Drop safe Star bm-9?

[Jim Watson]

Right, the Star thumb safety blocks the hammer and is a superior design to the Colt which only blocks the sear.
But then you get into Spanish metallurgy and quality of assembly.

Many if not all Star firing pins are full length, not inertial, so a hammer all the way down is leaning on the primer. A college classmate's father in law learned that at the cost of a hole in his foot.

I remember when the PD lightweight .45 was the Expert's Carry Gun, endorsed by Jeff Cooper and Maj. Geo. C. Nonte, but we are more cautious now.

 

[Nature Boy]

I’m wracking my brain trying to picture a scenario where I’d have the hammer down on a loaded chamber in my Star BM……

……still got nothing…..

 

[12Bravo20]

The old Star PD. It was ahead of it's time and would beat itself to death if you did not change out the recoil buffer on a regular basis. The aluminum frame made it lighter but it could not take the recoil without a buffer either.

I have never carried any of my 1911s or any of the different Stars with the hammer down and a loaded chamber. I have always carried them "cocked and locked" except when in the Army where they made us keep the chamber empty at all times.

 

[Archie]

You can't move a 1911 trigger without depressing the grip safety. It does not secure the firing pin, unless it is an example that uses the Swartz firing pin safety, actuated by the grip safety.
I remain skeptical of how far you'd have to drop a 1911 on its muzzle to make the firing pin detonate a round thru' inertia.
Moon

In a gun magazine -once upon a long ago - I read a report of experimentation on that subject. (No, I don't remember the author but the article struck me as accurate.)
If I recall correctly, the researchers used a surplus M1911A1 in average condition. Empty primed cases were used to determine if the arm would fire when dropped.
Computations of the weight of the firing pin and the firing pin spring resistance against the depth of penetration on the primer indicated a free fall of roughly twenty-three feet was required for minimum energy to meet the requirements. This minimum assumes the pistol lands exactly barrel perpendicular to the deck (muzzle down). This also assumes the landing surface is completely inelastic (no give) so all the energy is directed to the firing pin. So any angular deviation - sideways some - or resilient surface - like dirt, even hard packed - will require more height.
Not very likely.
I do not recall any conclusions about such a shock jarring the sear causing the gun to fire. This scenario requires a round in the chamber, the arm cocked and the safety disengaged.

Note this does not speak at all of any trigger (good or bad) or other modification.

I can say in over fifty years of owning a Government Model I've never had the problem.

 

[GBExpat]

I remember when the PD lightweight .45 was the Expert's Carry Gun, endorsed by Jeff Cooper and Maj. Geo. C. Nonte ...

Huh. Never knew that. Thank you! I badly wanted one in the late 70s but could never find one.

I currently have 2 that I acquired 17 years ago off of Gunbroker following a pensive reminiscent moment regarding my years living on the beach from '75 to '80 (I had forgot all about the Star PD!).

 

[DT Guy]

In a gun magazine -once upon a long ago - I read a report of experimentation on that subject. (No, I don't remember the author but the article struck me as accurate.)
If I recall correctly, the researchers used a surplus M1911A1 in average condition. Empty primed cases were used to determine if the arm would fire when dropped.
Computations of the weight of the firing pin and the firing pin spring resistance against the depth of penetration on the primer indicated a free fall of roughly twenty-three feet was required for minimum energy to meet the requirements. This minimum assumes the pistol lands exactly barrel perpendicular to the deck (muzzle down). This also assumes the landing surface is completely inelastic (no give) so all the energy is directed to the firing pin. So any angular deviation - sideways some - or resilient surface - like dirt, even hard packed - will require more height.
Not very likely.
I do not recall any conclusions about such a shock jarring the sear causing the gun to fire. This scenario requires a round in the chamber, the arm cocked and the safety disengaged.

Note this does not speak at all of any trigger (good or bad) or other modification.

I can say in over fifty years of owning a Government Model I've never had the problem.

As JTQ pointed out earlier, actual empirical testing showed the heights required to be MUCH lower: http://dave2.freeshell.org/1911/drop1/drop1.htm


Larry

 

[HisSoldier]

Having had several Star pistols dismantled I've had some experience with the design, and to me it's very well designed. In every Star pistol I've owned if you slowly engage the safety while watching the hammer you should see the hammer move ever so slightly rearward. Why? Because the common Star safety not only blocks the hammer, it also forces the hammer off the sear. Even if you dropped it far enough to break the safety, if that's even possible, the sear should catch it.
I'm also in favor the old 1911, a stroke of genius IMO, and have even dropped one onto the pavement once (How often does the average 1911 owner dropped them?). I maintain that the series 80 FP safety is another lawyer gimmick.
Neither the 1911 nor the Star pistols I own and shoot suffer from any faults except the 1911 types with FPS and Star's with an "S" appendage to the model number, it signifies a magazine safety. Yeah! They have moronic lawyers there too!