Grip Safety vs Frame Safety

[Moltke]

I'm a Glock shooter, not a 1911 guy, so I'll tread lightly but I know certain people have differing opinions on 1911 grip safeties. Some people pin it, weld it, tape it, or don't do anything to it, some think bigger is better, smaller is better, etc. My question is a bit more rudimentary than that - Why even have a grip safety? Or if you're going to have a grip safety then why have a safety lever on the frame? It seems like one of these can be designed away and still maintain safety with the gun, yes/no?

For USPSA, its just one less thing to worry about when drawing if you don't have to flip off a safety or make sure you have a good enough grip to depress a grip safety in order to get that first round off. Whereas in 3 Gun, its just one more thing to worry about when ditching a pistol that a small jolt may flip an engaged safety to the "off" position being set hard in a bucket resulting in a possible DQ. I know that all firearms need to be safe, but if there was a way to engineer these things out of a 1911 and maintain safe handling - would that be better?

[a.roberts]

Grip safety only blocks the trigger.

Thumb safety blocks the sear.

If i had to pick just one, thumb safety.

[bountyhunter]

I'm a Glock shooter, not a 1911 guy, so I'll tread lightly but I know certain people have differing opinions on 1911 grip safeties. Some people pin it, weld it, tape it, or don't do anything to it, some think bigger is better, smaller is better, etc. My question is a bit more rudimentary than that - Why even have a grip safety?

I read it was a requirement of the contract the design had to meet to be sold into service, I believe it had to have two safeties. IMHO, the grip safety is idiotic. A safety that works until somebody picks up the gun is not a safety, it's a marketing gimmick. The thumb safety is a legitimate safety since it prevents firing if the trigger is accidentally pulled. You will note that Browning's other "masterpiece design" (the HI Power) has no grip safety, so aparrently he was not a big fan of it either.

"The military mandated a grip safety and a manual safety.[1] A grip safety, sear disconnect, slide stop, half cock position, and manual safety (located on the left rear of the frame) are on all standard M1911A1s."

Edited September 19, 2013 by bountyhunter

[MadMadWorld]

Do not know the rule number, however the grip safety is not required in USPSA. Almost all the folks I know in USPSA who shoot the 1911 style frame do not have a functioning grip safety, myself included. Pinning is the predominate method, I just adjust the sear spring so it does not contact and the grip safety "floats" on my guns.

[45dotACP]

I'm in a sort of opposite boat. I have a functional grip safety, but the thumb safety (an aftermarket part I didn't install correctly) is faulty. The grip safety, according to legend, was a requirement of the US military contract and once I acquire a new, working thumb safety (lesson has been learned), I would probably just cut the grip safety arm off if you don't like the GS to hang you up. As for being safe...well as a fellow Glock shooter (I shoot it better than my 1911 actually), I don't believe the notion of a grip safety is any less unusual than the notion of a trigger safety. They're both kind of strange and really do stress the point of having a viable safety between the ears. First thing I was ever taught about guns (in 4th grade) is that a safety is a mechanical device, and it can, and will, fail on you at the worst moment. Better to realize that and train accordingly...especially that finger on the trigger thing.

[ktm300]

I have a functional grip safety, but the thumb safety (an aftermarket part I didn't install correctly) is faulty.

I assume you understand the thumb safety is the primary safety and has to work if you are going to shoot the gun in a USPSA match.

[bountyhunter]

I'm in a sort of opposite boat. I have a functional grip safety, but the thumb safety (an aftermarket part I didn't install correctly) is faulty. The grip safety, according to legend, was a requirement of the US military contract and once I acquire a new, working thumb safety (lesson has been learned), I would probably just cut the grip safety arm off if you don't like the GS to hang you up. As for being safe...well as a fellow Glock shooter (I shoot it better than my 1911 actually), I don't believe the notion of a grip safety is any less unusual than the notion of a trigger safety. They're both kind of strange and really do stress the point of having a viable safety between the ears.

Yeah..... but since the OP was a professed Glock shooter, I avoided pointing out the so-called trigger safety (which only works as long as nobody touches the trigger) is every bit as useful as a grip safety that only works as long as nobody picks up the gun.......

[JaeOne3345]

[L3324temp]

I never had an issue with the thumb safety and can't image that many do. You naturally disengage it when you grip the gun and place your thumb where it belongs. The grip safety on the other hand... gives many people I know (including myself) issues. Many grab the gun high to get better recoil control and end up not engaging it. Most disable it.

