6906 magazine disconnect disconnect?

[CH4]

I would prefer if 3rd gens didn’t have the mag disconnect, but I tolerate it.

 

[Engine49guy]

Reading this thread reminded me when about 15 years ago I drove down to my accountants office in South Beach Miami,
in the lobby waiting lounge I noticed a guy wearing a Metro Dade Fire shirt and a long leg brace, we chatted for a while like do you know so and so, how's the dept etc.
I then asked him..."What did u do to your leg?"
I was expecting a tore my ACL while whatever,
He said " I was cleaning my Glock .40 and removed the magazine but forgot I had one in the chamber".
Magazine disconnects are ok by me.
OUCH!

 

[SG-688]

FWIW - like disconnects or not - I'll post my frequent reminder that any of the S&W 39/59 pattern pistols can be fired with the magazine removed.

I know of two accidental deaths when the users inadvertently discovered this.

Of course, the two digit pistols can inertia fire with the magazine removed.

Relying on the disconnect rather than unloading -- removing the magazine while leaving a round in the chamber -- was always a bad idea. I never saw it suggested after the mid 1970's.

Interestingly, some young friends still in the business report that they've never had weapon retention training, in the academy or later.

 

[robertrwalsh]

For the I WANT TO ARGUE ABOUT IT crowd it is interesting to note that the pistols that S&W sold to government agencies they would sell without the mag disconnect at request. Those sold on the open market were sold only with mag disconnects. I am also told (don't know this for a fact) that if you send your mag disconnect removed pistol in to S&W for service you will find the mag disconnect back in it when the gun is returned.

 

[LVSteve]

As soon as I see a mod to a gun requires beating off the rear sight, I decide I don't need the mod. I'll either put up with the offending feature or not buy it in the first place.

 

[Brian Parrish]

As soon as I see a mod to a gun requires beating off the rear sight, I decide I don't need the mod. I'll either put up with the offending feature or not buy it in the first place.

You can get a sight pusher. Some are better than others. A good one enables you to change sights at a whim. A good one with precise measuring lines enables acute fine tuning of the sights. Like anything, it might pay to do some research before you decide on one. Pardon me if you already knew about this.

Kind Regards,
BrianD

 

[GaryS]

The only people I encountered got Glock Leg because they carried the pistol in sweat pants without a holster. When inevitably the gun slid down their pants leg their instinctive reaction was to grab the grip and stick their finger through the trigger guard. Ooops.

Reading this thread reminded me when about 15 years ago I drove down to my accountants office in South Beach Miami,
in the lobby waiting lounge I noticed a guy wearing a Metro Dade Fire shirt and a long leg brace, we chatted for a while like do you know so and so, how's the dept etc.
I then asked him..."What did u do to your leg?"
I was expecting a tore my ACL while whatever,
He said " I was cleaning my Glock .40 and removed the magazine but forgot I had one in the chamber".
Magazine disconnects are ok by me.
OUCH!

 

[kbm6893]

My 4013 and 4053 single stacks have the plate also. Seems like maybe the 1076 and 1006 do also. Maybe it is the large frame. No idea why some have and some don't. It does keep everything in place while installing the rear site and prevents you from pinching a spring.

Rosewood

You’re probably right. But the 9MM models surely don’t have that plate. Kind of stupid not to have it. They made things easier.

 

[rosewood]

You’re probably right. But the 9MM models surely don’t have that plate. Kind of stupid not to have it. They made things easier.

I agree, the 9mm ones do not (3913, 6904/6906). Thinking my double stack 4013TSW doesn't either.

 

[Borderboss]

You’re probably right. But the 9MM models surely don’t have that plate. Kind of stupid not to have it. They made things easier.

Actually, I think not having the plate made things easier. Since the sight drifts off left-to-right, I didn't have to take the sight completely off to remove the disconnector. I just had to drift it just enough to expose that hole. I then removed the spring and the disconnector, and then drifted the sight back into place.

