The old crf vs prf debate....

[Rule 303]

Oh dang, I thought that you had faded away. Maybe you should try to PM me instead but I sense you like the drama.

I believe he told it as it happened. He has not changed the description. You are not listening. I can tell you from personal experience of being in a deadly stressful situation, as I was in CAR, that you are incredibly focused, aware and don't forget a thing. Maybe your mind works differently and I doubt you are a psychologist.

Isn't it clear to you by now and from my answers that I am not ALLOWED to tell you more about the rifle or the exact issue due to an agreement with the manufacturer? If you can't take my word for it, fine but don't act like you know me, mate.

You are wrong with your assumptions about the part that broke but thanks for trying to educate me.

Not interested in drama just facts that you do not want to supply after making a statement. Yes I probably should have PM you but others were also interested in the answers.

Re the bit about a stressful situation focusing the mind. It ca, but not always on the actual facts of the matter. Proven time and time again, around the world and in all sorts of situations. You do not need to be a psychologist to know this. I would suggest you research this before blindly clinging to a dogma you appear to have a limited knowledge of.

Now you come out and say your mate is not allowed to tell people what part of the rifle broke and how the PF was then responsible for the rifle not working. You could have articulated this quite a while ago, as I was under the impression that your mate was not allowed to divulge the make of the rifle only. I believe you have dug your self a hole and are plain not willing to admit it. I did ask you what problems that occur with a PF can not occur with a CRF? Would you mind answering this.

Re wrong assumptions. No assumptions about what failed etc, just examples of probable faults and how they are not a fault with the design of the type of rifle so much as a manufacturing fault.

Others have covered the the problems you presented with your answer somewhat more elegantly than I, especially Red leg, but I tend to talk from the shoulder to try and avoid misunderstandings.

 

[Scott CWO]

was under the impression

Yep, your were under a lot of impressions and assumptions. I have cleared the air on them as much as I can. If I divulge the parts, that would divulge the make and model. My friend talked with the gunsmith, not I. Since I know him, I believe what I was told. You do not know either of us so therefore, you are suspicious. I get it. You will never be satisfied. I am not suspicious because I know him. It all really did happen. As I told Red Leg, I wish I could tell you more details. Please accept that you will never know and move on. Life is short. I do thank you for lowering your tone. We are making progress.

 

[Wyatt Smith]

I remember Scott telling the story with the rifle malfunction in detail. I can’t find the thread, but, Scott doesn’t want it told so I won’t repeat it. If I remember right, and I’m sure I do, the malfunction rendered the rifle useless. It was more than a jam. It was a push feed rifle. Would a CRF rifle have worked? I cannot say.

 

[Scott CWO]

I remember Scott telling the story with the rifle malfunction in detail. I can’t find the thread, but, Scott doesn’t want it told so I won’t repeat it. If I remember right, and I’m sure I do, the malfunction rendered the rifle useless. It was more than a jam. It was a push feed rifle. Would a CRF rifle have worked? I cannot say.

Yeah, I got in hot water because of the rifle details so I didn't share them this time around. I was told the story before the deal was worked out and I didn't even know the details of the deal until it was too late. Now, I am abiding by it since I know about it now.

 

[Rule 303]

Yep, your were under a lot of impressions and assumptions. I have cleared the air on them as much as I can. If I divulge the parts, that would divulge the make and model. My friend talked with the gunsmith, not I. Since I know him, I believe what I was told. You do not know either of us so therefore, you are suspicious. I get it. You will never be satisfied. I am not suspicious because I know him. It all really did happen. As I told Red Leg, I wish I could tell you more details. Please accept that you will never know and move on. Life is short. I do thank you for lowering your tone. We are making progress.

Late answering you as I have been away hunting. No assumptions made by me if you read what I said. The impressions I was under were of your doing/making. I see you still failed to answer the question what can fail on a PF that can not fail on a CRF. Care to answer that? If not is it because you can not? Fairly simple question really. By the way this question has no bearing on your mates rifle but on statements you have made i.e. It could only happen to a PF.

Not sure how naming the parts that failed would give away the make and model unless it was something like a Blaser etc that could be said to have unique parts or names for those parts. To be clear as you seem to have assumed I was fishing when giving examples before, I am not fishing/guessing as to the rifle make. Just an example. So you might be able to understand why the suspicion/curiosity on my part

I don't doubt that your mate went through the bear attack and was lucky to survive. In a former life I learnt that most situations are not recalled exactly as they happened. Like I said, you may care to research this, it is very interesting and enlightening.

 

[Scott CWO]

Late answering you as I have been away hunting. No assumptions made by me if you read what I said. The impressions I was under were of your doing/making. I see you still failed to answer the question what can fail on a PF that can not fail on a CRF. Care to answer that? If not is it because you can not? Fairly simple question really. By the way this question has no bearing on your mates rifle but on statements you have made i.e. It could only happen to a PF.

