What is the best CRF action to build on?

[Buster]

Don't see where I posted that I didn't like them but, the bolt handle and knob are butt ugly. My control feed rifles are Mauser 98s, 1917 Enfield, and pre64 Mod 70. I do have the one Montana also.

You poked fun at their name is why I thought maybe you didn't like them.

You gotta' admit, the ambidextrous, reversible M2 bolt and folding stock is innovative. I want.

"Yeah-yeah...I was triggered when I saw the seamless, ambidextrous integration of the bolt and stock on the M2 - the tactical advantages are awesome!"

Did I leave out any buzzwords?

 

[Butch Lambert]

You poked fun at their name is why I thought maybe you didn't like them.

You gotta' admit, the ambidextrous, reversible M2 bolt and folding stock is innovative. I want.

"Yeah-yeah...I was triggered when I saw the seamless, ambidextrous integration of the bolt and stock on the M2 - the tactical advantages are awesome!"

Did I leave out any buzzwords?

I'm very happy that you like it. To each his own.

 

[Buster]

If you watch, he (Ted, inventor/President) did a video specifically on the bolt handle and knob. He put a boat-load of thought into the design.

The idea being that as soon as you pull the trigger, your finger comes out, your hand goes up, and you catch the knob with your finger and work the bolt back. The shape of the knob fits/catches your finger and keeps it from being drawn in towards the action - very practical and engineer-like

The knob is attached with a screw - you could mount fuzzy dice on there if you wanted to.

So...a proven CRF design, choice of two different cocking/spring setups, accepts M700 triggers and guards, accepts most M700 stocks and accessories, accepts aftermarket magazines, accepts Savage nut-type barrels or threaded barrels, interchangeable bolt faces, rock-solid pic rail with several available pitches. I haven't found anything about it that I don't like - other than it's not tactical

I like the torodal lug concept, but I'm not smart enough to know if it will last or not. I can't see why it wouldn't.

I wouldn't liken him (Ted) to John Browning, but he seems humble and is one sharp cookie.

 

[Buster]

Customer service??

FWIW: I used the contact form on the American Rifle Co website and asked a question about the lugs on their action. Ted (owner/inventor/President) replied in less than 30 minutes with the answer.

Contrast that to my customer service experience with Montana Rifle Company - LOL

 

[John S]

I will attend the 2017 Shot Show.

The American Rifle Company is in Booth 20459.

That bolt knob is so weird I have to check it out;-)=

Plus check this out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0UStJXN4as4

Thinking out of the box.

 

[bigngreen]

I've generally gotten any answer I called to ask answered at MRC, I normally talk to the engineer and get any numbers I need, I've built a number of rifles on them and they shoot as good as anything else, been pleased with them.
The Bighorn is a wonderful action and very well made and simple, the Mausingfield is the dumbest action I've ever had in the shop, the rifle action is a simple thing and I avoid any action that seeks to engineer solutions to non issues, the bolt is a joke, the knob has fallen of on more than one but at least you can look tactical while fumble farting with your bolt knob.

 

[Pete Wass]

Interesting stuf

Nice to see something beyond the three rings of safety .

Pete

 

[Buster]

I've generally gotten any answer I called to ask answered at MRC, I normally talk to the engineer and get any numbers I need, I've built a number of rifles on them and they shoot as good as anything else, been pleased with them.
The Bighorn is a wonderful action and very well made and simple, the Mausingfield is the dumbest action I've ever had in the shop, the rifle action is a simple thing and I avoid any action that seeks to engineer solutions to non issues, the bolt is a joke, the knob has fallen of on more than one but at least you can look tactical while fumble farting with your bolt knob.

What part of the action do you consider to be dumb?
Which part of the bolt is a joke?

I (and others) will appreciate specifics.

As to knobs falling off, I assume they allowed the screw to loosen to the point the knob fell off?? Seems to me that would be called "user error". Regardless, I would think a drop of Loctite would be an easy remedy.

As to the shape of the knob: form follows function. That's just the way engineers think. Engineers are typically not great public speakers, they are typically not marketing geniuses. They don't generally engage in typical marketing bs.

The upside to the knob is anyone with a cnc can make any knob they think they can market - sexy, macho, refined, "tactical" - whatever.

 

[alinwa]

I will attend the 2017 Shot Show.

The American Rifle Company is in Booth 20459.

That bolt knob is so weird I have to check it out;-)=

Plus check this out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0UStJXN4as4

Thinking out of the box.

