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

A bunch of posts here and on AR from late 2008 and early 2009 detailed quality problems, service problems, and nasty customer service personnel problems with this rifle. Barrel bands coming off when it was shot, bad headspace, etc. on this $3000 rifle.

Trouble is, I went and looked at one at the local emporium and it is the slickest looking thing I ever saw (almost). Better yet, it seems to weigh about 8 pounds, not a ton and a half like the CZ and a lot of others. I would really like one. About the only alternatives are the Model 70 Safari Express, which isn't released yet, and Ruger's .375 Ruger, and I'd prefer the H&H cartridge.

The guy at the gun store ordered 5 and has sold 4 quickly. He claims (based on other Kimbers) that his customers have gotten really good customer service, better than most other makers.

Does anyone know if Kimber has gotten their act together? Perhaps the poor reports were just startup pains.

just wait for m70 of new or look for a post 64 al lot are on gun broker

A bad Kimber? hard to believe but I've only owned four.

The CZ is still the 375 H&H and since it's not a mountain rifle, the weight is hardly an issue.
Any pre 64 70 will cost a ton and has a horrible kicking stock, the push feeds were not much and the "new" one will no doubt cost more that a CZ and has that stupid new complex trigger.

700s also work well and are reasonably priced. Word on the street is that Savage will build you one as well. Brownings and SAKOs are also fine guns.

My opinnion on most of the high dollar mass produced so called custom rifles is that there sure are a lot of really good custom gunsmiths,many right out of school, that can build you such a better rifle for the same money and many for less if you search them out...I see a lot of plastic stocked rifles and laminated stock rifles out there bringing upwards of $10,000 and that tells me that W.C. Fields was right, there is a sucker born every minute and there are those who value everything by the amount they pay for it...

It just does not cost that much to build a composite rifle stock or a laminated stock, and the cost of a blank for either is zilch, they don't cost like a piece of exhibition Circasian walnut does, and even that is another story..the cost of walnut really varys from maker to maker and from distributor to distributor...Walk carefully among the giants is good advise.

I've looked at a few of the Caprivi's...they are nice looking rifles,but for $3k a copy I'm looking for a pre 64 to restock,or a Classic to work over,or a great Mauser 98 even if they do end up costing more.

And any day of the week I would take a Whitworth Mauser 375H&H for a grand or so over a Caprivi.

Get a Ruger.

My Alaskan (375 Ruger) shoots great and was 1/3 the price.

BMT

Quality control aside, I would hate paying Kimber Caprivi money to get an action that looks like a Model 70 but when it comes out of the stock you have a Rem 700 including the washer recoil lug.

Only ran one Caprivi through the shop so far...and it hasn't come back.....

That said, our experience has been "Kimber Roulette"....

When you pay $3000 for a rifle, you shouldn't need customer service...

JMHO....


Ingwe

INDY......I would be patient and just wait on the model 70 Winchester period!!! You already know, it is the PH's dream to own such a rifle and it just doesn't get any better in working ability with all the bells & whistles factory installed.

I too saw a nice looking Kimber the other day in the gun-room of the store I do business. However, all of my big bore rifles are indeed model 70 Winchesters and I have never had a problem one with any of them from the day I took them out of the box.

I have turned a couple into other calibers and still have never had a problem with any of those rifles. Go with a track record, Winchester and you will still have a dime or two to spend on ice-cream later down the road.LOL

Yeah but you have not had one with the "new" trigger either.

Have you tried one. It looks OK from the pictures but still no sear engagement adjustment.

From the drawing it looks basically like the old system but the sear no longer rests on the trigger piece. Will it take triggers like the Jewell or is the mounting changed....it looks as if it might take the aftermarket triggers for the older M70

And especially since the Kimber is a copy of the M70 and a cheap half copy at that.

