The old crf vs prf debate....

[Fastrig]

Fastrig,
Ah, but the special moments you may be missing hunting in a group!

Like watching a cougar hunting deer just out of rifle range and then hearing it scream near dark to run them from a plum thicket mere yards from you, calling in a cougar when hunting wild turkey, calling in bobcats when using deer calls, having quail run over your boots when still hunting along a wooded creek bank, having a doe and fawn walk with in mere feet of you when scanning a valley for game, turning to eye to eye contact with a coyote sneaking up from behind (mutual surprise and standoff) . Plus many more.

I love to hunt birds with others and am not against hunting big game with others, but many of my most memorable moments have been when hunting alone.

One last solitary still hunting memory; On a still and quiet morning, having two Phantom jets silently appear on the deck at about 100 yards out! They were practicing supersonic LOW altitude runs. The sonic boom caused game to appear in three different directions!

Yep, that solo thing is fun and serene often times, but in DG territory it's a bit of a risk. The last time I had a bear encounter I was field dressing a deer and didn't even hear the bear coming up behind me. Glad my hunting partner did

 

[TOBY458]

My .02. I have owned MANY bolt action rifles of all shapes and sizes. To this day, I have never had a single failure to extract with any of them. To me, ejection is usually more of an issue than extraction.
To me, a standing ejector is (probably) less prone to fail, but the only issues I've ever had was with a Sako 85 rifle with a standing ejector. But this is a design issue on Sako's part. And not all Sako 85s exhibit this problem.
On the typical push feed action the ejector, being a small spring loaded plunger on the bolt face, could possibly get stuck in the down position and fail to eject. But that would probably only occur if trash got inside the plunger hole or the spring broke. Both very unlikely in my opinion.

 

[Standard Velocity]

My .02. I have owned MANY bolt action rifles of all shapes and sizes. To this day, I have never had a single failure to extract with any of them. To me, ejection is usually more of an issue than extraction.
To me, a standing ejector is (probably) less prone to fail, but the only issues I've ever had was with a Sako 85 rifle with a standing ejector. But this is a design issue on Sako's part. And not all Sako 85s exhibit this problem.
On the typical push feed action the ejector, being a small spring loaded plunger on the bolt face, could possibly get stuck in the down position and fail to eject. But that would probably only occur if trash got inside the plunger hole or the spring broke. Both very unlikely in my opinion.

I have wondered about the plunger ejector in relation to fine dust. I have seen fine dust bind equally small mechanical parts on other machines.

Have you ever had the ejector bind from dust? A fixed ejector gives me more solace than the CRF claw extractor. I’ve never had an issue with Rem. or Sako style extractors.

 

[fourfive8]

This is one of those endless debates. I have had and used most kinds of extractors on many kinds of guns for a long time. I've fixed (replaced) one Rem extractor then had no further problems. I've changed one Rem extractor to a Sako type also with no further extraction/ejection problems other than the location of the Sako extractor significantly changed the angle of ejection causing another issue... suitable for another thread. I no longer have those two rifles. Currently have a few of each type, push feeds and CRFs. The CRF types are my primary serious hunting rifles for multi-thousand $ trips, DG or other. The only Rem push feed I still have is a little M600 in 222- hardly a trip disaster issue if the extractor breaks or fails or a chambered case gets stuck while hunting Pdogs or coyotes.

After I replaced that one broken Rem extractor with a factory replacement extractor, I learned exactly how they work or don't. Consequently, I don't have much faith in them. Just my opinion but they seem right on the edge of minimal engineering or prone-to-fail engineering. I did not say, that if functioning properly, they don't get a good grip on the rim... they do. BUT, that TINY half moon spring, with a bump, riveted to the side of the bolt simply is not reassuring. Sorry, just isn't.

 

[Fastrig]

This is one of those endless debates. I have had and used most kinds of extractors on many kinds of guns for a long time. I've fixed (replaced) one Rem extractor then had no further problems. I've changed one Rem extractor to a Sako type also with no further extraction/ejection problems other than the location of the Sako extractor significantly changed the angle of ejection causing another issue... suitable for another thread. I no longer have those two rifles. Currently have a few of each type, push feeds and CRFs. The CRF types are my primary serious hunting rifles for multi-thousand $ trips, DG or other. The only Rem push feed I still have is a little M600 in 222- hardly a trip disaster issue if the extractor breaks or fails or a chambered case gets stuck while hunting Pdogs or coyotes.

