Which action?

rickdavis81

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2009
Messages
172
Location
SW Missouri
Is there going to be any difference in using a Winchester or Savage action for a build? Any pro's or con's to either? I already have the tools to change the barrels on a Savage but will it help any to have the Winchester trued and lapped vs not doing the Savage? I read where you don't have to do that to a Savage because of the floating bolt head.
 

loaders_loft

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2008
Messages
1,127
Location
Sacramento, CA
personally I find the savage action a bit clunky, and don't like the system for bolt release. However, they are convenient, having the barrel nut design.

the savage action can also benefit from being timed, to make it cycle smoother.

winchester, are you talking about a push feed or a controlled round feed? I like my controlled round feed model 70 action...
 

geargrinder

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2006
Messages
2,007
Location
Dayton, Nevada
New Savages have a different bolt release. I haven't tried one yet, but hopefully it will be better.

I prefer Savage actions because I can do a lot of work myself before I have to send it to a gunsmith.

Even if I did send it in, it would only be to SSS for a Time and True.
 

loaders_loft

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2008
Messages
1,127
Location
Sacramento, CA
the bolt on a push feed looks more like a remington bolt. the bolt face has a full circle recess.

The bolt on a crf has a long bar along the left side, which is the mauser extractor. The bolt face is a 3/4 circle recess, open along the bottom. it holds the cartridge all the way from the magazine into the chamber and back out again.

I'm no gunsmith here, others can describe better...
 

NesikaChad

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2007
Messages
753
Location
South Dakota
A control round feed action properly tuned up is the only way to go IMO.

You have a very large amount of case rim purchase with the extractor that virtually guarantees the case is going to come out of the chamber.

The extractor does not rotate with the bolt which means it doesn't wear on the case rims.

The extractor's design provides a large amount of raceway surface contact with the receiver and this can serve as an anti bind feature-meaning rapid bolt manipulation is much easier to perform.

These actions also typically use a mechanical ejector rather than a spring loaded plunger ejector. The advantage here being there is no preload on the case when chambered and in battery and no peening/watermarking the case head when running hotter loads. I've always felt the fewer holes poked into a bolt face, the better. A mechanical style ejector also allows the user to decide whether or not he wants to kick empty shells all over the creation, or remove them from the loading port by hand. Nice to have if running delicate thin walled, neck turned brass or if working at the bench.

Combine that with a three position shroud safety, an open architecture trigger design, and a few other wigits and you really have something nice for a working/competitive/tactical rifle application.

Do they shoot any better? Probably not and it'd be a bolt statement I think to suggest otherwise. They do however offer a lot of features and reliability that push feeds just don't have. African dangerous game bolt action rifles are almost always a CRF type. That says something.

Hope this helped.
 
Last edited:
Top