Grip Safety on the 1911/1911A1

[RWK]

I have a question for our experts concerning the 1911A1’s grip safety.

To begin, I am a “card carrying†member of the fairly large group who believes John Browning was a genius, his firearms designs were essentially flawless (particularly given the materials and manufacturing processes available at that time), and his work is close-to “divinely inspiredâ€.

With that said, I have always wondered why the 1911A1 has a grip safety, while the BHP -- a very similar design in fundament concept -- does not. I believe I learned some years ago that the Army’s specifications for the 1911A1 required an additional -- grip -- safety, due to cavalry employment. However, that begs the question why Browning did not carry that design feature forward into the BHP?

Can anyone enlighten us?

Thanks and regards.

 

[Old Fuff]

John Browning passed away during the High Power's design and development period at Fabrique Nationale. The pistol was an outgrouth of a request from the French military, and apparently they didn't worry about grip safties.

 

[GSB]

The pistol was an outgrouth of a request from the French military, and apparently they didn't worry about grip safties.

I believe the only requirement was that it not discharge when dropped.

 

[Nightcrawler]

GSB: *snicker*

 

[Old Fuff]

I think they (the French) are best rememberd for rejecting the proposed Hi-Power and instead adopting a pistol with a single-column magazine shooting a odd-ball .32 cartridge. Fortunately F.N. did not drop the project.

 

[yzguy]

I believe the only requirement was that it not discharge when dropped.

why not, I mean that would be the only time the French ever fired one!!

 

[C.R.Sam]

J.M.B designed most of his products to sell.
Often submitting different approaches to the same requirement.
Buyer thereby often dictating the final configuration.

To further complicate the 1911 vs P-35 differences...
The P-35 was finalized by FN after John's death.

Sam

 

[Erik Jensen]

if I recall correctly, the *grip* safety was JMB's preference. the *thumb* safety was added per Army wishes.

 

[Old Fuff]

No, it was the horse soldiers that wanted an “automatic†safety in case a mount started getting out of control and the trooper jammed his pistol back into the holster to free up both hands. If truth be known, they didn’t want any kind of automatic pistol and much preferred the model 1909 revolver. It was nothing more then a Colt New Service .45 with Government markings. In the course of development the grip safety preceded the manual one. Browning knew all about both kinds because he’d used both a grip and manual safety on his model 1903 pocket pistol.

 

[BluesBear]

I agree with Baretta92F I have always heard that Browning preferred the grip safety over the manual safety. I was under the belief that Browning thought the combination of inertia firing pin, hammer safety notch and grip safety covered all possible scenarios.

The Calvary specified a pistol with a grip safety which is evident in the American Eagle Lugers that were submitted for testing, they all had grip safeties. The infantry, however, insisted on having a manual safety.
To please bith factions the model offered by Colt in 1910 had both.

The earlier Colt 1905 .45 had neither safety. All it had was a hammer safety notch and inertia firing pin. And, as I understand it, the original drawings for what became the Colt 1903 Pocket Model, showed only a grip safety and the manual safety was added at Colt's instruction.

Of course I could be mistaken.

 

[Old Fuff]

Browning's pocket pistols (as opposed to military models) always had a manual safety starting with the first one made by Fabrique Nationale (FN) in 1900. The safety also served as a latch to hold the slide open on the Colt's and later FN/Brownings. (I'm not sure about this on the FN 1900).

Browning's designs always reflected the needs of whatever market they were intended for. However during the long development of what became the 1911 model he had to adapt to the changing requirements and demands of the U.S. War Department. In this case the grip safety came first.

The Colt 1900/1903 series of Military/Sporting/Pocket pistols did not have any manual safeties as such, other then a inertia firing pin. The half-cock notch on the hammer was intended to catch the hammer if it accidentally fell during cycling, and was not intended as a carry position. Same is true on the model 1911.

Clearly manual safeties preceded grip safeties on Browning pistols. However Browning undoubtedly knew of their use on revolvers, such as Smith & Wesson's "New Departure" hammerless top-break that was introduced in 1888, and on pistols, such as the German Luger dating from 1900.

 

[Kharn]

I believe Browning had sold the patents for the 1911 to Colt, so he would have been infringing upon what was once his own patent if he included a grip safety on the BHP.

Kharn

 

[Old Fuff]

Browning never sold any of his patents, he leased their use to various companies. In the case of the 1911 pistol, the original contract between Colt and the War Department gave the government the right to set up a second source after Colt had supplied 50,000 pistols to offset the cost of development and tooling. Consequently Springfield Arsenal became the second manufacturer starting in 1914 at serial number 72571. The government retained the right to set up alternative sources during emergencies when Colt couldn't meet the demand, but neither the government, or Colt ever owned patents issued to John Browning.