Not sure how naming the parts that failed would give away the make and model unless it was something like a Blaser etc that could be said to have unique parts or names for those parts. To be clear as you seem to have assumed I was fishing when giving examples before, I am not fishing/guessing as to the rifle make. Just an example. So you might be able to understand why the suspicion/curiosity on my part

I don't doubt that your mate went through the bear attack and was lucky to survive. In a former life I learnt that most situations are not recalled exactly as they happened. Like I said, you may care to research this, it is very interesting and enlightening.

It’s great that you were away hunting. I wish I was hunting somewhere. Good for you. I was hoping you didn’t post because you were done. Please stop posting. Everyone is tired of this issue. I can’t legally say anything more about the rifle and be able to respect the wishes of a close friend. I would think that you could respect that at least.

As for not recalling what happened accurately, that probably happens in some cases, but not this one. I am close friends with this guy. We talk on the phone monthly and see each other as often as distance allows. It might surprise you but he doesn’t enjoy talking about the attack to others. He doesn’t like to tell the story to new people. When we are in camp with others, I never bring it up. If he chooses to bring it up, that’s his choice and he rarely does. I would say that he and I talk about his attack and mine only once every year or two. He hasn’t changed a word about the details. I believe EVERY WORD. I don’t need to research your theory. I choose to support my friends.

Let’s end these posts and agree to disagree. I wish you well.

 

[HWL]

A hunter, dying because of a charge...... with a Mauser M98 in it's hands is a hero,...the same hunter with a Remington push feed, same charge,..... is just a damned idiot....



HWL

 

[Fastrig]

A hunter, dying because of a charge...... with a Mauser M98 in it's hands is a hero,...the same hunter with a Remington push feed, same charge,..... is just a damned idiot....



HWL

Rather have the Blaser R8 personally.....

 

[HWL]

Rather have the Blaser R8 personally.....

The R8 was created to save the asses of the push feed communnity.....




HWL

 

[Rule 303]

It’s great that you were away hunting. I wish I was hunting somewhere. Good for you. I was hoping you didn’t post because you were done. Please stop posting. Everyone is tired of this issue. I can’t legally say anything more about the rifle and be able to respect the wishes of a close friend. I would think that you could respect that at least.

As for not recalling what happened accurately, that probably happens in some cases, but not this one. I am close friends with this guy. We talk on the phone monthly and see each other as often as distance allows. It might surprise you but he doesn’t enjoy talking about the attack to others. He doesn’t like to tell the story to new people. When we are in camp with others, I never bring it up. If he chooses to bring it up, that’s his choice and he rarely does. I would say that he and I talk about his attack and mine only once every year or two. He hasn’t changed a word about the details. I believe EVERY WORD. I don’t need to research your theory. I choose to support my friends.

Let’s end these posts and agree to disagree. I wish you well.

Scott you sure do not understand things do you. I asked a simple question that has nothing to do with your mate and you keep avoiding it. I can only take it that you are full of hot air and know not what you talk about. You made a statement and refuse to back it up about the difference between what can happen/not happen with CRF and PF. This has nothing to do with giving away your mates rifle and faults. Very simple really.

If others are tired of me let them say so, you are resorting to the school yard bully tactics to avoid answering again. As for the exactness of your mates statement and calling it my theory shows you really have lived a closed life. It is not a theory it is proven fact, research it. I am not saying you should not support your mate. I am not saying what he says is way off the mark. Just that his recollection may not be 100% accurate. This is not bagging him out just a simple statement of fact. If you can not accept what the real world knows to happen and will not research it then you are restricting your own education and knowledge. This would in no way denigrate your mate and no one is asking you to disbelieve your mate.

So just to let you know where I stand, if you come back with a comment that does not answer that one simple question, even if it is admitting you do not know of any difference then I will simply re ask the question. I take it you can understand this.

 

[Fastrig]

The R8 was created to save the asses of the push feed communnity.....




HWL

LOL.....

 

[Scott CWO]

On the contrary, a few people have tried to subtly mention that you should stop but you just don’t want to hear them or me. I have said repeatedly that I wish you well and that we should just agree to disagree. Can you do that? Yes or no?

Scott you sure do not understand things do you. I asked a simple question that has nothing to do with your mate and you keep avoiding it. I can only take it that you are full of hot air and know not what you talk about. You made a statement and refuse to back it up about the difference between what can happen/not happen with CRF and PF. This has nothing to do with giving away your mates rifle and faults. Very simple really.

If others are tired of me let them say so, you are resorting to the school yard bully tactics to avoid answering again. As for the exactness of your mates statement and calling it my theory shows you really have lived a closed life. It is not a theory it is proven fact, research it. I am not saying you should not support your mate. I am not saying what he says is way off the mark. Just that his recollection may not be 100% accurate. This is not bagging him out just a simple statement of fact. If you can not accept what the real world knows to happen and will not research it then you are restricting your own education and knowledge. This would in no way denigrate your mate and no one is asking you to disbelieve your mate.