I absolutely loved kimbers, their look was second to none. The French Walnut with ebony tip for some reason said buy me at every gun store I went to. I purchased the .300wsm, .270 wsm, .243 and the .375 H&H. All the guns but the .243 went back to the factory due to the wood contracting and expanding. Their customer service was great! As for the .375 this rifle is not floated, and therefor the expansion of the stock wasn't that critical. However, when I first reported my problem to Kimber they thought that the barrel should be floated and mine was not. After 6 weeks and a new barrel Kimber admitted to me that it was in fact not supposed to be floated. Nevertheless I got a new barrel with no explanation of why. A few months later with a box of sample loads from superior the best groups I could get where 2.5" at 100yds. Long story short I sold a gun that had been shot a total of 30 times for 2k and was happy to get rid of it. As for the rest of my kimbers I still have the .243 and a montana .204 the rest have been sold. I just dont have confidence in their product at that price range! I do think that they look good though.

CZ-USA is advertising they have a Express Rifle custom shop in Kansas City. I'd bet for the $3K or less someone could have a rifle built exactly how they want.

Just curious -why wouldn't you consider a guaranteed accurate Sako 85 in one of their many permutations for about half the price? My 375H&H Sako 85 is the finest factory rifle I have ever owned - nothing else comes close.

BCBrian

Which model 85? The Kodiak? Is the 85 really a "controled feed"? Similar to a Mauser type CF?

I think it is generally off the agenda because not the Mauser style exractor CRF bullshit.

Although I have always just loved M70 375 and have owned heaps of them the best 375s are the Sauer, HS Precision and Wby Mark V. The Mark V is a super reliable feeder and with the long magazine. The Sauer and HS Precision have the vertical stack in line feed and nothing beats that for reliability or smoothness.

I'm looking at a nice Stainess camo A Bolt for under a grand.

Mike378

Sako advertises it's model 85 Kodiak as a CRF rifle. That's why I'm asking BCBrian about it. I appreciate CRF for dangerous game rifles. But only one my four rifles, a 30/06 Mauser, has that feature.

It is totally "controlled-round feed".

Upside down, right-side up, left-side up and upside-up.

Not only is the feed totally controlled - it's slicker than goose you-know-what. So's the trigger.

It is CRF but with the PF type extractor.

I shot a Wby Mk V in .373 H&H "a bunch". Never even hiccuped! I would not hesitate to carry it in any situation (and I am a died in the wool Model 70 man).

Although 375 H&H is not normally associated with the Mark V they sell plenty and especially custom shop guns.

I have had heaps of 375s over the years and am now looking to get a pair at higher level that will probably see me out and Kimber Caprivi and Talkeetna make for a nice package but I think it will be Wby Custom Shop but the Kimbers are certainly a better price deal.

If Kimber 375s are as good as promoted and how they look it would be hard to a M70 the same without a lot of mucking about and a fair cost unless starting with cheap used M70 375s.

I have also been wonder about the latest Remington Custom Shop guns. They are Kimber Caprivi price but plastic or laminated stocks so in reality quite a bit dearer.

No, it has it's own - much copied - "Sako" type of extractor.

That about sez it all as far as I'm concerned....

I hate to say it but CRF is just gunwriter bullshit unless you plan to shoot dirty ammo in a nasty chamber on a regular basis.
There are a lot of push feed 375s, 416s and 458s running around in Alaska and Africa and I have yet to read any documented story of a PH getting wiped out because he had a push feed rifle.
Cartridge design has a lot more to do with feeding right than the bolt face. That is why the ancient 300 & 375 H&Hs are still the most reliable feeder magnums made regardless of its being in a 700/721 or M70. The new 400 H&H follows the same design and I have yet to have one fall out of my 700 400 H&H or fail to feed or extract. Only wish I were young and rich so I could go on Cape Buffalo safari with it.

[quote=oldman1942]I hate to say it but CRF is just gunwriter bullshit unless you plan to shoot dirty ammo in a nasty chamber on a regular basis.
There are a lot of push feed 375s, 416s and 458s running around in Alaska and Africa and I have yet to read any documented story of a PH getting wiped out because he had a push feed rifle.
Cartridge design has a lot more to do with feeding right than the bolt face. That is why the ancient 300 & 375 H&Hs are still the most reliable feeder magnums made regardless of its being in a 700/721 or M70. The new 400 H&H follows the same design and I have yet to have one fall out of my 700 400 H&H or fail to feed or extract. Only wish I were young and rich so I could go on Cape Buffalo safari with it.

