M-16 extractor vs. Mauser extractor

[hemiford]

I've been reading the Dangerous Game Rifle thread.

Majority opinion seems to have long favored CRF actions for DG use.

Can anyone offer opinion or reasoning which extractor system in the title
might be "better", or more reliable ?

Furthermore, which design aspect makes for more reliable extraction,
case taper or extractor design ?

 

[Greyfox]

iMO, having spent many years using both designs, for sheer extraction, the Mauser design will result in more effective extraction. In it's original design the Mauser extractor grips a greater radius of the cases extractor groove. It also remians stationary on the rim during the camming action of the bolt. An added benefit is that the bolt/extractor has secured the cartridge as it is stripped from the magazine, right through firing, and until you eject the cartridge. If the bolt is short stroked or even shot while upside down, the action will function. These attributes are considered insurance for hairy, dangerous game encounters using high preside cartridges that could be subjected to high temperature, bullet setback in the case upon refill, or just sheer durability and reliability. On the other hand, a typical shooter could go through their entire life and never realize the difference between the two designs from this respect. There are also advantages of this system over the CRF design in terms of simplicity, ease of single loading and strength of the action at the cartridge head.

 

[Beng]

Just as Greyfox said.
A Mauser extractor has usualy much more material at every Point of the extractor. It grips the case head over a greater surface area. This means you can apply more force to the extractor, as well as the case head before the stress reaches dangerous levels resulting in deformation or breaking of extractor and case head.

On the Mausingfield website there is a short description of the advantages of the Mauser extractor. as well, the sound quality sucks though.

 

[bigngreen]

The extraction qualities of the control feed round are very good, lots of surface area on the case non rotating and strong but it also has the worst feeding qualities, has to be tuned just right to single feed, if it gets a little out of whack they suck! I'll take feeding over extraction any day, of you have extraction issues with either your stopping the whole show and beating your bolt open any way so you in trouble with either!
.

 

[Greyfox]

I used a Mauser Whitworth Express in 375 H&H on my first buffalo hunt in Africa. I did have to tune the extractor tension for reliable feeding when I first got the rifle but once I did it remained dead reliable for the last 30 years since. I would still definitely choose the CRF over a push feed for the dangerous game. A proper CRF is not designed to feed without the catridge being fed from the magazine.

 

[7magcreedmoor]

I have always liked the big claw (mauser style) on my rugers and Winchester 70s. That being said, my remmy 700 and my savage 111s will all cycle upside-down, so I've never understood why people get excited over that.

 

[hemiford]

Hi All,
Concerning reliability, I have read various debates on the Mauser
vs. the Rem clip-style push feed. I assume, and maybe I'm wrong here,
that the M-16 style has a more forceful grip than the Rem clip,
so I thought that M-16 vs. Mauser might be a closer comparison,
not just a generic CRF vs. Push debate. I find peoples' experiences
on this invaluable.

 

[sable tireur]

hemiford,

I am a devoted Mauser fan and have built dozens of Dangerous Game rifles on the various designs using this style extractor. However, I also build a ton of competition rifles using the M-16 extractors.

Here is an excerpt from a magazine article testing the Push Feed against the Mauser-style extractors:

The first rifle I tested was the CRF Model 70 .416 Remington Magnum with a classic full-length extractor. After the first shot, I rolled over, worked the bolt and saw just what I expected: The spent brass whirled away when it struck the ejector blade, and the return bolt stroke slid another massive .416 cartridge into the chamber. I fired the next shot, rolled over, and that's when things went sour. As the bolt came back and the empty case struck the blade, it flew out past my head just as advertised, but the last loaded cartridge in the magazine did a nose dive out of the magazine and hit me squarely in the chest. That wasn't supposed to happen.

I repeated the test three times, and in every case the last nose-heavy cartridge flopped out of the magazine, and the loaded cartridge hit me A-frame-first as the bolt came back. It was very disheartening. I'd completed one test and had one failure. Things improved with every subsequent test, and there wasn't a single malfunction or failure to feed with any of the other rifles, push-feed included. The post-'64 .375 H&H Winchester Model 70 functioned without a hitch while being cycled upside down, and the Weatherby did exactly the same.


