More on Cocked and Locked

[Drakejake]

Not all 1911 type pistols that can be carried cocked and locked have a grip safety. My only 1911 is a Star PD--no grip safety. The PD has a half cocked position as an extra safety. If the hammer is dropped, it is stopped before it gets to the firing pin, provided the trigger isn't being pulled. There is no firing pin block other than the manual safety and this half-cock position. (Am I making sense?) The only pistol I have with a grip safety is my Beretta 418 in .25.

By the way, Star's Megastar and model 31 P, double action autos, can be cocked and then the safety put on. Hence cocked and locked. The decocker position of the safety is separate from the on-safety position.

Drakejake

 

[Handy]

There seems to be a huge misunderstanding that's being repeated in this thread:

JMBrowning DID design the 1911 to be carried hammer down, the Cavalry men in the Army expected to carry it that way, and it is a safe carry practice.

The Cavalry was coming off of SA revolvers. Cocking a pistol on draw made sense to them. To this end, JMB used an inertial firing pin so hammer down impacts could not fire the gun. (If the gun was only to be carried cocked he could have used the simpler, less troublesome floating, full length firing pin. See Tokarev and M16/AR15).

The safety, which later became a carry mode, was added to allow a quick means of safeing a fired pistol instead of thumbing the hammer down during a cavalry charge. The design of the later Radom pistol swaps a safety for a decocker to achieve the same ends.

There is no added danger in carrying a 1911 hammer down. The earlier versions of the Beretta 92 and CZ-75 were carried the same way with no pin block device. These pistols also lacked decockers, yet have DA triggers.

The danger of a pistol lacking a pin block is it going off if dropped on the muzzle, not the hammer. And a 1911 will go off if dropped on the muzzle hard enough if cocked or not.


Cond. 2 may not be preferred, but it is how the gun was envisioned and is no more dangerous than any number of guns designed for such carry.

 

[Pendragon]

Not all 1911 type pistols that can be carried cocked and locked have a grip safety. My only 1911 is a Star PD--no grip safety. The PD has a half cocked position as an extra safety. If the hammer is dropped, it is stopped before it gets to the firing pin, provided the trigger isn't being pulled. There is no firing pin block other than the manual safety and this half-cock position. (Am I making sense?) The only pistol I have with a grip safety is my Beretta 418 in .25.

That is neither here not there. I like some of the Star pistols, but comparing your Spanish Bastard to a more standard 1911 is not really a valid comparison.

My BHP Clone did not have a grip safety either and I never had a problem with it.

By the way, Star's Megastar and model 31 P, double action autos, can be cocked and then the safety put on. Hence cocked and locked. The decocker position of the safety is separate from the on-safety position.

Again - I like the Star guns - they are based on the 1911 concept but they are not 1911s - not in looks or shape or the totality of features.

 

[TheFrontRange]

I used to be psyched-out by Condition One carry, until I traded my way into a Colt 1991A1 Compact, got myself a good holster, and just wore the gun around the house for a while, cocked, locked, and unloaded. I wanted to "prove" to my bedazzled little mind that that hammer wasn't going to just fall all by itself.

Over the years I've carried DA revolvers, DA autos, even a single-action Ruger Blackhawk briefly, and have come all the way back to a 1911. As previously posted, whatever works for you, whatever you're the most comfortable with, the marketplace offers dozens of options for a defensive handgun. I carry a cocked-and-locked Kimber these days because that's what works for me.

 

[M1911]

In my opinion, carrying cocked and locked is a very dangerous methodology. Empty guns, as everyone knows, have a way of turning out to be LOADED. Safeties have a way of unexpectedly finding their way to the FIRE POSITION. A bullet in the leg or foot would represent the hardest way to learn proper safety procedures.

Huh? What does confusion over empty or loaded have to do with cocked-and-locked? A doofus who can't check the magazine well and chamber is just as dangerous with a Beretta 92 as he is with a 1911. That's completely immaterial to the current discussion.