[/quote

Really? How many PHs do you know that use 700s? Or better yet, why do the overwhelming majority of their bolt actions are CRFs? Full disclosure I hunt with a PF for the most part, but it's a Weatherby. Please post specifics. jorge

Maybe because I am Australian and did a lot of early shooting with M17s both in 30/06 and rebarreled to 270 and with crappy brass or ammo, I regard CRF as quite unreliable. You can spend all day having the extractor tension and clearance correct but is then totally dependent on the ammo condition and dimension.

I remember many years ago spotlight shooting and with a Pre 64 270 and PF M70 in 270. The ammo was reloaded rough with a straight line tool and primers were protruding. The Pre 64 was finished. Of course you say the ammo should be checked but any Australian will tell you that won't happen when spotlighting.

But if you were going to Africa and only shoot a few shots under what will be good conditions and will well chosen ammo things will be different. one thing for sure and that is a stagger feed CRF is sure nice to watch working, especially compared to an in line feed PF

Jorge, I suggest a subscription to African Hunter magazine would prove enlightening for you.

As I said lets hear about all the dead hunters and PHs whose push feed rifles failed them and thus they were killed.

Either one in a quality rifle will work 100%

ya jorge, what would you know on the subject, ol'man has a subscription to a magazine!? <laffin>

Thanks, everyone, for your comments. I think I WILL probably wait for the Model 70, as my next trip to Africa is not until May, 2011.

Now that this thread has been semi-hijacked into a push feed vs. CRF thread, I too am interested in any verified instances of problems CAUSED by the fact that a rifle was PF. I have heard of M700 extractors breaking but that is not a push feed problem. Aside from that, I don't think it makes any difference. Every military rifle action designed since 1903 has been PF. Shooting thousands of rounds in NRA Highpower, I have never had a feeding problem with them, or with PF or CRF bolt rifles. PF rifles, incidentally, feed perfectly well with the rifle upside down.

I have heard of problems with CRF rifles but those were not due to the fact that they were CRF.

Look at the size of the extractor on vearious rifles. A Model 70 CRF extractor grips more of the case rim than a Weatherby MkV which, in turn, grips more than a Remington PF. This could be an advantage if you have trouble extracting the case for some reason, but heck, my DG loads almost fall out of the action and they don't get mashed on the floor of the bakke for years on end.

I only had one extraction problem in my life. The case stayed in the chamber when the bolt was drawn backwards. That was a hot loaded 30-06 case, neck sized only, and mOdel 98 action.

I do, been a subscriber since 2001. So how many times have you been to Africa & hunted DG? jorge

I think there are a couple of reasons why PF for military. Firstly would be auto and semi auto. It would be very hard to get CRF to be relaible when the bolt closes so fast.The other issue and applying equally to bolt actions is the a much greater need for case rim and extractor groove dimension to meet a specifation for CRF to work.



Actually the difference in size is not as great as it looks. Only part of the CFR hook grabs the rim and the rest is lead in. The PF also tries to twist the case since the extractor rotates with the bolt. If you did want the biggest extractor of all it would need to be PF and CRF is limited to how much of a curve there can be since the rim has to slide under.

Yeah Roscoe there are a lot of Cape Buffalo here in Florida.(LAFFIN MORE)

Keep your head in the hat where all the answers are.

I forgot there are more PHs writing for Meridian Magazine than for African Hunter (HOWLIN!)

Well, for this LSU grad, the no longer 'Aints winning will make me just bold enough to move this argument to this direction.

I've never killed a "DG" African animal. Using a PF, I have killed a pile of game that were running and needed a fast second or follow-up shot. I've never dropped a round as seems to be the concern. I have, in my earlier years, though, short stroked (umm, make your own joke) a couple. That did slow the process down, and I'm pretty sure cost me, in one case, a bear. The short stroke did not cause a jam. So, would have a CRF been any different? This is an honest inquiry.

For what it's worth, I have the Weatherby Fibermark (Mark V) in .375 H&H, and I love it. I think I paid $1,100 for it on Gunbroker. It's my third Mark V, and I've loved every one of them.

