Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

A Glock trigger without the trigger safety


Cy Soto

Recommended Posts

With so many companies making parts for Glock pistols I am amazed that I have never encountered any company making a "Competition Only" trigger for a Glock without the the trigger safety. IMO it would be nice to have the option of purchasing a trigger with a different shape (wider trigger face, less curve, less curve, etc).

So why is it that no one has ever come up with something like this? In your opinion, is it due to legal limitations (removing this safety would make the gun ilegal) or is it a lack of interest from the general public?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 107
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

First off, why would you want to?

I was thinking that it would be nice to have the option of replacing the current trigger with one that has a different shape; maybe even be able to get a trigger made out of a material other than plastic (it may provide a less "mushy" feel to the trigger break).

Would you like the gun going off while holstering the gun?

It is true that this is a possibility but I don't consider that the removal of this safety would make this any more feasible than its current comfiguration. From what I understand most people that have had this happen to them is due to holstering the weapon while their finger is still on the trigger. I suppose that the other way this type of AD could happen is if a piece of the shooter's shirt would get stuck in the trigger while holstering. Then again the presence of the trigger safety is probably not going to prevent an AD.

Secondly it would be an illegal mod for IDPA.

You are right, I hadn't thought about that. But I guess it would still be a valid modification for USPSA "Limited", wouldn't it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is an after-market metal trigger. Lightening Strike. I believe it's shape has a different feel. (Not Production legal in USPSA.)

Removing the trigger safety is removing the key of the whole safety sytem of the gun. So , that is a big "no-go" in my book.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's something that you could do yourself and then all the responsibility would be on your shoulder. I wouldn't do it even if someone asked or was willing to pay for. It could be done easy enough with some sort of epoxy and a file, then shape to your hearts content.

Edited by Charlie Vanek
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is an after-market metal trigger. Lightening Strike. I believe it's shape has a different feel. (Not Production legal in USPSA.)

Removing the trigger safety is removing the key of the whole safety sytem of the gun. So , that is a big "no-go" in my book.

Even the lightning strike has a trigger safety.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would also declare that the offending gun is unsafe.

huh??

its not the best idea..and really doesn't buy you anything on a competitive level..but unsafe??

its not inherently less safe than the gun was originally...

anyway..

CY..its not going to make things any smoother or faster or more accurate..best to leave that one alone..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would also declare that the offending gun is unsafe.

huh??

its not the best idea..and really doesn't buy you anything on a competitive level..but unsafe??

its not inherently less safe than the gun was originally...

anyway..

CY..its not going to make things any smoother or faster or more accurate..best to leave that one alone..

Sure it is, you would have removed the primary safety device.

IT IS UNSAFE! PERIOD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is an after-market metal trigger. Lightening Strike. I believe it's shape has a different feel. (Not Production legal in USPSA.)

Removing the trigger safety is removing the key of the whole safety sytem of the gun. So , that is a big "no-go" in my book.

FWIW, I think the trigger safety is about as useful at preventing any sort of accidents as a 1911 grip safety.

Since the method of deactivation is to simply press a lever on a trigger, exactly what sort of mishap does it really prevent?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would also declare that the offending gun is unsafe.

huh??

its not the best idea..and really doesn't buy you anything on a competitive level..but unsafe??

its not inherently less safe than the gun was originally...

anyway..

CY..its not going to make things any smoother or faster or more accurate..best to leave that one alone..

Sure it is, you would have removed the primary safety device.

IT IS UNSAFE! PERIOD.

How many 2011's have the grip safety pinned down? :rolleyes:

Edited to add: mpolans beat me to it while I was erasing my originally written, and much longer response.

Edited by SA Friday
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've seen loaded guns tumble throught the air...after getting pulled from a holster on a chair start, for instance.

On a 1911, with the thumb safety engaged...the sear is blocked.

On a Glock with a trigger safety...the "sear" is blocked.

The Glock cannot fire unless the trigger moves backwards. As long as it doesn't...the trigger bar cannot come off the ledge, and release the striker. As long as it doesn't, the safety plunger cannot will remain down...preventing the striker from getting past it.

Production

22 Specifically prohibited modifications and features

•Disabling of any external safety or externally operated safety

and..

8.1.2.4 With respect to Rules 8.1.2.1 and 8.1.2.3, the term “safety” means the primary visible safety lever on the handgun (e.g. the thumb safety on a “1911” genre handgun). In the event of doubt, the Range Master is the final authority on this matter.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing I've noticed with at least one 'kit', and my own experiments, is that some trigger jobs end up with a trigger safety that works, unless you ride the reset.