His toroidal lugs don't fix the problem they just make the initial contact surface smaller, increase sliding resistance surface and (perhaps) move the contact point marginally closer to centerline. Certainly not a "fix" in the sense that a "fix" would change the parameters involved. This "fix" changes NOTHING material.

Perhaps drawing a picture of the assembly under load would be more appropriate than wiping a bowl with an innertube trying to make an irrelevant point.

Modern machining methods have made way for a lot of such "fixes" just because folks thing they "can" so they do.

Two of my "fix"ations were machining barrel tenon threads and/or receiver ring threads out of parallel with each other to promote thread engagement and machining a tapered seat into the action with a tapered cone on the barrel to promote "centering up" and to "eliminated barrel thread movement."

BOUGHT the stuff....SPENT the time and money......TESTED the "fixes" and quietly withdrew back under my rock......

I've had hunnerds of other similar mental irruptions and hope to have many more. Some of them do work!

 

[Buster]

I will attend the 2017 Shot Show.

The American Rifle Company is in Booth 20459.

That bolt knob is so weird I have to check it out;-)=

Plus check this out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0UStJXN4as4

Thinking out of the box.

He explains his thinking on the bolt knob design on one of his videos. I don't recall ever seeing any other manufacturer try to explain the features and benefits of their knob design.

When I first looked at the picture on the website, I never gave two thoughts to either the bolt handle or the knob. My objective was to find a CRF action that will place a projectile downrange accurately. I'm still looking for some reason why the Mausingfield won't do that.

Thinking outside the box is the reason we don't still live in caves.

 

[alinwa]

BTW.....the real "fix" for Sir Mausingbinger's problem has been addressed in a (in a much less "toroidal" way) by many others, the largest market being Savage, with the floating bolthead which actually DOES equalize forces, while keeping the BF parallel to the casehead. (Which the Msngfld doesn't do)

Jerry Stiller is one of many who've applied the concept to accurate rifles.....without success.

 

[alinwa]

He explains his thinking on the bolt knob design on one of his videos. I don't recall ever seeing any other manufacturer try to explain the features and benefits of their knob design.

When I first looked at the picture on the website, I never gave two thoughts to either the bolt handle or the knob. My objective was to find a CRF action that will place a projectile downrange accurately. I'm still looking for some reason why the Mausingfield won't do that.

Thinking outside the box is the reason we don't still live in caves.

??HUHH?? EVERYONE who's ever offered a tacticool knobby has advanced "reasons".......some of them valid. But needs vary. I prefer a modified spoon, for exactly the same reasons Sir Mausing likes his enormous but wastefully massive (and hideous IMO ) pineapple... I bring my spoons in closer to centerline in the interest of lessening binding (most custom actions bind, badly) and even move them fore and aft to make them hit my bones as I see fit.

As far as your needs....Define "accurately"

A pre-64 Win or clone will be accurate enough for most people even though none of the CF platforms can be brought up to true hyper-performance BR pressure levels.

AFAIK

al

 

[Buster]

His toroidal lugs don't fix the problem they just make the initial contact surface smaller, increase sliding resistance surface and (perhaps) move the contact point marginally closer to centerline. Certainly not a "fix" in the sense that a "fix" would change the parameters involved. This "fix" changes NOTHING material.

Perhaps drawing a picture of the assembly under load would be more appropriate than wiping a bowl with an innertube trying to make an irrelevant point.

Modern machining methods have made way for a lot of such "fixes" just because folks thing they "can" so they do.

Two of my "fix"ations were machining barrel tenon threads and/or receiver ring threads out of parallel with each other to promote thread engagement and machining a tapered seat into the action with a tapered cone on the barrel to promote "centering up" and to "eliminated barrel thread movement."

BOUGHT the stuff....SPENT the time and money......TESTED the "fixes" and quietly withdrew back under my rock......

I've had hunnerds of other similar mental irruptions and hope to have many more. Some of them do work!

Thanks for your input.

It's my understanding one of the benefits to the reduced size of the lugs is that it allows a CRF action to fit in
M700 footprint and capitalize on M700 parts and accessories.

I have a M98 and I've always thought there was way too much meat on the lugs. I gotta' think about 90% of the surface area of those lugs never bears any part of the load, regardless of how well they are lapped.

Heck...you could scrape the fit and it still wouldn't be a large load-bearing area.

 

[alinwa]

I wish someone would bring "Rifle Accuracy Facts" back into print.......THERE was an out-of-the-box thinker. His flexible boltface design was just one of many truly stunning thought processes.

