Why a grip safety on a 1911?

Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Cosmoline

Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2002
Messages
23,646
Location
Los Anchorage
I recently picked up a Star BM 9x19, which is a 1911 style semi but among other differences with the actual 1911, it does not have a grip safety. The grip safety has been my No. 1 complaint with 1911's. It seems like a pointless lawyer safety, though IIRC it dates back at least to the original Colt military models. I hate the feel of it in my hand, and hate having to rely on it to make the pistol function. The Star has no such safety, and seems to work just fine without it. It has a half cock hammer and a standard 1911 type safety. Why would you need a third external safety?
 
Funny you should ask that now. Take a look at the new issue of Guns & Ammo. Apparently many of Wayne Novak's customers asked the same question. His answer is called "The Answer" which is a one piece back strip/beavertail that basically replaces the grip safety with extended backstrap that over rides it. I thought it was pretty cool.
 
John Browning wanted neither the grip safety, nor the manual (safety lock). Both came about because the prime customer (the U.S. Army) ask for both.

In the case of the grip safety the horseback Cavalry of that day was worried that a trooper might have to holster a cocked but unlocked pistol to free both hands to bring his mount under control. The grip safety was supposed to provide a fail-safe way to prevent an ancidental discharge.
 
grip safety

You and I look at the same feature from different directions. When I carry a weapon, I want every safety feature I can get that does not detract from the actual use of the weapon. I got rid of a Star PD because of that. And BTW- half cock is NOT safe. If the hammer is hit hard, the pistol will discharge. I could not carry the PD.45 concealed with a round in the chamber and the hammer back. I just did not trust the thumb safety. I now carry a Para-Ord. It has thumb, grip, and firing pin safety. So does my Commander. I like 'em both, and carry cocked & locked. If you don't plan on carrying the pistol, none of the above applies.
 
Why would you need a third external safety?

I can't begin to count the times I went to sleep with my fingers
laying across the grip of a "cocked and locked" 1911A-1 .45.

It started in Viet Nam, while on ambushes out in enemy-held
areas. I just had to be able to feel my weapon to feel safe.

Twenty years later, when I was traveling all over the U.S., living in
motels, making a living for my family, it was not unusual for a motel
door to be opened with a key in the middle of the night and some
uninvited stranger try to walk right in. Fortunately for me AND them,
the chain on the door slowed them down long enough for me to "display"
my 1911 and ask them if they were "sure" they had the right room. I never had to pull the trigger, but I always had that option.

The grip safety is just a little more insurance against an A.D.
I can't find any fault with it, myself.

Walter
 
But how does it prevent an ND or AD? You've got the safety catch engaged. If you want an extra measure of security, a half cock would make a lot more sense than a grip safety. The grip safety is going to be engaged as you grip the handgun, which you'll do when you grab it. So it's really no protection against anything.
 
One argument, used by Smith and Wesson with their famous "Lemon Squezzer" revolvers was that a child could not depress the grip safety and fire the gun...Not quite true. I suspect most 5 year olds could, but never the less it was an argument.


I was looking through my copy of Goddard's book on the 1911 Government model development. Actually the grip safety was on and off certain test models of the 1905 and 1907 variety. By the time the 1910 pistol was made they all had the grip safety and manual safety required by Uncle Sam.

Grip safeties were not new to Browning designs though. The Colt 1903, .32 auto and 1908 had them. The little Colt and FN .25 autos did too....

Frankly I don't see the big deal and the grip safety has never been a problem for me to get properly depressed.....though I supose someone with small hands might.....Explaining why so many companies offer grip safeties with the bump on them.
 
Safe

Cosmo,

The thumb safety blocks the sear. The grip safety blocks the trigger...in case the thumb safety gets wiped off unbeknownst to you...and it can happen. If it does, there's only about .080 inch of trigger movement needed to put a slug into the old gluteus maximus if the grip safety isn't there to block it.

Necessary? Probably not...but I like for it to be there. YMMV

Cheers
 
1911 tuner

I wonder if the grip safety could be designed to interlock with the manual safety? This seems like it would greatly reduce the chances of the thumb safety being accidently wiped off. What do you think?
 
I have a Mauser 1896 with neither half-cock nor grip safety.

I have carried my 1911 cocked-and-locked in an inside waist
band holster, muzzle pointed at the family jewels (schmuken).

I would not carry the 1896 cocked-and-locked.

The Browning-inspired Tokarev sems to work fine with
just half-cock safety. The safety catch and grip safety
may be redundant, but they are not burdensome.
 
re:

sabre2:

>I wonder if the grip safety could be designed to interlock with the manual safety? This seems like it would greatly reduce the chances of the thumb safety being accidently wiped off.<

Anything's possible, I guess. Can't see that interlocking the two would make anything better. If the thumb safety's geometry is within spec and the plunger assembly is working right, it's not likely that it'll be accidentally wiped off...and if it does, the trigger is blocke and the half-cock is there.
******************
And:
>What do you think?<

That the more gadgets it's got, the more "Murphy" it gets. The grip safety can be easily "tuned" for an earlier release...for those few who have a problem with disengaging it correctly...without altering its function.

Novak's "Answer"? May I refer to an exerpt from Kuhnhausen's manual.

Rule 1. NEVER alter, or remove a safety feature from any gun. If the owner insists, let him do it. Then it's strictly his liability, and not yours.

