This really follows on from my recent 'Top End Springer' thread but I thought it should be separate.
Having looked / stripped / shot many rifles over the years I feel that while they are all generally very good, a niggly fault can be found that with some thought at the design stage could have been engineered out, making a good rifle even better. Now I am not really concerned with things like inadequate lubrication or over lubrication or maybe even sloppy spring guide fit and a need for a generall 'smoothing out' or deburring. I am on about design faults.
I will list two:
1. The TX safety catch issue; having to yank on the u/l to set it. I have seen several rifles where you need to give a good yank to set the catch, others where you don't and the complete cocking action is very sweet and smooth. This can happen to new and old rifles alike. Surely the fault, and I believe it is a fault, could be / should be engineered out at the production stage.
2. The old model FWB 124/127 awful safety catch. I have seen rifles where the catch sets but where even moderate trigger pressure overcomes it. Not good enough I am afraid. Clearly a redesign was needed.

I am sure there are other examples. While thinking about this I was going to remark that it is very pleasing that modern rifles e.g. HW77/97, TX, LGU, LGV are so very easy to strip, generally because of the trigger mechanism cassette and began to think this was progress compared with the older Webley triggers or the 3 ball Diana/Original. But of course the even older BSA and Heinel rifles had trigger units that made a strip so easy. So maybe there is no case to answer and modern rifles are indeed built for the diy market.

Just thoughts,
Cheers, Phil