So just to let you know where I stand, if you come back with a comment that does not answer that one simple question, even if it is admitting you do not know of any difference then I will simply re ask the question. I take it you can understand this.[/QUOTE

 

[Hearties]

 

[Alistair]

I can say with personal experience that Remington 700 extractors can and will fail at the most inoppurtune times. That said, this experience is in relation to range shooting not hunting.

As I'm sure we're all aware, Rem 700 actions, and their derivatives are very popular amongst target shooters, especially in classes such as F class or bench rest. As such, I've seen a lot of these used for this purpose at the range.

Now serious target shooters, especially in long range bench rest, are fond of using pretty hot loads to buck wind as much as possible. In fact, whilst they'd describe some of these loads as 'pretty hot', I'd describe them as 'dangerously overpressure'. Tomayto, Tomahto.

As a result of this, stiff extraction is a very common feature, especially in the hotter months and when rattling off 5 rounds as fast as physically possible before the wind changes.

That brings us onto the topic of this post. Under these extreme conditions, it is relatively common with Remington actions that cycling the bolt will cause the extractor to mangle the rim of the case. In some instances this is severe enough that the extractor either takes out a chunk of the rim, causing a stuck case, or alternatively bends the rim enough for it to slip off, causing the same issue.

Now whilst all extractors can, and possibly will, do this, the Remington is particularly bad because the extractor is so tiny, both in 'depth' and in width. By comparison, my Tikka 695, is a good 1mm deeper and possibly a bit wider as well. This issue also explains why many of the custom rifle guys working from a 700 action for blueprinting or whatever, tend to swap out the Remington extractor for either an M16 type, or a Sako unit.

Now what relevance does this have to the current debate? Arguably, not much. That said, it is my firm opinion that as far as reliability of extraction goes, the order of preference is as such: CRF > Generic PRF extractor a la Sako > Remington design.

I don't particularly care to comment on the relative reliability of feeding between the systems, both becasue I have little practical experience and because it is so dependent on technique, but I would say for certain that if I had to bet my life on one of these extractor designs, it would 100% not be Remington.

Al.

 

[Rule 303]

On the contrary, a few people have tried to subtly mention that you should stop but you just don’t want to hear them or me. I have said repeatedly that I wish you well and that we should just agree to disagree. Can you do that? Yes or no?

So Scott the question again, What can happen/not happen with CRF and PF? Seems yet again you want to avoid the question. Seems to me you do not know and are not secure enough in your person to admit you do not know or made a mistake in making the comment. Please answer the question.

 

[fourfive8]

Never had a PF fail in the field and never had a CRF fail in the field. Currently have 5 push feeds after a three year major herd sell-off of all manner of action and feed types. Currently the PFs include: a Win 94 30-30, a Glock 9mm, a Win 52 22rf Sporter, a post 64 Win 70 270 and a Rem 600 222 Rem. All the rest are either single shots, muzzleloaders or CRF Win 70s and bolt Mausers.

I have replaced the clip extractors on a couple of Rem 700/721 s though. Not much "grab" there so not much basic confidence- IMO the design just seems to be "minimal".

Here's a pic for side by side visual comparison of extractors- Rem 700 type and Win 70/Mauser type. Those Rem 700 extractor rivets are TINY- don't sneeze

 

[Rule 303]

Never had a PF fail in the field and never had a CRF fail in the field. Currently have 5 push feeds after a three year major herd sell-off of all manner of action and feed types. Currently the PFs include: a Win 94 30-30, a Glock 9mm, a Win 52 22rf Sporter, a post 64 Win 70 270 and a Rem 600 222 Rem. All the rest are either single shots, muzzleloaders or CRF Win 70s and bolt Mausers.

I have replaced the clip extractors on a couple of Rem 700/721 s though. Not much "grab" there so not much basic confidence- IMO the design just seems to be "minimal".

Here's a pic for side by side visual comparison of extractors- Rem 700 type and Win 70/Mauser type. Those Rem 700 extractor rivets are TINY- don't sneeze

View attachment 340234

Many moons ago I measured the Rem 700 extractor and Sako, both had the same grip area. The M700 extractor, baring manufacturing faults, gives a more secure grip than most other PF extractors as it is designed to dig in and grip under pressure. The Sako type can more readily jump the rim than the Rem. Put a Sako style extractor onto a Rem 700 bolt and you break the gas shield. That being said I would like both to have a greater grip area, and both can/do shave brass from the inside of the rim. If memory serves the newer R700 extractor does not have a rivet. Stand to be corrected on that one.

I have confidence in both R700 and Sako/M16 style extractors but still prefer CRF for Dangerous Game, plus the non rotating extractor does not shave the brass.