Controlled Round Feed

I guess, to be fair, I should fess up that I very much admire the Mannlicher. However, there is no rifle, not even the Mannlicher, that can seriously challenge the authority of the Mauser design. CRF is perhaps the most visible feature of the Mauser design, a facet which improves both feeding and extraction over any other design.

...no one has taken you up on this one. (Or maybe I shouldn't be...)
Al

Well, Al, we can't separate the rifles we use today from the history that shaped them. Truth is, there have been a number of bolt gun designs over the decades, but not one of them has had the impact of the Mauser. Mauser was able to take a design, and create strength with it, while most guns rely entirely on hardness of steel. When was the last time we saw any real genius in the manufacture of anything?
There are plenty of old military Mausers around for less than $400, that will still shoot happily away with full power ammo. If that isn't a testimony to quality and genius, I don't know what is.

All the test I have ever read, beginning with a very early issue of Rifle magazine, failed to show any significant advantage to CRF, even when firing upside down. I think it has become dogma after so many years of talk. My model 70 375 H&H made in 1970 doesn't choke, and if anything should according to scripture, it would be the one. Neither the Schultz & Larsen M1960 in 7X61, or any of my three Mannlichers. And, to twist the dragon's tail, neither of my AR15's. 
To tell the truth, I think the CRF hangs on by virtue of hairy tradition rather than any technical advantage. That's why town-cowboys drive pickups; they think they're supposed to, but don't really know why.

I don't want to be in the middle of you guys but I would offer that Roy Weatherby didn't really use CRF when he designed his Mark V action for his powerhouse cartridges for dangerous game; his concern with the Mauser design was not the feed but the pressure capability and gas shielding since the mauser didn't completely seal the cartridge head in the breech. His Mark V uses a recessed bolt face to enclose the case head and the Remington 700 is similar. The Remington 700 in 375 and 458 has been used to good advantage in Africa. It may also be remembered that many of the first dangerous game rifles were single-shot rifles that didn't have second shot capability let alone controlled round feed. Just a thought or two on the subject. Chris S

It seems as if some gun guys are waking up and questioning the catechism. By the way, the only rifle I ever saw choke on feed was a bolt rifle with CRF. My old buddy spent the butter and egg money on a Kimber. We went to the range to sight in a few rifles, so he took it along to show me how a great rifle works. He fired, opened the bolt, started to feed a second round and...BOING. The new round shot a couple of feet into the air and landed in the gravel. Ten or eleven tries later, with the same result, we headed for the sporting goods store where he had bought it. It came back three months later; after hunting season had closed. So, he sold it and bought a Remington 700 BDL. Of course, that's only one case, but every time I hear someone wisely speak about CRF, I smile.
Meantime, the Schultz and Larsen Model 60 has never skipped a beat.

Mike

Roy Weatherby was the glitz and sparkle PT Barnum of rifle meisters. He loved the 375 H&H case because he could alter the thing, pump up pressures to ridiculous levels, and reach new thresholds of muzzle blast and recoil.
Americans, being Americans, worship such shallow antics.

Weatherby hired all manner of media types to sound off about how great his hyper velocity circus was. He even claimed that his small bore cartridge hotrods outperformed the big guns on dangerous game, an absolutely reckless claim. Weatherby was never charged by a big powerful animal that is set on turning one into red coloured turf, and his claims that hyper velocity makes up for bullet mass are and were patently absurd, and even dangerous for hunters to accept.
Simply put, no Weatherby rifle can qualify as a dangerous game piece; extra long barrels, scope only sighting, trucklike stocks with idiotic white line spacers and sharp combs given stupid names are all against this, as are foot long muzzle brakes designed to make everyone in the vicinity deaf in remarkably short periods of time. As an open country rifle, sniping from extreme range, the Weatherby makes sense, but only in this venue.
The controlled round feed, bolt guide, gas venting, and C-ring are all there on the Mauser to ensure that the action functions, and saves the operator under catastrophic failure. Anyone have anything to say about Weatherby's gas venting system? Does it even work?

