Firing Pin Safety Spring Failure in 1911

[texagun]

I have a Colt Combat Elite (series 80) with less than 200 rounds thru it. At the range I fired it twice and it would not fire again. The firing pin was protruding from the firing pin hole and would not retract. Upon disassembling the gun, the firing pin safety spring had broken and lodged in the firing pin channel tying up the gun. I replaced the firing pin safety spring and the gun functions fine. My question is: Is this a common occurence in series 80 1911's? Would dry firing the gun cause this? Or would this be classified as a freak and unusual occurence? What effect would removing the firing pin safety and spring have on the operation of the gun? Thanks for any info.

 

[Jim Watson]

I have seen one S80 to lock up like that but the plunger spring was not broken. I think it was due to lawyer lever misfit or a weak firing pin spring. So I would count it a rare occurrence. But I would shoot it a good deal with the new spring before I counted on the gun in defense or competition.

The gun will run without those parts, get a shim spacer if you take out the frame levers. You will of course go to jail if you get in an otherwise justifiable gunfight with a so-altered gun, or at least we are told that.

 

[stans]

I took the Series 80 parts out of my Delta Elite and installe the spacer, but it is just a paper punching gun. If this is a defensive pistol, leave the parts in as there is no need to invite trouble with an attorney. This is why I prefer 1911's in the Series 70 style, no firing pin safeties.

 

[Walt Sherrill]

Inviting problems with an attorney?

I've heard that comment a lot, recently. I don't really understand where its coming from. (This is a serious observation, and NOT an attempt to get nto a big knock-down, drag-out fight...)

I've come to believe that if your use of lethal force was justified, it doesn't really matter HOW the gun was configured, tricked out, tuned, etc. On the other hand, if lethal force wasn't justified, you're probably in deep do-do, anyway. (I'll concede that it might be worse, in that case. Might. I don't know that this is the case.)

Is there a series of cases justifying this concern?

 

[DT Guy]

Worry about living through the gunfight first, IMHO. Jamming guns are more lethal than any lawyer....


Larry

 

[ktd]

I believe this is due to firearms instructor Mas Ayoobs stance on modifiyng guns. He has seen a lot of cases where lawyers come down to nitpicking on things like that to get a conviction, judgement, whatever.

I believe it was he who once cited a case where a police officer had a Browning HiPower with the mag safety removed, and this particular Browning was actually in the guys desk. It was not involved in the shooting at all, but the opposing lawyer tried to use it to paint the guy as being unsafe!

k

 

[Jim K]

I agree that the idea is to stay alive. But the concern about using an altered gun (lightening pull, disabling safety mechanism) is only partly about a criminal trial. In a criminal trial, the overall circumstances are far more important than the gun used or whether anything was done to it.

But in a civil case, the plaintiff's lawyer has a lot more leeway, and will use anything he can get on you to win. You can be cleared in a criminal trial, and the shooting ruled justifiable. But in a civil case anything goes. Questions about your past conduct, for example, that would be ruled out of order in a criminal trial can be used in a civil suit. If you ever got a speeding ticket, it can be used to show you are reckless and dangerous. Removing a gun safety shows you have total disregard for human life, and are a stalking killer, ready to destroy innocent people on sight, etc.

I never recommend removing any safety mechanism.

Jim

 

[Kruzr]

Inviting problems with an attorney?

I've heard that comment a lot, recently. I don't really understand where its coming from. (This is a serious observation, and NOT an attempt to get nto a big knock-down, drag-out fight...)

I've come to believe that if your use of lethal force was justified, it doesn't really matter HOW the gun was configured, tricked out, tuned, etc. On the other hand, if lethal force wasn't justified, you're probably in deep do-do, anyway. (I'll concede that it might be worse, in that case. Might. I don't know that this is the case.)

Is there a series of cases justifying this concern?

Having seen this discussed ad nauseum for the past 4 years on gun forums, the problem usually lies in distinguishing the criminal case from the civil case. I think most agree that in a criminal case, if it's a justified shooting, the gun won't make any difference. But, in a civil case, you can count on you, your character, your hobbies, and certainly anything you have to do with guns is going to be brought up before a jury. Keep in mind that most jurors won't have any knowledge of guns at all. When the lawyer for the criminal you shot tells them you modified your gun and took out a safety, it makes it sound like you are a gunslinger. Just imagine what would happen if they knew someone did a trigger job to lighten it. Anyone who watched TV will think of the words.........."Hair trigger" and associate it with a gunslinger from a western.

 

[Jim K]

Another dirty little facet of a shooting incident no one wants to mention is race! There, I said it, so I will be condemned forever and banned from the company of the politically correct.

If you shoot a person who does not look like you, you will be in a whole lot more trouble than if he did. If you are white/black and shoot a black/white person in a neighborhood where most folks look like your victim, you won't be considered a nice person who rid the community of a bad guy. You will be seen as the stranger who came into their peaceful area (no objectivity here, folks) and gunned down one of their people.

