I had my Horton out of the vault today and got to wondering about this. My gun has the sears and springs in place. Have any of you purchased a gun fitted with intercepting sears that 1 or both were not present and did it bother you? How did you handle it with the seller? I do not know too many sellers that take their guns apart to inspect for internal wear or missing parts. Opinions vary as to the necessity of intercepting sears in A&D designed guns. Like suspenders in addition to a belt, but in some other box lock designs they may be a functioning part of the design. Just thinking about this.

Yes. Very high grade Ford BLE with intercepting sears, when dissembled was found to not have one installed. Made no difference in the trigger pulls etc. Have had conversations with an English gunmaker, he’s seen them where the interceptors were never installed, like the actions pulled from bench stock to build a gun were intercepting sear actions, but the build requirements didn’t warrant their actual installation.

Interesting comment from the gunmaker. Left out on purpose for a lesser quality gun. Would you have the missing intercepting sear and spring duplicated for a high grade box lock?

A few of the English gunmakers have posted over the years that they have pulled them from some guns in for service, because of reliability issues. The A&D boxlock typically has a different angle on the bent that makes intercepting sears less necessary than on a sidelock gun.
Best work boxlocks are special guns indeed.

Best,
Ted

If you have been close by when a box lock without interceptors goes off accidentaly you wouldn't think they are unnecessary

I think safe gun handling is more important than intercepting sears. I've owned exactly one gun with intercepting sears, a pre Royal Holland, that I couldn't get to go off a great deal of the time due to the Holland patent single trigger that was installed.
In fifty years of shooting sports, I've never witnessed what you just described.


Best,
Ted

Never have. And if by accidentally you mean the trigger was pulled inadvertently, intercepting sears wouldn’t have made much difference anyway. FWIW.. they’re unnecessary, thousands upon thousands of BL shotguns & rifles built with out them testify to that. Here’s another interesting fact...a good many SLE guns have intercepting sears that don’t work properly (aren’t timed correctly, or just fitted up badly). The owners rarely if ever notice that they have faulty interceptors. Not naming any specific makers, seen bad examples from various makers, countries.

I agree, except with 58 years in my case.

If the gun went off without the trigger being pulled, such as when it was closed, there was a problem other than the gun not having intercepting sears. I have witnessed people accidentally firing a shotgun when they closed it more than once. They would look embarrassed and blame it on the gun, but it was poor gun handling nearly every time.

Finger outside the triggerguard until ready to shoot, is my mantra.

SRH

Also, safety on until the bird is in the air.
Karl

That policy doesn’t work so well if you shoot hammer guns, MF Ideals, most pigeon guns, etc. Never rely on a mechanical safety. Pointing the gun in a safe direction, keeping your finger off the trigger until it needs to be pulled, unloading or breaking it open before crossing obstacles, etc.
Safe gun handling trumps mechanical safeties all day long.

Truer words were never spoken.

SRH

Question is, On a high grade box lock fitted with intercepting sears, If one is missing would you have the missing one duplicated and fitted? Where they were omitted I would not have them made and installed as the maker thought they were not needed for the quality of the finished gun.

No. If the gun is functioning properly without them, no point in going through the expense of making or fitting the new parts. Waste of money.

I had a Belgian side by side start going off when I closed it. Repeatable. Sent it to the gunsmith. Got it back and it did it again. It is in my gun cabinet now. I've got to find another gunsmith. I had hunted with that gun for a few seasons before the problem developed.

Hunted with an acquaintance that had a Browning Superposed with a sling. Sling broke, the gun discharged when it hit the ground.

In both instances no harm was done to man or bird dog. But it is only so because of luck.

safe gun handling can NOT be guaranteed by everyone, that is exactly the point and reason for interceptors.

It seems to me, intercepting sears are primarily meant as insurance in case of a fall, or perhaps dropping the gun where the sear(s) could be jarred out of bent, an inadvertent act and not really as insurance for poor gun handling in terms of an individual shooter’s level of safety.

Nope

"Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that" - Mr. G. Carlin

Given that all of us are perfect here on DGS and never drop a gun or mishandle one, there's still those other oafs out there to contend with, and it's usually the innocent bystander who suffers. Bring on the intercepting sears and automatic safeties I say.

