Why not a 1911 with no thumb safety?

right, that why I said "Not all firing pin blocks are on Series 80 guns" my is not a series 80 yet it has a firing pin block

Click to expand...

And I was responding to MCgunner:

But, if it's a series 80

Click to expand...

And I said:

The Series 80 firing pin works off the trigger.

Click to expand...

Because I didn't know if he (or anyone) had plans to disable a grip safety or use one of those "Solution" backstraps that are made by people who either don't understand what the grip safety is for...or they don't care...to sell to people who don't understand what it's for.

1911Tuner said:

And I was responding to MCgunner:



And I said:



Because I didn't know if he (or anyone) had plans to disable a grip safety or use one of those "Solution" backstraps that are made by people who either don't understand what the grip safety is for...or they don't care...to sell to people who don't understand what it's for.

Click to expand...

got-cha, I just wanted to point out, just because it has a pin block, doesn't mean it is a Ser 80, I've lost count of the times I've seen guys in gun shops rack the slide back looking for firing pin block to see if it is a Ser 70 or Ser 80, as you know there is more than two types of 1911's , and yes you are 100% right on the Ser 80's , where the trigger moves the pin block

I like the Kahr system of striker fired pistols because of the long but smooth revolver like trigger but no safety or split trigger.

Considering how many clowns have managed to negligently shoot themselves or others with "Safe Action" triggers I think maybe a disturbingly large number of guys can't have too many safeties on their gun. Proper gunhandling and awareness are probably more important than firearm design and "idiotproofing". Our culture today has produced idiots that cannot seem to grasp basic safety requirements like finger and muzzle discipline. They're just so busy "multi-tasking" and staring at their phone all the time.

Click to expand...

If all those LEOs who have shot themselves in the legs with Glocks were carrying 1911A1s instead, does anyone seriously believe there would really be fewer negligent discharges?

Because I didn't know if he (or anyone) had plans to disable a grip safety or use one of those "Solution" backstraps that are made by people who either don't understand what the grip safety is for...or they don't care...to sell to people who don't understand what it's for.

Click to expand...

The Detonics Combat Master only has a thumb safety, it does not have a grip safety - so, there you have an example of a manufacturer who has chosen to build a 1911 style gun without two safeties.

1911s have very short triggers and many have very light triggers. Hence the thumb safety.

Those without any manual safety need long and heavier triggers to compensate. The danger is not so much in shooting once drawn, but in the holstering and unholstering process.

Most people are not 'gun' people and thus inadvertent touching of the trigger is a distinct possibility over time.

The NYPD found that out when they went to Glocks... painfully.

Deaf

If all those LEOs who have shot themselves in the legs with Glocks were carrying 1911A1s instead, does anyone seriously believe there would really be fewer negligent discharges?

Click to expand...

Well...the preponderance of Glock Leg instances occur during reholstering...and that is why the US Cavalry wanted the thumb safety added to the 1910 model.

So, yes. There would be fewer.

Jeff Cooper once mentioned a government agency that carried Brownings cocked and unlocked. No thumb safety, no grip safety, no firing pin obstruction. No ADs, either. Do you think they might have had more training and practice than most?

As to the types of firing pin obstructions, the Kimber appears to be similar to the Colt-Swartz. S&W also operates off the grip safety but the linkage is different. Colt Series 80 works off the trigger. And "Series 70" should not be taken to mean "lacking a firing pin block." But it is, and I guess we should get used to it, along with .451" "bore diameter." The same people who say so are awful quick to tell you the difference between "clip" and "magazine", though.

1911Tuner said:

Well...the preponderance of Glock Leg instances occur during reholstering...and that is why the US Cavalry wanted the thumb safety added to the 1910 model.

So, yes. There would be fewer.

Click to expand...

Perhaps. But there were many tales of GI's negligently discharging 1911s over the years, too -- and probably after the same level of training as is provided for most LEOs.

