Green Book Head Scratchers.

[jspruance]

If this topic has been previously discussed I apologize.

I am hoping to get some opinions and clarification on section 5.1.4. The section speaks about the trigger pull weight of a handgun. My confusion comes from the last few words of the paragraph. " However, the trigger mechanism must at all times, function safely and as originally designed."

Does this mean that for example P.O. series 80 pistols that have been converted to the series 70 mechanism will not be allowed?

[Vince Pinto]

Does this mean that for example P.O. series 80 pistols that have been converted to the series 70 mechanism will not be allowed?

I don't know anything about Para Ordnance pistols but, in general terms, the thrust of the subject rule is to acknowledge that competitors tinker with their triggers, usually to lower the trigger pull weight and/or stroke distance, however such modifcations must never jeopardise safety.

For example, if you removed a standard safety device from the trigger, you might be in breach of this rule. Note that I'm referring to the trigger mechanism, not to other popular modifications such as pinning the grip safety on a 1911.

Using Glocks (with which I'm more familiar) as an example, if you removed the trigger safety (the little hinged piece in the middle of the trigger), that would be in breach of the subject rule.

Hope this helps.

[LPatterson]

I see that Vince is on and will probably have this answered before me but I would consider that to mean that a single action does not double fire and safe action guns have the safeties intact.

[Dead Buff]

Vince, Series 80 pistols activate/deactivate a FP stop via the trigger. Series 70 pistols have no FP stop and thus better triggers.

[Vince Pinto]

Vince, Series 80 pistols activate/deactivate a FP stop via the trigger. Series 70 pistols have no FP stop and thus better triggers.

Thanks for the information - if it's not a Glock, I know diddly squat ......

Anyway, based on the information you've given, if a competitor replaces a entire Series 80 trigger group with an entire Series 70 trigger group, I doubt there'd be a problem, but somebody weigh in if I've lost the plot here.

What might cause problems is if you fiddled with part of a Series NN trigger group. In other words, rather than just removing one and installing another, you also modified the latter and made it unsafe.

Hope I'm making sense here ......

[jspruance]

Vince, the Series 70 trigger mechanism uses a half cock safety on their hammer to prevent follow through, the Series 80 uses a blocking mechanism (as previously mentioned) activated by the trigger to prevent accidental discharge.

I wonder if Todd J's P.O. pistols have been converted to Series 70 mechanisms?

Sorry I didn't better well initially.

[shred]

Think of a 'Series 80 firing-pin safety' as something like the Glock safety plunger.

It's similar in that pulling the trigger lifts a lever that pushes a plunger up and thus unblocks the firing pin.

This is a retrofit to the 1911 design made by Colt sometime in the liability-crazed 1980's. Most everybody else makes do with the grip safety, thumb safety and inertial firing pin. Most of the 1911 manufacturers (besides Colt and maybe Para) don't have this 'feature'. Kimber has something different that is driven by movement of the grip safety as I understand it.

Even better, here's a picture http://www.nomeking.com/s80.htm. The lower three red bits are the Series 80 parts. Non series-80 1911's don't have those parts or spaces for them to fit into.

You can see why all that extra mechanical flip-flapping is frowned upon by trigger afficionados

[Vince Pinto]

Thanks for the info guys.

Now, my next question in my "1911 Guns For Dummies" course is: "Does the replacement of a Series 80 trigger group with a Series 70 trigger group present any safety implications?", because that is the issue here.

Mind you, I don't know of a single case where a 1911-genre gun was declared unsafe specifically due to the trigger group being used - every case I can recall has been due either to hammer follow-through and/or due to a worn or excessively "shaved" (?) sear.

Help me out here - being used to Glock Perfection, I'm currently lost in the wilderness ......

[shred]

The "trigger group" difference is only those three parts. Pull them out, throw them away and you have a Series 70 trigger system, as safe as it's been for 80+ years (ideally you'd fill the holes / spaces in, but that's not required for functioning)

[kimel]

IMHO the Series 80 is a solution for a problem that doesn't exist except in the minds of a few lawyers.

To declare that returning a 1911 back to the original design that God ^H^H^H John Moses Browning intended was defeating the original safety and therefore illegal would not only be heretical but immoral and and grounds for banishment to the 7th level of Hell for all eternity where nothing but M. Moore movies play day and night and Hillary does a slow bump and grind striptease in all your dreams.

[kevin c]

"Does the replacement of a Series 80 trigger group with a Series 70 trigger group present any safety implications?"