Rule 2. DON'T work on any gun with a safety part removed unless the work includes reinstallation of the safety.

And that's all I've got to say about that...:cool:
 
Novak's "Answer"? May I refer to an exerpt from Kuhnhausen's manual.

Rule 1. NEVER alter, or remove a safety feature from any gun. If the owner insists, let him do it. Then it's strictly his liability, and not yours.

Rule 2. DON'T work on any gun with a safety part removed unless the work includes reinstallation of the safety.

And that's all I've got to say about that...
Click to expand...

Good point, if you used a 1911 in SD with the Answer installed. I could hear the lawyers now...
'Removed a factory installed safety device, so that the defendant could more easily shoot my client'
 
Point

Whirlwind:

>Good point, if you used a 1911 in SD with the Answer installed. I could hear the lawyers now...
'Removed a factory installed safety device, so that the defendant could more easily shoot my client'<
*********************

Or...if you let Bubba, the Chairborne Ranger try a few mags through your pistol, and he shoots himself in the foot with it...even though the grip safety wouldn't have prevented it...guess who's gonna probably be payin' Bubba's mortgage...
 
I'm part of the redundant safety crowd. I would NOT carry a 1911 without the grip safety. I would not have a SA gun without a grip safety. I also like the Series 80 firing pin block. Safeties can get knocked off by things. Murphy rules. It is the redundancy of safeties that is why I think a 1911 condition one is safer to carry than a "safe action" Glock. I do prefer DA autos, but I have no aversion to carrying condition one with a 1911 and have done it many times. I also like a thumb break holster with the strap blocking the hammer. You can't have enough redundant safeties so long as they don't interfere with the function of the gun IMHO. I could draw from that thumb snap holster and thumb off the safety about as fast as I can draw a DA from my Sparks summer special.

Besides, if it ain't broke, why fix it? I never even noticed the grip safety on my 1911s when I was firing them. What's the big deal? You're supposed to be concentrating on target and front sight.
 
The most mportant safety feature of any machine is between the users ears. Do what feels right for you because you'll have to live (or die) with the consequences. Personally, I don't see any disadvantage to the grip safety. The only time I want to fire my Kimber is whenI'm holding it properly. I don't find the grip safety uncomfortable, so it makes no difference to me. YMMV.
 
If the pistol falls muzzle up, it is conceivable, depending upon the amount of force required to press the trigger and the weight of the trigger itself, that, when the pistol strikes the ground, the trigger could continue to the rear under inertia. A grip safety prevents this from happening. Of course, a heavier trigger pull or a lighter trigger would mitigate this as well.

Also, as others have said, it's not hard for the thumb safety to be knocked off safe inadvertently. I carry a 1911 all the time and, with an ambidextrious safety, it has happened to me on multiple occasions. The grip safey gives a little more peace of mind that the gun will not go off until one intends it to go off.

Lincoln R. Carr
[email protected]
 
The only problem I have ever had with the 1911's grip safety is the finish wearing of so quickly leaving exposed metal, and if it isnt a beavertail safety I have a 1 inch lump protruding from the web of my hand no matter how I adjust my grip to aviod getting hammer bite during a long day of shooting.
 
In the first place the 1911 was designed as a military weapon. After spending 3 years in the 25th Infantry Div in the mid 60's, I'm convinced the Army does everything to the "lowest common denominator". Every thing is set up so the dumbest guy in the outfit can use it safetly. Common sense is out the window, the Claymore mine has a sign on it " this side to enemy".
 
re:

The real issue isn't whether it's necessary, and though there are many who wish that it weren't there, the fact stands that it IS there, and has been for
95 years. Removing or disabling it 35 or 40 years ago wouldn't have been a concern. In today's litigation-happy arena...where a woman can spill coffee in her lap and successfully sue the restaurant for making hot coffee...it could become a very big concern if somebody gets shot, either by intent or by accident.

I'll back out of this one now, since it's clear that the lines are drawn, but I can't, in good conscience, advise anyone to disable or alter the function of any safety feature on any firearm. That choice...along with the responsibility for making it...sits squarely on the individual.
 
I dislike them very much as I've had to 'spend money' to get them to work reliably for how I shoot. IMHO, they are as useful as the Glock safety on the trigger...meaning not much if at all.

But, as pointed out, removing safety devices doesn't 'feel right' even though many do it and no one can point to a case where it mattered...still!

The "solution" would be a 1911 manufacturer to produce one with a "non-working" grip safety, series 80 style FP safety, which is a really functional safety, and sell lot's of guns. :) And, it would be so easy to do!

That would satisfy those who don't want them and leave the others that do...typically 1911ish...meaning choices.
 
I have noticed that the New Safety on the Mauser 1896
and the grip safety on the Browning 1911 were dictated
by the concerns of the Cavalry: folks on horseback
having to operate a pistol one-handed with the other
hand occupied with reins, etc.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

F
  • Locked
Question on 1911 safeties
Replies
11
Views
628
The Real Hawkeye
T
W
  • Locked
The safety on Para LDA
Replies
9
Views
551
confederatescott
C
Gordon
  • Locked
BHP safety
2
Replies
35
Views
2K
Frank Ettin
Frank Ettin
F
  • Locked
1911 grip safety question
2
Replies
46
Views
3K
tipoc
tipoc
Zak Smith
  • Locked
1911 Thumb Safety - Redundant?
Replies
21
Views
2K
Jim K
J
Back
Top