Glock "safe action" question

J

Joe Klug

New member
Let me start by saying that I am not trying to rant about anyone's choice of pistol. I am just trying to understand something. Honest.

I have tried to read what I can about the Glock "safe action" trigger system and everyone (here and elsewhere) tends to say (roughly) the same thing about Glocks..... "if you keep your finger off the trigger it is completely safe".

Now, what I have noticed on my own is that once you rack the slide on a Glock you basically have a single action pull. That pull is a bit long and stiff (on new pistols at the gun shop anyway) but still a single action pull.

What I don't understand is why everyone thinks this is OK. If I saw someone with, say, a 1911 (just to use something for an example) with a round in the chamber and the hammer back but the safety not engaged I wouldn't think this is particularly safe "as long as their finger wasn't on the trigger". Yes, the Glock's trigger won't pull unless your finger is firmly centered which disengages the safety lever but the 1911 won't fire unless the grip safety is squeezed.

Someone please tell me, why is one OK and the other not OK? (Anyone trying to convince me that carrying a 1911 in the manner described above will be immediately dismissed. :))

Thanks.

Joe/Ga
 
Joe

When the slide is racked and the trigger reset, there is still no tension on the firing pin. The first "stage" of pulling the trigger cocks the firing pin, at which point you will feel greater tension. At this point, further pressure to the rear will result in the weapon discharging. When the Glock is chambered and the trigger reset, there is no tension on anything, unlike a 1911 which has the spring tension on the sear. So when the Glock is chambered the firing pin is free of tension and no where near the round. Hope this helped.

Be Safe
Mike
 
Mike/One, I don't claim to be an expert on Glocks and I don't mean to disagree with others who might be more knowledgable than I am on this subject BUT I saw a demo Glock at a gunshop with the slide half cut away to expose the internals of the pistol and when chambering a round, the spring is definitely under tension.
 
FUD

When slowly pulling the trigger of a Glock you will come to a point where it stops. The motion to this point brings the striker into the cocked position. If you do not fire the weapon the trigger will return forward as the striker again goes to the rest position. Field strip a Glock and look at the frame assembly. Push the trigger to the set position. And then dry fire it, there should be no tension there. The only tension will be in bringing the striker into firing position.

Be Safe
Mike
 
Cycling a glock pistol puts the striker under partial tension. Enough to significantly reduce the trigger pull but, theoretically, not enough to activate a primer if the sear plate were to release the striker. When you pull the trigger several things happen.

1) Your finger activates the trigger safety which allows the trigger, trigger bar and attached sear plate to begin moving to the rear.

2)As the trigger moves back the upward extension on the trigger bar depresses the plunger on the fireing pin safety that unblocks the firing pin channel near the breach.

3)When the pistol is at rest the lateral extension on the sear plate is fitted in a tight slot which prevents movement of the sear away from the striker. As the trigger moves rearward the lateral extension is esposed to a wider portion of the slot and the striker spring comes under increased tension. As the rearward extension on the striker plate encounters the downward angled disconnector the sear plate is driven down, away from the striker and the striker is released.

The pistol is safe w/out a "safety" like a 1911 because in its ready condition there is insufficinent potential enegry in the pistol to ignite the cartridge. A C and L 1911 has the potential enegry. Given equally catistrophic failures of all safetys involved (grip, striker, whatever) the 1911 will go off the glock wont.

Addtionally the longer trigger pull of the glock that stacks towards the end provides more mental warning that your finger is on the trigger and you are pulling it. At 3.5 pounds crisp, a sloppy trigger finger gets you in trouble quick. It seems wise to have an additional manual safety standing between. Although there are lots of old timers who have carried 1911 without using the thumb safety.
 
I think the original question is a very good and simple question, but the answer is not simple by any means. (and I would never claim to have the complete answer, only some thoughts)

In theory, I have to agree with the Glock people that the action is different and cannot be called a SA by any stretch of logic. On the other hand, at 5.5#, I also have to agree that the actual strength of the pull is not different enough from any other SA to be a factor. So the end difference in my eyes is the length of trigger pull.

If it makes sense to Glock to have what amounts to a "SA"(I realize it's not really SA) pull with a "safety" on the trigger that you release as you fire, then the question becomes does it make sense to you. I like the open market and think Glock should make the gun however they see fit. Once the gun is produced, the market decides if it is a design they want, and the market has spoken.