[HRider]

The reason that we have both on a 1911 is that the Cavalry wanted a pistol that was controllable with one hand (had to control a horse with the other hand). The first .45ACP to have both was the model 1904, it featured a grip safety and a safety lock, along with an internal hammer. The Military model of 1905 had neither grip safety or safety lock. The grip safety was re-introduced on the 1907 contract pistol. The safety lock was added to the 1910 test pistol and became the 1911 (the August 19, 1913 patent date on 1911 pistols is for the plunger tube that came about as a result of adding the safety lock).

It is interesting to me that many things that we think are "new" to the 1911 platform were done during trials and development. One grip safety designed by Browning himself activated a firing pin block (sound familiar?). Model 1900, 1902 and 1903 pistols had long slides and 6" barrels. Some model 1902s had only front cocking checkering, no rear serrations. Model 1903 was chambered in .41 rimless (the first 10mm). The 1905 pistol, like its predecessors, had a lower ejection port, an external extractor and a bushingless barrel. The military rejected the side ejection and the port was raised for more top ejection. During trials, extractor pins broke or worked their way out and failed so Browning designed the internal extractor. The model 1908 pistols were the first to have a short dust cover and a scalloped slide, all previous pistols had full length frames and full slides.

I believe the reason that the 1911 has endured is the years of R&D that were put into the final design.

Hurley

[3djedi]

There must be something useful in the 1911 style grip safety........Springfield uses it on all their XD, XDM, and XDS line of pistols. I guess it makes some people "feel" safer. Maybe for cops who sometimes get the drawstring thingy from jackets stuck in the trigger guard as they are holstering. I heard one guy holstered his pistol (with draw jacket drawstring stuck in the trigger guard) and as he lifted his arms to shut the trunk of the car, the cord tightened and pulled the trigger resulting in a shot in the leg. Grip safety would have kept that from happening...........

[Moltke]

Thanks for the input everyone.

[jmbaccolyte]

I never had an issue with the thumb safety and can't image that many do. You naturally disengage it when you grip the gun and place your thumb where it belongs. The grip safety on the other hand... gives many people I know (including myself) issues. Many grab the gun high to get better recoil control and end up not engaging it. Most disable it.

I guess it depends on the size or shape of your hands or something. I've never had any trouble with the grip safety, not in thirty years of shooting 1911A1s regularly. I certainly wouldn't disable it unless it was causing problems (don't fix it if its not broke) and then only for competition (a pinned safety on a carry pistol would be a bad idea if you end up in court on a civil suit wrongful death case).

[L3324temp]

I tuned mine to be a little less sensative. I was not comfortable with disablng it, but nearly everyone I know who had the same problem did so. I also agree that it should never be disabled on a carry gun.

[Moltke]

Not interested in what should be done to a carry gun, more interested in what should be done to make a 1911 more competitive with regard to safeties. Some of the replies in this thread have been very helpful, what else are people doing or not doing to their guns?

I can't help but think if there was a firing pin safety (series 80) or similar setup inside the gun, then would the lack of a grip safety make a difference? How about the lack of a safety lever? Purely as a "game gun" it would be grab, point, shoot.

[bountyhunter]

Not interested in what should be done to a carry gun, more interested in what should be done to make a 1911 more competitive with regard to safeties. Some of the replies in this thread have been very helpful, what else are people doing or not doing to their guns?

On grip safeties: I weaken the spring load so there is no chance of it not depressing, but still leaves it functional.

[paopao]

For carry gun there is no reason to disable it. Just for safety. But for competition, i think its ok to do it. I disbabled on my custom sti.

[jmbaccolyte]

Not interested in what should be done to a carry gun...

Sorry for the thread drift, but I thought that it was appropriate because we're discussing disabling a safety on a firearm and because we do sometimes use firearms to defend ourselves and there are people out there who are ready and even eager to sue someone who was just defending themselves.

A few years ago, a gangbanger in LA was breaking into a car and friend of mine (who was off-duty at the time) attempted to arrest the guy, but the banger fought him with a large screwdriver in his hand and my friend had to shoot to stop him (he died). It was ruled a good shoot, but the banger's parents still sued in civil court claiming wrongful death. My friend won the case but most attorneys require at least $10,000 to defend you (and my friend hadn't disabled a safety on his pistol- I expect they charge more for that, because it would take more of their time to defend). And in a civil case in CA, it only takes 9 out of the 12 jurors to agree to find you at fault and render a huge judgement against you (like taking your equity in your house and garnishing your wages forever).

