quote:

Originally posted by cdsx:
I'm just surprised no one has yet asked him: Why?

quote:

Originally posted by Bob Nisbet:
Been looking and thinking someone out there might have one. Not concerned with who made it. I have 6 gran daughters (Both sons with 3 each). I want to start my granddaughters with a light rifle for small frame girls (Under age 12) that will allow learning center fire rifle marksmanship and also work with pigs, rabbits, etc. They already have a good start using 22 rim fire. Starting like this with small recoil rifle will help them avoid developing a flinch.

quote:

Originally posted by Bob Nisbet:
Been looking and thinking someone out there might have one. Not concerned with who made it. I have 6 gran daughters (Both sons with 3 each). I want to start my granddaughters with a light rifle for small frame girls (Under age 12) that will allow learning center fire rifle marksmanship and also work with pigs, rabbits, etc. They already have a good start using 22 rim fire. Starting like this with small recoil rifle will help them avoid developing a flinch.

quote:

Originally posted by Stonecreek:

quote:

Originally posted by Bob Nisbet:
Been looking and thinking someone out there might have one. Not concerned with who made it. I have 6 gran daughters (Both sons with 3 each). I want to start my granddaughters with a light rifle for small frame girls (Under age 12) that will allow learning center fire rifle marksmanship and also work with pigs, rabbits, etc. They already have a good start using 22 rim fire. Starting like this with small recoil rifle will help them avoid developing a flinch.

Bob: The CZ is a poor choice for teaching youngster due to its backward operating safety. You don't want them growing up with the notion that you push the safety forward to make it "safe", which will eventually get you into big trouble with 99% of the firearms made.

Instead of spending the dough to build a .30 Carbine bolt action, why not buy one of the fairly inexpensive .300 Blackouts? Howa makes a good one on a properly proportioned small action. Swap your .30 Carbine ammunition for .223 brass, from which you can make very economical reloads for the .300 Blackout.

quote:

Originally posted by craig48:
I do agree with vzerone.

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:

quote:

Originally posted by cdsx:
I'm just surprised no one has yet asked him: Why?

He has posted in the classifieds why .. has lots of 30 carbine ammo, and, irrc, grandkids

quote:

That's a far reach on the safety Stonecreek. First off everyone should be totally knowledgeable of their firearms. Notice firearms plural. There are all sorts of safeties that operate in many different manners then "forward for fire". Many shotguns have a push through on the trigger guard. Then military rifles, oh my, swing over mauser safeties, Jap twist safety, Mosin pull and turn, hell the French didn't even have safeties on many of their firearms. To teach a kid that back is safe and forward is fire is not a good practice. The good practice is to teach them everything about the firearm including field stripping it.

quote:

Originally posted by craig48:
The system is safe as long as it's used the way it's supposed to be used.

quote:

Originally posted by Stonecreek:

quote:

That's a far reach on the safety Stonecreek. First off everyone should be totally knowledgeable of their firearms. Notice firearms plural. There are all sorts of safeties that operate in many different manners then "forward for fire". Many shotguns have a push through on the trigger guard. Then military rifles, oh my, swing over mauser safeties, Jap twist safety, Mosin pull and turn, hell the French didn't even have safeties on many of their firearms. To teach a kid that back is safe and forward is fire is not a good practice. The good practice is to teach them everything about the firearm including field stripping it.

As to the CZ's safety, this is what a magazine article in Rifle Shooter magazine https://www.rifleshootermag.co...57-lux-review/374604 has to say in part regarding CZ finally changing its safety to "forward to fire": "While the 455 was a reliable and successful platform, perhaps the biggest complaint about it was the lack of an “American-style” push-to-Fire safety. For years hunter safety instructors and 4-H shooting coaches have been begging CZ to add this to its rimfire rifles, and CZ listened.
I'm not sure where the author of the article came up with the term "American style" regarding the safety. But he is certainly correct regarding shooting instructors and their view of reverse-operating safeties. Virtually every gun safety, regardless of country of origin, which operates in a forward-backward motion uses the forward position as "fire" and the rearward position as "safe". Tang safeties, trigger safeties, "Model 70 type" bolt safeties, even pistol safeties all use this same forward motion to place the firearm in "fire" position.

Familiarity with one's firearm is essential to safety. I own dozens of rifles and am familiar with all of them. I am especially familiar with the single one I own (Brno ZKW 465) with a backward operating safety which is why I NEVER utilize the safety on that rifle and NEVER allow anyone to shoot that rifle without closely supervising them.

This same rifle happens to have two triggers -- one is the lever which "sets" the trigger and the other is the lever which fires the gun. As with ALL double set triggers, the rear one is the set and the front one drops the sear and fires the gun. What if CZ had chosen to reverse this order, making it different from the hundreds of thousands of other rifles with set triggers in the world? Would you then regard this as an issue only if the shooter is careless and "unfamiliar" with a particular firearm?

Let's go a step further. A bolt could be designed to operate by lifting it to lock and shoving it down to open. It is only convention (and operating convenience) which causes ALL bolt actions to lock by turning the bolt down and not up. Is this another "arbitrary" convention which is no big deal if a manufacturer chooses to ignore it?

So far as I know, and fortunately for all involved, neither Brno nor CZ has ever been sued over their backward safeties. Regardless of how you may feel about product liability, if such a case were brought it would be virtually a legal cake walk. CZ is wise to be modifying their safeties to work like everybody else in the known universe -- gas on the right and brake on the left.