MattBurkett Posted January 19, 2005 Share Posted January 19, 2005 Is it legal or not to disable a grip safety in the new rule book? I don't believe so, which sux btw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wakal Posted January 19, 2005 Share Posted January 19, 2005 Much like the old book, it says that safeties must be functional. ...NOT ALLOWED....E. Disconnection or disabling of any safety device on any gun. However, my 1911's have rear frame spacers, not grip safeties Alex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincent Posted January 19, 2005 Share Posted January 19, 2005 I would think: Appendix One - Equipment, Chapter A - Firearms Section 1 - Non-IDPA-Legal Modifications for ALL Divisions, Item E. Disconnection or disabling of any safety device on any gun. pretty much covers that one. You could hope that a "don't ask don't tell" policy for this very common modification would keep you out of trouble. However I'm not sure I'd want to bet my travel expenses and match fees on it. I have spent a lot of money trying to find a grip safety or grip safety adjustment that works for me, but haven't found anything yet. 1911 grip safeties just don't work 100% for me. I know there are plenty of other folks like me. All my carry 1911's have the grip safety pinned because they have to work all the time. I was warned by my AC not to take my CDP gun to the 2004 Nationals with the grip safety pinned. This is after shooting it this way since 1998 at matches all around the country as well as previous Nationals. Word was they were going to be checking grip safety function at the chrono booth. I didn't see it but that doesn't mean it wasn't happening. This lead to a mad rush to find another solution and I ended up gluing a huge piece of plastic to the grip safety. This works 99% of the time, but I'm sure not doing something that ugly to my sweet 9mm SVI Cross Competitor. Until somebody comes up with a more elegant solution I guess my SVI will have to be used for other sports. -Vincent Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincent Posted January 19, 2005 Share Posted January 19, 2005 Some may take Wakal's post as a joke, but I am seriously thinking about coming up with a custom part/gun that doesn't have a grip safety so it will be entirely legal - say the "M2005". Another idea is to come up with a radical new grip safety design that doesn't rely on the current mechanics. I've got a few things in mind, but don't have the time right now to follow through. If I figure something out I'll be sure to post. -Vincent Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scooter Posted January 19, 2005 Share Posted January 19, 2005 Wouldn't it be easier to modify the tab so that if you move the grip safety a little tiny bit, it no longer blocks the trigger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattBurkett Posted January 19, 2005 Author Share Posted January 19, 2005 Well, the tab is ground off. Frigging pointless safety that was added for horseback riding anyway. Even John Browning thought they were stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shred Posted January 19, 2005 Share Posted January 19, 2005 The problem with even tuning the tab to the tiniest release is those of us that push up on the grip safety as well as in. No matter how small the tab, it isn't going to disengage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincent Posted January 19, 2005 Share Posted January 19, 2005 Thanks Shred, some folks just don't understand. We aren't ignorant of how a grip safety operates. They just don't work for everyone. I'm so tired of hearing about tweaking the safety. If it was that easy wouldn't we all have figured it out by now? Like none of the gunsmiths who've installed all the various brands of grip safties ever thought to tune it. LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhino Posted January 19, 2005 Share Posted January 19, 2005 Rescomp used to make a part that was a one-piece beavertail and mainspring housing. I think they only made it for STI/S-V frames and I've not seen it available recently. Certainly it's doable and you're not disabling the safety, but rather redesigning your gun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TDean Posted January 19, 2005 Share Posted January 19, 2005 None of my grip safties are disabled, they are, however, pre-disengaged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Hostetter Posted January 19, 2005 Share Posted January 19, 2005 According to my read of the current rules, the grip safety must be functional. Since I have seen the Glock safeties checked at matches to make sure they work I am looking forward to seeing the 1911's checked as well. I would also think that replacing the beavertail with any other part, such as a one piece beavertail & m/s housing would be viewed as the same as disabling it. You can't "redesign" a gun, as someone else suggested for use in IDPA. I don't like the rule, but hope that in the future if it is enforced for one gun, it is enforced for all guns............