IOW, rack the slide, like LAMR, and it's fine. Ride the reset, take the finger out of the guard, and...you can still move the trigger back. Not sure how to feel about that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. In the example below, most 1911s used in IPSC could still fire, unless someone left in the firing pin block safety...which most folks take out. Keep in mind, given the example below, because of the inertial firing pin design, a 1911 dropped just right will fire without the hammer even falling, much less the trigger being touched; since all Glocks have firing pin block safeties (and I've never heard of anyone removing them) the Glock would still have to have something enter the triggerguard and move the trigger back for the gun to fire...and if something were to enter the triggerguard and move the trigger to the rear, then the little safety lever on the face of the trigger would also be pressed, allowing the trigger to move rearward.

So again, exactly what type of mishap does that little safety tab/lever prevent?

2. I don't think anyone is saying that such a modification would be legal in Production, but several people also shoot Glocks in Limited and Open, where such a modification would be legal.

I've seen loaded guns tumble throught the air...after getting pulled from a holster on a chair start, for instance.

On a 1911, with the thumb safety engaged...the sear is blocked.

On a Glock with a trigger safety...the "sear" is blocked.

The Glock cannot fire unless the trigger moves backwards. As long as it doesn't...the trigger bar cannot come off the ledge, and release the striker. As long as it doesn't, the safety plunger cannot will remain down...preventing the striker from getting past it.

Production

22 Specifically prohibited modifications and features

•Disabling of any external safety or externally operated safety

and..

8.1.2.4 With respect to Rules 8.1.2.1 and 8.1.2.3, the term “safety” means the primary visible safety lever on the handgun (e.g. the thumb safety on a “1911” genre handgun). In the event of doubt, the Range Master is the final authority on this matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

its so simple to do, all you need is.....superglue!

Charlie V. also mentioned something along the same line. He talked about applying epoxy and then filling the trigger. :)

I was hoping that my "invention" would be embraced by the shooting community and that I would be able to make a gazillion dollars from it!!! It is clear that I suck at this "invention" business of mine. Well... It's back to the drawing board for me. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2. I don't think anyone is saying that such a modification would be legal in Production, but several people also shoot Glocks in Limited and Open, where such a modification would be legal.

No...I already quoted you the rule.

What, so you're saying such a modification wouldn't be legal in Limited and Open? I'm not understanding your point now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2. I don't think anyone is saying that such a modification would be legal in Production, but several people also shoot Glocks in Limited and Open, where such a modification would be legal.

No...I already quoted you the rule.

What, so you're saying such a modification wouldn't be legal in Limited and Open? I'm not understanding your point now.

8.1.2.4 With respect to Rules 8.1.2.1 and 8.1.2.3, the term “safety” means the primary visible safety lever on the handgun (e.g. the thumb safety on a “1911” genre handgun). In the event of doubt, the Range Master is the final authority on this matter.

I think the trigger safety would be considered the primary safety on a glock.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What, so you're saying such a modification wouldn't be legal in Limited and Open? I'm not understanding your point now.

I think that Flex is quoting from the 2008 USPSA Rulebook.

8.1.2 Self-loading Pistols: (Page 29)

8.1.2.1 “Single action” – chamber loaded, hammer cocked, and the safety engaged.

8.1.2.2 “Double action” – chamber loaded, hammer fully down or decocked.

8.1.2.3 “Selective action” – chamber loaded with hammer fully down, or chamber loaded and hammer cocked with external safety engaged (see Divisions in Appendix D).

8.1.2.4 With respect to Rules 8.1.2.1 and 8.1.2.3, the term “safety” means the primary visible safety lever on the handgun (e.g. the thumb safety on a “1911” genre handgun). In the event of doubt, the Range Master is the final authority on this matter.

So if I am reading Flex's reply correctly, what he is trying to say is: It all comes down to figuring out if the Glock is considered a "Single Action" or a "Double Action" pistol. In my opinion if it is to be considered a Single Action this modification (removing the trigger safety) would make it illegal. On the other hand, if it is considered a Double Action, I don't beleive this rule would apply. Being that this is such a gray area it would be left to the Range Master to decide in a case such as this one. So it may be best to avoid any complications and continue to use Glock's original design.

Edited by Cy Soto
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...