And Mike, Browning superposed have an extra notch in the tumblers that’s supposed to catch the sear...a sort of interceptor, I guess, if the sear is inadvertently jarred out of bent. Apparently, the extra notch did not do its job when the sling broke. Scary.

Hunting guns should not have a trigger so light that it jars out of bent when dropped, or in a fall. Target guns are different, and are used under much more controlled circumstances. When I lighten a trigger on a gun I test it, unloaded of course, by bumping the butt on the floor or ground, solidly enough to simulate a drop or fall. I hit the side of the buttstock with my hand, in short I do everything I can to cause it to jar out of bent. If it is under 4 lbs., and passes my tests, I feel pretty good about it. I've never had one to fail except for one which had a soft tumbler and wouldn't "hold" the adjustments I did.

SRH

I was refering to walking in to a dog on point. Safe direction, finger off the trigger is a given with me.
Karl

This Horton "Poly Grip" is a very nice gun and the intercepting sears are not complicated parts. Thin flat spring provides the tension, again not complicated to make. For a gun of this quality I would have the missing sear and spring duplicated to complete what the gun maker intended. Each gun would have to be evaluated as to the expense of fitting a missing intercepting sear and spring, but for two easily duplicated parts I'd do it. Lesser quality gun probably not. Especially of both were missing and no pattern part was present.

Safety - there is nothing more important. I want: auto safety, intercepting safety sears, safe gun handling. No such thing as 'too safe'.

If automatic safeties were so important to gun safety, I wonder why the millions of pumps and semi-automatics made in the last 120 years don't have them? Why, it's a plu-perfect wonder people aren't accidentally killed everyday with the things.

I've got no issue with people who put safety at the top of the list, just with the idea that a non-automatic safety is "unsafe", or that it's user is an unsafe person.

JMO, SRH

The Browning incident mentioned above most likely involved an early model that did not have the second safety notch on the hammers.

Re safeties and sears. I have taken enough guns apart to see that the safety in the vast majority blocks the trigger, not the hammers. A gun can fire with the safety on. As noted above it can fire if the intercepting sears are not regulated properly, and more importantly if they are clogged with dry oil and grease.

On the other hand an OPEN action just cannot fire. There is no reason to close a gun till an active hunt phase starts, ie the dog goes on point, the birds fly over in pass shooting. This business of walking witha closed action while not in an active phase just does not make hunting sense.

An added plus, you cannot foget to close a gun the way you forget to disengage the auto safety.

I now use a gun with an automatic safety, which I like for hunting, but I hunted for years with a Browning super and no automatic safety. It was no problem then to be without an auto safety because I was always aware. Problem is now, going back to one without the auto safety. I really have to think about it and have spaced it a couple times before catching myself and manually putting the safety in the on position. I would never buy one of those guns with a backward safety where you pull back on the safety to fire.....disaster waiting to happen imho. I guess bottom line is to always be aware whether with or without the auto safety.

There are plenty of inexpensive German or other Central-European BLEs with intercepting sear mechanisms showing up many for less than American classics of equal grade and vintage. While there maybe some apprehension in buying unknown Belgian or Spanish gun there is less risk when looking at something made in Germany. Buhag or Hubertus anyone? Let us agree there is no reason to buy gun w/o extra safety features when it can be had for same or less money than piece w/o this feature.

A great many of those German guns, never had intercepting sears, they were built with over hanging sears. Two different concepts entirely.

There is an old thread from 2012 that shows a photo of what Dustin is talking about, a sauer with overhanging sear which is the principal sear as opposed to a secondary intercepting sear. The overhanging sear screw is in the same location on the German gun as the screw for an intercepting sear on an English boxlock, for example. Unfortunately, I do not know how to show or bring up an old thread here (the photo describing the overhanging sear was originally from sauerfan, post # 270748 if anyone knows how to pull that up).

I didn't say that, Stan.

I maintain (with good reason) that an automatic safety is inherently 'safer' than a manual one.

Thank you. I thought screw behind breast or ball of German gun was part of intercepting safety mechanism just like it is on Birmingham piece.

I always get nervous when I hear guys talking about the 2-3 lb letoff triggers in their game guns. Mostly bit my tongue and never said much.
If I am not mistaken it was Carlos Hathcock himself who opined that under 5 lbs was too light, period, and his "hunting" had much more on the line than any of mine ever did.

Best,
Ted

I should have stated that a bit clearer. For me, a safe 3# shotgun trigger is a dream come true. Anything under 4# is great, if it's crisp and clean. YMMV.

SRH

Most Repeating/SA arms whether rifle or shotgun simply do not lend themselves well to auto safeties, one would defeat their whole purpose. A double does lend itself to one. I have no problems with non-auto safeties but when one is so readily available I also see no use of depriving myself of whatever benefits it has, I Like them on my Hunting doubles.

Personally I NEVER EVER walk around in the fields & forests with an open gun, if you meet me afield expect to see my gun closed. If some precarious footing warrants it I will unload, then re-close the gun before preceding. A bad fall with an open gun has far greater potential of causing damage than to one closed & bolted. The worst fall I ever took while hunting I was carrying my FE Lefever, loaded & bolted. Though it hit the ground very hard it did not fire, nor suffer any damage other than a minor scratch or so.

Sear notches "Should" be placed as far from the sear axle as possible. I have several guns so set up. A J P Sauer & Sons/VL&D back action sidelock (lock plates shaped like a bar action) has the sears notches on their outer periphery with vertical sears. All of my Lefevers have the sear notches so placed with early ones having plate mounted sears & later ones frame mounted, but in both cases overhanging. None of these guns have intercepting sears & in my humble opinion, do not need them.

Thank's LeFusil, I'd forgotten about Continental guns with over hung sears. Just shows you have to do some research when interested in purchasing a gun. English "game guns" in my collection have triggers set at right around 3.5 for the front and 4 for the back. nice and clean and the gun fires when my brain says "bang". Much heavier and I start to wonder what went wrong. Once you get use to a specific trigger pull range it's hard for me to adjust to much heavier pull weights. Under that range and they are way too light for hunting and the clays course. Maybe it's just too many years shooting Bullseye pistol and Highpower rifles in competition.

What exactly is being made safe by blocking trigger movement no one has explained. Plenty of auto safe guns have gone off on closing with the safety automatically ON.

Safeties were conceived to make passing the gun between "gun" and loader a little safer in case of a fumbled pass.

Not having a loader I do not trust the safety.

A gun that discharges on closure has a bent/sear problem. It is NOT the fault of the safety. An intercepting safety would usually prevent this.

Some guns are maladjusted so that there is movement between the bent and sear when the safe is ON so that when the trigger is pulled when on safe it will fire when the safe is released. In essence that trigger has already been pulled. This is also the result of a poorly adjusted firing mechanism. But the safety mechanism will get the blame.

Famous man eater hunter, Jim Corbett, wrote that he never carried a cocked gun, he always had the safety on. Read it in the Man Eating Tigers of Kumaon. This from an experienced hunter is shocking, imagine what the inexperienced think about the magic powers of that safety button!

Yes, a safety is not directly involved in the cocking system. Which is exactly why it should not be trusted!

A safety, hammer intercepting or trigger blocking, does NOT make the gun safe. Which perhaps explains all armie's insistence on "making safe" which does not involve the safety at all.

One of the famous professional hunters carried his bolt gun loaded, but uncocked. All that was required was a quick movement of the bolt handle up and down to recock the piece. He also had the "safety" off. This may have been Corbett, or an African PH.............can't recall.

SRH

[quote=Shotgunlover]"Famous man eater hunter, Jim Corbett, wrote that he never carried a cocked gun, he always had the safety"

Corbett may have been talking about a hammer gun with a "stalking safety" which is a sliding bolt that locks the hammer in the half cock bent & off the firing pin or cap in the case of a percussion gun otherwise his statement does not make sense as most hammerless doubles & bolt action guns won't allow you to apply the safety on an uncocked gun (Note that I said most because you can apply the side trigger blocking safety on an uncocked Mannlicher Schoenauer rifle if so equipped but not the bolt mounted wing safety so I guess that is another possibility).

