Marlin Lever - Cross Bolt Safety?

ronecol

ronecol

CGN frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
67   0   0
Location
Orillia, Ontario
Disparaging critical comments are regular heard / seen concerning the cross bolt safety on the newer Marlin and Winchester levers. Why? What is the problem or disadvantage of this feature?

Personally, other than the pleasure of owning an nice older rifle, I don't understand the dislike.
 
Me neither. But then again I grew up with the cross bolt safety on the first marlin 30-30 I bought as a teenager. I have buddies 10 years older that were brought up without it and have an absolute hate on for it. People just don't like change.
 
Cross bolt safeties are ugly, and unnecessary.
If you had a chance to buy one of two rifles, in the exact same condition, one with and one without the cross bolt safety, how many people would opt for the cross bolt safety one?
 
I think the belief is that these safeties were added to satisfy lawyers. So they are bad. (and they're ugly)

The half #### position on the hammer sort of serves the same purpose as the "new" safety. But you can carry the rifle "cocked and locked" with the safety engaged.

Personally, I find the Marlin (cross bolt) safety unergonomic. You could just ignore the safety button, but I also find them prone to getting bumped into the "safe" position. Presumably, if you used the safety as intended, they'd be prone to getting bumped into the "fire" position. Tang safety is different, of course.

But you can get used to anything. If you want to...
 
Nutt'in like a big fuggly zitt awn a nice lever.
My 44mag hass one.
I yewser when I unload the mag tewb.
Found owt I can unload the tewb thru the load gate.
 
alpining said:
I think the belief is that these safeties were added to satisfy lawyers. So they are bad. (and they're ugly)

The half #### position on the hammer sort of serves the same purpose as the "new" safety. But you can carry the rifle "cocked and locked" with the safety engaged.

Personally, I find the Marlin (cross bolt) safety unergonomic. You could just ignore the safety button, but I also find them prone to getting bumped into the "safe" position. Presumably, if you used the safety as intended, they'd be prone to getting bumped into the "fire" position. Tang safety is different, of course.

But you can get used to anything. If you want to...
Click to expand...

The wife & I have several Marlins used in the cowboy game, with the cross bolt safety and they don't bother me in the least . I install a tight O-ring in the detent groove with safety in the "fire" position. They are in the fire position 24//7 and are treated accordingly at the firing line...empty tube until the beeper goes off.
 
ronecol said:
Disparaging critical comments are regular heard / seen concerning the cross bolt safety on the newer Marlin and Winchester levers. I don't understand the dislike.
Click to expand...

The cross bolt is completely unnecessary seeing as how the rifle already has a half #### safety.

I do wonder how many guys have heard a CLICK instead of a BANG when the cross bolt is either forgotten on OR accidentally engaged... I bet there are a fair number of deer/moose/bears that have the cross bolt safety to thank for saving their skin in those situations lol!
 
crossbolt has a detent ball held in place by a spring and a set screw
butt stock can be removed for access and when the set screw is tightened down hard the crossbolt becomes inoperable
 
ronecol said:
Question. If engaged is the extra safety feature when cycling the action to unload not considered valid or important?
Click to expand...

If one wanted to use it in this manner, they could. But I don't see it as important.

boxhitch said:
crossbolt has a detent ball held in place by a spring and a set screw
butt stock can be removed for access and when the set screw is tightened down hard the crossbolt becomes inoperable
Click to expand...

That is one way to do it. Not nearly as clean looking as the cross bolt safety delete though...
 
ronecol said:
Question. If engaged is the extra safety feature when cycling the action to unload not considered valid or important?
Click to expand...

Different expectations. If you think it's unsafe to unload a lever action without having a manual safety to keep you from accidentally pulling the trigger, there's your answer. Different from someone who successfully grew up without accidentally pulling the trigger while unloading a lever action.

Every design choice is a compromise, and you can get used to anything (if you want to).

For context: Many people who grew up on Glocks think that external safeties on a pistol are inherently dangerous. Many people who grew up before Glocks think that a pistol without an external safety is inherently dangerous.
 
I have always just stuck a 1/4" rubber O ring in the grove with the cross bolt safety in the off position and never bothered with it after that. Never had an issue using the half #### on the hammer. The cross bolt was only put there for liability BS.
 
It looks great on my 1895 Cowboy.

vKHVGgp.jpg

NZM7Jci.jpg
 
SOME places demand all safety's must work. Clubs and CAS some times. So screwing down the set screw looks good, and will not let it engage on the clock.
When selling the firearm it can be made factory stock or used as needed for hunting safely.

Yes I do understand you real men do not need gizmos.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom