Update:

Sorry for the long post, but...

I spoke to Ruger, and 4seventy has the thing about nailed.

From release in '89 till a changeover occuring in '92-'93, the MKII's were NOT CRF. From there on, they were.

Also, I have spoken to CZ, and have been told that the smaller calibers typically may or may not provide CRF and probably on the whole, do not. This is in fact as I surmised, due to the cut-out lower portion of the extractor. On larger calibers, CRF is probable.

I am having my extractor properly bevelled to allow snapover, as since the rifle cannot be counted-on to absolutely guarantee CRF, it makes no sense not to do so.

All this yap about CRF makes one thing absolutely crystal clear to me now.

Forget the hype, action type, the fact that your gun or the one you intend to buy is a "98" or any salesman shtick. I have heard for so many years the blanket statement that CRF actions are more reliable, and that is fine, but not so if they don't ACTUALLY produce the goods, and rarely have I ever {never in fact} read of any writer actually testing '98-type-action rifles to determine if they do provide CRF.

Reality is as reality does.

!!!!TEST YOUR RIFLE IN ALL FUNCTIONING ANGLES AND POSSIBLE POSITIONS BEFORE ASSUMING IT ACTUALLY PROVIDES CRF; Muzzle up, muzzle down, somewhat sideways, etc.!!!!

The gunsmith at CZ said that a muzzle down, slow feed as I suggested above can help determine the reliability of your action. In fact, since posting above, I've played around with my 98 and it, too, has failed a couple times.

If we were talking about expecting the gun to feed correctly upside down or under some other extreme condition, I would say this whole discussion is esoteric.

But a rifle fed slowly in a muzzle-down condition is in my opinion NOT an extreme condition and if its extractor does not snap over IMO the rifle would represent a potential real-life hazard if used under DG hunting conditions.

A 98 that doesn't provide CRF and doesn't snap over is not "faultless" and I bet there are many that only provide a sort-of CRF. Such rifles would make a Remington 700, SAKO AV, Savage 110, Winchester 70 push-or-CRF or Ruger M77 look very good indeed, especially the Ruger CRF {I can't remember Win's but think they snap over also as I believe do M17/P14 "Enfield"} action rifles since they are designed to snap over right from the factory, and under almost all conditions such rifles probably provide CRF anyway. And for DG, an unreliably-controlled 98 makes a double look even better!

I have always been just a tiny bit skeptical about the actual field value of CRF. I totally admit that under certain circumstances it would be valuable and could even "save a life", but if the rifle only gives sort-of pseudo-CRF the point is moot whether it is called a 98, 96, CZ or anything else.

Thanks for all your posts and input.

Keep 'em coming, too, since it would be interesting to see how many '98's when really given the test actually provide CRF.