When something very big and enraged is bearing down at you, you must have everything working correctly. 9 locking lugs might be glitzy and elicit various oohs and aahs, but they are unnecessarily complicated, and such things fail, and fail at the worst possible times. Perhaps the greatest testimony to the Weatherby circus is the fact that just about no one ever thinks of Weatherby and dangerous game rifles in even vaguely related thoughts.
However, the best riflemakers in the world swear by the Mauser action-Holland and Holland, Westley-Richards, Rigby/England, and here it is the exclusive territory of the Dakota and Granite Mountain brands. The number of modified Mauser designs is even more prevalent, from CZ to Winchester, and Zastava. When you are about to be mauled into an unrecognizable red blob, and you have one failure, that is what will happen. Push feed princesses can claim to own open country, and rimfire shooting, but when it comes to dangerous game, only Mauser merits attention.

Let's see how many pages I can inspire with fourteen words.
How come the guys who back up the hunters with CRF rifles use doubles?

Just kidding Mak. Great dissertation about Mauser and the legend it has inspired. I have no preference for either type, I just like good rifles and it seems like the pretty ones are all based on Mausers, maybe because they are good or maybe cause they are inexpensive as a basis for a custom when compared to a Dakota or such custom actions as one chooses. Whatever one chooses it is fine with me. Chris S

Not all PHs use doubles as first line rifles. Besides being ridiculously expensive, many have specialized ammunition requirements, in a land where even standard ammunition is scarce.
Seriously, though, if you honestly prefer an action that pops cartridges out of the magazine and stuffs them into the chamber-fine. Like I said, I'm a fan of the Mannlicher action, which is push feed all the way-just would not want to trust it when facing down a big, brown, charging predator with me in its sights.
It is important to remember that all current push feed actions-the Mannlicher is no longer current-were compromises to increase mass production profitability, NOT to build a better action.

In the words of a small arms analyst writing about the bolt action rifle and WW1, I paraphrase; The bolt action rifle reached its pinnacle of development before the war broke out. There has been no improvement on the design since.

....the Blaser? Chris S

The Blasers main claim to fame is its modular design. Since it has no true receiver, switching barrels and calibers is relatively straight forward. Blazer single shots are enormously popular in Europe, where hunting is very much a high dollar, gentrified affair that takes place on privately owned estates of vast acreage. The straight pull bolt was perfected by Mannlicher before WW1, and Blazer repeaters feature this type of action, with some alterations. I should preface the following comments with the following statement; I have never operated a Blaser, never shot one, so I have no direct first hand experience on their strengths and foibles.

First, the Blaser is a well heeled civilized man's arm. The engineering is excellent, the fit and finish very tight as befitting their price, but the actual dimensions of the weapon are somewhat awkward, and the tight pistol grip is a real problem with cartridges that generate any recoil. The stock design seems pretty generic for cartridges that generate only moderate levels of recoil.  Such stocks are great for 30-06 levels of recoil, but insufficient for handling recoil of more powerful cartridges.
Last I checked, Blazer repeaters weigh in at about 7- 8 lbs with scope. This is too light for serious cartridges. A 375 H&H, the premier big bore cartridge, demands a gun of at least 9 lbs weight. The all American big bore, 338 Win Mag, is absolutely fierce in a 7 lbs gun, a 375 at that weight is no fun at all.
Finally, switch barrels and switch calibers is great for someone who wants to hunt Deer in timber, and antelope on the prairie, but big rifles require a serious dedication to shoot well. Full power practice is, in my opinion, irreplaceable. There is no substitute for shooting full power ammo, and so, switch barrels on a big bore rifle are just another useless extravagance. The Blazer is not a rifle for the man who tangles with big, nasty critters who want to tear your arms off, period.

Mike thinks the Mauser action is an anachronism, and he is welcome to hold this opinion. However, this is a sight where we all still celebrate the single action revolver, which is nothing if not an anachronism! Hell, I'm an anachronism on two legs, so how in the world am I supposed to reject the best, most influential rifle design the world has ever seen on the basis that the world has changed?!?

I'd like to mention one thing that really caught my eye, when browsing around the internet, I discovered that Westley-Richards, famous English gunmaker, is involved with a French shooting destination whereby interested folks can go and experience the 44 magnum in an American revolver! In fact, W-R is ready to help hapless Brits who are hamstrung by their inane gun control laws to shoot genuine Colt Single Actions as well.
Now, I didn't spend oodles of time looking up particulars, but it did give me a sort of warm, fuzzy feeling inside to view a big American sixgun on their page proclaiming the opportunity to fire a 44 mag.
Just goes to show ya, everyone loves classic sixguns.