It's not that I think that Glocks are more safe, but just that I think it's hard to make any gun idiot-proof. (And yes, I've had a negligent discharge, and it wasn't during holstering -- it was one of those moments when the gun was "on" but my brain was "off.")

The one time I was almost shot in a ND, it was a guy holstering a 1911. Not a Glock.

I might be wrong but I feel many people with handguns, with external mechanical Safety's "Thumb Safety's" have in their minds they are safe, because of these thumb safety's even without knowing many times the safety's for some reason are not engaged.
But people with handguns without these external mechanical Safety's,don't depend on them so IMHO they are really safer.
They know if they touch or some how pull that trigger it's going to fire.

It's not just about poundage. It is also about how the pull feels and the distance of the pull.

The PPQ I had has similar trigger resistance to a 1911 I have. But, I'd feel much more at ease with running with a PPQ than running with a 1911 with firing enabled. Peak poundage wise, they're about the same. But, the characteristics of the pulls are very different.

Springfield Mil-Spec I own have a somewhat heavier trigger, and I would not be bothered by the thought of running from cover to cover with it while the firing is enabled as much as the other 1911.

When I had to explain to a jury why my Glock23 was safe and could not fire.
I explained the type holster I had the Glock23 in that day, covered the trigger and there was no way it could be fired.
This had always worked for me, and was good enough that day for the jury.

By MCgunner:
I mean, I prefer the thumb safety on such triggers...actually prefer a true DA....just sayin'..... I don't really understand the clamor to near single action triggers with no safeties. If you need a single action, buy a 1911, redundant safeties and not just the one between your ears. Helps with Murphy's law.

Click to expand...

Murphy can mess with 1911s too. I've seen a 1911 INSTRUCTOR forgetting to switch the firing inhibitor off. 1911s are not more safe. Different systems just swaps one risk for another.

I chose an M&P40 with no thumb levers. It's just a workable trigger. Whether if someone thinks an M&P, XD, etc. is a "single action" or "double action" is just worthless debate to me.

I don't care what you like. I don't tell you what to like or how your favirote DA guns should be configured. I like my striker guns with no thumb levers because they're effective and don't require me to work more for the same result.

They are nothing at all like 1911 triggers, nor do I want a trigger exactly like 1911 trigger on them. To say they're nearly alike just based on poundage is an error.

I have a Walther P99 9mm it's a striker fired D/A handgun, and it even has a decocker.

The one time I was almost shot in a ND, it was a guy holstering a 1911.

Click to expand...

That's why we engage the safety BEFORE we slip'em in the holsters. That's why the thumb safety was requested to begin with. For holstering under stress. Not for carrying cocked and locked.

Perhaps. But there were many tales of GI's negligently discharging 1911s over the years, too

Click to expand...

Yep...usually when they were clearing the piece at the end of watch, or incorrectly lowering the hammer on a hot chamber.

I feel many people with handguns, with external mechanical Safety's "Thumb Safety's" have in their minds they are safe, because of these thumb safety's

Click to expand...

I agree that people place too much trust in mechanical safeties...and they do stupid things with guns as a result. The safety isn't there so we can get stupid.

Bottom line: Is gun. Gun not safe.

Years ago a woman cut in front of me making a left turn, I was riding a motorcycle and it caused me to crash. Her insurance company forced me to obtain an Attorney.
The Attorney told me we have to settle this out of court,because many people have had problems with motorcycle riders and if on a jury won't rule in a motorcycle riders favor.

Many non shooters have read of all these AD with the person having the AD getting shot or someone near them getting shot.

Also they have seen the many youtube videos of the really stupid things people are doing with their handguns and having a AD.

So it's no real surprise so many non shooters, feel anyone with a handgun is a threat to their safety. They also are on juries.