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cameron Posted January 19, 2005 Share Posted January 19, 2005 I once had this discussion with a local MD. His inturpretation of a disabled grip safety was a "trigger pull" enhancement, and legal at his matches. Gee, I wonder why people get frustrated will IDPA rule summary's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmills Posted January 19, 2005 Share Posted January 19, 2005 I once had this discussion with a local MD. His inturpretation of a disabled grip safety was a "trigger pull" enhancement, and legal at his matches. Gee, I wonder why people get frustrated will IDPA rule summary's. Disabling a grip safety is illegal, not a "trigger enhancement". Disabling the grip safety via pinning, grinding off of the trigger stop tab, or by installing the Rescomp Beavertail/Mainspring housing, is in fact disabling one of the gun's safety features which is violation of the rulebook. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cameron Posted January 19, 2005 Share Posted January 19, 2005 rmills, I agree with your statement, but I was not about to disagree with the Match Director. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clay1 Posted January 19, 2005 Share Posted January 19, 2005 How about magazine safeties. How many people have weapons that won't shoot without a mag in the well? More importantly how many people with those types of weapons have had them modified to be non-functional? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wakal Posted January 19, 2005 Share Posted January 19, 2005 I wasn't joking I'll add a nice picture of a "stainless steel high-arched beavertail FRAME SPACE FILLER" to the "for sale" section of my web site. I'll talk to Dave Skinner about it next week at the SHOT show...not sure what his lawyers will say, but he may get a kick out of the idea. Alex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Detlef Posted January 19, 2005 Share Posted January 19, 2005 the same (i.e. not permitted) is true in IPSC (not USPSA) Production Division, btw. For whatever it's good here... --Detlef Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ted Murphy Posted January 19, 2005 Share Posted January 19, 2005 What would really throw mud on this one is if someone has a custom 1911 made from scratch and adds the Rescomp part. The shooter could honestly say the grip safety was never disabled cause it never came with one. That hair probably wouldn't split well at HQ though. I guess with all the calls and internet postings they felt they had to address it. I kind of like USPSA's "primary safety" rule better. I bet more people are affected by the series 80 parts than they are the grip safety. Still, it starts to require the MD or an SO to be somewhat of a gunsmith to make the determination and that's bad. I'd be suprised if many people take the task of checking the 1911's. That would be a real tough job. FWIW, I had a lump of bullet lube funk get lodged in the sear spring of my 1911 and it disabled the grip safety quite handily. Gusmith fixed it in 10 minutes and gave me a lecture about better pistol maintenance. While it would be wise to function test the safeties, most people don't do this at the safe area on match day. I'd have to say that an MD who found a gun with an inoperative grip safety should give the fella the chance to correct it before a DQ. Ted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Thomas Posted January 20, 2005 Share Posted January 20, 2005 If it was that easy wouldn't we all have figured it out by now? Not necessarily. It's not exactly information that litters the streets. I'd been doing this for about 15 years before I learned how to do it. Like none of the gunsmiths who've installed all the various brands of grip safties ever thought to tune it. Knowledge bases differ. And did you ask them to tune it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Run n Gun Posted January 20, 2005 Share Posted January 20, 2005 I just installed an Ed Brown Memory Groove grip safety on my Kimber and while grinding the frame of a Gold Match is not for the faint of heart, “sensitizing” the safety was really pretty straightforward and a simple job. YMMV Ed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincent Posted January 20, 2005 Share Posted January 20, 2005 I guess I'm just one of the few who takes the time to understand how their weapons work inside and out as soon as possible. This subject is a pet peeve of mine and it always get's me upset. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fullautodave Posted January 20, 2005 Share Posted January 20, 2005 I thought if you disabled your grip safety, you did it to enhance the relialibility of the weapon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincent Posted January 20, 2005 Share Posted January 20, 2005 On the other hand, I do totally agree that if the sport is going to apply the new rule it should be applied equally to all guns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scooter Posted January 20, 2005 Share Posted January 20, 2005 Here you go, this will solve your problem. Okay it's not a grip safety. It was a test by HK when they were working on the cocking lever for the P7's. But if someone made a lever long enough, the base of your palm would be pressing down on the safety. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pierruiggi Posted January 20, 2005 Share Posted January 20, 2005 That is hideous... Besides, it looks like it would force your hand WAY low on the grip. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now