Who called my nice Mausers anachronisms? My iconoclastic comments were directed at those who make a religious catechism out of opinions. Especially CRF. If I believed in conspiracies, I would think that manufacturers who were running out of popularity started rumors of problems with rifles without claw extractors. Kind of like the manufacturers (and duped gun writers) who made all the ridiculous claims for the short, fat cartridges. However, I don't believe conspiracy has helped the claw extractor hang on. I think it mostly spread by people with lack of broad experience. 
And my 375 H&H chambered Model 70 without claw extractor doesn't kick that bad. The reputation for hard recoil most likely came from people who tried it in rifles with excessive drop in the buttstock. Probably Mausers since Europeans can't seem to design a proper rifle stock. They still seem to believe in humpbacked thing that are only suited for open sights. 

Kimber has had an on again, off again thing with their sporting rifles since they started out in Oregon. People can blame a design for faulty workmanship, but that's like blaming the sky for an airplane crash.
There is no human endeavor that is without fault, difficulty, and the need to solve problems.
Facts are, when the craftsmanship equals the design, the Mauser has yet to be improved upon. Remington made their version of the Mauser until the arrival of the 721, which was just a tactic to cheap out and mass produce. BTW, anyone who has been around knows of cases where 700 actions were locking on just one lug due to shoddy tolerances, binding up instead of chambering a round, popping rounds up in the air, and so on. In this world of sanguine, faded plumage, it is fashionable to reduce everything to the same pathetic common denominator. It is equally fashionable to destroy heroes, and great steps forward. What passes for history, thinking, and understanding today is maybe just a click or two above the idiot level.
The 98 action is the standard. Genuine 98 actions have never gone out of demand. The Mauser has seen more custom modifications than any other design, and today, the original action is still being produced, pretty good track record for a design with an 1898 vintage, which captured the end of the black powder era, and the modern maturation of powder and projectile. No other bolt action can come close to this legacy, and certainly, no Remington or Weatherby ever will.

No one can honestly wipe away the history of the Mauser contribution, or its enduring legacy. Some can try, but they're just swimming upstream.

Mak: If I use your formula for success, there is no reason for any new revolvers because S&W has made all the improvements that can be done so Sa's and the like don't compare. There is no need for new knives because our ancestors developed obsidian blades that are still sharper than most modern blades. Mousetraps can never be made better! This is fun. Chris S

Pinnacle designs come along but once in a while, and usually after great effort. They are not limited to objects. Some may well say our Constitution is a pinnacle design, or, as we have seen with presidents and their masters, others think it can be "improved" upon.

I think you struck a nerve, Chris. For my two cents, I don't think socks can be improved on.
Or, the Sauer 90, either. Luckily, we are still seeing improvements on the AR15. But wood stocks are not one of them. Also, luckily, it doesn't have a big, honkin' strap of metal for an extractor. That would really cut down on the cyclic rate and probably cause a lot of jams. Good Old Eugene Stoner came up with a pinnacle design, I guess.

I was trying to figure out why this conversation has become an exercise in stupidity with grade school baiting, but then I guess its all a waste of time. After all, neither of you have anything left to learn, you both know it all. Good show.

Nobody said that CRF was bad. I just have a serious doubt about the sanctimonious statements about its necessity. It's like the persistent myths about the Ross. Everybody knows it's dangerous, but nobody can duplicate the mythical problem. Fact is, the Ross, firing the 280 cartridge won so many matches in the states that it was disbarred by changing the rules to disqualify the cartridge.
I just did a quick inventory, and I find that I have nearly equal numbers of rifles with and without CRF. No problems with any of them. I have never encountered the dreaded "short stroke" or the cartridge falling out problem. However, in my limited experience with dangerous game, I always seemed to have had a Model 70 (300 Win Mag or 375 H&H) made after 1964. I wonder if the (undocumented) problems with feed were not fear induced panic cycling without firing. It was fairly common in my time for soldiers to just shuck unfired rounds out onto the ground when they panicked. Of course, semi-auto service rifles helped some in that at least the first clip or magazine fed without need of moving a bolt. But then, we encountered the "jam" problem that occurred when soldiers would empty the magazine and keep trying to fire without reloading. Those problems are all documented.
I guess it comes down to T.E Lawrence's statement when asked about the trick to putting out a match with his finger. He said, "The trick is don't care about it hurting."

