Marlin Double Safety on Lever Gun

[R.W.Dale]

Any gun that requires you to actually pull the trigger on a live round to engage the safety is the height of stupid careless Victorian engineering.

OK

I have been in aviation for thirty five years and and I can absolutely promise you that you cannot design a machine to do your thinking for you.

That's absolutely true BUT would you consider a retractable undercarriage that required the pilot to drag the belly of the aircraft on the tarmac briefly to lower good design? With such a system you'd have to KINDA land to put the gear down.

Just like you kinda have to shoot an old Winchester or marlin to engauge the saftey. All the elements are there, trigger pulled, sear disengaged, firing pin free and a live round right in front of it all.

 

[CZguy]

That's absolutely true BUT would you consider a retractable undercarriage that required the pilot to drag the belly of the aircraft on the tarmac briefly to lower good design? With such a system you'd have to KINDA land to put the gear down.

A real life example would be a Cherokee six equipped with automatically deploying landing gear. You would set the altitude that the gear would extent automatically.

Years ago I flew with a man who came in for a landing in one and didn't bother to select the landing gear into the down position. I asked him about it and he said "don't worry, they extent automatically". That kind of thinking will cause an accident in planes, cars, guns etc.

With a Marlin or Winchester lever action you need to point the gun in a safe direction, and carefully lower the hammer. Relying on the cross bolt safety will only mean that someday you stand a chance of thinking you had it on when you didn't.

The only way that I know to be safe is to do it the correct way each and every time. If you rely of a device to do it for you, your setting yourself up for a possible failure someday.

 

[R.W.Dale]

With a Marlin or Winchester lever action you need to point the gun in a safe direction, and carefully lower the hammer. Relying on the cross bolt safety will only mean that someday you stand a chance of thinking you had it on when you didn't.

The only way that I know to be safe is to do it the correct way each and every time. If you rely of a device to do it for you, your setting yourself up for a possible failure someday.

Now just to clarify I'm not really a fan of the cobbled up crossbolt patch safety feature either. I think Winchester and now Mossberg were on the right path with the new tang mounted safety. I think the whole concept of lowering the hammer on a live round is the problem. The crossbolt really does nothing but make things more complex

 

[Davek1977]

Again, the only safety one should ever need is that between the ears. The rest are helpful to varying degrees, but none are absolutely fool proof. However, any gun in proper working order is as "safe" as the person handling it, no more or no less. My 11 yr old nephew will likley be using the very same 336 Marlin I used on my first deer hunt, and I have no qualms about that.

 

[Sav .250]

rcmodel:
On your information about putting an "O" ring on the cross bolt safety. Who would have thought? Will pass that on to my son.

 

[Yellowtail3]

coming late to this

When got my 336 in 2006, I didn't like the safety. I took a shot at a doe one morning, only to hear CLACK! as the hammer dropped on that safe'd rifle... and decided at that point I really hated the safety. I was accustomed to a bolt gun, where you couldn't pull the trigger with the safety engaged. I supposed I was also influenced a bit by peeps on various boards, almost universally bad-mouthing the Marlin safety, talking up the desirability of pre-crossbolt safety rifles.

Well... I've changed my mind. It's definitely safer to unload/cycle ammo through the rifle with safety engaged. I keep the safety on when walking in the woods, and when climbing the tree. When stalking and attentive on the ground, I leave it off, w/hammer at half cock.

I could live without the safety, no problem. I understand how to, and I think that 99% of the time no cross-bolt safety would be fine. But it is useful.

Oh, and that doe I took a 'CLACK!' at that morning? She froze, turned and looked toward me. I held verrrry still, then slowly and silently disengaged safety... cocked rifle... and just as I was about to shoot, a much bigger buck stepped into view.

I shot him instead!

since then, I've changed my mind on the cross-bolt safety - it's useful, and I don't mind it.

 

[MCMXI]

Well... I've changed my mind. It's definitely safer to unload/cycle ammo through the rifle with safety engaged.

There's no way that the rifle can fire if you don't close the lever all the way when cycling the action to empty the magazine. You have the two-piece firing pin safety feature along with the trigger block safety feature both of which require the lever/action to be FULLY closed. Now add to that the fact that your trigger finger isn't anywhere near the trigger when cycling the action and I'm left wondering how the hell anyone could manage an AD when emptying the magazine. Emptying the magazine isn't an exercise in speed so what's the problem?

Added in Edit: What I do is I place my fingers in the lever loop, then move the lever down enough to get my thumb on top of it. I keep it there as I work the lever until the magazine and receiver are empty. With this method, the lever closes enough for the extractor to grab the rim of the case but the lever is no where near to being fully closed since my thumb is in the way. Works every time and is 100% safe and no cross-bolt safety required. Many, many CAS shooters remove the safety for obvious reasons and they don't seem to have a problem unloading the rifle or using the rifle in a safe manner.

 

[Yellowtail3]

no problem, 1858, but... I stand by my assertion, that it is safer to cycle rounds through the rifle with the safety on.

Nice thumb method; I may adopt it. I'll give a try after my next time afield (Monday afternoon, if all goes well). But I'll prob leave cross-bolt safety engaged.

I think a 336 can be operated quite safely without cross-bolt safety; if I were buying another, I'd look to find an old one (cleaner looking). Still... the cross-bolt safety is useful. And hey... because of it, my 2nd deer w/the Marlin was a five-pointer, instead of a doe!

 

[MCMXI]

no problem, 1858, but... I stand by my assertion, that it is safer to cycle rounds through the rifle with the safety on.

No problem too Yellowtail3 ... but I'll stand by my assertion that you don't need to fully chamber a round when emptying the magazine which is also a very safe method due to the precautions taken by Marlin to prevent an out of battery discharge. In other words, hell will freeze over before you'll have an AD if you follow the procedure that I described above keeping your thumb on top of the lever. My Winchester '97 shotgun made in 1921 doesn't have a safety ... it uses the hammer half-cock safety feature like the Marlin. It does have a neat way to empty the magazine though which it needs since it'd be much harder to control the slide as compared to Marlin's lever.

 

[Cajun]

Keep your booger picker away from the bang switch and you will not have to worry about a discharge when you are loading or unloading!!

 

[Yellowtail3]

cute imagery there, Cajun. If the rest of the world were so competent, there wouldn't be any need for any safeties on any rifles, would there?

 

[CZguy]

cute imagery there, Cajun. If the rest of the world were so competent, there wouldn't be any need for any safeties on any rifles, would there?

Sarcasm won't change the fact that he's right.

I just would have phrased it a little differently.

 

[Yellowtail3]

well, that's why they have safeties - for the rest of us. Or maybe just for all those other incompetent guys?

 

[ArmedBear]

Competence is one thing at the range. It's another when it's 10 degrees out and blowing 30 MPH, you're wearing gloves, and tired from the trail. Having additional safety devices, provided they are easy enough to use, is never a BAD thing.

My only complaint, really, is that there's no lock on the safety. I'd like to be able to lock it off-safe, so the gun would behave like a traditional Marlin while hunting. Then, I could unlock it and put it on-safe, when I return to car or camp, for an extra measure of safety when unloading it, etc.

Someone on here (rcmodel?) uses a rubber O-ring to do that. I'll have to try it.

 

[MCMXI]

How many times do I have to say this ... you DON'T need to close the lever all the way to empty the magazine. With your thumb in the way, there's no chance of accidentally closing the lever since you'd have to severe your thumb to do so ... and unlikely event even if you have severe frostbite. If the lever isn't closed, the rifle can't fire ... PERIOD!!

 

[ArmedBear]

You're right about that. The Marlin won't fire out of battery. It's a very safe design, actually, not a horrible example of Victorian disregard for safety.

But... If I'm busy and I hand the gun to someone else to unload, I'd just as soon not have to train them in a lever-action trick.

 

[MCMXI]

ArmedBear, I'll consider installing the ABLS (ArmedBear locking safety) once you bring it to market (a good idea by the way), but until then it's no safety for me.

 

[R.W.Dale]

How many times do I have to say this ... you DON'T need to close the lever all the way to empty the magazine. With your thumb in the way, there's no chance of accidentally closing the lever since you'd have to severe your thumb to do so ... and unlikely event even if you have severe frostbite. If the lever isn't closed, the rifle can't fire ... PERIOD!!

That's all well and good for unloading. But after loading the rifle I challenge anyone to make a pre crossbolt levergun safe without "putting the booger picker" on the loud switch.

 

[Yellowtail3]

krochus makes a good point - having to pull the trigger on a rifle with a round chambered, to lower that hammer and make 'safe' w/o safety... hmmm.... another data point in favor of the cross-bolt safety.

I look forward to taking Miss Marlin hunting tomorrow evening. I'll let you all know if the deer cooperate... .

 

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

Well said, SST & krochus.

 

[MCMXI]

That's all well and good for unloading. But after loading the rifle I challenge anyone to make a pre crossbolt levergun safe without "putting the booger picker" on the loud switch.

True, but I don't care. I'm either at the range or out in the boonies when I chamber a live round so I do what I've done my whole life ... keep the muzzle pointed in a safe direction and don't point it at anything I don't want to shoot. This isn't complicated and lowering the hammer to the half-cock position on a Marlin with the hammer spur attached is easy and safe. Come to think of it, I've lowered hammers thousands of times on a variety of firearms and never once has the hammer fallen forward in an uncontrolled manner. Maybe I'm just lucky.

 

[CajunBass]

Maybe I'm just lucky.

Not necessarly. Maybe those who have had it happen, were just unlucky.

 

[Yellowtail3]

Here's hoping I get lucky today - heading off to the woods now. I'll be sure to disengage that safety once ensconced in my tree...

 

[SSN Vet]

I love my marlin 336 CS....

And I understand that it has a "loading/unloading" button that makes the gun safer than it is when I perform those functions, simply relying on my frost bite impaired manual dextarity.

And after hearing 'click' when I really wanted to hear 'boom' on one occasion, I learned (via. experience which I will remember, vs. readin' which I often forget) that immediately after the loading/unloading operation is complete, the loading/unloading button gets turned off.

Any "yooper" used to 6" of snow on opening day should appreciate that

 

[SSN Vet]

My only complaint, really, is that there's no lock on the safety. I'd like to be able to lock it off-safe, so the gun would behave like a traditional Marlin while hunting. Then, I could unlock it and put it on-safe, when I return to car or camp, for an extra measure of safety when unloading it, etc.

I've toyed with an idea for some time.... it won't lock the safety in the off position, but it would help prevent the safety from getting bumped into the "safe" position.

The idea is to remove the safety and mill ~1/8" off of the "red" end, so it is flush with the receiver when the safety is off. Then if I want to engage the cross bolt safety, all I have to do is use a key, bullet or twig to push the flush smooth end.

This way I'd still get the "Safe" end standing proud when the x-bolt is engaged, and both ends would be flush when the x-bolt is not engaged.

10 min. on the milling machine at work should do the trick.