It'd probably be unsafe only if you dropped the gun muzzle first onto a concrete like surface from a considerable distance above, using an extra long FP, extra weak FP spring, and unusually sensitive primers which would ignite if tapped by the FP, if it moved foward enough in the FP channel to pass the breechface. This was the type of scenario, I believe, that Colt was trying to prevent, though I don't know if it actually ever happened in real life...

[Neil Beverley]

Hey Vince, I really think you ought to try a Glock. I think you'd like them.

[Vince Pinto]

..... and Hillary does a slow bump and grind striptease in all your dreams.

OK Kimel, that's it pal. You're OFF my Xmas card list. I won't be able to sleep for weeks with that thought in my mind.

[Dead Buff]

It scares the living crap out of me just knowing there are people who can think up such punishments...

[shred]

It'd probably be unsafe only if you dropped the gun muzzle first onto a concrete like surface from a considerable distance above, using an extra long FP, extra weak FP spring, and unusually sensitive primers which would ignite if tapped by the FP, if it moved foward enough in the FP channel to pass the breechface. This was the type of  scenario, I believe, that Colt was trying to prevent, though I don't know if it actually ever happened in real life...

I always used to wonder exactly how much hazard this constituted? After all, the muzzle is pointed straight down, isn't it? There might be some flying concrete, but my previous experience with shooting a concrete floor point-blank (my AD story) is not much comes back at the shooter.

I guess the other thing this prevents is if the pistol is dropped directly on the hammer such that it breaks the sear, somehow misses the half-cock notch (dunno how) and thus hits the firing pin. That wouldn't be good.

[Vince Pinto]

Hmmm.

(Note to self: Keep shooting Glocks, but wear a BRV when others are shooting 1911s)

[IPSCDRL]

Hmmm.

(Note to self: Keep shooting Glocks, but wear a BRV when others are shooting 1911s)

Naw, as the good Colonel correctly points out, the safety of any firearm rides between the ears, not the hands.

[shred]

Just don't try and catch that Glock when you drop it. There was a sad story on here a few years ago about a guy that did that.

Given the geometry of the 1911, it seems very unlikely that you could drop one on the hammer-- the typical big beavertail grip safety will block almost any attempt to smack a cocked hammer in an undesirable direction.

Ah, now I get it. This is for the maroons that carry their 1911's around with the hammer down on a loaded chamber. Drop that on the hammer and you might be poorly off without a FP safety. Good thing we never do that in IPSC.

[jspruance]

I think the important thing to remember is that when you totally swap out series 80 parts and totally replace them with quality series 70 parts you have the same system that is present in all S?I pistols.

The half cock safety is not present on the series 80 hammer so the entire mechanisn must be replaced to have the same safety level as the original series 70 handguns.

I guess I am still hoping to hear a ruling.

[Vince Pinto]

I guess I am still hoping to hear a ruling.

OK, I'll stick my neck out and say that, based on the information provided in this thread, it is unlikely that I would have a problem with you replacing a Series 80 trigger group with a Series 70 trigger group, if I was your RO or RM.

Of course the real test is how your gun actually functions during the match. Frankly all unsafe gun (or ammo) calls are made after potentially unsafe actions are actually observed, and this is why we have redundancy with our safety rules.

[Flexmoney]

OK, I'll stick my neck out and say that...it is unlikely that I would have a problem with you replacing a Series 80 trigger group with a Series 70 trigger group, if I was your RO or RM.

LOL...I think you would be sticking your neck out if you did have a problem with it.

[kimel]

That's an understatement.

[mcoliver]

Okay I did an unscientific "test" on inertia firing before. Old singlestack, chambered a shell with a live primer (can't remember the brand). Dropped it from 5' muzzle down on a rug (didn't have the heart to drop it on bare concrete). Didn't set-off the primer but I did crack the bushing after several tries. Thinking about it, I should have done the test again and removed the FP spring.

I also did some flying-1911-bouncing-on-the-bed-landing-on-the-floor test but that's for another time...

[Dead Buff]

I guess the other thing this prevents is if the pistol is dropped directly on the hammer such that it breaks the sear, somehow misses the half-cock notch (dunno how) and thus hits the firing pin. That wouldn't be good.

I have seen the half cock notch sear off when a gun is dropped on the hammer - in this case it was a CZ75 A without FP stop...the bullet missed the UNAUTHORISED gun handler (WITHOUT PERMISSION) right elbow by millimetres (burnt hair) and proceeded to penetrate the roof of the B&B...please don't ask...I was sitting at the bar enjoying a beer...and NO it was not my gun....