Mak, you take this all too seriously, and then you went all liberal on us by using the dreaded "we're too dumb to learn anything new" tactic. This smacks of "If you don't see it my way then I'll take my CRF home and won't play any more". Your loss as we were starting to have fun. Chris S

What is the point of discussion? It is to air issues related to the topics covered in this site. We may well never reach a permanent conclusion from any of this. Debates over certain topics have raged unresolved for decades.

However, just because we do not arrive at a definitive answer does not mean the discussion is useless. The format, if employed well, can expose hidden things that we never thought about before. I have never said that push feed doesn't work, nor have I said that everyone should sell off their push feed bolt guns in favor of CRF models. No, Chris, I haven't had a liberal hissy fit, I just got disappointed at the degeneration of this discussion.
I brought up this topic of CRF because I believe it is still relevant today. For one, we have the undeniable imprint of history. For two, we have a small, but influential industry dedicated to keeping one particular action alive, no matter what. Finally, we have current modified versions of this action that continue to sell to dedicated sportsmen, despite the changes in the hunting field and the marketplace.
I freely admit to belonging to the pro-CRF camp. An action honed in the trenches, amidst mud, dust, ice, grime, neglect and abuse that still works is a solid design in my book, and in fact, in my opinion, is the best. However, I don't think anyone is completely free of bias, and we tend to develop this bias due to a variety of reasons, experience being one of them.
A well built, well designed rifle, if properly cared for will function on demand. Most hunting does not involve, usually, encounters with dangerous animals-either four or two legged, and it is often on this basis that other actions and even rifles rise to prominence. However, when that dangerous beast is confronted, all such bets are off.
I do not believe that I can completely do justice to this topic, but I do think I can make some contribution. In the end, if this was achieved, is for others to decide. 

But yet you still rush to vindicate your position by saying we were having a useful debate. Useful only if we deemed to agree with your conclusions about CRF and Mauser. True this "debate" has raged on for years and likely will never be settled but I think you basically were baiting us to respond so you could air your position. Feel free to debate as you wish, we will listen. Chris S

Chris, I think I said a few times that folks are free to disagree, and I think I made it pretty clear that I'm not unbiased. Here's an interesting point, when Winchester returned to their Classic model in the 1990's, this featured the pre-'64 style action with CRF. It sold quite well. When FN dissolved the Winchester factory, and restarted production in the South, the only model they kept was the 70, and the pre-'64 CRF action has figured prominently, and sold well.
Now, one can interpret these facts in various ways. However, the bottom line is that CRF is a desirable enough feature that a number of sportsmen seek it out. I'm not the only one who holds this point of view.

You won't quit until I give in, CRF is boss! It rules the rifle world. Thankyou for the enlightenment. Chris S

I was enjoying a little time off since you  stepped in.
Although I have had a number of Mauser type actions an still have a few, I find the looseness of the actions somewhat annoying. I even had a nice Husqvarna 30-06 at one time that shot well and was very well made. However, working the bolt felt and sounded like a Model T rolling down a cobblestone street. There is no comparison with a Sauer 90 with its retracting rear locking lugs or a Schultz and Larsen M60 with triple rear locking lugs. And before anybody brings up the myth of 'springing actions', I should let it be known that in the early '70's there was substantial research on that idea. It didn't pan out. However, I still see the idea being tossed about, especially by those who never read P.O. Ackley's experiments. 
Anyway, all the slickest actions (bolts) seem to be the ones bolt bodies the same diameter as the locking lugs. None of them seem to be CRF. 

........just sipping a bourbon and couldn't type anymore so I gave in. Aside from the afore mentioned M70 CRf most of the CRf rifles are made from Mausers because they're cheap and easy to come by so they lend themselves to extensive remodeling. Who wants to pay $2000.00 t0 $3000.00 for a custom CRF action and then spend several thousand more just to make it look nice when you can pick up a cheap action for under $500.00 and start with that. As you note Mike, most of the "modern" bolt rifles are push feed with bolts as smooth as butter and actions so strong they would withstand several hundred psi with ease, something a Mauser is not noted for. As I mentioned earlier Weatherby designed his Mark V to handle upwards of 200k psi which not many Mausers can stand. I own both kinds but I generally limit my handloads to a modest level anyway since I don't spend a lot of time hunting T-Rex. Anyway, now I'm in trouble again, thanks Mike. Just kidding, love the discourse.........Chris S

