controlled/push round feeding
 

what is the differences? is one better than the other in certain calibers?

RE: controlled/push round feeding
 

Controlled round "grabs hold" of the cartridge, picking it up from the magazine and controls and holds it while being pushed forward into the chamber. Push feed is just that ... just giving forward motion to the cartridge as it is chambered.

Some prefer one over the other. It is said by some that in a dangerous game weapon that controlled round feed is better.

I prefer it myself, but for no other reason than the majority of my favorite rifles are Mauser 98 variants and I've just grown accustomed to its characteristics.

With a controlled round feed you can theoretically be upside-down and cycle your rifle without losing the cartridge to gravity. In other words a controlled round feed rifle is supposed to be in control of the hot cartridge and the spent casing from the moment you guide the bolt forward to chamber a round to the last second when you have withdrawn the boltfull back and have ejected the spent round.

I can't think of too many negatives or positives to either. They are just different.

RE: controlled/push round feeding
 

ok thanks for insite 8mm

RE: controlled/push round feeding
 

Its possible to short stroke a push feed(partially chamber a round) then pull the bolt back and try to chamber another which would jam everything up good- atleast this is the best argument I've heard for a controlled feed and Ireally don't think its a very good one.

More likely to happen is to have a custom rifle build off a mauser 98 action (controlled feed) by a basement gunsmith or a hack who happenstohave a 'gunsmith' shop and find that the new chambering doesn't feed from one side or the other from the magazine- jamming it up solidly. Mauser actions have to have their feed rail and feed ramp geometry to be very precise in order to get the level of reliability that they are famous for. Unfortunately what often happens is thta Joe Huntergets his new mauser actioned rifle from the local gunhacker, goes to the range, single feeds it and is happy with the way it shoots, then takes it hunting. On a full magazine, the frst round will feed because it was on the same side of the magazine as being single-fed, but the second round will hopelessly jam the rifle up.

BTW: I'm a huge fan of the mauser design for a lot of other reasons than the controlled feed and prefer it over modern push feeds.

RE: controlled/push round feeding
 

they are both good types. depending on what you will be hunting might make a difference. if im hunting anything in North America other than bears, i would take the action that shoots the most accurate and gun feels the best. If bear or african dangerous game was on the list, id take a controlled round feed action. But that said, i have a couple of each kind and like them both.

RE: controlled/push round feeding
 

The only good argument for CRF I've ever read is from Dangerous game hunters.....

I've owned both and can tell you that the push feed rifles I've owned have been extremely reliable.....(I don't own Savage)

One of todays excellent bargains in used guns is the M-70 push feed.....great guns and reasonably priced!

RE: controlled/push round feeding
 

X 2!

RE: controlled/push round feeding
 

Thank-you for the replys.So what it basically boils down to is personal preference and what the manufacturer offers in the gun you like?

RE: controlled/push round feeding
 

When Paul Mauser switched the extractor setup on his bolt action rifle design from push feed to controlled round feeding, it was considered a great improvement in the design.

I think it still is. But CRF is much more important on a military rifle than on one used for hunting or other sporting applications (except for hunting dangrerous game!!).

RE: controlled/push round feeding
 

My understanding is on big/dangerous game the pro's prefer a controlled feed because of reliability. Maybe today that's not as much of the case as it was back int he day, but that's still how I view it.

Controlled feed will always load, always shoot....might not be MOA accurate, but at 50yds, what's that matter to a charging animal?

Push feed I think of like a remington action, accurate.

Maybe that's an older view, and I'm sure some guns can be controlled and very accurate, as well as some push feeds can be less accurate.

I believe I read its easier to make a push feed accurate, than it is a controlled feed.

Controlled should be quieter to chamber/throw a round.

RE: controlled/push round feeding
 

Let me throw another issue out on the topic.....CRF actions cannot totally enclose the case head....push feeds can.....and to a great degree do in many cases.....the Rem 700 and M-70 both do a good job of controlling the possible rupture of the case head....the Rem 700 is possibly the best at it!....but far and away the push feeds do it far better than the CRFs.....

If something goes seriously wrong.....(and it happens)....I'd far rather be shooting a push feed action as the ruptured case will be contained in steel before it is allowed to expand the inner ring of the action!.....resulting in a blown up action.....and potential injury.

I, personally, would never own or build a varmint rifle on a CRF action as these actions are fed the greatest pressured rounds.....and the most reloaded rounds...and are less capable of containing a serious mistake.....and it happens!

RE: controlled/push round feeding
 

Mauser 98 actions are built to vent gases away from the shooter in such an event.
A lot of people put a Sako or AR-15 type extractor on remington bolts in order to get a strong positive extraction as with a Mauser, but it pretty much defeats the purpose of Remington '3 rings of steel' bolt/action system.

Really, the argument between crf and pf rifles is moot, they are all about as strong (limited by the strength of steel), extraction is positive on both (though there are problems with Remington's extractor in magnum cases), feeding is reliable in both (with the problems associated with crf being attributed to novice gunsmiths, accuracy is similar (I've heard of PF rifles being more accurate, but that might be attributable to the inherent accuracy of remington 700s (they have things in them too that hurt accuracy such as the ejector putting constant pressure on the case rim, but short of a benchrest shooter, you'll never know the difference it will make).

RE: controlled/push round feeding
 

Push feed rifles work just fine for any purpose I've ever used them for. I have no personal preference between the 2 except that my favorite action, Browning A-bolt,is push feed. I've built many more controlled 98 style rifles than push feed except for my personal rifles.

RE: controlled/push round feeding
 

I have had several of both and see no benefit to either but as a whole push feeds wer more accurate. Maybe the design maybe the rifle itself.

As a test I took every push feed Remington I own and cycled them upside down. All fed perfectly and none dropped a round.