Really like my sig but . . .

P

Prof Young

New member
So my CC gun is a sig p238 and I really like it. It is a single action gun and I would prefer not to carry with the hammer cocked. I'm wondering what's out there that is as good as the sig, but has both a safety and is double action?

Live well, be safe
Prof Young
 
My SIG P230's were always great guns (better than my P238 by a long shot). DA, with a decocker, no safety necessary. P232 would be the current model, and P230's can still be had at reasonable prices.
 
I would prefer not to carry with the hammer cocked...
Click to expand...

Do you know that both the P238 and the P938 have an interlock between the trigger and the firing pin? The gun cannot fire (firing pin cannot move) until the trigger is pulled about half way through its travel and the firing pin is unlocked.

In effect, you have two safeties on the gun. The manual safety and the interlock between the trigger and firing pin.
 
That's good to know, but you guys aren't suggesting you'd carry a 238 "cocked and unlocked" are you? Are you suggesting that is as safe a carry method as a Glock? Doesn't sound right to me.
 
That's good to know, but you guys aren't suggesting you'd carry a 238 "cocked and unlocked" are you? Are you suggesting that is as safe a carry method as a Glock? Doesn't sound right to me.
Click to expand...

It's an interesting question. It seems as though people are concerned with the status of the gun (fully cocked) because it is indicated by the hammer and you can see the gun is cocked.

This is like carrying a 1911 without the thumb safety and using only the grip safety. The Detonics Combat Master has a thumb safety and no grip safety.

With a Glock, the striker is partially cocked and you finish the process by pulling the trigger. You do have the blade trigger release in the trigger, and another safety that blocks the striker if the pistol is dropped.

With the HK VP9, the striker is fully cocked and the safeties include the blade in the trigger, striker block safety, and a drop safety.

The firing pin block on the P238 and P938 functions as both a firing pin safety and a drop safety - and requiring the trigger to be pulled halfway to disengage the safety acts as a trigger safety but, without the blade.

If you didn't see the hammer cocked (the gun had a striker), the striker was fully cocked when carried and the trigger had a blade safety - would you feel safer?
 
The Beretta PX4 in the standard configuration can be carried in DA with the safety on, and you can get it in full size, compact, or subcompact sizes to fit your needs. I personally don't like the placement of the safety on Berettas, but it does fit the bill. I don't know if it qualifies as "as good as your Sig," since that is a fairly subjective description, but i think most folks would call it a high quality piece.
 
Does it have to be a single stack .380?

DA pistols generally don't have active safeties because the long heavy DA pull is thought to negate the need for one. There aren't many of these pistols. Exceptions include the partially tensioned Ruger LC9 and LC380.

What do you think about a DA (or partially tensioned) pistol without a safety?

What do you think about a traditional DA/SA with a safety? You could carry it hammer down on a loaded chamber, although the remaining shots would be single action.
 
I prefer a DA for carry and currently have the Ruger LC380. It is OK. I like the size and weight. I keep looking but have not found anything "better enough" to cause me to replace it. I like all my pistols to be "ready to go" so they are all loaded, chambered, and cocked. The last part is easy as all but one are DA.

As was said above, the final and best safety is me so those of my pistols with manual safeties don't have them engaged.
 
buckhorn_cortez said:
It's an interesting question. It seems as though people are concerned with the status of the gun (fully cocked) because it is indicated by the hammer and you can see the gun is cocked.



This is like carrying a 1911 without the thumb safety and using only the grip safety. The Detonics Combat Master has a thumb safety and no grip safety.



With a Glock, the striker is partially cocked and you finish the process by pulling the trigger. You do have the blade trigger release in the trigger, and another safety that blocks the striker if the pistol is dropped.



With the HK VP9, the striker is fully cocked and the safeties include the blade in the trigger, striker block safety, and a drop safety.



The firing pin block on the P238 and P938 functions as both a firing pin safety and a drop safety - and requiring the trigger to be pulled halfway to disengage the safety acts as a trigger safety but, without the blade.



If you didn't see the hammer cocked (the gun had a striker), the striker was fully cocked when carried and the trigger had a blade safety - would you feel safer?
Click to expand...


I'll throw a monkey with a wrench in the mix. The purpose of the blade on a Glock or VP9 is as another drop safety. Yes it can help with snags, but that's not its main purpose. The possibility exists, granted it's a small one, that were the gun to be dropped muzzle up that when it hits the ground momentum would drive the trigger rearward and discharge the pistol. Because of the extreme light weight of the blade, it's physically impossible for that blade to be driven from momentum unless maybe from a plane at altitude. Firing pin blocks would not stop the pistol from discharging at this point because the trigger was in fact "pulled". The manual safety on the 238 and other cocked and locked pistols works as the blade. On pistols with very heavy DA triggers the momentum on the trigger would also be insufficient because of the weight of the trigger.

Now in fairness the 238 has a fairly stiff trigger so maybe it would be fine. But maybe it wouldn't. While the weight of the trigger pull may well seem stiff enough compared to say a striker fired pistol, the fact remains that you would be using a product in a manner that was not how it was originally designed not were you to call SIG and ask them would they recommend carrying the pistol in that fashion. Will any of that matter in the long run? It may well not. But there is definitely some extra liability when you carry a firearm in a manner otherwise directed by the manufacturer.
 
