Why the lack of pistols with a grip safety

Remington R51 was on the right track, though Remington blew it; single large safety backstrap shielded by a hammer shroud, and a single action trigger. Combine that with a good trigger-covering holster (and a version of the gun that's made properly) and you have a very solid setup that is as fast to bring into action as anything. With a narrow and slick gun like the R51, it'd be comfortable, too.

BTW, the glock "safety" is not an operator safety (like a manual or grip safety). It is a drop safety; that's it. If it weren't there, the guns would fire if dropped muzzle up. Since it's positioned in a handy spot and technically does rely on user input, they sold it as an 'automatic' manual safety. It's no different from the trigger-operated internal firing pin block safeties in many other designs in function, but it is one of very few designs that rely on that feature alone to activate the trigger group.

TCB
 
Well. Doesnt a holster prevent that?
Click to expand...

Exactly. And operator care and respect.

Neither my revolver nor my P226 have "safeties" of any kind, and it doesn't bother me a bit. Granted, the double-action pull is probably stronger than a striker-fired pistol like a Glock, so they are less likely to be fired accidentally when loaded and decocked in a backpack or purse.

The only worry I ever have is with a nightstand gun, I don't like the idea of having a gun right next to my bed that I can just fire by pulling the trigger, so I do use the "safety" on my HK45 that currently lives there. When my P226 lived there, I kept the slide locked open and the magazine not-quite locked in place, so I had to do specific things in a specific order to fire it. Just a hangup, I've had some really weird dreams and sleepwalked when I was a kid, so it spooks me to have a ready-to-fire gun nearby when I'm sleeping.
 
Such as a nightstand gun, if its dropped, or if off body carry is needed.
Click to expand...
None of those things alone will make a Glock fire

Nothing but pulling the trigger will

If you can't carry a gun, or place it on a nightstand without pulling the trigger when you don't mean to, no safety is going to make a difference
 
brit said:
Rack the slide to cock the action. Hold the pistol, in the strong hand, as though you had picked it up in a hurry! So as the tip of your trigger finger is pushing the trigger sideways.

The gun will not go click!! Will not fire (simulated discharge) there is two little nubbins that block the rearward dissemble the pistol, pull the trigger bar out,
use a any tinny blade to trim those bits off.
Click to expand...

Since it's early in the morning and I'm bored, I just tried your little trick with all of my Glocks that I have here at the moment: Gen2 G20, Gen3 17, 17L, 19, Gen4 17, 20, 21 & 26. I have a Gen2 G23 that I'll try Monday.

All of them work perfectly no matter how much sideload I put on the trigger.
 
Well Snyper and .45, this has (Believed by some) to have caused a Glock not to fire, when the operator wanted it to, according to after action reports.

And I purchased my First Glock 17 in 1984, our Company, in Toronto bought 10 Glock 17s, direct from Glock in Austria. Ours were all AMXXX Serial numbers.

And no Snyper, it has never happened to me, just somthing I found out playing around with the trigger movement.

My carry Glock19 4th Gen, stays in my holster, or on the night table, this pistol has never malfunctioned in any way, shape or form.
 
Koda94 said:
depends on the holster, but Im talking out of the holster. Such as a nightstand gun, if its dropped, or if off body carry is needed.
Click to expand...
My nightstand gun is holstered for that reason. My next plan is yo screw thr kydex into my bed. But there is no way my chambered glock is going sit unholstered.

As for off body carry what is that?
 
After all, series 70 1911s especially should be carried with the safety on because they don't all do so hot when dropped.
Click to expand...

I suggest you do a bit more research on how the 1911A1 operates.
 
Don't give credit to the 1911, but to S&W and the Safety Hammerless or New Departure revolvers of the 1880's era when Daniel Baird Wesson was partially motivated by reports of children firing guns accidentally.

It was commonly referred to as the lemon squeezer because of the grip safety and the genre's similar action to a once-common kitchen utensil of the same name.

There is an interesting write-up I found in a Dillon Reloading catalog written by a Mr. John Marshall entitled "Classic Handguns: The S&W Safety Hammerless Revolvers".

S&W also reintroduced this type of revolver with the Centennial Models marking their anniversary back in the 1950's.
 
44 AMP said:
I suggest you do a bit more research on how the 1911A1 operates.
Click to expand...

I agree, and I shall.

AKexpat said:
Sounds like your reply answers all of your questions...
Click to expand...

I don't get it. I thought the OP asked why don't more manufacturers use a grip safety?

I did not proclaim to be an expert on 1911s. I have a large admiration for them and want one desperately (I'll get one when the time is right). I hope you didn't think I was trying to slam the 1911 in any way. If they suddenly stopped making 1911s with grip safeties I would feel as though we lost an important part of what makes a 1911 what it is.

I hope to grow my knowledge from here by engaging in discussion with everyone here and as I grow that I can share what I have learned. I am aware that with this hobby, like many others, there is a high amount of subjectivity involved and while no one is always right or wrong we don't always agree. If we all agreed we would all own the same firearms (boring).
 