I'm headed to Namibia in April for PG, but I won't hesitate to hunt DG with this gun. If I'm killed one day because I had a PF rather than a CRF, than it was clearly my time to go.

god your an idiot

Seyfried and lots of others I'm sure have used PF actions on dangerous game;Harry Selby for one. Finn Aaggard in one rifle IIRC,a 458,had a PF;his other was a 98.His 375 was a pre 64 M70.... I guess you pick your experts in these matters and run what you are comfortable with......

I'm unlikely,like 99% of others on here,to ever shoot enough DG animals to ever become an expert at it,as such experience does not come with two, or four,or even a dozen encounters of this type.I would suspect a guy would have to have been in dozens of encounters, maybe hundreds,before he had a real notion of whether PF or CRF is best.

One thing I do suspect is that it is hard to take range experience of any kind,or even hunting of non-dangerous game,and translate it over into the realm of DG hunting,and duplicate the kind of fear, and urgency that goes with watching someone get pounded, or having to save your own bacon. At those times I suspect a bolt rifle is worked in an entirely different manner than anything you can duplicate in practice.

I've never had a PF jam on me,but have seen it happen with others. I cannot imagine how a properly functioning CRF can be made to jam if it is short stroked,although I guess it is possible if the extractor drops the cartridge,but see sentence below.

There is no sense bringing improperly-timed CRF's into the equation because this is like evaluating how a tire is running when it is flat.

On the extraction/ejection issue, I have seen the little post 64 extractor break;ditto the Savage 110,and also seen the Rem 700 extractor pull right through the rim of the case.I have never seen a Rem extractor break.Just the other day I saw a target rifle with a frozen plunger ejector in the gunstore for repair.I have seen one claw extractor break;it happened cycling an action in my basement.

You can't bring military weapons into the mix because they are semi or full auto,and do not depend on human hands,under great stress, to cycle.That said I was told the other day that a bunch of military stuff was tested in Arctic conditions, and the only military rifles that came through with a clean slate for function were those made by Accuracy International.Maybe someone on here knows about this?

Just because you kill an elk with a 257 Roberts does not make the Roberts the perfect elk cartridge.Along similar lines, just because a tourist hunter takes a PF rifle to Africa,and kills two Cape Buffalo with it,does not make it a "perfect", or even suitable DG rifle...

In the end, you play the odds,and pick your experts by the preponderance of the evidence,.... because compared to African and Alaskan pro's who specialize in DG, or some gun professionals who have done this stuff a great deal..anyone else's views on the matter are really not worth considering......

...Paul Mauser patented,and tested,PF rifle actions very similar to the PF's used today in many sporting rifles.The patents are right there for everyone to see....They were rejected by him and the German Gov't (IIRC)as being less reliable than the 98.With all due respect, I seriously doubt anyone on here knows more about reliable bolt rifle function than Paul Mauser.Just cause he is dead and unable to post does not mean he was wrong in any way.

So, in playing the "odds", I am not going to reinvent any wheels,and will just float along with the generally-accepted advise of many experienced Alaskan and African guys when it comes to this stuff and use a good,properly-timed CRF. JMHO and YMMV.

First off, I would hardly trust brownings actions with a round like the .375 h&h especially when my life was at stake. Theres no point in paying 3000 or whatever dollars for a kimber to have shinyness and "quality attributes" in a gun. cz550 and mauser replicas/original mauzers are the best out there, and you know who makes them. That being said I have never personally owned a savage, but wouldn't feel safe with them either for the purpose.

I couldn't agree more with what you've written, Bob. Good post.

By the way, I have only ever seen one claw extractor fail/break and that was on a Win M70 Classic with the MIM (cast) extractor. After looking at it, I was convinced that it was from a flaw in the metal in just the right place. Of course, it only failed after probably 1500 rounds. Failed at the range thankfully, not while hunting.

Test

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.

Mike: Well.......sure,you're correct.....but consider that the CRF is not functioning at that point the way it's supposed to......Properly set-up CRF's are not supposed to have an extractor that drops the empty when the bot is withdrwan to eject.If your rifle does that,you should get'er fixed.Besides,some M70 Classics are bad examples of a properly tuned CRF

Bob,

You can tune all your like but that won't overcome ammo problems.