No substitute for having the muzzle pointed in a safe direction.

Famous Hunter was Peter Capstick. Not very safe but by your self entering the long grass after something nasty, with a Mauser wing safety might be just a bit quicker. A lot of hammer guns were fitted with stalking safety's, most engaged at half cock and they disengaged when drawing the hammers to full cock but some were fitted to full cock. I have a 1829 copy of a Purdey percussion rifle with a stalking safety fitted. It locks the hammer in the full cock position and I only use it when stand hunting. It is silent and no sound made from drawing the hammer back from safe to full cock. Always disengaged and hammer lowered to 1/2 cock when preparing to move. Pretty nifty system for stand hunting.

I am the guardian of a 24 ga percussion double shotgun made by I Funk of Suhl my FIL brought back from WW2 that is equipped with halfcock stalking safeties that release when the hammers are brought to full cock.

It's a very nifty & robust system that should prevent an accidental discharge by dropping the gun or having something strike the hammer & breaking the halfcock bent allowing the hammer to strike the cap. A nice & useful feature on any hammer gun, cartridge or percussion.

I have several hammerless doubles on which the safety can be applied in the uncocked state. These all have un-latched top levers which allow the lever to return to center when the gun is fully open. With gun open & lever at center push safety off. Pull triggers to release sears, then release triggers & close gun. With an auto safety gun the safety will reset, with a manual safe it can be left in which ever position desired.

As stated a safety does not 100% guarantee that a gun"Cannot" go off. If someone has a proven instance where safety has "Caused" a gun to fire would like to see the evidence.

Corbett was talking about his boxlock double rifle. The gun recently featured in this site I think. Not a hammer gun.

He went on to describe how he kept the trigger pressed while disengaging the safety and fired, so the click of the safety would not awaken the sleeping man eater.

If Corbett was in the habit of carrying an "uncocked" boxlock double rifle w/the safety on as earlier described it must have been sort of a Chinese fire drill when he needed to shoot something in a hurry.

I'm thinking something is lost in the translation.

Britanny Man, no translation, here is the text from the book, page 123, Bantam Edition, the chapter on the The Mohan Man Eater:

"And now, for the first time in my life I regretted my habit of carrying an uncocked rifle. The safety catch of my 450/400 makes a very distinct click when thrown off, and to make that sound now would either bring the tiger right on top of me or send him down the steep hillside without any possibility of getting a shot"

"Aligning ths sights of the rifle on his forehead I pressed the trigger, and while maintaining a steady pressure on it, pushed up the safety catch. I had no idea how this reversal of the usual method of discharging a rifle would work, but it did work;"

The 450/400 used has been featured in a thread on this site. It is a boxlock Jeffery.

The inescapable conclusion is that Corbett assumed that putting the gun on safe uncocked it. The safety does no such thing.

"The inescapable conclusion is that Corbett assumed that putting the gun on safe uncocked it. The safety does no such thing."

Exactly what I meant by "something lost in translation" Corbett or his editor/or ghost writer apparently didn't know much about firearms terminology or how they functioned. I don't think the sliding safety cocker /decocker as used on some current German double rifles had been invented in Corbett's time.

I'm not sure of the name of the system(s) that Blaser, Krieghoff & others use that allows rifles (double or other) to be carried uncocked yet easily & quickly cocked when the need arises & again easily uncocked if the shot is not taken by simply pushing the safety slide. It's not traditional & the large thumbpiece looks a bit strange but it's a very nifty & super safe system.

Not unusual for a competent gun user to not know about gun internals and how they work.

No mechanical system is foolproof. Safe gun handling trumps all.

While I whole heartily agree that safe gun handling rules, intercepting sears are designed for those times when things do not go according to plan. I hunt wild birds in wild places. I have taken more than a few tumbles over the years. I am very conscious of where I point my muzzles but to be completely honest falls are unplanned events. I am not sure what the hell even happened sometimes. Last time out hunting in about 5" of snow I stepped in a hole up to my knee. I was lucky to not get hurt though my gun did end up full of snow. Interceptors are a good idea on a field gun but they do not replace safe gun handling.