There is Remington 798 like Mauser (Mark-X)with controlled feed. I shall to wait and see. One for me, think so.

PS: 7xx= Remingtons modells 98= like Mauser 98

They are put together from barreled actions made by Zastava Arms in Serbia.

They have made and continue to make quite a number of different types of small arms for both civilian and military purposes. Including shotguns, Mauser bolt action rifles, the "famous" Yugo SKS, AKs, SVD's, 50BMG Sniper rifles and machine guns.

They combined the short action rounds in the 799 rifles and the long action versions are the 798 rifles.

The 798 comes in the fallowing calibers - .243 Win, .270 Win, 7mm Rem. Mag, .308 Win, .30-06 Spfd, .300 Win. Mag, .375 H&H Mag, .458 Win. Mag.

While the "short action" 799 comes in the fallowing calibers - 22 Hornet, .222 Rem, .223 Rem, .22-250 Rem, 7.62x39 Soviet

Dimitri

The reviews that I have read regarding the Remington 798 mirror my experience with Zastava sporter rifles that I own. The fit and finish leave something to be desired. The actions are about as smooth as rubbing two corncobs together. An F.N., Mauser or VZ-24 action is considerably higher quality and much smoother. I would shop the used gun racks for an F.N., Mauser or VZ-24 sporter. Take care...
Joe

Really shitty, Zastava! What Remington peoples are thinking? First Baikal and now Zastava.

I agree with Joe. There are no controlled-feed Remingtons in my future. All the best...
Gil

These are the same actions as the Charles Daly actions of a few years ago. At the Charles Daly prices, they were a good deal.

'Controlled feed' is a misnomer, anyway. The design criteria was a non-rotating claw extractor for fool proof extraction. The fact that the cartridge rim slipped under the extractor as the cartridge was pushed forward was inconsequential from Peter Paul Mauser's perspective. As a desirable feature, controlled feed is way overblown, I don't care what Craig Boddington says. I have shot push feeds all my life and never had a double feed. I can also feed flawlessly in my Remingtons when they are held upside down. Go figure.

As an interesting side note, the new Sako 85 touts 'controlled feed' as a feature. Unfortunately for Sako, you can easily demonstrate that there is no 'control' for about the first 2.5 cm of the bolt movement.

Phil,

I always figured double feeding must be caused by inexperienced shooters (no offence to anyone on this board). Because everyone knows you fully stroke any rifle's bolt, even in semi-automatics, it doesn't stop till it hits the end of its possible travel then goes forward. So why someone wouldn't pull the bolt all the way back till they can't and then push forward I never understood.

Dimitri

Inexperience is the ONLY reason D....

I too think the whole CRF thing is overated. My 700 Remingtons feed upside down, sideways and every which way. My one model 70 Win, touted as CRF is only CRF when feeding from the right side of the staggered box magazine. When feeding from the left side it is a push feed until the last inch before bolt is fully forward. To top it off, if you turn it (70) upside down, half the time the bullet nose will hit the breech end of chamber and jam. Not knocking the Win 70, great rifle........but in my opinion CRF is not the reason. I have and will continue to hunt dangerous animals with the Remington 700 with no worries.

As an interesting side note, the new Sako 85 touts 'controlled feed' as a feature. Unfortunately for Sako, you can easily demonstrate that there is no 'control' for about the first 2.5 cm of the bolt movement.[/quote]...........
There is more intresting side note: Sako is now second class Beretta!!!

My Rem 700 feeds upside down, my Win 70 feeds upside down, my Ruger 77 feeds upside down, my Marlin 1895 feeds upside down and my Encore feeds upside down (sorry, couldn't resist). Nice to know that if I ever find myself in the situation Will Smith was in in "I Am Legend" my rifle will still feed...

Dimitri, I've seen bolt guns, lever guns and pump guns all short-stroked and jammed. Try firing REALLY fast and it can happen. Practice sure does minimize the chance though.

Feeding issues aside, the extraction of the fired case is typically more positive with CRF rifles. Especially, when compared against the very small and delicate Remington M700 style. Given that with overpressure loads, any extractor can fail, Remington uses a very small engagement on the rim, and to compound the problem, they use a push button style ejector. This cuts costs but increases extraction/ejection problems when compared with CRF.