 

[alinwa]

Thanks for your input.

It's my understanding one of the benefits to the reduced size of the lugs is that it allows a CRF action to fit in
M700 footprint and capitalize on M700 parts and accessories.

I have a M98 and I've always thought there was way too much meat on the lugs. I gotta' think about 90% of the surface area of those lugs never bears any part of the load, regardless of how well they are lapped.

Heck...you could scrape the fit and it still wouldn't be a large load-bearing area.

JUST to be clear, accurate rifles are NEVER lapped! I would no sooner lap my lugs than paint my racecar with a brush....

 

[Buster]

??HUHH?? EVERYONE who's ever offered a tacticool knobby has advanced "reasons".......some of them valid. But needs vary. I prefer a modified spoon, for exactly the same reasons Sir Mausing likes his enormous but wastefully massive (and hideous IMO ) pineapple... I bring my spoons in closer to centerline in the interest of lessening binding (most custom actions bind, badly) and even move them fore and aft to make them hit my bones as I see fit.

As far as your needs....Define "accurately"

A pre-64 Win or clone will be accurate enough for most people even though none of the CF platforms can be brought up to true hyper-performance BR pressure levels.

AFAIK

al

That ugly, in-efficient pineapple offers you a chance to make some money installing something you (or your customer) likes better. Be of good cheer...the glass is half full!

For my purposes, I have defined "accurately", at least to myself. I have little doubt the MRC properly smith'd would suffice, and probably save me a thousand dollars.

But if practicality were the rule, two-thirds of all calibers would've never been invented, and most of us would not own more than 6 firearms.

 

[Buster]

I wish someone would bring "Rifle Accuracy Facts" back into print.......THERE was an out-of-the-box thinker. His flexible boltface design was just one of many truly stunning thought processes.

Interesting...maybe that's where Ted (ARC) got his idea for the toroidal lugs? Rather than fight deformation of the lugs, harness it to help with alignment.

 

[Buster]

BTW.....the real "fix" for Sir Mausingbinger's problem has been addressed in a (in a much less "toroidal" way) by many others, the largest market being Savage, with the floating bolthead which actually DOES equalize forces, while keeping the BF parallel to the casehead. (Which the Msngfld doesn't do)

Jerry Stiller is one of many who've applied the concept to accurate rifles.....without success.

Sound's as if you have a personal dislike for the guy. Do you think he's selling snake oil???

You claim the floating bolthead "DOES equalize forces, while keeping the BF parallel"...isn't that a lot like defining "accurately"?

If all that truly happens when the trigger is pulled, I'd say it's just accidental. The proof of that lies in the fact that you don't use the floating bolthead in your high-accuracy rifles.

IMHO, the savage floating bolthead is not much more than a clever method of marginally improving accuracy. As a side benefit, it allows them to utilize cheaper manufacturing methods, and helps make up for sloppy machine work. But it works for them, and I'm okay with that.

But, neither here nor there, from what I've seen, I like the ARC. I like his thinking, and I appreciate the effort he makes to explain his thought process.

 

[Butch Lambert]

Hey Buster, are you sleeping with mouserfield? Go buy one and send us photos. I don't think many here really care about his product, good or bad. I think this thread has been dead long ago.

 

[alinwa]

Sound's as if you have a personal dislike for the guy. Do you think he's selling snake oil???

You claim the floating bolthead "DOES equalize forces, while keeping the BF parallel"...isn't that a lot like defining "accurately"?

If all that truly happens when the trigger is pulled, I'd say it's just accidental. The proof of that lies in the fact that you don't use the floating bolthead in your high-accuracy rifles.

IMHO, the savage floating bolthead is not much more than a clever method of marginally improving accuracy. As a side benefit, it allows them to utilize cheaper manufacturing methods, and helps make up for sloppy machine work. But it works for them, and I'm okay with that.

But, neither here nor there, from what I've seen, I like the ARC. I like his thinking, and I appreciate the effort he makes to explain his thought process.

OK, I'm going to find out if you're really INTERESTED in facts? Or just like to compare opinions. Harold Vaughn wrote his book in the interest of separating FACT from OPINION. As an engineer he places the "why" before the 'what".....Bill Calfee also wrote a book in which he expounded on lots of stuff that WORKS. But he's not so good at the "why." I'm not taking from either book, it's just that the "why" is where the real juice is.