Ah, another grip safety discussion.

I see complaints of extra parts....you know, like those pivoting trigger tabs or hinged triggers that are not present on a lot of guns out there.

The grip safety is designed to just move out of the way. I've owned 12 1911s, 7 XD/M/S models and a Colt 1903 pocket hammer less. I never had any of them fail to disengage even when quickly drawing from the holster using a high hold, thumbs forward grip.

After observing how at least 80% of shooters at my local ranges incorrectly hold a firearm, I know why a lot of people might frown upon them.

Then you have the people claiming a perfect grip is needed. I can hold XDs and 1911s half way down the frame and still disengage the grip safety. With a normal hold it's no problem.

I'd like more manufactures to incorporate them into their pistols so trigger tabs and hinged triggers that do the exact same thing are eliminated. The XD grip safety blocks the sear though since it's a SAO pistol, but I doubt most people know this.

Here's how it works.....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jIeQuOwbvc8
 
Snyper said:
Such as a nightstand gun, if its dropped, or if off body carry is needed.
Click to expand...
None of those things alone will make a Glock fire

Nothing but pulling the trigger will

If you can't carry a gun, or place it on a nightstand without pulling the trigger when you don't mean to, no safety is going to make a difference
Click to expand...
I didnt say that. I said if the trigger is snagged. I agree with your last sentence.

Moomooboo said:
Originally Posted by Koda94
depends on the holster, but Im talking out of the holster. Such as a nightstand gun, if its dropped, or if off body carry is needed.
Click to expand...
My nightstand gun is holstered for that reason. My next plan is yo screw thr kydex into my bed. But there is no way my chambered glock is going sit unholstered.

As for off body carry what is that?
Click to expand...

yes, you get what im saying about trigger snag...

off body carry is when you use, carry or place your gun in a backpack, fanny pack, briefcase, under a pillow, nightstand, duffle bag, jacket pocket or compartment etc. etc. anything not in a traditional holster on a belt or on your body.
 
Last edited:
Well in that case dont carry with one in the chamber. Its too easy. It takes less than a second to rack a round. If you have it placed there, youre not looking for quick draw aa it ia
 
I don't believe grip safeties are needed, but I will say this: they make a lot more sense to me than the trigger safety.

I don't think they're needed because the circumstances that a ND would occur without a grip safety are exactly the same as the circumstances where it would occur with a grip safety. The aforementioned loose gun in the purse could occur with an XD, too, though it would require two contact points instead of one. That does theoretically make it safer, but in practice, the difference seems marginal to me. I put it in the same category as a loaded chamber indicator - I don't think it makes a gun any worse, but I also don't think it substantially improves it.

For the life of me, I cannot conceive a plausible scenario where the trigger would be depressed negligently, but not the trigger safety 2 mm away.
 
For the life of me, I cannot conceive a plausible scenario where the trigger would be depressed negligently, but not the trigger safety 2 mm away.
Click to expand...

If the gun is dropped and the trigger safety wasn't there, inertia could potentially move the trigger bar and fire the gun. By locking the trigger unless something is pushing against it, the trigger safety prevents such a thing from happening.
 
There have been some reports of folks getting a hand injured and not being able to grip the gun firmly enough to fire in an emergency. Probably pretty rare.

The vast majority of NDs are finger on the trigger. The one time I was almost shot by an ND was by a gun with a 1911 that he was holstering.

Anecdotes - worth what you pay for them. I personally see no need for a grip safety on my carry gun.

Recall they used to have grip safeties on J frames and some revivals of such. Not to popular now.
 
We know the story of how the cavalry wanted a grip safety on what became the 1911, but the original purpose of a grip safety was to make sure the shooter's hand was out of the way of the slide when it came back. I think (hope) that folks today are more knowledgeable about auto pistols than they were c. 1900 and know not to hold the hand too high up on the gun.

Jim
 
^As I recall, the US Army bid specs required a safety on the .45 semiautos submitted for its 1907 trials, but the exact form of the safety was left up to each manufacturer. Colt/Browning submitted the M1907 with a grip safety. Because of concerns about mounted troops being able to reholster safely with only a grip safety, the refined M1910 was fitted with an additional thumb safety, which eliminated the concern and was retained, along with the grip safety, on the M1911.
 
I agree with some of the other posters saying that Browning brought the grip safety with him to the Army pistol trials, instead of the other way around. I have a Browning-designed Colt 1903 with a grip safety, that predates the trials.

The 1903 grip safety is tiny. It requires a conscious effort to use, on my part. Along with the short trigger reach, only suited for people with doll hands, it makes the 1903 a range curiosity, and I would never carry it. I would rather carry my much older S&W 3rd Model DA revolver, which has its own ergonomic peculiarities, than the 1903.

I also agree with lamarw that the inspiration for Browning was the S&W safety line. People don't live in a vacuum. Gun companies back then were under some of the same pressures that they are now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top