I am not deliberately trying to start a raging argument. I understand that a 3-position side-swing safety is considered the gold standard. But I am wondering what to do about a rifle I am have.

I'm wanting to get into a .375 H&H at a "moderate" expense. Toward that end, I've gotten a used Whitworth Express Rifle. So far, I've had the barrel cut and recrowned at 22" and had a NECG banded front sight installed. Now I'm thinking about next steps.

This rifle has had the original trigger replaced with a Timney that has the side safety. It works very well. If I replace this with an Alaskan Arms trigger (old Winchester Model 70 type), and 3-position safety, I'm looking at about $500 in parts plus installation charges (I can probably do the trigger, but not the safety). So I'm thinking hard about whether to do this or not.

I own a lot of other rifles, and almost all of them have 2-position safeties, including Remingtons, Sakos, Colt Sauers, and customs by the Biesens. The only 3-position safeties are on my Model 70's. I've never had a problem with any of the former group, nor do I leave them home because of the way they function.

That Timney side safety would be quick to use. I know it doesn't lock the firing pin, nor does it allow unloading on "safe."

I understand only I can decide, but wonder what others might think?

While I prefer the 3-position M-70 OR the FN "crowbar" safety there is nothing wrong with the Timney side safety.
Another option would be a two position Wisner safety. (The one that uses a "military sleeve which is then machined to accept the two position lever")

That and the FN crowbar should be much less expensive than having a 3-position fitted.

Something else to keep in mind is the "notch" in the stock for the existing safety that you will have to deal with if you change it.

To stay with your original "moderate price", leave it as is.

DF

Jkob does a safety for a bit over $100. Gentry will install one of their safeties for $250. So there are options less than $500. But there really is no functional liability to the safety on the Timney.

Thanks for the replies, gents. This rifle disease can certainly make me obsess! I kind of "want" to put a 3-position safety on this Whitworth, but then I get to thinking about all my other rifles with 2-position safeties that don't worry me. Weird, I know.

I'm planning to have the stock refinished, so would want a piece of walnut that matches as well as possible fitted to the gap. I'm sure you would see it if you looked, but it probably would not be obvious.

Using one of Jim Kobe's side-swing safeties is an option, but they are also 2-position. Jim put one on a Swede for me several years ago and it works perfectly. (Jim is who cut the barrel and installed the banded front sight on the Whitworth.)

I was thinking that if I go to the expense of a 3-position side safety, I would swap out the trigger for one of the new ones from Alaska Arms that lists for $220, so that is how I got to about $500 in parts. I could just use a Timney without safety for a lot less, or perhaps the safety mechanism on the trigger I have can be removed and the trigger is still functional.

Decisions!

I think it all lies with personal preference mainly. I like both though. They each fill their own niche.

Sorry for not helping... LOL

You're are boxing yourself into a corner. First, you say you want this to be a modest cost project. Now you are talking $500 in mods and a stock refinish. These will surely come close to doubling what you have into the gun.

If you want a Win 70 style safety, and a Win 70 style trigger, you know the cheapest route is a Win 70. I think you could find a push feed era M70 for a good value, because the market under-values them. I think the Win 70 is a great choice for big cartridges like the 375 H&H; the two times I have been to Africa, I have taken only M70s.

In terms of 2- v 3-position safeties, the key issues for me are 1) is it large enough to be readily taken off safety quickly and 2) does it block the firing pin instead of just the sear? The little low side safety on the commercial M98s like your Whitworth are neither. I don't really need the center position of a 3-position safety all that much, although I certainly use it.

But I understand the appeal of making mods to a M98, having done one in the past, and having two more in process. The tradition of a M98, combined with the H&H, is compelling. Just don't fool yourself into thinking that it is a low cost proposition.

utah708,

Thanks for your additional reply. I understand what you are saying. I guess "moderate expense" is too relative a term, and was a poor choice on my part. I know I could have saved money just by buying a new Winchester or CZ. I expect to spend a good bit more than that, but less than a full-blown custom, by the time I am done. But it will be exactly what I want (if I ever decide. I'm actually pretty close.)

I got what I think is a good deal on the Whitworth, at $625. For the work I've had done, plus another take-off stock that is in better shape and has much more figure than the stock that came with the rifle, I'm into this for about another $425. So I'm at $1050 and have a very serviceable rifle. I'd definitely like to have the forend shortened a tad, the plastic tip replaced with ebony, ebony inlays over the crossbolt, and the stock refinished. I know that will cost for these aesthetic improvements. Then I'm foolishly agonizing over what to do about the trigger and safety.