Mike, Mak: Just thought I'd stir the pot while I watch football and old movies, John Wayne of course!!!!! Back to CRF and the Mauser and clones or clone wannabes. Mauser uses a flat barrel breech face to butt against the bolt and that glorious claw extractor which is not exactly the best of all solutions. The gap between the actual bolt face and the barrel leaves the case head unsupported and can be a place for a case head separation or rupture. Also the huge claw is definitely strong and has been known to actually rip the rim off a case when hard extraction is encountered. Granted this is rare but it illustrates why Mauser decided to employ gas escape ports and enclose the rear of the bolt with a solid shroud to prevent any blowback to the shooters face. In the case of the M70 and the Springfield 03 a cone breech was used as opposed to the flat barrel breech face of the Mauser. Why?  The Springfield was so altered supposedly to allow using the Mauser system without infringement to Mauser patents but the U.S. still ended up paying some royalty settlement before WWI. I would assume Winchester cared not for the benefits of the Mauser system for some reason on the M70 but don't know what that reason was, but it was speculated that it would aid in chambering the bullet better, whether this is true I don't know. What I do know is both models leave a substantial amount of the case head unsupported and this is often evidenced by the slight bulge ahead of the rim on a case fired in these two variations. In my 35 Brown-Whelen 03 I get considerable stretching in this area when heavy loads are used and it limits case life to only 2 or 3 reloading before the case is actually too thin there to be reliable. Lighter loads increase case life but it still is not as good as cases fired in the Remington 700 I use. It should be noted that Remington advertised it's 700 bolt as enclosing the case head in "3 Rings of Steel" for many years, touting the benefit of totally enclosing the case head against bolt face and barrel breech face. The gap of the cone breech is also increased since the cone needs a slot cut where the extractor has to go to allow the claw to grasp the case rim. This cone breech and extractor slot are often touted as inferior to the original Mauser design. .......All told it is apparent that Mauser made a great design but it still had it's faults as nothing can be perfect! Respectfully, Chris S

Chris;
I never found any definitive reason for the cone breech of the '03. I have searched through Sharpe's The Rifle In America to no avail as well as Ackley's stuff. I think the armories must have had more of a reason for the design than royalties. 
You mention a 35 Whelen 'o3 that stretches brass. There was some controversy about the narrow shoulder on the 35. The thought was that it would allow the cartridge could be forced into the chamber from the firing pin strike and thus the brass would be stretched. Could just be another old wive's tale like CRF, but that's why I stayed away from the 35 when I remodeled an '03 and turned it into a 338-06 instead. Now, there's a lightning bolt. I get 2850 with the Nosler 210 Partition, the greatest bullet design ever.
My two M70's from the dark period without CRF both shoot wonderfully and have never let me down. One is 375 H&H, and the other is 257 Roberts in the Featherweight. My first M70 was 1968 vintage and was 300 Win Mag. The only bullet I used in it was the 200 gr. Partition. No animal ever moved after I hit it except for my first Montana whitetail. It was running full blast, and I clipped its back leg. Nine shots later from the 44 MAG Super Blackhawk, I finally finished it off. Eight shots in the boiler room from 30 yards, and he kept getting up. Finally, his shoulders were so pulverized that he could get back up, and I put one between his eyes. The shells were Remington factory loads with a 240 gr. soft- point jacketed bullet. The bullets had too tough a jacket and just zipped through without expansion. Since the, I only shoot my cast bullets from revolvers. Anyway, I finally traded that M70 for a B78 Browning in '06 because I could never use anything else as long as I had the 300 Win.
I'm glad to ID another bourbon devotee on this forum, though. Two fingers every night before supper. It seems to energize the physics gland so that I can do extreme analysis of firearm actions. Puts everything into sharp focus.

Mike

Chris;
I think we lost MAK about 5 posts ago. Some people don't seem to respond to reality therapy. 
Any way, Famous Grouse Blended Scotch is a hit also. I remembered that when I bought a Greek 1903 Mannlicher on Graduation Day from U. of Maine, ols Bill, the gunsmith told ma that they used to be quite popular in Maine because they had such high scope mounts that they could be carried like briefcases. One of mine, in carbine form, has a G&H quick release mount that is like that. It's extremely light and easy to carry in the woods. 6.5X54 MS of course. There's another thing that hasn't really gotten better. Hard to beat the ballistics.

Mike

The Mauser action does indeed benefit from a cone style rather than a flat breech. The pre-'64 winchester action-a CRF action, features a generous cone breech.The claw extractor was designed to rip the cartridge out of the chamber no matter what, so sure, a few cases of brass mangling have occurred over its longer than 100 year history, so what?
I'm completely unmoved by the 3 rings of steel hype. I've said before, and it will be repeated that the Mauser 98 gains its strength from design genius, not by rockwell hardness. Saying the Remington mass produced action is stronger, is a completely useless point, since the Mauser action is plenty strong for any reasonable pressure. However, if the Mauser action is crafted from the best steels, as in the Heym express rifle, any strength advantage from the cheaper action quickly disappears.
The Mauser design supports cartridges through the use of the C ring, however, other CRF actions such as the model 70 require no C ring, and support the cartridge just fine.
There is an advantage to the Rem. style round reciever-it sits better in a stock than a square bottomed receiver, however, even this advantage evaporates rather quickly once one uses glass bedding and recoil lugs. When it comes to small and medium caliber high intensity cartridges, the Rem action can be wonderfully accurate, even if the bolt does just shoot cartridge brass all over the county.
I am often surprised at the vehemence folks have in defending the Rem action, especially since it was engineered simply to be cheaper to manufacture, but I guess folks really like getting less for their money, rather than more-sort of makes clearer the "why" behind prevalence of overpiced cheap junk on store shelves today.

Mak, what facts do you have to support your claim that the Mauser and M70 support the case head "just fine"??? Micrometer measurements of case head expansion? Tests conducted on the cases fired in cone breech rifles? Mike: while I don't have any experience with a regular 35 Whelen my Brown is more like an improved-improved Ackley. Once the cases are fire-formed to the chamber I haven't ever had any forward push that I ever noticed. Elmer was rather experienced with both the 35 and the 400 Whelens and he never talked about case life or forward movement that I recall but I may have overlooked any comments he made to the effect. He did some bear hunting with the 400 Whelen and liked the big bullets. I picked the Brown-Whelen mainly because I like big bullets too and wanted to be able to use 250-300 grain weights in my rifle. I lucked out and actually found a box or two of some 275 grain bullets that worked wonderfully in it, but they were scarce when I first started out. I usually loaded the 250 grain Speer pointed soft point and it was a hard hitter. With several loads using 4064 and 4350 I could hold 1 inch groups at a 100 if I did my part and they would smack an iron pig flat! My friend had a custom rifle on a Sako action in 338 and at the range we would shoot the iron pigs at 150 yards and his 338 would move or wobble them but not topple them, my 35 B-W toppled them with ease. Oh, Ilike Remmy 700's because they are usually super accurate and beat a M70 hands down fresh out of the box!!!! Hee, Hee!!!!!! Chris S

"The Mauser action does indeed benefit from a cone style rather than a flat breech." All the Mausers that I have worked with have had a flat faced breech. The Springfield '03 is the one with the coned breech; and, yes, it does benefit from it.
"Saying the Remington mass produced action is stronger, is a completely useless point". So, the Mausers are whittled out by hand in the Hall of the Mountain King?
Here is an interesting first hand experience with a CRF rifle. A guy brought me a Ruger M77 chambered for 220 Swift earlier this fall. A fine caliber, at least. I have an M77 myself in 22 Swift with a heavy barrel. Killed a nice muley buck with it about 25 years ago. One shot, one dead deer. Anyway this guys rifle wouldn't open after about the 20th shot. (so he said). He was right. The bolt was tight as a tick and would only lift a few degrees. Of course, I tried the time-honored method of slapping my hand against the bolt handle. No joy. So, I tried a plastic mallet. No joy. I asked if it had been fired or if it jammed on loading. It had jammed on feeding a fresh cartridge. He had the cartridge box, it was new, no reloads involved. Hmmm. 
So, out came James Howe's  The Modern Gunsmith. Buried in vol. 2 was the answer: hydraulic ejection. Luckily, I had all the necessary materials and tools. Five minutes later, out she popped. After cleaning, I tried another fresh cartridge gently, and it jammed while feeding. Head scratching revealed that the extractor was forward of the bolt face. The guide groove was not over the bolt rim. So, when he slammed a cartridge out of the magazine, the extractor jammed the cartridge deeply into the chamber much like a resizing die. A good thing that he wasn't "facing down a big, brown, charging predator." 
Now, that has never happened to me with a CRF action but, apparently it can happen. However, I suspect a bit of human fiddling was the base problem. 
Now, MAK, since you don't like bolt rifles anyway, why get acrimonious about an antique piece of tin clamped on the side of the bolt? I think we should just admire and use all of the ones that work and love them like our dogs. 

