What mechanical safety designs used on pistols would not qualify for a best list?

Status
Not open for further replies.
N

Nom de Forum

Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2008
Messages
2,769
Location
Arizona
There are many different “best” mechanical safety systems used on pistols but as we all know they still rely on the thought processes of the user to qualify for inclusion on a best list. Perhaps a list of mechanical safety systems on pistols that, even when the user does everything right, would not qualify for a best list may be interesting and useful. I nominate the system used on the Walther PPK as not qualifying for a best list. It does work, but is less than optimal, the same design was not used on Walther’s next successful pistol design (P-38), and has not found favor with pistol designers. Anyone have other nominations?
 
I am not a big fan of safeties that need to be moved upwards to engage the 'fire' position. The more natural movement is downwards, like on a 1911.
 
tuj said:
I am not a big fan of safeties that need to be moved upwards to engage the 'fire' position. The more natural movement is downwards, like on a 1911.
Click to expand...

I agree with you, but I am thinking more along the lines of how the mechanical safety system functions to prevent discharge of the pistol. Not so much how any particular individual part of the mechanical safety system is manipulated to be engaged or disengaged.
 
Last edited:
I had a Ruger P-89 DA/SA back when that was a new handgun. It's safety wore out, and the hammer disconnect portion failed. The hammer block was still in place, though. I consider that desig. To be less than stellar. It forever turned me off to safeties. Hence my extensive revolver and Glock collection.
 
If we are going to have a "not the best" list, we need to define some terms. What is "best"? What would be "worst"

For worst, I would have to nominate a Colt Single Action. It has no mechanical safety other than an empty chamber under the hammer and can be carried 6 up and fully cocked. I'm sure there are others out there, but that one comes readily to mind.

For best, perhaps Eric Holder's new safety bracelets :evil:

And maybe we need to define "safe" as well. :scrutiny:
 
JRH6856 said:
If we are going to have a "not the best" list, we need to define some terms. What is "best"? What would be "worst"

For worst, I would have to nominate a Colt Single Action. It has no mechanical safety other than an empty chamber under the hammer and can be carried 6 up and fully cocked. I'm sure there are others out there, but that one comes readily to mind.

For best, perhaps Eric Holder's new safety bracelets :evil:

And maybe we need to define "safe" as well. :scrutiny:
Click to expand...

I think the other thread in this sub-forum should be the place for a "best" list. The people posting there are well into discussing the subject.

I agree with your nomination of the Colt SA revolvers that permit hammer down on a loaded chamber, and that design feature is not limited to Colt.
 
My emf buntline has a roller built onto the hammer that is slightly oblongated so that rolled forward is safe and back is for fire. Previous owner dropped hammer on fire so much it wore the oblongated part down and it no longer works as a safety. Crappy design to begin with coupled with highly malleable materials turned into a craptastic system. Good thing for me that this is the biggest flaw in the design.
 
Like the Beretta 92(movie fan), but hate the safety/decocker location. When racking the slide it is just in the way and makes it tough to do when on fire. If the safety is on non fire, it is easier to grab, but then it decocks and defeats the whole purpose lol.
 
My personal least favorite is the cludged-on afterthought safeties seen on surplus combloc pistols such as the assorted Tokarev variants.

I could actually broaden that if this wasn't a handguns sub, since there are a few guns that were designed to use half-cock as safety (e.g. M1892 lever actions) but get cobbled on safeties anyway.
 
After spending to many years with revolver and now kahrs I'm not a fan of a safety switch of any kind. My safeties are a longer trigger and keep the finger off the trigger unless your ready to shoot something.
 
The worst would be the CZ52, just because it often drops the hammer AND fails to block the firing pin, essentially becoming another trigger.


Larry
 
Another nomination for being left off a best list, and possibly the worst ever, is the Type 94 Nambu.
 
