Author Topic: Grip safety? (Read 1352 times)

m-g Willy · « **on:** March 31, 2005, 12:32:11 PM »

I been thinking what reason for the grip safety on the 1911. John Browning only put one on the 1911 because the Army wanted it. The later improved Browning pistol (High Power )didn't need one. I also seem to recall Skeeter Skelton telling how he drilled and pinned his grip safty in permently. I was just wondering how many other 1911 shooters think the grip saftey isn't really needed.

Mikey · « **Reply #1 on:** April 01, 2005, 03:00:37 AM »

m-g willy: true enough, the grip safety isn't necessary. While Skelton may have pinned his closed, back then he didn't have to deal with the liberal courts that are in existence today.

When I was in Vietnam we regularly taped the grip safeties closed on our government models. There were times when you would go to trigger off a round and hadn't quite gripped the pistol correctly and the shot wouldn't trip. That is one of the concerns for the 1911 in stress-fire - gripping the dang thing right so it goes bang.

I wouldn't recommend taping the safety closed again but at least youcan remove a piece of tape. Mikey.

Questor · « **Reply #2 on:** April 01, 2005, 03:30:35 AM »

For a target shooter, it's not a problem at all. For anything else, there are simply better guns to be had, so why not use them? We've learned a lot about how to make good guns in the hundred years or so since this relic was invented.

Iowegan · « **Reply #3 on:** April 01, 2005, 07:49:39 AM »

John Browning's design didn't survive 100 years because it was bad. There are two specific reasons for a grip safety. The first is obvious .... safety. The second is to insure the shooter grips the gun properly so it will be accurate and won't malfunction from torque. John Browning's commercial model design included a grip safety 6 years before the Government bought it and gave it the 1911 designation.

Actually, there have been quite a few guns made with a grip safety to include S&W revolvers. Considering the 1911 was designed to carry cocked, locked, and the chamber loaded, the extra safety margin from the grip safety is a very good idea. Some people just don't like anything that has "safety" in its name and want to disable them. When you train properly, it's almost like the grip safety isn't there. You have to learn how to draw and grip the gun, then everything else falls into place.

Questor, Please name just one gun that has a more robust design than a 1911. No gun on the market has aftermarket support like a 1911. The 1911 can be configured for plinking, bullseye, combat, tactical, pins, plates, etc, and makes a great carry gun. You can buy a host of different sights, grips, barrels, thumb safeties, grip safeties, slide locks, hammers, triggers, magazines, and more. Granted, one configuration does not fit all needs but changing a few parts can taylor a 1911 for any handgun use.

Questor · « **Reply #4 on:** April 01, 2005, 09:41:18 AM »

I suppose it comes down to what you mean by "robust", but I've tried the SIGs, Pardinis, H&Ks, Glocks and CZs and they are awesome compared to the 1911. My 1911s are becoming safe queens.

SLAVAGE · « **Reply #5 on:** April 01, 2005, 10:34:20 AM »

is ther a way to put a decocker on the side safty?

Iowegan · « **Reply #6 on:** April 01, 2005, 12:49:48 PM »

Questor, The guns you mentioned are all very respectable. However, they are all designed for a specific function. I can't imagine someone showing up at a bullseye match with a Glock or a SIG. Except for magazines, sights and grips, the guns you mentioned have little support from aftermarket sources. Robust means you can change the basic platform to fit nearly any shooting need. Try buying an extended trigger or a match grade barrel or any one of the hundreds of custom parts for the guns you mention. I'm not saying they are bad guns, just that you can't change them much to meet different shooting needs.

SLAVAGE, Decockers are used on semi-autos with DA/SA features where it is not safe to carry with the hammer cocked. The 1911 was designed to be carried cocked and is a single action only gun. I can't imagine when a decocker would be useful on a 1911. The key for safety with any gun is to train with it and learn how to use the existing features. Books, video tapes and classes are available to learn proper techniques.

Castaway · « **Reply #7 on:** April 01, 2005, 01:02:20 PM »

Wow! Questor, this is a touchy issue. What does the FBI Hostage Rescue team use? What did the Marine Special Ops folks adopt? When all is said and done, a 45 starting hole is bigger than most 9mm's can ever hope to attain. When it comes to selection of bullet launchers. Mr. Browning got it right 94 years ago in a package that is still considered state of the by the boys that do.

HouseofCash · « **Reply #8 on:** April 01, 2005, 06:41:28 PM »

I think both you men have good points, every gun mentioned in your posts have there places in the world.

I have a Glock 22 .40CAL and my 1911s are 10 times better, but, that is my opinion. You like what you like. I like heavy guns. I like the feel of cold steel in my hands. My glock has none of thoughs. My glock looks like a 1 inch by 1 inch block with a cheezy blow molded piece of plastic on it for a hand grip. Has no style at all. Were the 1911 has 94 years of style and USA history in it, in old photos, world wars, ext. ext.

But, if you want high cap. mags., laser/light mount out of the box, a lighter gun and only have $500.00 dollars to spend get a run of the mill glock. It will probably be a life long great handgun for your self.

Good thing I got the glock as a gift and did not buy it. I kinda feel bad talking crap about it. My wife would kill me. SHHHHHHH.

But on a real note I'm not tryn to change your mind. Shot what you like. There yours not any one elses.