Edited September 24, 2013 by jmbaccolyte

[Supermoto]

Not interested in what should be done to a carry gun...

Sorry for the thread drift, but I thought that it was appropriate because we're discussing disabling a safety on a firearm and because we do sometimes use firearms to defend ourselves and there are people out there who are ready and even eager to sue someone who was just defending themselves.

A few years ago, a gangbanger in LA was breaking into a car and friend of mine (who was off-duty at the time) attempted to arrest the guy, but the banger fought him with a large screwdriver in his hand and my friend had to shoot to stop him (he died). It was ruled a good shoot, but the banger's parents still sued in civil court claiming wrongful death. My friend won the case but most attorneys require at least $10,000 to defend you (and my friend hadn't disabled a safety on his pistol- I expect they charge more for that, because it would take more of their time to defend). And in a civil case in CA, it only takes 9 out of the 12 jurors to agree to find you at fault and render a huge judgement against you (like taking your equity in your house and garnishing your wages forever).

So what you are saying is you have absolutely no proof that disabling the GS will cause increased scurtiny.

I disable the grip saftey on my carry guns for the same reason I do on my competition guns. I need them to work everytime, all the time. Being able to fire even with a poor grip is certainly more important with a carry gun then a comp gun.

[jmbaccolyte]

Supermoto- If by proof you mean numerous professionally done studies, then no. But its an informed opinion based on having been a law enforcement officer who presented over 300 felony prosecutions (admittedly most of them pled guilty instead of going to trial). In my opinion, that's still a fair amount of time spent in court for anyone who's not an attorney. In my experience, a good attorney would rake you over the coals for deactivating any safety and might make you look like the troublemaker to jurors who don't have any experience with firearms. And probably there won't be anyone on the jury with a decent amount of experience with firearms, because he would get them excused. Judges don't want experts on the jury- they believe experts belong in the witness chair.

Any attorneys out there who want to give us a better opinion?

Edited September 24, 2013 by jmbaccolyte

[Moltke]

For competition purposes, as long as it's okay with in the rules, we can disable safeties. Hooray, settled.

[IHAVEGAS]

I think the grip safety makes a lot more sense when you think about the dynamics of a dropped gun and add that the thumb safety might usually be off when this happens. It would be interesting to see test data where folks dropped race guns from various heights with and without gs's, but I'm not holding my breath waiting for the data .

For competition purposes, if I get a bad grip on the gun I am not going to shoot well, the safety telling me I've hosed the grip seemed like an advantage during the adjustment phase. I don't see folks having problems with them after they have used them for a bit, but apparently some folks do.

[HRider]

I have seen a few dropped guns, never seen any of them go off, thank God. The 1911/2011 platform also has another inherent safety feature, the half cock notch, that also comes into play anytime the trigger is not pulled. While the subject of active grip safeties versus safety locks has been discussed many times, most 3 gunners don't have a problem setting a rifle or shotgun in a dump barrel quickly and/or with authority with the safety engaged. Most of those rifles and shotguns have a safety that only prevents movement of the trigger, no half cock notch on the hammer and the hammer is cocked when they put it in the dump barrel. I have not seen one go off by itself yet (but, I have seen people DQed for throwing guns in a barrel with the safety off).

I believe that the matches that require the safety to be engaged are just trying to keep us all a little safer so we can play another day.

Hurley

[StraightUp_OG]

The grip safety is not "Marketing fluff" please enjoy the following quote:

"Since cavalry troops were going to be the primary combat users of the pistol, several specific design features, like the grip safety and lanyard ring, were mandated by the horse soldiers. (Nothing will turn a cavalry trooper into an infantryman faster than shooting his own horse by accident.)"

As has been stated above it was the US Government that mandated the grip safety.

I disable all GS on my comp guns but on my carry 1911's all safeties work.

[Sarge]

I think the grip safety makes a lot more sense when you think about the dynamics of a dropped gun and add that the thumb safety might usually be off when this happens. It would be interesting to see test data where folks dropped race guns from various heights with and without gs's, but I'm not holding my breath waiting for the data .

For competition purposes, if I get a bad grip on the gun I am not going to shoot well, the safety telling me I've hosed the grip seemed like an advantage during the adjustment phase. I don't see folks having problems with them after they have used them for a bit, but apparently some folks do.

I think I have seen two custom guns dropped in the gravel at matches. I also know the grips were pinned and the safety was off. No bang.