1911 'Safety Cut'

[1911Tuner]

Again, it depends on what you use the pistol for, and wht its intended role is. I've shot the ones with all the bells and whistles, and I don't shoot any better or worse than I do with my
stock USGI pistols or the clones of same.

To be fair, when I opt for a little entertainment on the falling plate machines, I can pick up the sights a little faster with my 91A1 Colts...but only a little.

 

[Jim K]

Hi, Tuner,

Yes, sometimes the safety can move a bit, though it shouldn't. But it shouldn't allow any overtravel that would affect the safety of the gun.

Jim

 

[1911Tuner]

Yes, sometimes the safety can move a bit, though it shouldn't. But it shouldn't allow any overtravel that would affect the safety of the gun.

They don't, Jim. With the overtravel, pulling the trigger lets the sear move just a little. The hammer won't fall, but they fail the click test. It wouldn't be an issue on mine, since they have .027 inch hammer hooks and a very light breakaway angle on the sears....but if a gun has .020 hooks and a heavy breakaway, it could be a problem.

I suppose that one could argue that there's no reason to be pulling hard on the trigger with the gun cocked and locked...but we can't bet on what some folks will do. I've known a few dillies in my time.

 

[Jim K]

My only thought was that upward movement of the safety should be stopped by the frame, not by the slide.

Jim

 

[1911Tuner]

It's supposed to be, Jim.

Since I never investigated...largely because it's a non-issue because I never engage the safety with the slide off...I got curious and dug through my box-o-stuff until I came up with a GI safety that would function properly and installed it in one of the pistols. It won't move far enough without the slide to allow the sear to move when the trigger is pulled. Sooooo....It would appear that the spec issue is with the safety rather than with the frame. Not really surprising since Colt has been outsourcing their small parts for a while now.

 

[a5werkes]

The safety lever travel should be stopped by the engagement of the detent on the forward edge of the safety lever with the safety plunger in its OFF position and its travel limited by its engagement with the sear surface while in its ON position. When properly fitted, the cut-out in the slide should not influence the travel stops of the 1911 safety; the cut-out only acts as a blocking engagement for rearward slide travel - this is why altering the safety blocking surface to the slide should not alter its function regarding sear control safety.

The photos illustrate the oblique internal movement of the safety as it travels thru its limits of ON/OFF;

 

[1911Tuner]

The safety lever travel should be stopped by the engagement of the detent on the forward edge of the safety lever with the safety plunger in its OFF position and its travel limited by its engagement with the sear surface while in its ON position.

Nope. With the port in the frame and the safety lug in proper spec, the travel is limited in both directions even if the sear and plunger assembly are absent.

Jim...I forgot to mention...All my Norincos save one allow the safeties to overtravel so much that pulling the triggers will actually let the hammers fall...and the one that doesn't nearly does. Like the Colts, I haven't really determined which is out of spec. As long as they work with the slide on, it's all good.

In a gun with original spec hammer hooks and sears, even a tiny bit of sear movement with the safety engaged really isn't a major concern anyway as long as nobody starts milking the trigger on a loaded pistol. It requires about double the normal force to make it move, and as long as it doesn't stage at the tips of the hooks, it won't cause a problem.

Many of you would be surprised at the number of pistols that will fail the click test for sear movement...and nobody ever knows about it as long as they observe the simple "Safety on/Finger off" rule.

The safety wasn't put there so that the pistol could be carried cocked and locked. It was added so that a mounted trooper could manually engage a safety and reholster the pistol when his horse went haywire in the heat of a fight. Even then, the boys understood that a man in a tight situation may forget to take his finger off the trigger before jamming the gun into its holster. The manual safety made it much less likely that he'd shoot himself or his horse...assuming that he'd remember to engage it.

It's a sad statement that....in spite of modern technology...today's manufacturers can't seem to produce pistols that are consistently as good as those that were made between 1940 and 1945. Pistols that came from five different contractors...only two of which were actual gun makers before they got the contracts...and several parts suppliers that had never made gun parts before. Very sad that "spec" has become a 4-letter word.

