Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.
Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The Powder Keg' started by Logansdad, May 4, 2002.
Which is better & why ?
First, let's call it what it really is: non-rotating claw extractor. I say this, because that's the real benefit of mauser-style actions. It's not in the feed, it's in the extraction.
Folks will tell you (especially gun writers, because they run out of things to write about and this is always a subject that can be rehashed) that push feeds can "double feed" and jam up your rifle. I have two issues with that: first, it's hard to do. you just about have to be trying to do it. Second, you can do it with a non-rotating claw extractor, too. Next they will tell you that you can't chamber a round in a push feed when it's upside down. Hmmm, did somebody foreget to tell Remington about this?
My favorite is: "It's more reliable and if you are hunting dangerous game, you need controlled round feed." BWAHAHAHAHAHA! If you think your rifle's reliability is in question, are you going to use a turnbolt action? Hell no! You are going to do what African dangerous game hunters use - a double rifle.
I'll hunt dangerous game with a Remington 700 any day. Or, I will use a Mauser or a Winchester 70. I really don't care. I own at least one of each and none is any more or less reliable than the other. Even for extraction. The reason the non-rotating claw extractor was thought such a great feature when the Mauser 98 came out was the crappy soft brass that cartridges used at the turn of the 20th century. Now that brass is so much better, the non-rotating claw extractor is not as attractive as it once was.
FALPhil, I have to agree with you completely on this one. A controlled round feed is supposed to be more reliable according to the gun writers. However, I have found out thru years of shooting and reading gun magazines that much of what gun writers say is, quite frankly, a load of crap. I've shot many thousands of rounds thru push-feed rifles and have never encountered a problem of any kind based on the type of feed system that the rifle had. Any feed problems were based solely on a problem with the magazine or improperly loaded ammunition, both of which were discovered at the range within a very small number of rounds and the problem was corrected before the rifle was taken hunting. As for hunting dangerous game with a push-feed rifle, I'll take my Remingtons and Savages on a hunt for any legal animal. Afterall, I have a much greater chance of having a bad primer and the cartridge not firing than I do of having a problem with the push-feed.