I carry a 1911 cocked and locked. My safety has never been swiped off. I know, because I check. And even if the safety did get swiped off while in the holster, how would that cause the gun to go off? There's still the grip safety and half-cock notch. A holstered gun is a safe gun. The only way it is going to go off is if I draw the gun from the holster, put my finger in the trigger guard, and pull the trigger.

Regarding Sigs, they are fine guns. But what makes them so much "safer" than 1911s? Many NDs occur while drawing and reholstering. Lets consider the difference between a 1911 and a Sig in these circumstances.

With a 1911 carried condition 1, when drawing from the holster, the finger should be kept out of the trigger guard until the gun is on target. As the gun is withdrawn from the holster and the barrel clears a 45 degree angle with the ground, the safety is swiped off. The gun cannot discharge until 1) the safety is lowered and 2) the trigger is pulled. How can this go wrong? If the shooter gets his finger on the trigger too early but the safety is still on, nothing bad happens. If the shooter gets his finger on the trigger too soon AND lowers the safety too soon, then something bad can happen.

Now consider the draw stroke with the Sig. There's no manual safety on the Sig. As the gun comes on target, the finger gets on the trigger. How can this go wrong? If the shooter gets his finger on the target too soon, then he can have an ND. There's no manual safety that might or might not save him. The Sig's DA trigger is longer and heavier than the 1911s trigger. Might that reduce the chance of an ND, all other things being equal? Maybe. But I've read that when startled, people tend to clench their fists and in doing so can easily exceed a force of 50lbs in their trigger finger. The difference between 5 and 10lbs of force isn't going to save someone in that event.

Let's now consider reholstering. The typical reholstering ND happens when the shooter forgets to remove his finger from the trigger guard while reholstering. What happens then is the finger is stopped by the holster, the gun keeps moving downards, and thus the trigger is pulled. Here's an example of where this has happened: http://www.frontsight.com/safety.htm Scroll down to Unintentional Gunshot Wounds.

Suppose the shooter is using a 1911 and reholsters with his finger on the trigger. If he remembered to apply the safety, then nothing happens. If he forgot to apply the safety, then there's a short, light trigger pull to be overcome and he will probably have an ND.

Suppose the shooter is using a Sig and reholsters with his finger on the trigger. If he remembered to apply the decocker, then he's got a somewhat longer, harder trigger pull to overcome, but is still likely to have an ND. If he forgot to decock, then he's in the same situation as a 1911 with the safety off -- a short light trigger pull to overcome, likely resulting in an ND.

So how, exactly, is a 1911 in condition 1 much more dangerous than a Sig? I just don't get it.

Don't get me wrong, Sigs are fine guns. I own one. But this idea that 1911s are unsafe in condition 1 is something that I just don't buy.

As others have pointed out, shotguns and rifles are carried cocked and locked. They also have much heavier firing pins and generally do not have a firing pin safety. As a result, they are much more likely to go off when dropped than a handgun. But the same people who are terrified of a cocked 1911 are unafraid of a loaded rifle or shotgun. I just don't get it.

 

[Edward429451]

Its my understanding that the Series 80 type pistols have no true half-cock notch. It was redesigned for some reason or another having to do with the conversion to Series 80 when the put in the firing pin block. If its not half-cock, what is it and whats it for?

Anybody got the scoop on that?

 

[Handy]

Colt got rid of the half cock notch (there's still a bump there, though) when they put a pin block in. They may have been thinking it was no longer necessary and the halfcock can affect sear shape.

Its main purpose is to catch the hammer if the most fragile part of the sear fails. That function is better handled by the pin block.

 

[moxie]

Drakejake,
The Star PD is a fine pistol, my son and I both have them. You are correct, it doesn't have a grip safety. Preferred carry in a holster is condition 1, cocked and locked. If you are uncomfortable with that, go with Condition 3, hammer down on empty chamber. With the Star in Condition 3 you can also apply the safety, which you can't do with most 1911s. This is of little value except possibly to slow down a BG who gets your gun. Personally, I would only carry any 1911 in my pocket in Condition 3, unless I had a pocket holster which helped keep the gun oriented correctly. We used to carry 1911s in Vietnam in Condition 2, trusting the inertial firing pin and the grip safety and believing cocking the hammer was a cleaner operation than wiping off the safety. That was then. Now I trust Condition 1 for holstered carry. I've heard tales of Condition Zero, but never actually met anyone with the moxie to do it.
Cheers,
Moxie
P.S. Anyone have a good source for Star PD recoil buffers??