After I replaced that one broken Rem extractor with a factory replacement extractor, I learned exactly how they work or don't. Consequently, I don't have much faith in them. Just my opinion but they seem right on the edge of minimal engineering or prone-to-fail engineering. I did not say, that if functioning properly, they don't get a good grip on the rim... they do. BUT, that TINY half moon spring, with a bump, riveted to the side of the bolt simply is not reassuring. Sorry, just isn't.

Thanks for the education....never owned a Remington rifle so like to hear experiences like this. Is there an issue of any kind with the Sako 85 action as I'm considering one for my wife? Never owned a Sako either....thanks!!

 

[fourfive8]

Here's a pic of a broken (about half) Rem extractor. The pointer is a mechanical pencil with #7 "lead" exposed.

 

[Clodo Ferreira]

Hi,

To me, there are no other system for a big game hunting rifle, dangerous game or not, than a true M98 Mauser. Their virtues are not ONLY the main ones: feeding-extraction-ejection ways. There are much more.
So, this thread is going to run in a full circle.
I have no doubts about the superiority of the Mauser 98.
Best!

CF

 

[fourfive8]

I think the ONLY issue I've heard of with factory Sako extraction wasn't the extractor directly but had to do with the angle of ejection. But both extraction and ejection are interrelated in that the case head is held by the extractor until the ejector pops the case out of the action. The issue with the angle of ejection in a Sako was reported in a thread here on AHF by Toby458, IIRC. In that instance the angle of ejection was too high and the ejected case was hitting and rebounding off the scope or scope turret then ending up back in the action causing a jam or potential jam. I wouldn't think that type jam issue to be common, but surely one of the things to check for when setting up a new rifle- no mater the brand. I have not experienced any issue with two Sakos I've owned.

I've had similar instances, not with the Sakos, but with a couple of Winchester 70 CRF rifles and the one Rem push feed with the Sako style extractor. The issue seems more common and logically so with low mounted scopes. So currently all my hunting rifle scopes (my scopes are simple, have two knobs and no odd reticle stadia, etc.) are mounted rotated 90 degrees left. No matter how easy or hard I eject, the cases clear the scope and turret cover.

Here're a couple of pics- A spent case that impacted the turret cover on one of my M70s years ago and pic of how I mount my serious hunting rifle scopes that helps prevent unwanted case impact during ejection. While these impacts were not causing jams for me the potential was real. Another plus is that it opens up the loading/ejection port so it's easier to load in a hurry.

 

[Fastrig]

I think the ONLY issue I've heard of with factory Sako extraction wasn't the extractor directly but had to do with the angle of ejection. But both extraction and ejection are interrelated in that the case head is held by the extractor until the ejector pops the case out of the action. The issue with the angle of ejection in a Sako was reported in a thread here on AHF by Toby458, IIRC. In that instance the angle of ejection was too high and the ejected case was hitting and rebounding off the scope or scope turret then ending up back in the action causing a jam or potential jam. I wouldn't think that type jam issue to be common, but surely one of the things to check for when setting up a new rifle- no mater the brand. I have not experienced any issue with two Sakos I've owned.

I've had similar instances, not with the Sakos, but with a couple of Winchester 70 CRF rifles and the one Rem push feed with the Sako style extractor. The issue seems more common and logically so with low mounted scopes. So currently all my hunting rifle scopes (my scopes are simple, have two knobs and no odd reticle stadia, etc.) are mounted rotated 90 degrees left. No matter how easy or hard I eject, the cases clear the scope and turret cover.

Here're a couple of pics- A spent case that impacted the turret cover on one of my M70s years ago and pic of how I mount my serious hunting rifle scopes that helps prevent unwanted case impact during ejection. While these impacts were not causing jams for me the potential was real. Another plus is that it opens up the loading port so it's easier to load in a hurry.

View attachment 335512View attachment 335513

Thank you very much for the insights and education....greatly appreciated!!

 

[postoak]

If you read what Sako 85 owners say in comments, then the lower scope results in less problems even though it sounds counter-intuitive.

Here are two guys who manufactured solutions on their own:

 

[Fastrig]

If you read what Sako 85 owners say in comments, then the lower scope results in less problems even though it sounds counter-intuitive.

Here are two guys who manufactured solutions on their own:

Wow, Sako obviously has an issue with their ejector, but hasn't taken steps to correct it? That's enough to shy me away from that rifle. Thanks again!!!