There are simple facts and one leads to the other. CRF is far more complicated, a lot more needs to happen right for it to be right. That of course leads to fact two and that is cycling problems are more likely to occur with CRF.

Mike: ..........mmmm.....thinking on this

Wish I could say I have had a CRF failure attributable to ammo,but I have not.....maybe this will happen eventually.I hope not!

We have about exausted it

But the Kimber Caprivi looks nice but the internet sure does turn up some bad stuff. But American Rifleman article said it is the most accurate 375 (the stainless Talkeetna) they have ever tested.

A good picture of one.

http://www.hallowellco.com/kimber%208400_talkeetna.htm

American Rifleman article.

http://www.americanrifleman.org/ArticlePage.aspx?id=1693&cid=3

"98% of PHs use CRFs"....Could you share the statistical data base where you acquired this totally BS "fact" from? Do you consider a double rifle a CRF? I just keep howling at all these "experts" who just make up shiet as they go along to justify their OPINION.

I am STILL REPEAT STILL waiting for the documented list of the 100s of PHs and clients who have been stomped, gored, eaten and otherwise abused because their PF rifles either failed to feed or extract when some large critter was coming to kill them.

Talk is cheap but unless you can back it up with documented factual data it's just more BS to go into the gunwriter myth database... and god knows there is enough of that to fill a large bookcase.

Amazing how our guys who fought the most dangerous game of all (Germans & Japs), seemed to want to keep their M-1s rather than swap them out for K98s or type 99s. Guess they were just stupid too as they were too dumb to know that the US Rifle caliber 30 M-1 was an unreliable POS....... (LAFFIN)

I guess we need to add reading comrpehension to your list of maladies. I said those who USE BOLTS. Why do you insist on being so obtuse? Read Boddington's two books on African Rifles and look at the PHs surveys in there. You also quoted the African Hunter article on the PH tesing at Rifa in Zimbabwe. Did you conveniently fail to mention the push feed issues with the 700s there or are we back to the reading comprehension issue? I've said it multiple times I'm no expert with just three safaris under my belt, but more importantly a lot of folks here know me and I don't make stuff up. African literature is replete with examples of bad choices in rifle types, actions cartridges and so forth. So why is it most PHs (REMEMBER THOSE WHO USE BOLT ACTIONS AND NOT DOUBLES-GET IT?) use CRFs? And also tell us, how many safaris have you been on and what kind of DG have you hunted. jorge

and the 30 cal M1 was SEMI-auto, while the K98 and such were bolt.

friggin idiot.

The above statement is so profound and deeply complex I confess I fail to understand it's relevance to the topic at hand, for surely anybody who compares military employment of firearms to Dangerous Game hunting is well, prone to using such grammatical wonders like "and such"...jorge

my comment was not to you Jorge, but to the old one.

I know wolf, guess I just tried too hard to make it sound complex and mix up our resident moron. My apologies. jorge

Glad you guys figgered out the M-1 was not a bolt gun.

I'll try and make is SIMPLE. It was a superior battle rifle to ANY bolt action, and battle conditions are far worse than hopping out of a Land Rover and popping some unaware Kudu odd a set of sticks.
Need pictures?

Now about that list of dead clients and PHs.... wonder why you "experts" can't seem to produce that???????

And there you have it. Any moron that compares combat to hunting dangerous game is about as bright as those new-fangled "eco-light bulbs" that seem to be all the rage today. The second statement is pretty impressive as well if you consider ignorance and lack of grammatical skills a virtue. Just for your own education there geezer, kudu are not considered dangerous game and I don't know about your African experience but the kudu I've chased sure as hell didn't behave that way. But do carry on mentally-masturbating about things you've never done and never will. jorge

Jorge, still can't seem to come up with that list... maybe you are not whacking your willie hard enough? Lots of name calling but apparently unable to supply any verifiable facts.....
What Herter's used to call a "drugstore cowboy".

Remind me again what any of this has to do with a 375 Kimber........