 

[M1911]

Personally, I would only carry any 1911 in my pocket in Condition 3, unless I had a pocket holster which helped keep the gun oriented correctly. We used to carry 1911s in Vietnam in Condition 2, trusting the inertial firing pin and the grip safety and believing cocking the hammer was a cleaner operation than wiping off the safety.

You must have mighty big pockets to fit a 1911 in there

I'm not a fan of condition 2 carry, partly because of the need to manually decock on a loaded round. To me, that seems to be something that can easily be fumbled. That said, if you compare a 1911A1 to something like a Kimber, the 1911A1 was easier to thumbcock (smaller grip safety, larger hammer spur) than a Kimber.

 

[Drakejake]

Pendragon,

A couple of questions.

1. Why do you call the Star PD a "Spanish Bastard"? Many pistols are modified versions of the 1911. Does that make all of them "Bastards"? By the way, the Star PD is considered an innovative pistol in that it is said to be the first compact .45. Many people think highly of this pistol and one peson said it was the best pistol Star ever made (hard to prove).

2. Why can't one compare the PD to a 1911? It is similar in some respects, different in others. Since it is single action and can be carried cocked and locked, a comparison with the pure 1911, especially in this thread--which I started-- seems to be in order.

Addendum

I don't know of any source for Star PD recoil buffers except for Jack First. I think he sells them for $14 each and a hefty shipping charge. Someone with a model to work from and some skill with tools can probably make them by hand.

Drakejake

 

[moxie]

For M1911:

I was referring only to the Star PD in my earlier post. It is pretty small, about the same size as an Officer's Model and a bit lighter. It is certainly suitable for pocket carry by someone who desired to. If one chose to do so, I was recommending how best to do it, namely with a pocket holster, but that's not even an issue if you carry in condition 3. Even a full size 1911 can be carried in a coat pocket safely, no print through, no sag, no problem. Is there a problem?
And, like I said, some of us used to carry in Condition 2, as in past tense. Times have changed. That was in Vietnam, like I said, so the 1911s involved were stock Colt, Ithaca, Remington, etc., production with small hammers and grip safeties. Not much "beavertail." Thumbing the hammer was easy. And, in that environment, the danger of manually decocking the hammer on a loaded chamber didn't even get on the bottom of the list of things we were worried about. Now, as I said, I prefer Condition 1 or 3.

For Drakejake:

Don't worry about someone denigrating your pistol. It's fine.

I called Jack First. $14.00 each is ludicrous for a shock buffer. Best approach is cut the flange off a worn one (stock) and install it under the spring in front of a 1911 recoil buffer such as sold by Wilson which are about a buck apiece. Essentially you have the same as stock, just in two pieces. Works fine.

 

[Pendragon]

Honestly, I meant it as a term of endearment.

I would buy one if I found a nice one...

Its just that when talking about C&L on a pure 1911, its a little different than the PD

 

[M1911]

Even a full size 1911 can be carried in a coat pocket safely, no print through, no sag, no problem. Is there a problem?

Yes. No way are my pockets big enough for that

And, like I said, some of us used to carry in Condition 2, as in past tense. Times have changed. That was in Vietnam, like I said, so the 1911s involved were stock Colt, Ithaca, Remington, etc., production with small hammers and grip safeties. Not much "beavertail." Thumbing the hammer was easy. And, in that environment, the danger of manually decocking the hammer on a loaded chamber didn't even get on the bottom of the list of things we were worried about. Now, as I said, I prefer Condition 1 or 3.

Yes, the beavertail safety on Kimbers and such definitely gets in the way of thumb-cocking. I can certainly understand how in Vietnam the danger of manually decocking would not show up on the radar screen. Thankfully, I was 15 when we pulled out of Saigon (G*d what a humilating thing to watch, the UH1s taking refugees off of the rooftops -- it still makes me mad), so I missed the draft.