 

[TOBY458]

I think the ONLY issue I've heard of with factory Sako extraction wasn't the extractor directly but had to do with the angle of ejection. But both extraction and ejection are interrelated in that the case head is held by the extractor until the ejector pops the case out of the action. The issue with the angle of ejection in a Sako was reported in a thread here on AHF by Toby458, IIRC. In that instance the angle of ejection was too high and the ejected case was hitting and rebounding off the scope or scope turret then ending up back in the action causing a jam or potential jam. I wouldn't think that type jam issue to be common, but surely one of the things to check for when setting up a new rifle- no mater the brand. I have not experienced any issue with two Sakos I've owned.

I've had similar instances, not with the Sakos, but with a couple of Winchester 70 CRF rifles and the one Rem push feed with the Sako style extractor. The issue seems more common and logically so with low mounted scopes. So currently all my hunting rifle scopes (my scopes are simple, have two knobs and no odd reticle stadia, etc.) are mounted rotated 90 degrees left. No matter how easy or hard I eject, the cases clear the scope and turret cover.

Here're a couple of pics- A spent case that impacted the turret cover on one of my M70s years ago and pic of how I mount my serious hunting rifle scopes that helps prevent unwanted case impact during ejection. While these impacts were not causing jams for me the potential was real. Another plus is that it opens up the loading/ejection port so it's easier to load in a hurry.

View attachment 335512View attachment 335513

Turning the scope is how I remedied the issue with my Sako 85 as well.

 

[Ray B]

Rotating the scope solved the ejection issue my friend had with his BAR as long as he remembered that Up was now Left, Down was Right; Right was Up and Left was Down. He was shooting a 7 Mag and didn't bother with any of the new adjustable reticles or range estimation stuff.

 

[fourfive8]

Not hard to figure which is L-R or U-D once the scope is turned. And how many times do most hunting scopes have to be messed with or re-zeroed anyway? Instead of having to think much about it each time, if necessary, I just took a fine tip pen and marked the correct directions on the turrets as shown. Might save a wasted round or two of "oops went the wrong way" somewhere down the line.

 

[Scott CWO]

Not discounting your comments, but why would a rifle manufacture pay the medical bills for someone that got themselves in that situation? It certainly wasn’t their firearm’s fault and doing so would set a very bad precedent for their company.

It also showed that a human screwing up on cycling a control fed rifle is a reality as well.

I seriously doubt this friend of yours, or anyone else for that matter, would have gotten a control fed rifle, or any other rifle, cycled in the very serious and unfortunate situation he found himself in.

@Fastrig these are your statements I an referencing that either state or infer that my friend did something wrong. My friend did nothing wrong and it was the rifle's fault. The rifle malfunctioned.

As I stated earlier, he did have the ability to cycle the rifle and point it at the bear but it would not operate correctly so he was only able to stick it in the bears mouth, much like a stick.

I agree with you that a deployed sidearm would have been great to have in his situation after he was knocked down and like I said, he carries one now when following up a wounded bear. However, a CRF rifle is still the primary backup rifle (for a guide/PH in Alaska or Africa) that one should carry day in and day out and is the primary all-around tool for that job. A sidearm, in case you get knocked down, would be a great addition. As you know, some African PHs also like a good double rifle for two quick shots, instead of a bolt action.

I also agree that a PF will feed upside down but maybe not when being thrashed around by a wounded bear at all kinds of crazy angles and under much stress. I don't care to find out. The Mauser claw extractor actually holds the cartridge more firmly, so in my opinion and in the opinion of a the majority of guides/PHs that I have asked, it is a better option for DG. To each his own.

 

[Von S.]

I have wondered about the plunger ejector in relation to fine dust. I have seen fine dust bind equally small mechanical parts on other machines.

Have you ever had the ejector bind from dust? A fixed ejector gives me more solace than the CRF claw extractor. I’ve never had an issue with Rem. or Sako style extractors.

I only speak of things that I have personally experienced....not what some person has read that was written by someone who heard stuff from someone with an overactive imagination simply made up.

Most of my bolt guns are mauser type actions and once they have been "tickled a bit" will put the round in the chamber every time, though some may want to feed certain lengths and shapes more easily.....after I'm done they a.ll feed everything. Push feeds see to come ready to please in the feeding department.