 

[RogersPrecision]

Hi guys!!!
It's been a while since I have posted.

The thumb safety is stopped on the down stroke by contact of the lug with the frame window.
On the upstroke by contact with the slide.

Here are some pics and text of how I recently fit one up. I DID NOT do the grip safety fit.

New thumb safety. Someone else previously fit the grip safety. Notice how the lower radius of the ts does not match the radius of the frame.

When in the 'on' position, some of the lug window shows.

See the dent in the lug window? This is caused by a sharp corner of the thumb safety. This is what stops downward motion.
If left as is, the dent will grow and peen outwards. The rear of the ts will wear the finish off the peened metal and it will look bad.





So I added a drop of silver solder to that area and filed it flush.

 

[RogersPrecision]

I filed the added material to closely match the lug window contour. Now it will not peen.
And I was able to stop the downward travel a bit sooner. This means I will have to take less off the
ts radius to get it to match the frame.

Take a look at these 4 plungers. Two of them are scarred up from use because they are soft.
One has a very incomplete radius on the tip. One is just right because I reworked it.
If it to had been soft, I would have hardened it with Kasenite hardening compound and my torch.
Time spent here and on the dimple in the ts leads to a fine feeling ts that will last and last.

The stock ts paddle before recontouring. Larger than it needs to be.

 

[RogersPrecision]

Paddle has been recontoured. Inner lug fit to the sear. Radius matched to the frame.
Yes, a bit more of the lug window has been exposed. I don't find it objectionable.

And a couple of 'sneak preview' shots.





Nothing to it!
Almost dropped right in!!

 

[a5werkes]

Quote:

"On the upstroke by contact with the slide."

Chuck.
Sorry, I must be confused. When the thumb safety has been modified as originally posted in the thread, there is no contact with the safety and the slide.......that's why it can remain ON when the slide is retracted.

What am I missing?

 

[RogersPrecision]

The rear of the slide cut is unaltered. This is the contact area with the TS.

 

[a5werkes]

I will refer to the 1st photo in Post # 16.
The slide is retracted, the safety "cut-out" is unaltered, the hammer is cocked, the safety is more than 1" away from the cut-out.

The thumb safety in the ON position is properly engaging the sear, not the slide in any manner...the lower edge of the slide is clear of the safety of course to prohibit any interference with slide movement.

 

[Jim K]

Hi, RogersPrecision,

You wrote that the safety is stopped "on the upstroke by contact with the slide."

I will repeat myself. Nope. The safety should be stopped in BOTH directions by contact with the internal edge of the frame cutout, NOT by contact with the slide and definitely NOT by the safety plunger. Now there are tolerances involved and SOME safeties are stopped by the slide, especially with makers who think "spec" is a dirty word.

But that does not mean the original concept has changed, only that makers have grown sloppy in an area where, to be honest, it doesn't really matter much. But, it should be possible to remove the top of the safety to allow slide movement with the safety on without any problem; the safety stop position both ways should be dictated by the frame and safety, not by the slide.

Jim

 

[1911Tuner]

Anyway...back to the original question.

The ability to chamber/clear a round with the safety engaged can be accomplished in a couple of ways. One entails modification the the slide....which is permanent, and one can be done by modifying a Gunsite thumb safety...which is less expensive and easily reversible.

Even if the modified safety allows overtravel, it's not likely to negate the safety's primary function of preventing the hammer from falling should the trigger be pulled, even though it will probably allow some sear movement....which isn't as critical with long hammer hooks as with shortened ones.

The obvious solution is to keep one's finger off the trigger during the chambering/clearing
operation...which we're supposed to do anyway. No manual safety is a substitute for common sense and discipline. It's not a device that allows us to get stupid with a gun.

Which brings us back around to...Maintaining muzzle and finger discipline makes having the gun on-safe during the procedure unnecessary for the private citizen using the 1911.