I am a bit two-faced in this debate in that I don't like the system in theory, yet I would really like a Glock at some point, and really respect them. I think the Safe Action Trigger and Glock as a whole is a great design that has yet to be perfected. If I knew the answer to make it better I wouldn't be wasting my time working for a living.

Kiffster

------------------
Sig 229 .40 - When you care enough to shoot the very best!
 
One,
I also am not am armorer but your statement is in error. Unless the trigger is pulled and to the rear it is always under partial tension. Pulling the trigger back to fire only pulls the firing pin back the rest of the way and then releases to fire.
That is one of the ways you check your firing pin. While gun is unloaded, squeeze trigger to rear locked position. shake the gun and you should hear the firing pin loose with no tension rattle. Rack the slide to reset the trigger and the rattle should go away.

------------------
"It is easier to get out of jail then it is a morgue"
Live long and defend yourself!
John 3:16
NRA lifer
GOA
GSSF
KABA
 
Not to jump into the lion's mouth, but if you think about the definitions of Single Action and Double Action, the Glock is a Single Action---just as the Para LDA is really a LSA Long Single Action. To even utter Double Action Only is to contradict oneself.

------------------
Frontsight!
=========================
"Put a rifle in the hands of a Subject, and he immediately becomes a Citizen." -- Jeff Cooper
 
The only thing that prevents the true single action name is the fact that you do have to pull the firing back with the trigger, however slight it is, in order to shoot. I feel safer calling it a modified double action. Maybe we can just call it a Glock safe action.

------------------
"It is easier to get out of jail then it is a morgue"
Live long and defend yourself!
John 3:16
NRA lifer
GOA
GSSF
KABA
 
We do need a term for a tigger that is neither DA or SA. I have been using "Safe Action Trigger" like Glock refers to it(Glock refuses either of the labels also), but that name only refers to Glock's complete system.

LSA for Long Single Action as Frontsight! said above would work, but it still uses the term "Single Action" which isn't really acurate. I was wondering if they use that in their material or if you came up with that. At least it is generic enough to cover a number of styles like the Para, Steyr, Glock, etc. Any other suggestions or terms you have heard to describe a trigger that is not SA or DA?

How about:
"modified double action" (MDA) - as Lee mentioned - I like that one
"Long Action" (LA)
"Light Double Action" (LDA) - I kind of like that one also
"Easy Double Action" (EDA)
"Double Action Light" (DAL)
Or my favorite so far: "One-and-a-half Action" (OAAHA) :D

(I must have too much time on my hands, time to get back to work)
Kiffster

------------------
Sig 229 .40 - When you care enough to shoot the very best!

[This message has been edited by Kiffster (edited June 06, 2000).]

[This message has been edited by Kiffster (edited June 06, 2000).]
 
Well, the striker in the Glock is ultimately pulled back and released by functioning the trigger. It is not "cocked" in the same sense that a 1911 is. The only thing left to do to fire a 1911 after racking the slide is to break the sear/hammer notch engagement. The 1911's length of trigger pull required to break the sear/hammer engagement is WAY shorter unless you have a really crappy 1911, but that's beside the point.

Since pulling the trigger is *absolutely* required to "cock" and release the "sear"/striker engagement the Glock Safe Action is much closer to "technically" being a double action. It's not simply sitting on a sear/hammer, or more accurately a connector/striker notch after racking the slide. It still HAS to be "cocked" by the trigger pull. It CAN NOT be cocked by any other means while the gun is fully assembled, period. Now it's sounding more like a DAO, huh?

The weight and nature (be it long, short, light or heavy) of the trigger pull has nothing to do with whether or not an action is considered "single" or "double", unless we plan to rewrite all the gun books. The function of the action (whether sear/hammer or connector/striker) and not the trigger pull, defines it as "single" or "double". Simple as that.

You couldn't put a long, tensioned trigger pull on a 1911 and call it a double action any more than you could reduce the trigger pull of the Glock to a fraction of an inch and call it a single action, as long as the trigger cocks the action.

As for a name, I think that Light Double Action best describes the Glock action. That is, if you have to have something else to call it?? What you call it doesn't change the function of the pistol.

Now, see...I explained my point of view on the matter without trying to defend Glock. :D



------------------
The Glock freak formerly known as Chris...
 
Oh yeah, Joe. As for being "OK", that's completely up to the person buying/carrying the pistol. The Glock isn't *THE* pistol, it's *A* pistol. Just like there isn't any one shooting position that's best for everyone, there is no single pistol that is best for everyone. I know you know that though.