 

[Fastbolt]

I love 3rd gen Smith & Wesson autos. I own several. I believe that the magazine disconnect is an answer to a question no one asked. If the magazine disconnect was such a good idea, why didn't Smith & Wesson keep it for the P99, SW, SD or M&P series?

It was an option that S&W finally asked Walther to design for the SW9945, at least the "L" version. We were told about it in my last SW99/P99 armorer class, but they didn't have one to demonstrate and it wasn't included in the manual.

It's an option for the M&P, and it's an elegantly simple one.

 

[kbm6893]

It was an option that S&W finally asked Walther to design for the SW9945, at least the "L" version. We were told about it in my last SW99/P99 armorer class, but they didn't have one to demonstrate and it wasn't included in the manual.

It's an option for the M&P, and it's an elegantly simple one.

I’d add the option to my M&P pistols if I could.

 

[Fastbolt]

I’d add the option to my M&P pistols if I could.

I think it was after my second M&P pistol armorer class, at the end of '09, when I ordered a M&P 40C. I decided to order it with the magazine safety option (lever) just on a whim. Well, that slowed the process quite a bit. I was told to be patient, as the demand for the M&P's had far outpaced their ability to produce them.

It was in the Spring of the following year I called and asked when I could expect my order to ever reach the production. I was told that the production run slated for the mag safety inclusion was still a ways off, but if I was willing to take one without the mag safety feature, they'd pull one from a current LE contract to send me. Tired of waiting, I said go ahead. Thus, I got night sights and no mag safety.

If I'd thought about it, I probably could've asked for a sear housing block, already set up with the mag safety, from the parts bins brought to one of the armorer classes, and installed it myself. It wouldn't match the language on the slide about firing without a magazine, though.

 

[Yaworski]

The way we were trained was to never let the gun run dry - drop an empty mag after the last round is picked up into the chamber.

So your gun was disabled until you inserted the fresh magazine.

 

[Fastbolt]

So your gun was disabled until you inserted the fresh magazine.

There were some reviews and studies done over the decades, and trying to find examples of instances where someone was unable to return fire because they were in the midst of a magazine replacement, and a magazine safety prevented them from shooting at that moment in time ... difficult to find, to put it lightly.

Now, a few examples could be found where a magazine had become unseated and rendered a weapon inoperable, but not where a cop had died as a result. It was something considered better addressed by making sure a holster design protected the mag catch from unintentional depression, and teaching cops to surreptitiously quick-check/tug on their primary mag.

It's been reported as having been observed to be more of a problem when a magazine floorplate might be damaged, and the rounds dumped out of a magazine (even without the user being aware of it), by the weapon having been turned into a single shot pistol. Bumping something too hard, like a veh door pillar (entry/exit), or even banging against a veh seat belt buckle, has been observed to cause issues which weren't noticed by some armed folks.

One study that was previously done by some large agency years ago (which I can't remember) was unable to find a case where a magazine safety cost a cop his/her life, but they were able to find a number of cases where a cop having been able to dump a magazine - and render the pistol easily inoperable - saved them in some fights over their weapons.

In other words, documented 'saves' could be found, but not instances where not being able to fire that one chambered round during a magazine reload cost lives.

Personally, as long as the design of the magazine disconnect/safety doesn't interfere with the trigger pull (weight), I've never cared one way or the other about them. My issued 3 gen S&W 9's, .40's and .45's all had them for many years.

Frankly, having watched more cops than I'll ever be able to count come through training and qual ranges, I'd be surprised that many even above-average shooters might be able to multi-task in some dire stressful situation, meaning interrupting the "must reload fresh mag" technique response midstream, to stop and shoot NOW, relying upon that lone chambered round.

Hell, most people have a hard enough time finding, grasping, orienting and securely seating a fresh magazine in a pistol with the slide forward in battery (which requires more seating effort, and confirmation of the magazine actually being seated securely).

Nowadays, unless someone lives in one of the nanny states (like mine, CA ) that imposes such things as a magazine safety on non-LE, it's increasingly difficult to find that option.