I can understand the importance of that feature with a company of infantry riflemen. It's hard to keep an eye on that many people who are directed to go hot in a battlefield environment. For the lone pistolero, it's a matter of safe gun handling practices and keeping one's attention focused on the task. In short...The answer to a question that nobody asked.

 

[Peter M. Eick]

One thing that occurs to me is that by removing that much metal on the side of the rail, how much engagement do you have on the slide to the frame? I would guess that you have about an inch or so at best.

Would that not impact accuracy with not a lot of slide to frame fit?

Also if you are going to change that, why not extend the rails on the frame forward to the end of the dust cover and have something similar to my Sig 210 for rail to frame engagement?

 

[Kruzr]

The article in the Guns & Ammo 1911 edition with the Novak gun modified indicated the reason for this mod is to allow press checking with the safety engaged.

It reminds me of Novak's backstrap "Answer" in that I can't quite figure out who asked the question...........

 

[DT Guy]

I agree about the importance of muzzle discipline; that's why I don't have holes in the furniture.

I do wonder, though-I've seen instructors advise holding the hammer when dropping the slide, in case a hammer hook or sear fails; wouldn't this essentially duplicate that? And that could also be worthwhile, IMHO-

Larry

 

[1911Tuner]

I do wonder, though-I've seen instructors advise holding the hammer when dropping the slide, in case a hammer hook or sear fails; wouldn't this essentially duplicate that?

Well...Sorta, but not exactly. The thumb safety doesn't block the hammer. It blocks the sear.

Worthwhile? Not sure for what exactly. Part of owning a 1911 entails performing function and safety checks periodically unless the gun isn't fired much.

They're outlined in the Colt owner's manual...or at least they used to be.

They go as follows:

Hammer cocked. Engage thumb safety. Pull trigger. Hammer should not fall. Safety off...Hammer should fall.

Hammer cocked. Grip gun without depressing grip safety. Pull trigger. Hammer should not fall. Depressed safety...Hammer should fall.

Hammer cocked. Manually pull slide rearward approximately .100 inch. Pull trigger. Hammer should not fall. Slide full forward...Hammer should fall.

Lock slide rearward. Trip slidestop to release slide. Hammer should not fall. (If it does, get it fixed immediately.)

If it passes the last one, there's no reason to hold the hammer when releasing the slide.

To expound:

If the hammer follows the slide, most often it's stopped by the half cock or quarter cock. That followdown is most often the result of insufficient tension on the center leg of the sear spring, and most often easy to correct. The technical cause is inertial trigger bounce in which the trigger nudges the disconnect briskly enough to roll the sear out of the hooks. The sear resets and grabs the half cock notch, stopping the hammer from reaching the firing pin. Falling all the way to the firing pin suggests another, more serious issue.

In this respect, the ability to keep the gun on-safe while manually operating the slide could possibly mask a functional problem that...if left unattended...could result in a dangerous condition. So, regardless of whether you decide on this option...performing the safety function tests should still be done. The frequency depends on how much the gun is fired. Colt says before every workout, but it's not critical to do it that often. I shoot a lot...a LOT...and I do it 3-4 times a year.

 

[1911Tuner]

Advanced Safety Checks

I mentioned the "Click Test" earlier, and some readers may not understand how to do it.

Cock the hammer and engage the safety. Pull the trigger with about double the normal force needed to fire the gun. Bring the safety close to your ear, and slowly, gently pull the hammer just past full cock. If you hear a light click, it means that the safety allowed the sear to move. The sound is the sear resetting. Not good.

Hammer cocked...manual safety in the "fire" position. Pull the trigger without depressing th grip safety. Again pull the hammer barely past full cock. If you hear the click, the grip safety isn't blocking the trigger correctly.

If you allow the hammer to hit the grip safety tang during either of these tests, it will result in a false click. Just barely move the hammer past the full cock.