Oh man, every day! and why not? mine still works while yours I'm sure is a shriveled up memory that no dose of blue pills can even begin to breathe life into it. LOL! jorge

Every post you make is a hijack.I'd ignore you but its too damn entertaining to see what idiotic crap you'll come up with next..

Have you ever had a friend?

I REPEAT:
Jorge, still can't seem to come up with that list... maybe you are not whacking your willie hard enough? Lots of name calling but apparently unable to supply any verifiable facts.....
What Herter's used to call a "drugstore cowboy".

IT'S ALL ABOUT THE LIST...WHY DON'T YOU JUST ADMIT YOU CAN'T DO IT BECAUSE IT DOES NOT EXIST?

The friends I have I didn't meet on internet chat rooms.

I'd encourage the "ignore" feature on Oldman . . . you can't win and arguement with this type of mentality, it's not possible. Every week we get another one of these idiots . . .

Encourage all you want, that's ONE way to handle getting caught in an unsupportable BS position. The only "idiot" is someone who makes a claim and cannot trot out the facts to support it when questioned. Back when I was brought up, MEN were taught to admit if they were wrong about a proposition, now they just hide under the desk. I still await the list........

The list you dogmatically hang your hat on does not exist, anymore than a list of those who used CRFs vs doubles, muskets or anything else for that matter and anybody with half a brain understands. What DOES exist is the very article you quoted from African Hunter magazine regarding the 700 and the survey by Craig Boddington on two of his books on African rifles, the numerous articles by Weiland, Taylor and a host of other professionals on the subject citing their predilection for CRFs. And that fact is evidenced by the reality that almost 100% of those PHs WHO USE BOLTS in the field use and prefer CRFs over push feed.

I'm not hiding douce-bag, I just chose to ignore you and waste my time trying to out-wit the witless, until a specific comment is leveled at me then it just makes my day to ridicule your ignorant ass. I've admitted being wrong here on more than one occassion, as far is being a man is concerned, too bad you'll never get the chance to prove it. But do tell us about your african experiences with that rifleof yours. You can do that can't you? jorge

jorge.....exercise in futility...time to just start dishing a little back...



Ingwe

oldman1942 flapping his gums over here to eh?

Yep...almost time to see if OldDouche will call me a racist again...



Ingwe

I know as many PHs as anyone and I believe most have control feed rifles for backup....Some do not and they are mostly plainsgame PHs and mostly in RSA or they are fairly new to PHing and can't afford a control feed rifle..At least that is my assesment based on the ones I know personally..I do know some old elephant control officers that used push feed M-70s way back yonder, mostly because that was all that was available..

But the bottom line is I have had a couple of bad experiences with push feeds allowing the cartridge to fall out as I ran after buffalo and tried to chamber a round, I have seen many more failures with pushfeeds than with control feeds..I personally think control feed rifles are not bullshit and I base that on experience not on guess and by gosh by oldman, and btw I would bet I have him bested by a number of years...

I know some folks that use pushfeeds and they are satisfied with them, and I have no problem with that, what I do find disturbing is when someone spouts off about a control feed rifle being BS when it is not, That is my option, my opinnion, to use or not to use, and the bullshit is on the internet, not in the field.

IMO, a dangerous game rifle is a 98 Mauser full custom, first and foremost, followed by a Win.control feed M-70 if you use a bolt gun. but if you switched it around that wouldn't hurt my feelings..

You will never see me in the bush with a push feed rifle of any sort unless I'm pushing a couple of rounds into my double rifle! and I actually prefer a good Mauser to a double rifle for hunting DG..I do love double rifles however.

Ray,

i follow you most of the time but i met the late Robet J Montvoisin who guided in a lot of central african countries (Cameroon, Zaire and CAR) and in Zambia and was too a elephant culler in Chad in the 50s and he was using a Weatherby Mark V in 460 and 375 Weatherby magnum in his last years of guiding. i think some french speaking guides are on those action too. i ve met too a canadian that guide in Tanzania and he used too a mark V action. but they re exeptions as usual.

see you

Hi all, I'm new to the site.