As far as feeding goes with a bolt gun the Blaser r8 hands down is the fastest bolt and the mauser action if by far the slowest.

 

[Rule 303]

My criticism of the Remington extractor has to do with the small surface area that it contacts the rim and the need to completely close the bolt and sometimes fire the rifle to get the extractor to grip the rim. There are other push feed types that contact more of the rim and grip the rim without full closure. So my criticism addresses those two shortcomings rather than specifically the push feed system or makers. Possibly other M700s would not have the symptoms that I have observed with the few M700s in which I am familiar.

Which push feed rifle have more contact area than the M700. Just curious as I have measured a few and they are all about the same. Never had to fire an M700 to get the extractor to bump over the rim. Which grip without full closure of the bolt? I have had other types jump the rim and leave a case in the chamber-namely Sako types but not an M700/788 even with the cir clip cracked most of the way through, one with it broken. Fluke that never fell out.

 

[Rule 303]

@Fastrig


I also agree that a PF will feed upside down but maybe not when being thrashed around by a wounded bear at all kinds of crazy angles and under much stress. I don't care to find out. The Mauser claw extractor actually holds the cartridge more firmly, so in my opinion and in the opinion of a the majority of guides/PHs that I have asked, it is a better option for DG. To each his own.

Hate to tell you but a CRF in that situation is just as likely to fuck up. Very easily in fact. Have seen this in non dangerous game hunting. Has more to do with the feed lips. Rifle bumped cartridge jumps the feed rails up front and is down to far the back for bolt to pick up or the nose is pointing in wrong direction and jams on side of chamber mouth/action side. Not saying this was the case in your friends situation but sounds like it.

 

[Scott CWO]

Hate to tell you but a CRF in that situation is just as likely to fuck up. Very easily in fact. Have seen this in non dangerous game hunting. Has more to do with the feed lips. Rifle bumped cartridge jumps the feed rails up front and is down to far the back for bolt to pick up or the nose is pointing in wrong direction and jams on side of chamber mouth/action side. Not saying this was the case in your friends situation but sounds like it.[/QUOT

I am not able to mention the make of the rifle but it was not a true CRF. The bolt actually malfunctioned due to the stress he put on it and it would not close on a round. It was not a jam or feeding issue.

 

[Fastrig]

@Fastrig these are your statements I an referencing that either state or infer that my friend did something wrong. My friend did nothing wrong and it was the rifle's fault. The rifle malfunctioned.

As I stated earlier, he did have the ability to cycle the rifle and point it at the bear but it would not operate correctly so he was only able to stick it in the bears mouth, much like a stick.

I agree with you that a deployed sidearm would have been great to have in his situation after he was knocked down and like I said, he carries one now when following up a wounded bear. However, a CRF rifle is still the primary backup rifle (for a guide/PH in Alaska or Africa) that one should carry day in and day out and is the primary all-around tool for that job. A sidearm, in case you get knocked down, would be a great addition. As you know, some African PHs also like a good double rifle for two quick shots, instead of a bolt action.

I also agree that a PF will feed upside down but maybe not when being thrashed around by a wounded bear at all kinds of crazy angles and under much stress. I don't care to find out. The Mauser claw extractor actually holds the cartridge more firmly, so in my opinion and in the opinion of a the majority of guides/PHs that I have asked, it is a better option for DG. To each his own.

Sorry if you took those as criticism of your friend, but nothing could be further from the truth. I do not think he did a damn thing wrong, as a matter of fact, in the circumstance he was in I’d say he did everything right. I found that a rifle manufacture paid his medical bills surprising, not sure how that can be construed as a criticism of him. My little impromptu test was no criticism either, it was merely to see what would happen if I was in that kind of position, i.e. would my rifle cycle upside down, could I bring the rifle to a shooting position if a bear or other critter was on top of me, and would my PF vs CF rifle be a hinderance. And the last quote was in context of a bear thrashing a person around like a rag doll, again presuming the bear was on top of you. You’ll have to excuse me if I point out that your rendition of the events expanded over several posts and it wasn’t till the very last one where you said the bear backed off and or had your friend’s foot where he could get to his rifle. The original posts said the animal was on top of him going for his head and face, which prompted me to think how the hell could anyone do more than what your friend did to defend himself, and I’ll stand by my comments based on what you originally imparted. Again, I’m very glad your friend is okay and sorry if you took anything I said as a criticism of him as they weren’t meant that way in the least.