I don't think you're going to find anything close to a Sig P238 in a DA/SA w/safety configuration, mainly because SA carry in a small package is what makes it unique... the package, not the gun (as Colt and Kimberly have similar offerings). I have considered adding a P232 to my collection, but size wise there is no comparison.

To me the P238 is a pocket sized handgun, and I prefer IWB. I wouldn't want to carry one in my pocket, and if I were carrying IWB I would go with something larger. That is what is nice about having options though.

If the thought of carrying with the hammer back and safety engaged doesn't work for you, I'm sure there are other guns out there. I wouldn't feel less safe carrying one FWIW, as it is highly unlikely to go off on its' own.
 
Lots to learn here.

As I read these posts I'm starting to think that I need a better CC vest that would allow me to have the gun in a holster which protects the trigger. I think If I could find that arrangement I'd feel okay about carrying with one in the pipe, the hammer cocked and the safety on.

Live well, be safe
Prof Young
 
Prof Young said:
As I read these posts I'm starting to think that I need a better CC vest that would allow me to have the gun in a holster which protects the trigger. I think If I could find that arrangement I'd feel okay about carrying with one in the pipe, the hammer cocked and the safety on.



Live well, be safe

Prof Young
Click to expand...


Yea carrying without a holster is a pretty dumb idea. Even pocket holsters are an option.
 
Prof,

What holster are you using that leaves the trigger exposed?

TR,

Will physics permit a, say, 5-lb trigger to be activated by the drop of an unsafed 2-lb gun accelerated by gravity alone?
 
Last edited:
TunnelRat,

Thank you very much for that. While the momentum from a drop would be unlikely to move the trigger it certainly is possible.

I'm also not a fan of the pocket holsters I've seen for the P238. If carrying in a vest I might use a pancake holster sewn in or attached somehow. It just seems more sturdy. Winthrop makes an affordable pancake holster that I would recommend. It fully covers the trigger and also the safety and is very low profile.

The P238 really is good little gun.

Thanks for all the good info everybody!
 
Limnophile said:
Prof,



What holster are you using that leaves the trigger exposed?



TR,



Will physics permit a, say, 5-lb trigger to be activated by the drop of an unsafed 2-lb gun accelerated by gravity alone?
Click to expand...


Idk. Go test it. I can only say what I have read and heard and as I said I'm unsure in this case. I don't have the facilities to test it practically nor do I want to do the vectors and calculate the forces on paper. No one is paying me to do it and it's not something that affects me personally enough to spend my free time (I would just use the safety). Maybe we can get the Mythbusters boys to lend a hand?
 
Last edited:
TR,

I found an online calculator to solve for force of impact of a fallining object.

Getting everything into metric units:

- A 2.0-lb pistol has a mass of 0.91 kg;
- A trigger pull of 5.0 lbf is 22 N;
- The waist-high drop height of 3.0 ft is 0.91 m; and,
- The acceleration of gravity of 32 ft/s/s is 9.8 m/s/s.

The kinetic energy just before impact is equal to the potential energy just before the drop:

(0.91 kg)(9.8 m/s/s)(0.91 m) = 196 J = 196 N·m.

To get the force of impact one divides the distance moved after impact. I'm guessing this means the depth of the crater made in the surface impacted. However, a drop onto concrete would create no crater except on a molecular level, which implies from my interpretation that the impacting force a bit shy of infinity. Would it be reasonable to assume the distance in question is the length of the trigger pull? Assuming a 1-in traverse of the trigger (0.025 m), the resulting force of impact is 7,800 N -- more than enough to "pull" the trigger.

My calculation may be flawed, but I'll continue to use my safety locks.
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orders_of_magnitude_%28force%29

Doesn't seem completely out of line with the examples above. The only caveat of course is that the pistol has to fall exactly with the muzzle up or the force on the trigger is a the result of some trig on the angle of that drop force, but like I said it's still possible.

I've been thinking about this lately because I own both a Glock and a P320. The P320 doesn't have the little tab (they supposedly offer it as an option to LEO I've just never seen it available commercially), but I'm pretty sure they still claim it's drop safe and I'm not sure how.

Edit: I wonder if the weight you should use is just the weight of the pistol, or more related to the trigger itself. The gun isn't one rigid body. :confused:
 
I think CA drop tests by ensuring that the muzzle is struck squarely on concrete after a waist-high drop. I believe the rationale there is to ensure any firing pin restraint won't be overcome by the force of the impact. Reading the original users' manual for the M1911, it seems that Browning regarded the inertial firing pin as a safety feature. But, I understand that drops of 1911s with no firing-pin block can result in a primer detonation if the impact is just right.

I had never considered the possibility of the trigger being a factor in a drop, except if one tried to catch a dropped handgun and inadvertently depressed the trigger. I've read it's unwise to have a trigger pull less than the weight of the gun, because if you ever fumble the gun with your finger inside the triggerguard, a detonation is highly likely.

Until you pointed out the role a trigger blade safety has in preventing a drop from causing a detonation, I considered such a safety a joke. I believe Glock claims such safety prevents anything but square pressure on the trigger from activating the trigger, but I am unaware of any unsquare pressures ever being a problem. Your story makes much more sense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top