The Safety Situation

Ray1970 · #51 08-25-2017, 09:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smoke

You might want to check him out over on Glock talk I think he's claiming something like two hundred thousand rounds through that weapon now and it's like 25 years old

That's roughly $40,000 worth of ammunition. I bet he could spend another $500 and buy a new pistol as I'm sure his has to have some excessive wear.

Smoke · #52 08-26-2017, 01:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ray1970

That's roughly $40,000 worth of ammunition. I bet he could spend another $500 and buy a new pistol as I'm sure his has to have some excessive wear.

18yrs and 200K + rounds, I think it's worn out. | Page 2 | The Leading Glock Forum and Community - GlockTalk.com

I haven't read the entire story but I think he decided that he wanted to see how much he could put the gun through before it failed

Walkingwolf · #53 08-26-2017, 01:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smakmauz

I think it's also why you see most of the striker fired guns coming from the factory with 5-6lb trigger weights. It's a compromise between the heavy 11-12lb DA triggers and super light 2-3lb SA. I think there is a slight bit more engagement between the sear and striker to pull through than on DA/SA guns in SA mode. It's not much but it makes enough of a difference to make people more comfortable carrying without a manual safety.

I've never seen anyone carrying a 1911 cocked and NOT locked for this reason.

I have seen lefties carry 1911's condition 0 mostly 3 decades ago though. None of the ones I knew that carried that way had an ND. 80 series 1911's have a FP block, they are just as safe to carry with no safety as a Glock. If one looks at the history of 1911 semi auto they will find that the 1910 did not have a thumb safety.

hdtwice · #54 09-01-2017, 12:18 AM

Originally Posted by Ray1970 View Post
We will have to disagree. My M&P's, XD's, XDM, and VP9 have the striker pretty much fully retracted. Pulling the trigger on these guns simply releases the striker. In fact, when I first started shooting an XDM in IDPA they wouldn't even lest you compete in SSP with the Glocks because the XDM was considered "single action" as the trigger only released a fully "cocked" striker whereas the Glock was considered "double action" because pulling the trigger served two purposes- completing the "cocking" of the striker and then releasing it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smakmauz

^^^^yep!! you nailed it!

So would either of you say that the glock is a bit safer when carrying from accidents from either a finger, or some bit of fabric getting into the trigger guard as opposed to my shield?
I really like my shield but as a new guy making some decisions on safety on or not, it sounds like the glock might have been a better choice due to a somewhat "middle ground" on the trigger pull.
In an earlier post Smakmauz was talking about the striker in the shield being about 98 percent cocked vs. the glocks 60 to 70 percent cocked ... any difference in safety? Thanks for any input.

Smakmauz · #55 09-01-2017, 01:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hdtwice

Originally Posted by Ray1970 View Post
We will have to disagree. My M&P's, XD's, XDM, and VP9 have the striker pretty much fully retracted. Pulling the trigger on these guns simply releases the striker. In fact, when I first started shooting an XDM in IDPA they wouldn't even lest you compete in SSP with the Glocks because the XDM was considered "single action" as the trigger only released a fully "cocked" striker whereas the Glock was considered "double action" because pulling the trigger served two purposes- completing the "cocking" of the striker and then releasing it.

So would either of you say that the glock is a bit safer when carrying from accidents from either a finger, or some bit of fabric getting into the trigger guard as opposed to my shield?
I really like my shield but as a new guy making some decisions on safety on or not, it sounds like the glock might have been a better choice due to a somewhat "middle ground" on the trigger pull.
In an earlier post Smakmauz was talking about the striker in the shield being about 98 percent cocked vs. the glocks 60 to 70 percent cocked ... any difference in safety? Thanks for any input.

I'll say this, when I first started carrying, I was more comfortable carrying my shield with the safety on. I trained to draw and take the safety off in a single motion and got good at it. After I became more comfortable with carrying firearms and got a lit more familiar with their operations I am perfectly comfortable carrying a glock or M&P with no external safeties. I like about a 4.5-5.5lb trigger pull on my carry guns with a good amount of pretravel like the stock m2.0. Which is what I'm going to be carrying as soon as my holster from stealth gear arrives.

I would have said that the glock system is just a bit safer because of the sort of half cocked nature but I've been hearing stories of failures where even at half cock, being able to ignite a primer so I'm not really sure anymore. I always thought that was the purpose of the "safe action" trigger system to hold it in a position where it wouldn't have enough energy to ignite the primer if it failed but still took up some of the trigger weight. But if it can still ignite primers even in a half cocked state then I don't see a point in dealing with their system since there are far better systems out there.