The years long debate around the merits of controlled feed vs push feed actions is still alive and well. While the debate has likely been around much longer, it initially took off in 1965 when Winchester redesigned their model 70 to cut costs. Ever since then many shooters have firmly entrenched themselves in one camp or another and pined about the virtues of their particular system. I hold no illusions of ending the debate with this article. However, this should provide you with the benefits and drawbacks of each system so you can make your own decision.
History and Operation
Both styles of designs have existed since the 1800’s. The classic controlled round feed system was a feature of Paul Mauser‘s bolt actions from the 1890’s. The controlled round feeding system uses a large extractor that locks around the case rim as the case leaves the magazine. It holds the case all the way into the chamber and throughout the firing cycle. The cartridge fires, and the bolt pulls back and hits a fixed metal ejector ejecting the casing.
The push feed system as typically thought of was pioneered by the Remington 721 which evolved into the Remington 700 in 1962. In this system the bolt pushes the cartridge from the magazine but doesn’t grip the casing. It is only once the cartridge is actually chambered that the extractor engages the cartridge. A spring loaded ejector inside the bolt head throws the spent case out after firing.
Controlled Round Feed Advantages
Now that we know the basic operating mechanisms of controlled feed actions lets take a look at their function. Controlled round feed actions offer several benefits over their push feed counterparts. Firstly, the large extractor on controlled round feeding offers a better leverage for stuck cases. This was likely more important back when gunpowders like cordite were common and extremely temperature sensitive. However, even nowadays where it may be overkill the positive extraction provides peace of mind.
In addition, the mechanical ejector provides another benefit. Because there is no spring, spent casings eject in proportion to the speed the action cycles. This allows for strong ejection in the field as well as mild ejection at the range. Handloaders appreciate this for keeping their range brass free of dings and dents.
Finally, the controlled round feeding system prevents a type of double feed malfunction that is possible with a push feed. The malfunction occurs when a cartridge is pushed free of the magazine but not completely chambered. If the shooter then pulls the bolt back with a push feed a malfunction will occur. The controlled feed system avoids this by pulling the original cartridge back with the bolt. I have never seen this type of malfunction myself but I suppose it is possible in situations with high stress or with inexperienced shooters.
Push Feed Advantages
On the other hand, push feed actions have their own set of advantages. The most significant of these that has driven the popularity of push feed actions is that it tends to be cheaper to manufacture them all else held equal. This means that your money goes a bit farther opting for a push feed action than it would for a controlled round feed action at a similar price range.
Another advantage is that the push feed action is easily single loaded. Due to the large extractor in controlled round feed designs, it is often neccessary to feed them from the magazine. This isn’t a drawback while hunting, but at the range it is useful to be able to load cartridges one at a time. A push feed system is much better suited for this than a controlled round feed.
Finally, in my experience push feed actions feel slightly smoother than controlled round feed. There are simply less friction points in a push feed action. That’s not to say controlled feed actions are rough. However, I have yet to find one as slick as a Tikka T3X.
Reputation for Reliability
As an aside, many people argue that the controlled round feed system is inherently more reliable than the push feed system. I believe this is failing to see the forest through the trees. Because they are cheap to manufacture, there are a host of cheap push feed bolt actions that do have feeding issues from time to time. I don’t believe this is due to the push feed system but instead to the fact that they are budget rifles.
If manufacturers made controlled feed rifles to a similar price point I would expect similar hiccups. The added cost of making a controlled feed rifle eliminates the action type from the extreme budget market, thus improving the systems reputation for reliability without merit. This is much the same way that virtually all of the titanium rifle actions on the market are unfailingly reliable. It would be ridiculous to suggest that the receiver material is what causes the reliability. However, if one is going to spend the money to use titanium to build something, they tend to also spend the money to build it properly.
Final Thoughts
In closing, there are advantages and disadvantages to both systems. Inherent accuracy is identical and reliability is near to it in a quality rifle. The ability to gently eject with a controlled feed rifle is appreciable, as is the easy single feeding on a push feed rifle.
Pick whichever system piques your interest the most. Pondering too deeply on the benefits of one or the other is splitting hairs at best. Both are excellent, proven, and tested actions that when well maintained will provide a lifetime of service.