 

[DT Guy]

Tuner, let me start this post by saying that I have a lot of respect for you. I've learned a lot from your posts, and you're actually one of the main reasons I frequent this part of the site.

That said, I can appreciate that you don't think this mod is worthwhile, and have no wish to change your mind; I'm sure your opinions were developed from a great deal of experience and hands-on operation.

But while a safety that blocks the sear (I knew that, actually, but it blocks the sear INTO the hammer, essentially the mechanical equivalent unless the hooks or sear nose fail, I think) might mask a functional problem, it would also prevent an ND at the time the slide is dropped. An ND that would, in my case, not strike anyone (muzzle discipline) but which I would still rather avoid altogether, if that's possible.

I have operated 1911's and other SA autos without a single issue for 30+ years, including work as an LEO and competitive shooting. I 'get' that they're safe, when used properly. But I'm not adverse to improving something, if I can, and I'm curious about how things work anyway.

I see, and realize others may not, an advantage to having a mechanical safety blocking the sear while I'm press-checking or dropping the slide. It's another layer between mechanical failure (of the sear engagement, for instance) and an ND, or a head failure (never say never) involving a finger or other object in the trigger guard. My concern is whether there's a cost to the change, in either reliability or other functioning, and if there is, what it is.


Larry

 

[1911Tuner]

Understood, DT.

The point of my observations is that, if the gun can discharge when the slide is dropped, there's a serious problem...and the gun will go into burst mode or even full auto sooner or later. Not a matter of IF...but WHEN.

Safe gun handling entails more than muzzle and trigger discipline. There's also the oft unspoken responsibility of the owner to be certain that the gun is functioning correctly, most especially the safety features. If the hammer falls during a slide release...even if it's only to half cock...the gun requires immediate attention and should be kept unloaded until that attention is obtained. If it doesn't fail any of the outlined tests...it won't discharge a round during a slide release. It's specifically designed not to do that. That simple.

My view on the safety on while loading and unloading is that somebody feels a need to use it as a substitute for common sense and discipline...and that can ultimately lead to
carelessness because a mechanical device can never replace one's own brain. Mechanical devices can fail.

 

[DT Guy]

My view on the safety on while loading and unloading is that somebody feels a need to use it as a substitute for common sense and discipline...and that can ultimately lead to
carelessness because a mechanical device can never replace one's own brain. Mechanical devices can fail.

The same could be said of carrying the pistol; in a good holster, with a correctly functioning pistol and with proper trigger discipline, condition 0 should be as safe as condition 1. And I suppose in theory, it is. <Contemplates trying it, shudders>

But I wouldn't do it, and personally I'm glad JMB added the thumb safety for those cavalrymen. I prefer a pistol I'm not actively trying to shoot be in condition 1 rather than condition 0, and would see value expanding the circumstances that it could be in condition 1 for.

Again, largely theoretical, since I don't see myself firing up the mill and taking that much of the pistol's slide off anytime soon, but I am curious-

Larry

 

[1911Tuner]

I dunno, man. I just can't wrap my head around what purpose it would serve, other than to encourage carelessness...and to let those who are already careless become moreso.

Note the number of people...me included...who have had loaded guns pointed at them, and when reacting in the predictable manner have been casually told:

"Don't worry about it, man. The safety's on."

The knowledge that I'm handling a gun in firing condition tends to make me more careful...more mindful of what the muzzle is trained on...and more determined to keep my finger away from the trigger. When we stop thinking and start to fall back on mechanical devices, we tend to do just that. Fall back on them. Then, when we encounter a weapon that doesn't have the device...

BANG! Whoops! Sorry about that Joe. Ya okay? Joe? JOE!

 

[toocool]

The grip safety is a main feature of the platform

I may be wrong, but I don't believe that's correct. Unless my memory is failing (and as I get older, I find that happening occasionally ) the original design of the 1911 did not have a grip safety. That feature was added at the request of the military prior to adoption of the pistol for service use. I believe the comparison was made with the 1935 hi-power, another Browning design, and on which the grip safety was not included.