On all of the Mausers that I have had built I have used Gentry or Dakota three position safeties. Both function fine but I am not impressed with them overall.

For a long time I have been thinking of switching all my rifles over to Wisner two position safeties for the following reasons:
1) Standardize all my rifles
2) 2 pos is simpler than 3 position(on or off only)
3) The 2 pos uses the original shroud which looks better(IMHO)

Recently I purchased a rifle that had a wisner 2 pos safety(by Kobe). I really like the function better than the 3 pos safeties. The only downsides that I see are the fact that the safety must be off to remove a chambered round and bolt dis-assembly is more difficult. I can dis-assemble the bolt by hand with little problem and I am not too worried about taking the safety off to unload the rifle.

So my question is, are there any other downsides to the Wisner 2 position safety as compared to the 3 position safties?


Jason

Other than what you already said i can't really see any other con's. But for the looks have you seen the 3 positions units made by Lapour or Satterlee? They both make to look alot more like the original shrouds with the tall flange on the top. I'm not a fan of the gentry or dakota's either. See the differrence this is a Satterlee in the white.
-Don

I'm not a fan of the 2 position safety. IMO, the slot that's milled in the shroud to accept the new lever weakens the shroud considerbly. I went through a briar patch once with one of those safeties on a M98 and when I got to the other side the top piece of the shroud that's left after the milling is done was bent upwards and that small retaining screw was stripped out. This left the safety lever flopping around and pretty much useless. I lost all confidence in them after that. I much prefer one of the newer 3-position safeties.

Terry

My goodness we gun guys must have the same gene. I like the looks of a Mauser on a Mauser. I like the functional practicality of the 3 position safety. It is a balancing act. I have a few pre 64 Win 70's and have one, but owned/built many Mausers over the years. My little Oberndorf clone sports a 2-position safety by Gary Stiles. His look like Chapmans but 99% of the time are a drop-in fit and don't have/require the (detent?)notch on the rear of the cocking piece. Takedown is a big downside to the two position. That Satterlee shroud has potential to solve that balancing act. I'll bet it is a bit pricey? And where do you get them?

airgun1, the Satterlee safeties only cost a little more. I think around $150-$175 last time I bought one.

Here is his contact info:
Satterlee

Terry

J Brown,

I don't want a safety thats only two position over a three position safety. I want to be able to unload my chamber on safe! I know this to be a very desirable feature.

To be frank I don't follow your reasoning.

quote:

Originally posted by TC1:
I'm not a fan of the 2 position safety. IMO, the slot that's milled in the shroud to accept the new lever weakens the shroud considerbly. I went through a briar patch once with one of those safeties on a M98 and when I got to the other side the top piece of the shroud that's left after the milling is done was bent upwards and that small retaining screw was stripped out. This left the safety lever flopping around and pretty much useless. I lost all confidence in them after that. I much prefer one of the newer 3-position safeties.

Terry

That is one reason to make a plug to fill the old safety hole before cutting the shroud. I also lower the wing until it just kisses the top of the firing pin. Also either reharden the shroud or don't aneal it to begin with. Besides it looks better. I would still prefer a 3 position anyday but I can't alway warrant the extra $150 on something like a truck gun.
Don

quote:

Recently I purchased a rifle that had a wisner 2 pos safety(by Kobe).

Yes.....I know

If one doesn't care about the fact that you must put the firearm on fire to remove the chambered cartridge and happens to like the original styling of the '98 Mauser shroud then the one you have is a very good safety.....

There are a lot of modern production rifles that have the same feature.....placing the safety on fire to remove the chambered round....

Very nice work Don.

Mine did not have a filler plug. Only what was supplied with the kit.

Terry

quote:

Originally posted by Savage_99:
J Brown,

I don't want a safety thats only two position over a three position safety. I want to be able to unload my chamber on safe! I know this to be a very desirable feature.

To be frank I don't follow your reasoning.

I always point the rifle in a safe direction when I remove a round from the chamber, so safety on or off is not too important to me.

As far as my reasoning, I like the fast that the 2 Pos flicks off in one smooth motion. The 3 pos is a bit "not smooth." On a DGR this is important.

Jason

quote:

Originally posted by Don Markey:

quote:

Originally posted by TC1:
I'm not a fan of the 2 position safety. IMO, the slot that's milled in the shroud to accept the new lever weakens the shroud considerbly. I went through a briar patch once with one of those safeties on a M98 and when I got to the other side the top piece of the shroud that's left after the milling is done was bent upwards and that small retaining screw was stripped out. This left the safety lever flopping around and pretty much useless. I lost all confidence in them after that. I much prefer one of the newer 3-position safeties.

Terry

That is one reason to make a plug to fill the old safety hole before cutting the shroud. I also lower the wing until it just kisses the top of the firing pin. Also either reharden the shroud or don't aneal it to begin with. Besides it looks better. I would still prefer a 3 position anyday but I can't alway warrant the extra $150 on something like a truck gun.
Don

I agree about the Lapour and Statterlee safties looking nice. I had a PME 3 Pos. which is the same as the Lapour. It was beautiful, too bad my gunsmith "lost" it so I never got to use it.