Now if you are white, you may be thinking about a black victim in a black neighborhood, but I can guarantee that if you reverse the situation it does not look any better (it may look worse) for the shooter.

So now, you are not an innocent person defending himself, you are an invader, a heartless hunter, out to satisfy your blood lust by seeking out and gunning down innocent victims in your racist insanity. You were not out to kill at random, but to terrify and slay white/black people.

Anything that can be used against you in those circumstances will be. And the judge, the attorneys, the jury, may all look like your victim. In those circumstances, having done anything to your gun, using Black Talon ammo, anything can by used against you.

Jim

 

[1911Tuner]

Safety Removal

Just tossin' in my 2 cents here. I wholeheartedly agree with the view that
modifying and/or removing a "safety feature" on any gun is a crapshoot if the gun has a serious role to fill. Again...Let us acknowledge the vast difference between the criminal action and the civil. In a criminal proceeding,
there are certain boundaries proscribed by law that can't be circumvented.
In a civil suit...all bets are off.

There's also the matter of an accidental shooting...which can be just as ruinous as a purposeful shooting, if not moreso. This...even if the altered safety had not one thing to do with the AD/ND. Don't bother trying to explain how the gun functions and that regardless of the presence or absence of the
mechanism, that the trigger must be pulled before the gun will fire. You're trying to explain it to the average juror, and you'll lose him or her before you get past the trigger bar lever. All they know is that a "safety feature" was altered or removed...and that's all they need to know in order to judge you as
reckless or irresponsible. The hue and cry is up, and the general public is demanding that guns be made MORE safe. The soccer moms are behind it, and they are being heard. For you to take a "safer" gun, and do something to it to render it less safe is an invitation to disaster should things suddenly go wrong. In an accidental or negligent shooting, you'll have problems aplenty even with all safety features in good working order.

Also, any licensed gunsmith who will purposely alter or remove an engineered safety mechanism for a customer is taking a real chance on losing his business and possibly most or all of what he owns. This applies to the
kitchen-table tinkerer doing a favor for a friend too. Friends today can become enemies tomorrow. If your buddy comes to you to have the
device removed, and shoots his neighbor's kid in the foot a year later...
and he's faced with a million-dollar lawsuit...guess who he's gonna drag into the fray with him. He loves ya like a brother, but when he's lookin' at losing
HIS kids' future, he'd rather pass the buck if possible. Bet on it.

I have removed all the lawyer parts from my Series 80 pistols. All are range guns and never carried. Nobody except myself and a few chosen friends who are experienced with the 1911 design are allowed to fire the guns. All others
are handed pre-Series 80 pistols...or revolvers.

'Nuff said...

 

[Gunsnrovers]

I have one S80 Commander. It's been reliable for the last 13 years. It has the lawyer parts in it.

Obviously parts can fail. You experience is NOT a common occurance. People can cherry pick examples of parts failures all day. The gentlemen in the lane next to me in January had the hammer strut snap on his Colt. Are Colt's hammer struts now to be suspect?

Keep a gun well maintained, replace springs when worn. Check, service, and repair as needed.

All that being said, if you're going to add the shim to the frame, pay a smith to fill and smooth out the old hole in the slide. If you're of the mindset that you need to remove the S80 parts to secure 100% reliability, the hole left in the slide could allow powder and debris from the extractor down into the pistol. Hey, it could happen.

I like Springfields response to 1911 safety best, but I'll take Colt and the S80 parts over Kimber every day of the week.

 

[texagun]

1911Tuner wrote:
"Just tossin' in my 2 cents here. I wholeheartedly agree with the view that
modifying and/or removing a "safety feature" on any gun is a crapshoot if the gun has a serious role to fill. Again...Let us acknowledge the vast difference between the criminal action and the civil. In a criminal proceeding,
there are certain boundaries proscribed by law that can't be circumvented.
In a civil suit...all bets are off."

Excellent point and post! All my guns are "carry guns" so I won't disable any safety feature on them. My son is an attorney and my daughter-in-law is a District Attorney and both have been involved in "gun cases" and would agree with the substance of your post. The civil liabilities will OFTEN outweigh the criminal liabilities in even the most minor "gun case." They will attempt to take away everything you have for even the most minor infraction. Think twice before disabling ANY safety device. My Combat Elite has been repaired. The gun smith that repaired it said the firing pin stop had been replaced and incorrectly fitted so apparently someone had been in there before me and incorrectly re-assembled the firing pin safety components, probably resulting in the subsequent failure of the firing pin safety spring. I bought the gun from an estate....had less than 100 rounds thru it....and I fired it only twice before the breakage. I am glad to learn that this type of failure is a rare occurence. Thanks to everyone for their help and advice. This forum is a great source of information and knowlege.