Last edited:
I was going to say the CZ as well. I don't know the design is flawed so much as extremely wear-prone with the materials used. I would submit any safety that acts only on the trigger does not qualify for a best list, since that is only the first in a series of parts that make the gun go bang, and not the important one ;)

Oh, I hate the Broomhandle safety, too, since it reminds me too much of a Remington's (not the recall issue, I just hated having a little lever thingie alongside the bolt instead of a trigger guard mounted lever or crossbolt). And slide-mounted safeties, both because they make racking more painful, and because the movement introduces one more factor than can cause the safety/decocker to engage. I also finally got to examine a Walther P1 and found it retarded; who the hell puts the 'fire' position between the safe and decock? With a really-really weak detent between 'fire' and decock, no less? Took me a good 20 seconds just to figure out what the heck I was doing wrong to drop the hammer down :confused:

"My personal least favorite is the cludged-on afterthought safeties seen on surplus combloc pistols such as the assorted Tokarev variants."
Those aren't safeties; they are labeled as "Import Restriction Workarounds" on the shipping manifests ;)

TCB
 
barnbwt said:
I was going to say the CZ as well. I don't know the design is flawed so much as extremely wear-prone with the materials used. I would submit any safety that acts only on the trigger does not qualify for a best list, since that is only the first in a series of parts that make the gun go bang, and not the important one ;)

Oh, I hate the Broomhandle safety, too, since it reminds me too much of a Remington's (not the recall issue, I just hated having a little lever thingie alongside the bolt instead of a trigger guard mounted lever or crossbolt). And slide-mounted safeties, both because they make racking more painful, and because the movement introduces one more factor than can cause the safety/decocker to engage. I also finally got to examine a Walther P1 and found it retarded; who the hell puts the 'fire' position between the safe and decock? With a really-really weak detent between 'fire' and decock, no less? Took me a good 20 seconds just to figure out what the heck I was doing wrong to drop the hammer down :confused:

"My personal least favorite is the cludged-on afterthought safeties seen on surplus combloc pistols such as the assorted Tokarev variants."
Those aren't safeties; they are labeled as "Import Restriction Workarounds" on the shipping manifests ;)

TCB
Click to expand...

Yeah the CZ52 is really a shamefully wasted opportunity to make a really good pistol due to shortcuts in materials and failure to correct obvious design deficiencies. The firing pins and weak barrel coupled with the safety issue ruin what is a very interesting design.
 
I am pretty open minded about gun safety designs. I have used inverted 1911 safeties where "up" is fire and "down" is safe such as on some Berettas. But there are two safeties I cannot stand...

1) Magazine disconnect safeties
2) Keyhole safeties or a similar mechanism on the firearm that requires a key. To fire or take apart.
 
Magazine interlocks might have a place in police and security guard duty guns but for those of us that use them as sporting tools for shooting in competitions they are just one more point where we could see a ND. The added fumbling needed to perform the hammer down last act before holstering is a big pain.

At the risk of starting yet another 1911 feud I'd also suggest that the double sided and oversize thumb safeties found on many 1911's are less than safe. The oversize controls means that very little force in many cases is needed to move the safety to the FIRE position. Ideally using the oversize safety lever should be coupled with a modification to the detent to produce a firmer position lock to guard against this possibility. But on the ones I've handled this has not been the case.

In terms of being TOO safe I would also include the decocker safety on the Beretta 92fs. For those of us used to racking the slide after a reload I find it's much too easy to accidentally trip the decocker/safety down and render the gun useless until corrected.
 
BCRider said:
At the risk of starting yet another 1911 feud I'd also suggest that the double sided and oversize thumb safeties found on many 1911's are less than safe. The oversize controls means that very little force in many cases is needed to move the safety to the FIRE position. Ideally using the oversize safety lever should be coupled with a modification to the detent to produce a firmer position lock to guard against this possibility. But on the ones I've handled this has not been the case.
Click to expand...

I love 1911s, would own a dozen of them if money allowed. And I agree. I prefer the standard, single side GI length safety on 1911s. Thankfully with all the aftermarket parts available, even if a stock 1911 comes with the super duper extended ambi safeties, they can be fairly easy to replace to something more suitable.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

L
  • Locked
Curious, what's the BEST handgun safety design?
2 3
Replies
66
Views
5K
Jim K
J
B
  • Locked
Discuss the Criteria for Military Service Pistols
Replies
7
Views
631
lechiffre
L
T
  • Locked
Pistol engineering and safeties
2 3
Replies
64
Views
2K
GEM
G
C
  • Locked
Who's got a Ball Mill design?
Replies
5
Views
518
Loyalist Dave
Loyalist Dave
ugaarguy
  • Locked
  • Sticky
Trigger Mechanisms; A Guide to What's What
2
Replies
31
Views
103K
Johnny Guest
J
Back
Top