What's wrong with staggered feed?

I just bought an "old" unfired 10FP .308 with a staggered feed magazine http://savageshooters.com/SavageForu...1804.0.htmland I would like to know why Savage switched to center feed? Better design? What's wrong with the staggered feed?

Simplicity in feed particularly when planning a detachable box magazine down the track ... which Savage now has. By the way there's nothing wrong with either staggered or in-line feeding systems. Much easier to get rebated rims feeding properly from inline magazine boxes, much easier and more reliable to have inline feed in cartridges were the projectile is similar in diameter to the case body eg. 458WinMag etc...

Its easier (cheaper) to machine as well as the action rails are no longer controlling the cartridge. What many don't realise as well is that Mauser had specific action rail and magazine follower dimensions for every case they were chambered in, so a higher level of care was required in their assembly. The Tikka rifles in comparison have always had the same receiver being used with different inline magazines for everything from 222Rem to 9.3x62 ... which simplifies production immensely.
Cheers...
Con

I prefer staggered feed. The main reason for center feed, if I have heard correctly, is that Savage had problems getting stagger feed rifles to feed the short fat cartridges.

Single feed mags are simpler to design and manufacture. Just part of making, and keeping, these excellent shooters at an affordable price. My opinion. In one of the recent rags there is an excellent article on this topic.

Slim