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

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