Most of my Glock World Domination type posts are made in humor. I wouldn't push anyone into carrying a Glock if they didn't feel safe with them. I simply prefer Glocks for my personal and professional use.

I'm completely "OK" with the Safe Action system but I would be very hesitant to carry a 1911 cocked and locked. Is it because the Glock system is better or safer? No, probably not. It's just what I'm comfortable with. :)

Now, did you ever think you'd hear me say that Glock wasn't the best? :D
 
Most duty and CCW glocks have a two stage trigger. Pick up the slack, then it's hot.

1911s are true single actions with one smooth trigger pull.

No big whoop.

------------------
The Seattle SharpShooter - TFL/GT/UGW/PCT/KTOG
 
Thanks everyone for your replies. I think I understand the Glock system a bit better now. Through your input I learned something new. I had no idea that the striker on a Glock was pushed to the rear by the trigger before it is released. I have tried a Glock before that had some trigger work done to it (it had a real light pull) and I never would have thought it was doing anything but releasing a sear.

See.....you -can- teach an old dog new tricks. :)

Joe/Ga
 
Chris,

>Now, see...I explained my point of view on the matter
>without trying to defend Glock.

They don't need defending. Just some explaining like you did. I'd be willing to bet that I'm not the only one here that wasn't aware of exactly how the Glock system worked. I might, however, be the only one to admit it. :)

>The Glock isn't *THE* pistol, it's *A* pistol.
>there is no single pistol that is best for everyone.
>Most of my Glock World Domination type posts are made in humor.

The Church of Glock folks called and left a message for you.......they will be by to pick up your robes in the morning. :D

>Now, did you ever think you'd hear me say that Glock
>wasn't the best?

That -is- a shocking developement. :) However, I always say that everyone must make their own choices. What is best for one person may not be so for another. I guess that's why there are so many brands and models on the market. I just want to try to understand (and possibly test fire) as many as possible.

Joe/Ga
 
In the original meaning, "double action" referred to the action of the trigger in doing two actions, cocking the hammer and releasing it. In a "single action" gun, the trigger performs only the last; the hammer must be cocked manually.

The Glock is a true double action, since the trigger both cocks the striker and releases it.

Since the real purpose of a manual safety is to prevent firing if the trigger is pulled accidentally, a safety built into the trigger is absurd on the face of it. That anyone considers it a safety is a tribute to Glock's PR hype. It is like painting the combination of a safe on the door. Like all DA handguns, the real safety is in the long trigger pull.

Jim
 
This is not an attack on you, Jim K, just my .02 on the external safety issue in general. No flames intended.

In my opinion, an external safety on a DA pistol is simply a crutch and only serves as a device that allows one to violate the "stay clear of trigger until ready to fire" rule. If one is responsible in handling their DA pistol an external safety is as useless as tits on a bore hog. As far as that goes, this applies to SA's also.

If you need/want/prefer a pistol with an external safety, get one. Personally I prefer to practice safe handling and responsibility and have a pistol that is ready when I am. I'll assume responsibility when/if I have another *negligent* discharge.

------------------
The Glock freak formerly known as Chris...

[This message has been edited by Rainbow Six (edited June 07, 2000).]
 
I have to agree with R6 that I DO NOT want an external safety on my defense handgun. That is why I don't dog Glock for not having them on their gun. I wouldn't mind it if they offered a version with a true external safety, but I wouldn't want it to be universal, just as an option. And I can see why they would't want two versions of the Glock out there.

I really like the SA/DA of the Sig, and the fact that it has no external safety like the Berreta and H&K was a big factor in choosing a Sig. (The fact that it is the best gun on earth is a big added bonus :D - I presume everyone realizes that was a personal opinion not a criticism of any other choice)

Anyway, I guess Light Double Action is probably most correct in terminology, but I think I'll just keep calling Glock's system "Safe Action" like they do. Para has more of a Light Double Action because it has no trigger safety.

Kiffster

------------------
Sig 229 .40 - When you care enough to shoot the very best!
 
I used to dislike external safeties. Now I amno longer sure...having tried some really looooooooong DA triggers, I almost think that JMB got the idea right on his 1911 and Styer M-series got the safety placement right. HK USP series, OTOH, as well as many rifles and shotguns, have safeties that would end up being ON when they should be OFF...with bad consequences.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top