Mike

Chris,
I do think a lot of the suppositions about cartridges such as your 35 were just jawboning by people without benefit of experience. I really picked 338-06 because it (almost) was used by Elmer Keith. Of course, he had to use bullets of a slightly different diameter since there weren't any good 338 pills available at the time. And, I like the '03 action because it's light. My finished rifle with Conetrol mounts and rings holding a Weaver K3 weighs in at 8 pounds. And, of course Nosler makes the sainted Partition in 338. 
Anyway, it's nice to know that somebody else out there likes a fine rifle in an excellent caliber. Can you post a photo?

Mike

My point regarding the cone style breech was referring to the Winchester CRF action, a direct descendent of the Mauser action. Careful reading would have clarified this without the need for additional posts.
Second, the CRF action does not need any defense in regards to cartridge support. Currently, the CZ 550 magnum action is all the rage across Africa and the USA. This action regularly digests cartridge pressures from 65,000psi on down.  It regularly delivers accurate shots from the biggest and baddest of the massive English Dangerous game cartridges, and has done so for longer than anyone here has been alive.
It has nothing to prove.
Now, it is time for push feed afficiandoes to prove that their design is anything more than a lathe friendly tube within a tube that was stripped of everything difficult to manufacture.

Just in case my comments may again be nitpicked to death, the CZ action is a modified Mauser directly descended from the BRNO, and the excellent Czech contract Mauser actions. I refer to them as a continuum because they are directly descended.

Mike: Here it is. I put a 3-position safety and a one piece firing pin and an ugly fiberglass stock (really miss pretty walnut but) but it is a real 03 and I love it. Chris S
 

Hi all, I haven't been here in a while and today I thought I'd cruise through and, saw this interesting.....uhh, banter? My question is probably rather simple. What is really the big idea of control round feed when, I have several "Mauser copies" that feed perfectly?  I have shot them all a lot, never have had any troubles with feeding or bullets flying out of the magazine when I've been in a hurry.....and there have been a few times that I was hurrying.  I also understand why companies would bring this feature back. As someone previously pointed out, Winchester's sales went up when they did offer it again.  I think it is from the lack of knowledge that the CRF may not really be a needed feature but man, I got sumthin' to brag about. Just my humble opinion. Anybody else?

Chris 3755, I forgot to comment on the rifle. I too like wood stocks but that looks like an all round tough gun. Nice work.

Chris;
Where did you get the 3 position safety? I found an old Buehler wing safety for my Springfield, but I don't really like it. It is a little flopsy. 

EMK;
In my opinion, the M70 Winchester has always been a fine rifle. I have 3 without the CRF extractor, and they have always been sweet and reliable. I even tackled a mean and furry critter with a '68 vintage 300 Win Mag without fear. He's dead, I'm still here. Some people just can't get it that I like all good rifles; even the ones with retro extractors.

Oh, the humanity. Killed by a push feed M70. What will I tell my Ma?

Beautiful bear. I got mine with an off the shelf Ruger M-77. You don't think we did something wrong do you? Maybe we should get some rifles with CRF and do it all over again?

There are two problems:
1. I don't live in Montana anymore. I'm stuck (I hope temporarily) in Mudhole, Mississippi.
2. Griz licences don't sell for a buck anymore.

But, as long as I had somebody with a 577 Nitro to back me up, I would use a rifle with CRF. Maybe the above Springfield in 338-06.

Mike

Very sorry about the Mississippi residence. I'd be glad to have a legit excuse to buy a .577 as I've wanted a double for some time now. Hey, lets forget about the cost of a Griz tag and why don't you head west for a Wolf hunt. See, Washington doesn't yet have a season (the Wolves haven't quite killed all our game just yet). And since there is no season, there are no tags required to purchase so, it's really an economical hunt.........wait, I'll work this one out and get back to you.  Until then, I'm selling all my rifles and getting one of those CRF things.