Dave.

myronman3 · « **Reply #9 on:** April 02, 2005, 03:53:08 AM »

i have used about every kind of weapon out there, with a glock being the only exception until two weeks ago. as far as pistols go, i was a huge h k fan. one day the wife and i were shopping and we stopped at a store in the mall that sells guns. i just looked at a kimber 45, she bought it for me. the h k's are now gone. they couldnt hold a candle next to the kimber. the glock's are nice- i like the magazine capacity of them.

if kimber would come out with a double stack 10mm (hell, even a double 45) that felt right in my hand (no polymer, please) i would own one so fast your head would spin.

i dont think there is a AUTO pistol out there that is better than a good 1911. the only fault is the magazine capacity.

i know para makes double stack 1911's, but i havent heard squat from owners of them.

Castaway · « **Reply #10 on:** April 02, 2005, 05:37:34 AM »

myronman3, had a Para Ordnance P 13, liked it, but traded it for a friends Kimber TLE. Buddy is happy and I am too. Didn't like the fat grip as much as the standard 1911 frame. The P 13 was accurate and ate what ever I fed it with ease but was just too thick for me.

HouseofCash · « **Reply #11 on:** April 02, 2005, 05:51:13 AM »

Quote

if kimber would come out with a double stack 10mm (hell, even a double 45) that felt right in my hand (no polymer, please) i would own one so fast your head would spin.

Welcome to the great world of Kimber. I know, no polymer, but kimber does make a "BP10-2" High Cap. . Yes it is polymer and I do not like them much, but, it feels nothing like a Glock or any other polymer frame full size handguns out there. You might like it. Also if you ever get some time at a range, ask to shot a Kimber TLE it is what the L.A Swat carry. That is my newest Kimber. See what you think. Also try out some SFAs. There real nice also.

Dave.

myronman3 · « **Reply #12 on:** April 02, 2005, 05:54:59 AM »

oh yeah, i love my kimber. my favorite pistol.

vinconco · « **Reply #13 on:** April 04, 2005, 01:29:16 AM »

I think another reason people pin the grip safety is because newer pistols such as the Kimber and all manner of modified 1911's use the "high" grip safety allowing a higher grip on the gun. When you move your gripping point higher it makes it harder to depress the safety all the way. Newer high grip safeties are manufactured with a bulge at the lower end so your hand has a better chance of depressing it. Doesn't work for me however so on my self defense gun I had to adjust the grip safety to barely block the trigger so any movement would disengage it. I pin them on all my competition guns.

vinconco · « **Reply #14 on:** April 04, 2005, 01:45:33 AM »

myronman3;
I have owned a Para 45 and used it in USPSA competition since the early 90's. I've probably put 300,000 rounds through it and had good and bad experiences with it. The main problem is the magazine which needs to be clean to work reliably. During a competiton if the mag is dropped for a reload I usually have to field strip it and swab it out before I use it again. Now this depends on where its dropped but if your on an outdoor range you had better clean that mag. Single stack mags are easier to clean with a brush and do not have to be disassembled.

HouseofCash · « **Reply #15 on:** April 04, 2005, 04:36:41 AM »

Is this GI SFA non-polymer? Its not a kimber and sights are crud, but it might be what you are looking for myronman3.

http://www.springfield-armory.com/images/pistols/PW9701LLarge.jpg

Dave.

Questor · « **Reply #16 on:** April 04, 2005, 04:49:46 AM »

Iowegan:

That's exactly my point. And I think the heart of the disagreement is what we value in our guns (viva la difference!). I only shop ergonomics and function. If I want an accurate gun for bullseye, I get one regardless of who makes it. If I want a hunting gun, I get one of those. The history or the flexibility of the design is irrelevant.

I'm shooting the Pardini almost exclusively now. It's great to have a 45 that actually fits me, performs well, and requires about one third the time to clean and maintain.

HouseofCash · « **Reply #17 on:** April 04, 2005, 06:11:53 AM »

Questor:
Put in thoughs word you are pretty darn right. I cant disagree with what you said in your last post, you hit the nail on the head and made it easy to see.

With that being said I think people get into these disagreements, because they have pasion/personal reasons for some of the guns they own. I know I have a gun or two that I feel that way about, because it was a handed down piece or something I spent my hard dollars for.

But you make a strong point.

Dave.

Iowegan · « **Reply #18 on:** April 04, 2005, 08:29:09 AM »

I have a safe full of handguns in several brands including auto-loaders and revolvers. They all serve the function I bought them for. I totally agree with buying a gun that fits you and the situation you bought it for.

Some people don't have the luxury of buying a gun for every situation. They may have extra large or small hands and maybe don't get along well with factory equipment. What if that person could buy a gun that could be easily altered to fit like a glove? What if the configuration (bullseye, tactical, concealed carry, etc) could be altered by just changing a few parts? What if the accuracy, reliability, trigger length, or trigger pull could be changed to meet the shooter's needs? How about a wide selection of sights, scopes or red dots? And how about other accessories like holsters, magazines, or grips? What if you could change to calibers like a 22 LR, 9mm, 38 Super, 40 S&W, 45 ACP, or 10mm Auto, in just a few seconds? The robust qualities and after market support is what made the 1911 survive for so many years.

Yes, I do have a passion for 1911s but I'll be the first to admit they are not the best choice for all shooting needs. I wouldn't even think of hunting with one. As far as pinning a grip safety, wouldn't it be easier to just buy one that fits your hand? If you want high capacity magazines, take a look at the SVI. I have one in 38 Super that holds 18+1.