 

[Jim K]

Hi, Tuner and guys,

One more word, then I'll get off this thread. Tuner, you make good sense, but then you say you have removed the "lawyer parts" on your own guns.

But they won't always be your guns. Should (God forbid) anything happen to you, your family will inherit those guns and possibly sell them. Then, if safety devices have been removed and trouble occurs, they could be held liable for selling a defective gun, even though they may know nothing about guns and the person who did the alteration is no longer around.

Something to think about.

Jim

 

[1911Tuner]

Heirs

Jim said:

But they won't always be your guns. Should (God forbid) anything happen to you, your family will inherit those guns and possibly sell them
*******************

I intend to be buried with my pistols!

Just kiddin'...My heirs for those and a few more guns are already determined.
The parts are with the guns and identified by serial numbers. Both my heirs apparent (Step-sons) are aware of the condition, (should I not have the opportunity to reinstall the parts) and able to install them should they wish
to. Unless I should meet with an untimely demise, I'll likely restore the pistols to original condition long before the lads get their greedy mitts on'em anyway. I have plans to rebuild the guns within the next couple of years,
at which time they'll likely be retired from hard duty. They've pulled their
hitch. and are gettin' a bit loose in the leotards. The older one says that the younger can have all the toy guns as long as he gets the Rands and the old Colts and the Union Switch and the pre-64 Winchesters. Now all I gotta do is figure out who gets the Garands and the Smiths. Got a nice pre-war nickel .44 Special Hand Ejector...
(Down Fuff! Down!)

Meanwhile, I've decided to see if I can shoot a pair of Norincos apart. From what I've seen of the Chinese Clones, I'd better get started if I have any hopes of success.

Picked up a minty M-94 in .32 Special two weeks ago, by the way. It came with one box of ammo with two rounds fired. I'd guess that that's about all it's seen, judging by the condition of the piece. Still negotiating on a just-as-minty Model 61. I think it's in the bag.

 

[Hawk]

After reading the advice in the other FPB safety thread, I've decided those Series II parts are not getting replaced. Maybe I'll grind off the "II" on the slide and engrave "do not sell" to deal with the heir issue.

I'm feeling pretty good about the odds. My only carry arm at this time is a P7 PSP. I've got an order in to Milt Sparks for something to hold a P239.

If the first time I fire a shot in anger comes when I just happen to be holding my de-lawyered CDP, then I lose. Better that then return the CDP to single shot functionality. Besides, I didn't just remove a safety, I REPLACED the Kimber safety with a Springfield safety: titanium pin and heavy return spring. How's that for a rationalization?

 

[Old Fuff]

Tuner:

No way should those fine old Colt’s and (gasp!) Smith & Wesson’s go to those callow youths in your family when the can be sent to a greedy …. ah, I mean good home in the Southwest where they would be stored in a nice dry cave where they wouldn’t rust away,

Think of your … ah … responsibility to … preserve them for future generations …

THINK OF ME !!!

 

[Old Fuff]

Hawk:

>> Besides, I didn't just remove a safety, I REPLACED the Kimber safety with a Springfield safety: titanium pin and heavy return spring. How's that for a rationalization? <<

I don't know if it would work or not, given the kind of courts we have today ... but I think you have something besides bone between your ears ...

 

[45auto]

IMHO, if it's a real concern for someone I think it's better to spend the money and change to another 1911. Meaning, if you don't want the firing pin safeties, bite the bullet and change your gun, i.e. sell the Kimber II or Colt series 80 and buy one without.

I know it's easy to say because you generally loose money, but piece of mind and all that!

I'm debating the same things with my series 80.

 

[Hawk]

Just tossin' in my 2 cents here. I wholeheartedly agree with the view that modifying and/or removing a "safety feature" on any gun is a crapshoot if the gun has a serious role to fill. Again...Let us acknowledge the vast difference between the criminal action and the civil. In a criminal proceeding, there are certain boundaries proscribed by law that can't be circumvented. In a civil suit...all bets are off.

This got me to wondering...

In a civil case, why would the plaintiff's attorney stop at modified trigger pulls or disabled safties? Wouldn't he also go after "RECKLESS AND FLAGRANT DISREGARD for manufacturers handling and safety instructions"?

I dug out my owner's manual and found this:

Always store and carry this product empty, with the hammer forward on an emptied chamber… Never carry this pistol cocked, loaded and ready to fire as this practice could easily result in an unintentional discharge

Not unexpected given a litigous society, but why are we so much more comfortable counseling ignoring printed instructions as opposed to removing factory parts? IANAL, or a 1911 expert, just curious as to what others think.

I guess I should be happy with the above noted excerpt - if Ruger got to making a 1911, I'd expect to see the full text warning against condition 1 to be engraved on the slide - it'd fit.