Sound's as if you have a personal dislike for the guy. Do you think he's selling snake oil???

I don't have a personal dislike of the guy....I don't know him from Adam's off ox. I DO have a personal dislike of folks playing fast and loose with "facts." He has a legitimate product. No magic, no gain even IMO, but "Snake Oil?" no, not quite.....just far from innovative. (That said, I DO, REALLY, dislike the name Mausingfield.....but I'm a word guy. I'm picky about presentation. I also think that Carlocks LRKM acronym is silly) There are lots of products out there. Some of them exhibit superior function, some superior accuracy, some look good. ALL LEGITIMATE PRODUCTS, so "no, not Snake Oil" just not really innovative.

You claim the floating bolthead "DOES equalize forces, while keeping the BF parallel"...isn't that a lot like defining "accurately"?

I can't make any connection here between your first sentence and the last but here goes..... #1-No, I don't "claim" it, it just DOES. That's a fact, due to design. It completely eliminates the entire problem by isolating the bolthead from the bind. The FACT is that it completely addresses the "problem" outlined by Mausingfield, BETTER than the Mausingfield.....it's just that the bolt head is only a small part of the total accuracy equation. #2-Again, no. Accuracy is defined by results. Period. And by measurements. I don't really enjoy shooting rifles which leave air in my groups at 100yds....I build and use 1/10-1/4moa rifles. I have lots of rifles which WILL shoot into the same hole "all day long"......you could do it, my neighbor kid who's never fired a rifle could do it. I could set the rifle up and tie the cat to it and could put 5 bullets into one raggedy hole at 100yds. But if I'm going out to shoot a deer in the woods I'll carry my vintage 1954 M70 cuz I like it and it'll hit a deer 100% of the time and If'n I was looking down the ivories at M'Bogo who's looking back like I owe him money......I ain't CARING about accuracy, I be want me some controlled feed....

If all that truly happens when the trigger is pulled, I'd say it's just accidental. The proof of that lies in the fact that you don't use the floating bolthead in your high-accuracy rifles.

I have no idea what it is you're implying here. "All that, and a lot more" absolutely DO HAPPEN when the trigger is pulled, it's just that his "solution" is flawed. Kinda' like the problem "we're gonna' run out of oil" and the solution "so we'll fix it with solar".....the SOLUTION is flawed. Solar power is a stupid "solution" and the only reason it's even a topic of discussion is because unscrupulous people define a "problem" and offer a "solution" that makes them rich. The Mausingfield guy ain't even gonna' get rich, and he ain't ripping people off, but that doesn't mean it's "better." His is a "Ford VS Chevy" argument. Also, you make the statement "the proof lies in the fact that you don't use a floating bolthead"......

We define "proof" differently, you and I

This isn't a "proof" of anything except that changing this interface isn't the whole answer to the problem.....may even point out that it's only a TINY part of the problem.....

IMHO, the savage floating bolthead is not much more than a clever method of marginally improving accuracy. As a side benefit, it allows them to utilize cheaper manufacturing methods, and helps make up for sloppy machine work. But it works for them, and I'm okay with that.

But, neither here nor there, from what I've seen, I like the ARC. I like his thinking, and I appreciate the effort he makes to explain his thought process.

Do you have an explanation for WHY the Savage floating bolthead "marginally improves accuracy" in your opinion? I'm disappointed in your use of the term "sloppy machine work" as the actual FACT is that the Savage is held to significantly closer tolerances than a classic "good" rifle like the old pre-64 70....but that aside, if you're impressed with ARC's presentation then that's enough! As Dr Hook sez...."some folks likes pork chops and some folks likes ham hocks"

I've seen a lot of presentations.... in some cases I'm impressed with the presentation, in some cases with the information. And in most cases I'm just not impressed a'Tall......

F'rinstance, on the subject of testing and "thinking outside the box" I enjoy 'Mythbusters' style shows. Some better than others.I like Dustin's presentations on 'Smarter Every Day' more than Adam and Jamie because he's SMARTER, better educated......he asks better question and structures better testing regimens. But in both of their cases I really enjoy that BOTH OF THEM are more interested in facts than in their collective egos. Both of them have re-done shows because a reader has emailed or written in showing a flawed premise.

I like this.

This is how real progress is made. You cain't learn to play the song without you play it over and over a thousand times......


So, if you want to point out HOW and WHY the Mausingfield is superior to a Win70 controlled feed, I'm lissening. I heard his spiel.....wasn't impressed two yrs ago, ain't now.


al