doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Modifying the MF Ideal Safety?

As noted on the recent thread on the Greener side safety, the Manufrance Ideal is a top contender for the most awkward, useless safety out there, enough so that Jean-Claude Mournetas in his book on the Ideal reports that it's common to find examples in which the thing has been disabled altogether. Having shared the frustration first hand, a partial improvement if not a solution comes to mind, and I'm curious to hear what others think about it.

The problem with the MF Ideal safety seems to be in part conceptual and part execution. Conceptually, the designers, brilliant as they were, could and should have looked to decades of experience to realize that the top tang, push-forward-to-shoot safety is about perfect for its intended function. As Mountetas points out, about the same time they were finalizing the perverse Ideal safety, the same team were equipping the cheap, rustic MF Robust with a top tang safety that operates directly on the sears rather than simply blocking the triggers as with the Ideal. So let's grant that the Ideal's safety is poorly conceived and that it's location and operation are inherently problematic.

Those problems are made worse by execution of the design. The twin safety "buttons" on either side of the trigger guard are thin, flat discs, slightly convex and scored on the bottom where the trigger finger is supposed to engage one of them before moving inside the trigger guard to engage either trigger. So your finger has to somehow find this thin flat disk and then exert some amount of upward pressure in order to push it backwards into the live position.

Wouldn't in be better if the disk were built up into a short stud, maybe 3-4 mm (around 1/8 inch) deep? Then a crude backwards sweep of even a gloved finger would be able to engage it. The problem of getting used to having a backwards moving safety button next to the trigger guard would remain, but at least the thing would be easier to find and engage. Just a thought. What do you guys think (besides get a damn gun with a proper safety!)?

Wolfe, I got out my MF Ideal to consider your suggestion. I'm afraid building up the safety button even an 8th inch would interfere with the trigger pull. That is you'd then have to contend with both the safety going the wrong way, but also inadvertently putting it back on safe when moving the trigger finger into position to fire. Just a thought; you've likely considered it more than I have...Geo

No George, I'm afraid I've been dealing in a thought experiment unhindered by physical reality. My Ideal's in the shop for a tune up--only had it a few weeks. So I haven't actually had the chance to look at the thing. Interaction between to goofy safety and the triggers doesn't sound like a step in the right direction. Thanks for the reality check!

Bill

Bill, when my dad taught me to shoot and hunt, he drilled into my head that every gun is always loaded. ALWAYS! And no gun's safety works. NEVER EVER! And one never points a gun somewhere they're not prepared to shoot. NEVER!

So I never depend on my safety to be safe.

I know that's not the solution you are after but I treat my Ideal like it's a pigeon gun. I don't use the safety.

I'm very careful about muzzle control, not having my finger inside the guard until ready to shoot and keeping it broken while I'm walking the fields. Not too hard to get used to closing it as you raise it to your shoulder, especially when working with dogs that are giving you a bit of a heads up that "something is nearby....get ready!"

Besides, that Ideal of your is so perfect, you can't really contemplate a "modification" like that.

Yours is the only post war gun I've seen that I actually want!

When I started hunting with an Ideal 302 16 last season, I took Floyd's lead and kept the gun broken open and unloaded until the dogs got birdy--about half the time. Floyd hunts with an unloaded gun until the dogs point. It's not a bad habit if you can do it. Gil

I think there was a version of the Ideal between the Lunette guns and the regular version that didn't have a safety.


Best,
Ted

You're right, Ted. Apparently the safety was an optional feature through the lunette period and became standard in 1910 when the lunette passed out of production.

Keeping the gun unloaded till the dogs go on point certainly seems both safe and sportsmanlike. Not sure how to manage that with a flushing cocker, though. The broader point that no mechanism can substitute for the safety between the ears is well taken. I was just talking to an older Irish friend whose mother badgered her husband into getting rid of the family double after a local idjit blew away part of his brother in law's hip jumping over a ditch with a loaded gun. The double in question remains a mystery, but my friend says it was English, had engraving, and when presented to a dealer brought an instant offer of 1000 pounds--this in the 1960s! I'd love to know what it was.

Bill, here is a pic of a No. 5 that Kirk Merrington consulted me on the value and perhaps helping find a buyer. I helped on both accounts. I hooked a friend up with it, and have been fortunate enough to shoot it. Someone made some modifications to an otherwise pristine pre war beauty. One of those mods can be seen in this pic, and I absolutely hate it. Feels like a tumor when handling/shooting the gun.

If you can't get used to yours, I will be happy to take it off your hands.
Like James, I have always treated my Ideals like pigeon guns. The safety is a piece of crap. To me, it's just not that big a fly in an otherwise awesome ointment.


Mike

Good looking gun, Mike. Too bad about the wart.

I was thinking I would post a pic, but didn't get around to it.

I have very seldom used the safety, if only to get a feel for it. The lump does not help IMO.