bother when a Model 70 is much better. I'm retired now, but I flew Vikings. Hunt, "brazed" is just another way of gluing something (yes I'm being sarcastic. As to the new 70s, don't own own one, just pre-64s or early production classics. Lastly, I have huge, huge issues with the 700s safety. Cheers, jorge

Jorge,
Well, I've seen safety's of all stripes snap on safe on firing, although its usually side type. I'm not sure any rifle, other than the low mass wing safety's of the Rugers, are immune. But then these are small, so pick your poison.

Since a lot of this thread concerned the new 70's, I would think that the effectiveness of brazing vs. a press fit would be worthy of discussion. Both the post 64 CRF and SC guns are so made. I know some post 64 CRF Model 70 owners that have the press fit portion of the bolt "glued" (brazed) to the bolt body. It helps with any unfortunate bolt failure.

There have been quite a few PH's and/or controll shooters who have used push-feed actions on their dangeorus game rifles, including some who shot thousands of animals. It isn't a rarity.

Another common misconception is that it's impossible to "double-load" a CRF action.

Here's the bottom line: CRFs are used by well over 98% of those PHs that use bolt action rifles. PHs are not generally well-off financially and PFs are generally cheaper to buy and manufacture than CRFs, so if PFs were "just as good" as CRFs we'd certainly see a lot more of them in Africa and we do not. I'd hunt ANYTHING with a PF if that was my only choice, even a Remington (BARF) or a Savage (PUKE), only don't try and tell me a PF is "just as good" as a CRF. If it were, you'd see a lot more of them in the hands of Professionals. Hunting DG with PFs, single actions or levers are kinda Vespas and Fat Chicks-lots of fun until your friends (or PHs) se you with one...jorge

Jorge,

In suitable calibres PFs are the dear rifle. Wby, Sako, Blaser, Sauer etc.

Howa is out, only goes to 338.

In Australia if I wanted a cheap 375 "something" it would have to be Ruger Hawkeye or CZ.

The most expensive rifles that frequent the forums are PFs...Wby, Sako, Sauer and Blaser.

And one way you will see CRFs double feed big time is when the extractor is not right and they leave the case or round sitting on the floorplate after the bolt is pulled back. Case rim and extractor dimensions if not set for the extractor will do it. Ask Winchester Australia, it was very prevalent on the 300 and 338 Win stainless. And that is double feed even when the shooter does things the way he is supposed to.