Hmm, the gun described is eerily similar to the R51... (minus the crap workmanship). I agree that a safety-less 1911 would be very handy, though

TCB

Also, 1911 designs without a safety catch were adopted by two armies before WWII: the Polish Radom P-35, which had a decocking lever instead, plus a grip safety, and the Tokarev TT-33, which had nothing. The Radom was well regarded; the Tokarev, not so much.

Click to expand...

Yes the primary designer of the Radom Vis, Piotr Wilniewczyc initially only included a grip safety and had the take down latch on the frame double as a sort of slide locking device. Wilniewczyz admired Browning's designs a great deal did but not care for the thumb safety too much. He considered it a possible weak link and potentially dangerous as a soldier might forget to disengage the safety and be shot. They regarded it as routine and safe that a shooter would thumb cock the pistol and lower the hammer on a live round. (As did Browning and Colt with the first American pistols built in 38 acp. with neither grip safety nor thumb safety...which did not sell well in part because of that.)

But during the 1932 trials for his gun he ran into the same challenge that led Browning to add the thumb safety...what to do with a loaded cocked handgun while on horseback or in a scrum. Browning came up with cocked and locked carry. Wilniewczyc came up with a hammer drop safety that decocked the gun. Similar to that found on the Walther PP and PPK and a bit later in the P38. But those were da/sa guns whiule the Vis (P35) was a single action. If you wanted to fire again you then had to thumb cock the hammer.

The Radom P35 was one of the better 9mm guns to come on the scene in the 1930's.

tipoc

No, no, one cocks his Radom by rubbing the burr hammer against the stripe down his uniform trousers' leg or against the pommel of his saddle.

An old magazine article pointed out that one COULD ease the hammer down on a 1902 Browning .38 but that most shooters would probably prefer to unload the chamber and return the round to the magazine so that the pistol could be returned to action by simply working the slide; Condition 3.

if the series 80 has a firing pin block when the hammer isnt pulled, couldnt you just carry it hammer-down for a safety? no thumb or grip safety?

That has been feasible since 1902, IF you are very careful every single time about getting the hammer down softly and safely. And if you have a method of cocking it when wanted.

I did it for several years without incident or even a scare. But then I realized I had been advised to do so by a southpaw who learned to shoot before ambidextrous safeties were available.

Jim Watson said:

Jeff Cooper once mentioned a government agency that carried Brownings cocked and unlocked. No thumb safety, no grip safety, no firing pin obstruction. No ADs, either. Do you think they might have had more training and practice than most?

As to the types of firing pin obstructions, the Kimber appears to be similar to the Colt-Swartz. S&W also operates off the grip safety but the linkage is different. Colt Series 80 works off the trigger. And "Series 70" should not be taken to mean "lacking a firing pin block." But it is, and I guess we should get used to it, along with .451" "bore diameter." The same people who say so are awful quick to tell you the difference between "clip" and "magazine", though.

Click to expand...

Yep, supposed to have been a counter-terrorist organization in South America.

Carried in condition zero.

Deaf

No, no, one cocks his Radom by rubbing the burr hammer against the stripe down his uniform trousers' leg or against the pommel of his saddle.

Click to expand...

Hard to do if no saddle. But actually easy to do with jeans. I've seen old pre war promotional material for the FN Hi-Power with the original rounded hammer promoting the same for the Hi-Power. Which implies condition two at some point. But a thumb is usually handy.

An old magazine article pointed out that one COULD ease the hammer down on a 1902 Browning .38 but that most shooters would probably prefer to unload the chamber and return the round to the magazine so that the pistol could be returned to action by simply working the slide; Condition 3.

Click to expand...

That's fine except for combat situations where one does not have the time or conditions for that dance. It also required two hands to lower the hammer to the safety notch safely. Browning describes these problems, and his solutions to the problems, in his patents for the grip safety and the thumb safety. Until the extended tab on the rear of the grip safety was added the hammer could not be lowered one handed to the safety notch.

But with the 1911 and the Radom different paths were taken to solve the same problem.

tipoc