The Whitworth as modified comes in at 9-1/2 pounds with a 3X Leupold in Talley quick detachable mounts, hitting my target weight for a rifle in this cartridge.

I appreciate your thoughts.

And that is a beautiful, classy rifle!

Sounds like another conundrum encountered when we want to make a Mauser like a M70....we run into these cost/benefit predicaments...having BTDT,this is the reason I look longingly at Mausers these days,put them down,and buy a M70 instead.Unless of course someone else has already spent the chedda in the right areas and I'm buying a properly assembled rifle, used.

But the OP is into this already,and a reasonable,responsible person would worry about the cost and leave it "as is".....but rifle nutz are not reasonable people and Woodsie will not rest until the rifle is exactly as he likes it

I would worry about the mechanics before the aesthetic stuff;get the Alaskan trigger and the 3 position safety.....then play with the stock later is how I would roll.

As Utah alludes to, a "perfect" 375H&H never comes inexpensively.A sophisticated guy like Woodsie will not be happy until it fits his version of "perfect".

Bob,

You make some excellent points, not the least of which is the implication that this is not entirely about money. The cost is a consideration, but not the whole story or I would have bought "new."

Al I know it isn't all about the money.... after a few years I couldn't tell you what a certain feature cost me at the time,especially if the rifle becomes a favorite and gives years of good service.

Yeah, Bob. A Loony should never have to explain, especially to a pack of fellow Loonies...

DF

DF: This place is like an insane asylum...EVERYBODY's crazy here...

We ALL understand exactly what's going through Al's mind.

Bob,

You could be right!

It is all true. I am building a 9.3x62 on a Mauser because there are things not right on the 35 Whelen shown in the photos. No possible rationale--just because.

I'm not Bob, but I can deffinately relate. I wanted a pre 64 model 70 in 375 H&H and I couldn't afford to buy an all original rifle so I had one put together for nearly 1/3 the price of an "all original". I could have also saved myself even more by buying a new SC made by FN model 70 for $1,000.00. Sometimes it's not exactly about money, but what makes you happy. I'd say build it exactly how you want it and enjoy the hell out of it.....Nothing wrong with a good whitworth. One of my good pre 64 lovin buddies carried his whitworth (375 H&H) around every year when it came time for elk hunting and left his pre 64's at home. I actually saw that whitworth today when I was at his shop. Back to the 2 position or 3, I've used both and started out on a sporterized m1917 which had the 2 position safety with a timney trigger and I was totally content with it. It's your rifle though, make it how you want it......

Damn straight there's something wrong with that 35 whelen. For 1 it's not a 9.3x62 and for another the bolt is on the wrong side. Man, how do you work that thing that way?????

Turn it upside down, which explains why the controlled feed is important.

....Good one . That's why I always have problems with those dang rem 700's...The cartridges just keep falling out

I'm a CRF fan.....I fall down a lot.

I'm a lefty. I took a left hand Ruger MKII and a Mauser M-98 to Africa in May. The Ruger proved to be heads and shoulders above the Mauser with it's low scope safety. Getting a live round back out, as my ride took off over the rocks, proved this, time, and time again. My P.H. made his point, that the big difference between the U.S. and Africa, is that you always reload instantly, and keep a live round in the chamber, until he says to unload the rifle. So the three position safeties are golden, between the occasional shots.

I like a three position safety but I don't consider a two position one a liability, nor would it influence my purchase of a rifle. I have never hunted Africa, but I've known many that have and none ever mentioned a problem with a two position safety.

Again, I appreciate all the responses. And it is very nice that they were all thoughtful and did not get into the raging argument that sometimes develops on this topic. You helped me think it through.

I made my decision and took the rifle to Jim Kobe yesterday. The conversation with him about the trigger, safety, and other things was also very helpful. (I am fortunate indeed to live within driving distance of both Jim and Redneck.)

I'm going with a new Timney trigger and Jim's two-position side-swing safety. I counted up, and I have 6 rifles with Timney triggers and 11 with two-position safeties. I've never had a problem with any of these. Obviously, someone else might have made a different decision. Jim is also going to do the stock work. I'm sure I will like the finished product.

Hmmm...interesting..

That's funny Bob. Never know when that CRF is going to pay for itself do you

Hi Woodsy, my point is that I had both a low scope safety, left hand, on my 416 wildcat Mauser, and the stock three position safety, on my 270 Win.,CRF Ruger MkII, left hand bolt rifle. Both rifles are scoped, and I carried both of them in the carrier in the High Rack Pickup Box. So it gave me a good chance to really compare them against one another.

