S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forums10
Topics38,479
Posts545,210
Members14,410
|
Most Online1,335 Apr 27th, 2024
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2016
Posts: 148 Likes: 108
Sidelock
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2016
Posts: 148 Likes: 108 |
I've read where an automatic safety is nice in that it actually gives a gun owner the option to have their gun be automatic or not since the safety switch's automatic action can be disconnected or left as designed. Out of curiosity, have you seen automatic safeties changed much? Is such an adjustment considered heresy on a nice English gun?
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,718 Likes: 479
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,718 Likes: 479 |
I do not like them at all. I do not like to depend on them, for my safety, to function properly. I can put them on if needed. Plus in rapid field shooting they do slow me down. No safety on a gun used for clay's will last forever. I can see a heavy clay's gun being shot 10,000 times a year. I have shot some more than that much. To me they are an unnecessary wear point. As to removing them that is a personal thing. If you do so in a way that can be reversed then to me there is no reason not to do so if you want.
|
1 member likes this:
spring |
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,982 Likes: 106
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,982 Likes: 106 |
I think they are great on a hunting gun, but the worst thing ever on a competition gun.
Socialism is almost the worst.
|
1 member likes this:
spring |
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,624 Likes: 13
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,624 Likes: 13 |
I used to hunt with a guy who bemoaned having to put a safety on between points/ covies and I suspect often didn't bother. Now a former hunting partner, still a friend. But on a gun used for skeet, clays etc auto safe is a total PIA. There are enough things to think about before calling for the bird. Gil
[IMG]
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 281 Likes: 9
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 281 Likes: 9 |
I hate them. If I like a gun I will buy it anyway but its a point of negotiation for me. On clays they are a lost bird occasionally and hunting I want to know I put the gun on safe so I end up checking anyway. A safety is a mechanical devise that WILL fail, use the one between your ears, hopefully it is more reliable and trust worthy
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 229 Likes: 4
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 229 Likes: 4 |
I agree with Gil. A dozen hunting shotguns in my family and all have auto safeties. I do not shoot competition clays, so do not care about that.
One of my hunting Parkers is over 100 years old and the safety still works.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,035 Likes: 47
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,035 Likes: 47 |
By definition a 'competition' gun has no auto-safety. Many have no safety at all.
As far as seeing the auto safety 'changed much', no. Typically field guns are used in the field where the auto safety very much belongs.
Some guys do find a nice field gun they more often use on targets and have the auto feature disabled.
Disabling the auto feature is not all that common and far from universal. It's not a one way street to do this.
I own a gun that had the auto safety re-enabled by the previous owner.
There's no right or wrong, it's a personal thing and I don't much care either way.
You should be able to safely and correctly use any type of gun or safety system.
"The price of good shotgunnery is constant practice" - Fred Kimble
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,888 Likes: 107
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,888 Likes: 107 |
I've shot so many rounds of skeet with my Fox-Sterlingworth Skeet & Upland Game Gun that I never even notice. I can switch to a Superposed or Model 21 Skeet Gun and likewise never notice. I much prefer the automatic safety for hunting.
My Father bitched all the time about the manual safety on the 20-gauge Winchester Model 101 I brought him from Japan in 1972, but he carried it enough to wear much of the bluing off it in the last 17 years he hunted. When he once in a while missed a bird with it, we would here "I'd ah got that with my old Remington!!" Old Remington being an 1896 vintage AE-Grade Hammerless Double.
|
1 member likes this:
67galaxie |
|
|
|
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 777 Likes: 36
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 777 Likes: 36 |
All my guns are, and always have been, auto safety and I really don't see the problem. I have shot many 1000's of clays and never been caught out with the safety on. Mind you, a stiff safety can be a pain on a cold day with frozen fingers! I have very rarely come across a safety that has been disabled but then I am totally focused on British sporting shotguns. No surprise there then! The only one was on a Wm Powell SLE with non-functioning hammers (yes, non-functioning hammers as original spec!) which had had the auto safety pushrod filed off (as original). Seeing as the gun would most likely be used by someone who was used to an auto-safety, I reinstated the auto push rod. It would be the work of a hour or less to make it non-auto again so I thought this was the safest option. To reinstate an auto-safety on most British shotguns is pretty simple AS LONG AS THE WHOLE PUSHROD MECHANISM HASN'T BEEN RIPPED OUT! One can just silver solder a new piece on the end where it has been cut off. For information the link to the Powell is http://www.heritageguns.co.uk/Powell%2012%20SLE%209622/Powell%2012%20SLE%209622%20Details.htm
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 553 Likes: 56
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 553 Likes: 56 |
Toby,
Interesting gun. I can't imagine why someone would put non-functioning hammers on a gun. It looks like they don't even move.
Ken
|
|
|
|
|