Tempest in a teapot. On the other hand, you can bet that if the commercial market suddenly demonstrated a significant demand for that feature, though, gun companies would find a way to meet that demand. S&W and SIG already have it, anyway, and engineers for other gun companies likely wouldn't find it an impossible challenge.

Suit yourself, if it's allowed by your local laws.

I'm certainly not removing the nylon ejector depressor plunger and its spring in any of my well-worn 3rd gen S&W's.

 

[Yaworski]

I'm certainly not removing the nylon ejector depressor plunger and its spring in any of my well-worn 3rd gen S&W's.

I would never admit to doing so.

 

[Adventurer104]

While teaching firearms to leos 1998-2004 ish, pretty much when 3rd gens fell out of favor, i would challenge the “ gun wont shoot with mag dropped” fight set up. Me and trainee on the range with gun down range, both with eye and ears on, both gripping gun. Id say drop mag ( after I just just enough pressure on trigger to engage sear). Mag falls i say will gun fire?
Trainee shakes head no, i fire the magless gun.
Moral of story to class, there are no absolutes.

 

[kbm6893]

Show me one instance where a person was killed or even shot because they were in the middle of a gunfight, had the presence of mind to even do a mag change in a gun that wasn't empty, dropped the mag, and was prevented from firing when they needed to in the second or two it takes to get the new mag in. I highly doubt any of us here even have the ability to do that under fire. I can surely show you cases where it has saved lives.

And even if they did, what are the odds the round you just fired under that amount of stress was not only a hit, but an instantly incapacitating one? Because if it isn’t, you now have an empty gun, but the slide is not locked back, meaning it takes two hands to get the gun back in action, instead of the one hand if the slide is locked back?

 

[Frank Black]

Show me one instance where a person was killed or even shot because they were in the middle of a gunfight, had the presence of mind to even do a mag change in a gun that wasn't empty, dropped the mag, and was prevented from firing when they needed to in the second or two it takes to get the new mag in. I highly doubt any of us here even have the ability to do that under fire. I can surely show you cases where it has saved lives.

And even if they did, what are the odds the round you just fired under that amount of stress was not only a hit, but an instantly incapacitating one? Because if it isn’t, you now have an empty gun, but the slide is not locked back, meaning it takes two hands to get the gun back in action, instead of the one hand if the slide is locked back?

Won’t have to worry about that dilemma either way. I’ll be shooting to slide-lock with my most awesome FBI-style/no-janky-mag-disconnect M1076, loaded 9+1 with 200grn JHPs (@ or near 1200fps).

Should I opt to do a ‘tactical’ reload before reaching slide-lock, the chambered round will still fire, if needed, for the 0.5-1.0 sec during which the partially spent mag is removed.

There’s a reason this set-up on 3rd Gen guns (much like the ‘decock only’ mod to the slide-mounted lever) was called a ‘tactical upgrade.’

Sadly, YMMV with non-upgraded 3rd Gen guns.

 

[Brian Parrish]

Won’t have to worry about that dilemma either way. I’ll be shooting to slide-lock with my most awesome FBI-style/no-janky-mag-disconnect M1076, loaded 9+1 with 200grn JHPs (@ or near 1200fps).

Should I opt to do a ‘tactical’ reload before reaching slide-lock, the chambered round will still fire, if needed, for the 0.5-1.0 sec during which the partially spent mag is removed.

There’s a reason this set-up on 3rd Gen guns (much like the ‘decock only’ mod to the slide-mounted lever) was called a ‘tactical upgrade.’

Sadly, YMMV with non-upgraded 3rd Gen guns.

I think I may understand the tactical reload differently than you do. Would you take a look at Mas Ayoob's instructional video on the subject? I will be curious how you see the subject differently than he does. If you are concerned about being ready to shoot during the scan/assess phase, then I suspect that you will appreciate the advantages in his approach.

He makes reference to something I personally consider to be very important, "You may want to move your position, and not be where you were when it started..."

Here ya go:
[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07t14o8Ed7w&t=637s[/ame]