I didn't know which rifle to grab, until the game presented itself. We went after small plains game, but I finished up with a Kudu and a Gnu. FWIW, I had my G.S. match the pull of the new Timney trigger in the Mauser build, to my existing 3.5 lb. trigger pull, in my Ruger MkII.

Walking over the ground, you can simply stop while you load or unload. But in a High Rack box hunt, and where I was, you can't even walk over all these loose rectangular rocks, in the Karoo, the driver has the final say, on the giddy up!

But on my Mauser, the safety locks down the bolt handle, on safe, so it comes off, to empty the chamber, as the truck bolts off. A two position safety that lets you unload on safe, is much better, in this High Rack drill, IMO.

bsa I frequently need all the help I can get...you think I have trouble walking, you should see me shoot!

Bob, don't ruin my image of you....I know that "S" on your shirt means you don't fall down and I know you are bs'n about your shooting ability...

In a PF rifle it makes sense to have a 3 position safety since you have to cam the bolt over in order to make the extractor snap over the rim so the case can be extracted. In a CRF, all you have to do is move the bolt straight forward and back.

If you need to carry the rifle with a round in the chamber, just hold it vertically with the trigger pulled and chamber a round, then let off the trigger. Then all you have to do is lift the bolt handle to cock it.

none of this is right.

More to the point I would be waiting for the God all mighty bang...and the slap of [bleep] on the ground.

Ok then. Just move the bolt back and forth on your PF and watch it double feed. If you hold the trigger while riding the bolt home, it locks the trigger to the rear, so it cant possibly fire. Now unless your bolt shroud falls off and someone comes along with a punch and hits it with a hammer, the rifle's not going to go off.

Do you handle rifles very much? or just read about it?

if you hold the PF at an angle (muzzle up) with the ejection port down and push the bolt foreward just far enough to strip the top round from the magazine, then retract the bolt, said round simply drops out (into your hand if you have a clue)

if you lower the firing pin onto a loaded round, the mainspring will apply constant pressure on the primer and could easily cause a ND. i have never seen this method called safe by anybody with a clue.

and i handle rifles a bunch more than you do.

Obviously not. With the firing pin cocked and the trigger locked to the rear, the firing pin is NOT resting on the primer. Go think about that and come back later............

Oh for Gods sake....when you let the firing pin ride foreward as you chamber a round with the trigger engaged, you will end up with a live round with a firing pin resting against it.

If I ever see any prick I hunt with doing that I will immediately stop hunting with them and make them painfully aware of how f_cking stupid they are...now piss off and grow a brain.

i gotta quote this before the stupid gets edited out of it. my gawd...

JSTUART is correct. pulling the trigger while chambering a round allows the FP to follow the cocking cam until the tip of the FP i resting on the live primer under spring pressure.


seriously, dude, you should be asking for advice instead of trying to give it.

GFY, really

in fairness, i did have a good belly laugh over your "firing pin cocked and the trigger locked to the rear" comment...

thanks for that.

Obviously you haven't tried it. Just keep throwin' stones at the moon.

sure i have. guess what. when you pull the trigger to the rear and close the bolt on a loaded round, the firing pin 'uncocks' and goes foreward. and the tip of the FP hits the primer. just like it's supposed to. imagine that...

trust me, do NOT go around telling people to do schitt like this, because you do not have the slightlest clue

well said toad!! iam loving this thread lol!!!!!!!

Didn't go off did it?

After re-reading your posts I realise that Toad and I are in error....you should definitely continue what you are doing....you should also start having unprotected sex at gay bars and main-line heroin with dirty needles.


Have a good life.

Every now and then someone says something so off the wall that it makes you question what you've known forever, this is one of those times. To prove to myself that what you said is absolutely bat-$hit crazy I went to my safe and pulled out one of the many CRF M70's in there and did as you say, sure enough the firing pin fell when I rode the bolt home. I wasn't crazy enough to have a round in there at the time, but if I had then it's obvious that the firing pin would be resting on the primer of the live round. Just to make sure I pulled a second M70 out and did the same thing, the firing pin rode home on it too. Then I pulled out a zastava mauser 30-06, same thing, the firing pin rode home and would be resting on the primer if there were a round in the chamber. Any of them could be fired with a sharp blow to the bolt shroud in that condition.

Mr Stuart has a way with words, as most Aussies do. I won't get quite as colorful as he, but it's obvious that anyone dumb enough to follow your advice would be a menace to himself and anyone around him.