Both CRF rifles didn't seem to know whether they were upside down, sideways, nose-down or in any other position. The Weatherby's ejector was noticeably springier than the old Model 70, and it kicked the empty brass farther away from the rifle. The Montana Rifle Company XWR, another CRF gun, performed perfectly as well. The old myth suggesting that PF rifles won't cycle upside down is just that, for both of the rifles tested that had the "less reliable" engineering performed without any problems.

Read more: Fact or Fiction: Push-Feed Rifles Won't Cycle Reliably Upside Down - Guns & Ammo
​

In the second place, when on God's Green Earth will you be shooting at Dangerous Game UPSIDE Down? I suppose someone will come along with a scenario that could happen but the odds are REALLY against this happening. Yes the Mauser-type extractors can have a slightly bigger bite on a case rim with the supposed advantage of extracting a tight case. On the other hand I have had these extractors literally rip the rim right off the case leaving the case still tightly held in the chamber.

The M-16 extractors are used under some of the most adverse conditions when we compete in most Tactical matches. Rain, snow, dust, mud, wind, baking heat, freezing temps, smashing rifles against concrete and rocks and we still run the matches and the extractors still function. The military still uses the Remington extractor with some rifles now sporting the M-16 extractor. Have any failed? Sure. I've fixed or replace several during competitions but I've also seen snapped claw extractors as well but that's because I deal with hundreds of rifles a year not just a handful.

I don't think there is a clear winner here at all. Pick the action and rifle which suits your physique and the uses required then go shoot and enjoy!

Regards.

 

[Deleted member 46119]

I want the case base supported as much as possible. PRF requires the chamber be notched where the extractor protrudes from the bolt. Maybe not much but some. Don't like it, just me. YYMV.

Weatherby's have been "dangerous" game rifles for a bit now. If you are going "that" dangerous where failure to cycle a bolt action could get you in trouble, get a double or lever and make sure your tender has another ready.

As for the old style Rem clip, I've got one on the 277/26-Nosler. Any attempt to cycle the action quickly after a fired round will leave the case in the chamber and it won't be picked up by closing the bolt. Waiting for the case to cool and shrink away from the chamber walls will allow for "mostly" reliable extraction. I have a replacement clip and rivet awaiting installation.

High accuracy rifles have been built with "M-16" style extractors for quite some time now. No ejector but extractor.

The 'problem" of extractors and ejectors pushing the case off center has been plaguing my mind for some time. I know if it does, it's always the same. Perhaps that is why some have success just neck sizing and some don't and FL size.

 

[sable tireur]

I want the case base supported as much as possible. PRF requires the chamber be notched where the extractor protrudes from the bolt. Maybe not much but some. Don't like it, just me. YYMV.

The Mauser system does not require that the tenon be notched and the head of the cartridge is contained by that tenon. So is the Badger 2008 and 2013 along with the GAP Tempest.

As for the old style Rem clip, I've got one on the 277/26-Nosler. Any attempt to cycle the action quickly after a fired round will leave the case in the chamber and it won't be picked up by closing the bolt. Waiting for the case to cool and shrink away from the chamber walls will allow for "mostly" reliable extraction. I have a replacement clip and rivet awaiting installation.

Can't cycle the action quickly? You're kidding, right?

I've competed in a hundred or more Tactical competitions where every stage was timed, meaning that fast bolt cycling was mandatory. I have used stock Remington 700 bolts with the factory extractor and ejector without ever encountering a problem. I've seen a couple of M-16 extractors fail and I've done a fast replacement for the shooters on the spot.

If your case is sticking in the chamber and can't be withdrawn immediately after firing, there is something wrong with the chamber or the extractor is chipped, bent or broken. My guess is that the chamber needs attention so that you can extract quickly all the time. Either it needs a good polishing or you have let the neck of the brass grow too long and it's sticking in the chamber. Also check the chamber neck diameter. Replacing the extractor is easy and expedient if that is the problem.

Regards.