Mike: I used the shroud and safety parts from a M70 Winchester, it fits the Springfield perfectly. Go figure hey........ I happened on a complete M70 bolt at a gun show in NM and snapped it up figuring I might need it sometime and then one day I was brainstorming how to improve my old 03 and it hit me square in the face- use the force Luke - no really just kidding, got carried away.......I thought why not try the M70 shroud and safety and see if it will work and it did after a little careful measuring and fitting to get that notch in the firing pin (striker) to work like it does on a Winchester. I think Wisner or someone once sold the same thing as a kit machined in his shop. I suppose someone could scrounge up an old M70 bolt somewhere......Those Claws are REALLY BIG.........I take my hat off to you sir, a great feat and must have been really scary knowing you didn't have CRF. Chris S

Chris, from what I can see in the photos, your work on the '03 is excellent. Must give you a feeling of accomplishment.
In terms of the rest of it, I wonder if everyone here speaks English, reads English, and understands English. I never wrote, not once, that el cheapo push feeds don't work. I can't comprehend why people imagine that somehow I attempted to make this point when I never did. I even admitted to being a fan of a certain type of push feed action, but for some reason this simply does not register.
For the record I will succinctly restate my essential points;
1) The Mauser action is the most influential rifle in history, bar none.
2) The Mauser action remains the go-to definition of dangerous game bolt actions today, a position held for over 100 years.
3) Mauser actions and CRF have a definite and secure place in the market.
None of these points are negotiable. None of these points are opinion. None of these points are open to sneering, ignoring, pretending they don't exist, or various other mental gymnastics.
In addition, I assigned some, but not all value judgements associated with Mauser actions in previous posts.  As with all value judgements, the reader is free to exercise their own views.

1) CRF, when correctly crafted and tuned, offers a definite edge in feeding/extraction. Compare WW1 experience with the Ross rifle, for instance, with that of the Mauser.
2) The Mauser action has a finely tuned gas venting system that is demonstrably better than el cheapo actions.
3) El cheapo actions depend on steel to make up for hackneyed design strength. Mauser depends on design for strength.
Nothing here suggests that, for instance, that an cheapo Howa action won't feed, eject, and extract. Nothing here says that you can't shoot an animal successfully with an el cheapo action. Nothing here states that an el cheapo action can't be durable or accurate. So, you push feed fans can all get your feathers ruffled, but try to do so over something I actually said.

You said, and I quote. " it was time to stir the pot and put my thoughts on record concerning the control round feed". Perhaps we were just reciprocating? I'm sure Jack O'Connor would agree with you whole heartedly!

And I love the Bausch & Lomb mounts and rings on your Springfield. I have either those or Kuharsky Brothers on about half of my rifles. Then I can buy the old Balfor and Balvar scopes without the El Cheapo latitude and longitude wheels. After all, how can it be anything but a capitalist conspiracy to have ugly projections sullying a smooth scope body?
Mike

Ya know, I too am worried about my El Cheapo (is that Mexican or Brazilian or ?) Anyway, my el cheapo stuff has been all over and done some serious hunting. I've never been in a camp and been ridiculed about my gear. And now, I still think I've done it all wrong. Tomorrow there will be a firearms sale at my house. I'm getting rid of my el cheapo guns forthwith and buying something that kills game. I'm also taking down over 60 heads and animals and offering them at a reasonable price as they too were short changed by the weapon used against them. I feel better now.

Thanks, emk, for once again ignoring what I wrote, and jumping to some unrelated conclusion based on...what, I don't know.
It really doesn't matter to some folks what anyone writes, they are going to mangle and distort it to fit their own desires. If you are truly interested in offering some substance, go ahead, but if you persist in reacting to what you imagine rather than to what appears in print, I can't help you.
Somewhat off topic, I think Keith and O'Connor agreed on the most important stuff, they just had different ways of saying it. When O'Connor lost his ammo on an AK trip, he replaced it with heavy for caliber fodder, and was pleased with the performance, despite the velocity loss.
Funny too, that O'Connor is forever associated with the .270, but actually hunted more with other calibers.
Here we are, admiring Chris' work on his '03, which was such a complete Mauser copy that America lost the suit in court, and had to pay Mauser compensation, a bit of history, a bit of fact, and a bit of experience. Lets' not cloud it up as is so common today with whimsy.

My final comment on this, unless something worthy comes along in response, is that I hope all of you anti-CRF types stay away from the used CRF sporting rifle market long enough for prices to drop. Unfortunately, it seems you are fewer than you think, because despite the hostility to history and tradition, prices have so far remained distressingly consistent...