I really like the plug in yours and the idea of re-heat treating.

Jason

If your 3-position safety isn't smooth it's because it wasn't installed correctly. It's not the safeties fault. Something else to consider, Don has access to or owns his own mill and lathe and doesn't charge himself an hourly rate. If he did the price would be on par with a store bought 3-position.


Terry

quote:

Originally posted by TC1:
If your 3-position safety isn't smooth it's because it wasn't installed correctly. It's not the safeties fault. Something else to consider, Don has access to or owns his own mill and lathe and doesn't charge himself an hourly rate. If he did the price would be on par with a store bought 3-position.


Terry

You are right there, if I had to pay someone it would probably be the same price as one of the cheaper 3 position safeties like the gentry. But that is only if he can install the 3 position one. If he has to pay for that labor that changes everything. As for the action I think it is how the PME safety springs off instead of being pushed is what he likes. It's just a different feel. But his could be installed without being hand fit and be rough.

quote:

As for the action I think it is how the PME safety springs off instead of being pushed is what he likes. It's just a different feel. But his could be installed without being hand fit and be rough.

Yes, you are correct. The 2 pos moves about 45 deg then springs "off." Very slick and very quick. This would be great for a DGR. It is louder than the 3 pos though...

My 3 positions have been fitted by good gunsmiths and are smooth. The problem is that both the Gentry and the Dakota (and all other 3 pos safties I would think) feel like they are going through two separate motions as they go through the middle detent.

The middle position is great in every respect, except when actually taking the safety off to shoot the rifle. Then it is just one more unnecessary thing.

I just had a thought. Couldn't the middle position detent be eliminated? This would require a lever without the middle detent and would require holding the lever in the middle position to open the bolt, but would allow the safety to function like a 2 pos when taking it off "safe."

Jason

I just sent some finished two position units out to get blued; they should be done in a week or so if anyone is interested.

Jim

IMO there are two problems with the 2 position safeties. First, they do come off 'safe' TOO Easily. Secondly, where the shroud is cut out for the lever, it leaves the front of the sear and the firing pin exposed to dirt, rain, snow, and twigs.

IMO serious well-made DGRs need tang safeties or trigger-finger safeties, period, end of discussion. Also IMO the safety should NOT have to be removed in order to unload the rifle and the bolt should have some method of preventing it being raised accidentally both when on safe and when the safety is disengaged. These requirements mean that some of my rifles have 2 safeties,a conventional one to lock the bolt & striker and to permit easy bolt takedown, and an additional sliding tang button to lock the trigger and sear, for use as a stalking safety. Plus, often, a spring detent to hold the bolt closed, albeit this is sometimes simply too much work on rifles other than Mausers and Springfields. The 1903 I'm building now will have a spring bolt detent, a sliding tang trigger safety and a 2-position bolt sleeve safety that's a benchmade copy of a Jaeger, IMO the simplest and most effective of all the 2-position ones.

Complicated? Yes. Expensive? Yes. Useful? Very yes.
Regards, Joe

The tw position ones I make can be made so the bolt will open when the safety engaged in the rear position.

Seems to me, a bit complicated on a DGR to have two separate safeties. Ever forget to disengage one? I also find it hard to belive when stalking, that a wing safety, a two position one, is not easier to disengage than one on the trigger. Six of one, half a dozen of the other?

When stalking or otherwise anticipating a shot, where do you place your thumb? I personally place mine over on the left side of the PG in order to positively control the rifle by having a firm grip on both sides of the wrist. I would think that this practice would be SOP for any encounter with something that could respond very suddenly and very violently, and IMO it takes entirely too long to move my thumb first to the right and then back over to the left before firing.

IMO right-side safeties are for lefties although I use some of the M70-style 3-position ones to enable easy and safe unloading and bolt disassembly. The Jaeger/FN style is the simplest, most positive and most foolproof of all the 2-position safeties and is the one I use if I'm restricted to that style. Different strokes.
Regards, Joe

To each their own, that's why they are "custom rifles". I personally never had a problem with the safety on the right, it's all it what you are used to. And as Jim said you can set up the safety to allow you to operate the bolt with the safety on.
-Don

Seems to me that I remember several dangerous game hunters who have suffered death and/or dismemberment when their bolts were accidentally partially lifted and caused a snap at an exciting moment. One at least was a well-known NA hunter whose name escapes me now, charged by a brown bear in Alaska, back in the '30s as I recall. This is one reason that all genuine Oberndorf Mauser and Mannlicher-Schoenauer sporters have a built-in bolt retainer spring detent from the factory.

I want a safety or other detent device that locks the bolt on every rifle that I own, and on the ones used for hunting I want a safety that's swiftly available.

So far as the 2-position ones that require milling, my opinion is that the Jaeger/FN style is half as expensive and four times more reliable than the side-swing ones. But not nearly as many Conspicuous Consumption braggin' rights, so....
Regards, Joe