So, back to original question. Are the Caprivi's any good? I am entertaining the prospect buying one. It looks nice, but the problems I have read about concern me. Other options are the CZ 550, a custom gun, or a Dakota or similar.

I don't have any plans to hunt dangerous game, just have always liked the 375 H&H caliber. I shot a mule deer with a Sierra 300gr bullet out of a Ruger #1, and had no meat damage to speak of. I had a Remington Model 30 Express barrelled in 375, but the "gunsmith" did a hack job, so I won't be stocking it. I have two Argentine 1909 actions I bought many years ago, and was thinking of having one of them built into a 35 Whelen. That would make an adequate elk rifle, but still isn't a 375 H&H. Any ideas?

The M70/375 is probably about the most strongly associated calibre and rifle out there and with top resale values.

But you a spanning some big price ranges when you inlcude CZ and Dakota.

I know it's a big range of pricing, but price isn't the primary concern. It's more about value. Is the Winchester out and available yet? Any street pricing? It should be about the same as the CZ 550, right? Is the Sako CRF? Just looking for a good rifle, and can pay a bit more for better wood, smooth action, etc.

I think the M70 is supposed to hit the shops in the later part of the year. Winchester lists the retail at about $1300US

Gunbroker and similar have the previous model which some would prefer because of the trigger but they can be pricey.

Sako is CRF in terms of what that means but it is not the external claw extractor. They are like a push feed but with the bottom half of the bolt counterbore cut away so the case rim can slide under the PF style extractor.

Dakota is way out of the area of "and can pay a bit more for better wood, smooth action, etc."

If Kimber is OK, then it is hard to beat at the price.

For good wood probablly the best deal around is the CZs which are done by American Hunting Rifles. Stick that in Google and you will get their website. The rifles have a tremendous reputation pn AccurateReloading Big Bores forum and AR is the home of Big Bore forums.

Dakota and Wby Safari are $6000 plus and so so wood and you would be at $8000-$9000 with either with wood ugrade.

If you want super smooth and super reliable feeding and top accuracy then the Sauer but it is PF. You can upgrade their wood but that will put you into Wby/Dakota pricing.

My gut feeling is the Kimber Caprivi would be OK. I think some of the accuracy probems with Kimber in the smaller calibre are because they are very light. Vey light barrels that are not real good barrels can be real hair pulling stuff. But the 375 Caprivi is a heavier barrel, about like the M70 375.

I also suspect the Kimber Caprivi gets some bad press because of the action being like a Rem 700 under the wood while it preteds to be a M70 above the wood.But the reality is that is an image thing.

And last but not least, what about the Ruger RSM in 375. They are a nice rifle, reasonable wood and priced less than the Kimber Caprivi.

Thanks, Mike. It seems to me that the RSM, at 10# without scope, is a bit heavy in a 375. It's 1/2# heavier than the 416, probably because of the bigger hole in the barrel in the 416. Maybe the Caprivi is the way to go, although the Winchester should be okay.

Yes the RSM is heavy but balances and points far better than the muzzle light Kimber. It can also be found for 1/3 the price. If you can't handle an 11 pound 375 H&H well.....

IMO light rifles cause more bad field shooting than any other single factor.

My $375 $1200.

On paper, the Kimber Caprivis is the best value. If I lived in America I would give one a go. But all costs more in Australia and sending back via agent causes a headache just thinking about hit.

As a side note, I had one of the early RSM 375s, same as the one oldman1942 has and I found the weight OK. Although we are not climbing around mountains in Australia But of the Kimber is Ok I would prefer it. The RSMs recoil plate system is a put of and I don't like the Ruger mounts.

The Ruger recoil plate system, combined with a cross bolt is very rugged. Doubt you'll see an RSM with a split stock.
Ruger rings are rugged and avoid one more failure point on heavy kickers, scope mount bases. They can also be removed easily if necessary and another scope put in place or the irons used.

Sad they don't make it anymore and the Hawkeye will never be the rifle it is. heck they don't even make a real 375 H&H.

The Kimber also costs almost 3x as much, the difference of which will buy a Schmidt & Bender rather than a Tasco.

I think Ruger has $2400US on its website and Kimber about $3200US