To be fair, the circumstances in which one style is better than another is rare, however, in eight years of guiding elk and five decades of hunting, the failure in the field of several Remingtons (along with two bolt handles that have detached from the bolt body) taint my POV. On top of that, try disassembling a Remington bolt in the field!

So, I'm guiding two guys in Idaho and one day we have lots of rain with snow falling toward late afternoon. One has a Remington 700, the other a pre64 M70. Temp dips below zero by early morning and both bolts are frozen. Our Winchester chap simply disassembles the bolt, knocks out the ice binding the firing pin and spring - takes about three minutes and our Remington owner is lighting a fire to roast his bolt because there is no way to disassemble it. It takes about fifteen minutes during which time our Winchester hunter shoots a nice 6X6. The temps don't warm up much, but, later in the morning Mr Remington finds another nice bull and makes a hasty snap shot at about 50 yards. Nothing. The bolt froze again.

Going to Africa? Ask African outfitters if they have preferences for brands of rifles and the top listed ones will typically be CRF. OTOH, Reminton's M700 may be among the strongest of actions available and part of that is due to their feed/extraction/ejection system which allows a more complete containment of the cartridge.

M700's have a deserved accuracy reputation. In my safe there are several M700s and I prefer them for varmint or non critical shooting. In that role they do a fine job.

Handloader wrote:

Going to Africa? Ask African outfitters if they have preferences for brands of rifles and the top listed ones will typically be CRF.

When I was in Africa (East Africa) the top listed brands tended to be doubles and Mausers. For dangerous game, it was always doubles.

FALPhil wrote:

Handloader wrote: Going to Africa? Ask African outfitters if they have preferences for brands of rifles and the top listed ones will typically be CRF. When I was in Africa (East Africa) the top listed brands tended to be doubles and Mausers. For dangerous game, it was always doubles.

FALPhil: neat. Either in this thread or new one, I believe your African hunting experience would be of interest. I'm headed there in 09 and would appreciate hearing of your experiences.

At the SHOT Show, 2008, there were numerous African outfitters and I was surprised to find that an African hunt was less expensive than most of the Alaskan hunts we have done. And, of course, you are right about the double rifle on dangerous game, however, CZ, Mauser 98 and Model 70s are often rifles used and recommended by the several guides I've interviewed. What did you hunt and what rifle(s) did you take?

Handloader wrote:

FALPhil: neat. Either in this thread or new one, I believe your African hunting experience would be of interest. I'm headed there in 09 and would appreciate hearing of your experiences.

Unfortunately, I did not "hunt" in the normal sense. I was working for a company under government contract. There was a lot of turmoil in Southern and Eastern Africa during the '70s, and the Red Chinese were garnering influence. I worked most of the time and only had a few days off to myself. I was in sub-Saharan Africa about 4 months.

I did, however, seek out hunters and outfitters when I could. Back in those days, elephant hunting was still relatively common, and it was not unusual to see 60-70 pound tusks transshipping through Mombasa and Lourenço Marques (now Maputo). Of course, none of them were headed to the USA.

What was very interesting to me while I was there, was that the most common chamberings in hunting rifles of the average working man were 8mm Mauser and 9.3mm. Most of the hunters I met took hunting for granted prior to the 'revolutionary' activity. Very few ever went after dangerous game or Big Five. And most of them had not been hunting animals for a few years prior to my arrival - it was just too dangerous, except in Kenya, which was relatively stable at that point (thank you, Jomo Kenyatta).

If I had had a way to import guns back into the US, I could have bought some nice rifles for pennies on the dollar, as most of the Portuguese, Germans, and British ex-pats were liquidating everything for hard currency prior to their departure. I did end up with some nice deep-sea fishing gear, however.

My closest brush with wildlife was a 1-day photo safari which took me between Mombasa and Nairobi. It was the dry season, so the animals were congregated around water holes. I got to see quite a variety of wildlife in a short time.

I want to go back to Africa one day. I am waiting until my children are no longer dependent on me (about 4 years). I still correspond with people I knew in Southern Africa. There is an element of risk anywhere you go in Africa. There is a reason they call it The Dark Continent.