Production review

[Nik Habicht]

As I understand it (and I could be wrong), even a skilled M&P smith could not inspect an M&P and tell whether it originally came with or without the mag safety

IIRC, S&W rollmarks language regarding ability to fire without a magazine somewhere on the guns without mag safeties. Rumor has it that they also do this on models they convert/remove the mag safeties from. Of course most S&W smiths probably can't read, so.... :roflol:

So the short of it is - I think you've done the right thing by banging on Charles about it, and making comments on the USPSA forums. I'd suggest sticking the argument of comparisons of the SP-01 to the SP-01 Shadow, etc, rather than comparing it back to the M&P magazine safety...

Hmmm, I agree completely. Had I read a little further, I could have saved some typing.....

[HoMiE]

There might be some rollmarks on guns destined for CA, but you can't say that everybody from CA has a drop test complaint gun as some guns make it into CA by way of private party transfer and they would not have such safeties or rollmarks.

If the argument is made that there is no difference in SP01 and SP01 Shadow minus the FPB and it should be OK. Then it is not very hard for people to say well you OK'd the removal of additional not primary safety, therefore I should be able to remove(make inoperable) the grip safety from XDs and FPBs from Glocks, XDs and M&Ps. So I can see it is easier for BoD to say "No, unless otherwise allowed", which seems to be the direction of production division.

[ChuckS]

The reason we are going though this drill is to get production guns more like production guns, no? I have been thinking about this the last couple days as an owner of an SP-01. I came to realize that if no mention of that mag disconnect was mentioned, I would just put the FPB back in and get on with life. But let's look at this

The ruling states:

"

n For purposes of this clause, the prohibition on “disabling” means that you may NOT modify an external safety mechanism in any way that affects its function as a safety per the OEM design.

n For purposes of this clause, a magazine-disconnect is not considered a safety mechanism, and may be removed

"

How can the second sentence is true for the M&P since S&W calls the mechanism a "Magazine Safety"?

(http://www.smith-wesson.com/wcsstore/SmWesson/upload/other/2009_S&W_Catalog_1.pdf page 8)

The fact that S&W (The OEM) calls it a Safety in their design, there is a conflict. Since the OEM classifies it as a safety device, how can USPSA say it isn't?

Since we are tying to get away from "well he has X so I should have Y", perhaps it is time to accept the production configurations as they are and not make any exceptions?

Please note: I really don't give a rodents derriere about M&P and I have been thinking that my SP-01 may be an interesting platform for a 9 Major open gun, I will be able to survive with or w/o the FBP. I just hate to see us go through the efforts to clear the mine field by installing a claymore facing the wrong way.

Later,

Chuck

[kimel]

You're going to bring that up as an example of how to introduce a "challenge"??? ohmy.gif Oh man...

Often, when giving an example, it is a good idea to use an example that is familiar to the audience. That is all I did. I didn't say it was a good example or that I agreed or disagreed with the challenge or the decision. It was simply offered as an example that the majority of the audience would be familiar with.

Didn't mean to poke any tender areas and I apologize if that example brought back bad memories.

[Gary Stevens]

Guns produced without the FPB, don't need them. Guns produced with them do need them.

This actually falls into two different areas. First of all information was provided that if parts get worn, or are improperly fit at the beginning, the firing pin can possibly impact the primer without the FPB. Second this puts USPSA in a difficult position to allow a part to be removed that's single purpose is to prevent the firing pin from impacting the primer.

Now one could ask why does CZ produce guns with them and without them, or why does Smith and Wesson produce guns with magazine disconnects and without them, those are questions the manufacturers will have to answer if needed.

[ciscoip]

Guns produced without the FPB, don't need them. Guns produced with them do need them.

This actually falls into two different areas. First of all information was provided that if parts get worn, or are improperly fit at the beginning, the firing pin can possibly impact the primer without the FPB. Second this puts USPSA in a difficult position to allow a part to be removed that's single purpose is to prevent the firing pin from impacting the primer.

Now one could ask why does CZ produce guns with them and without them, or why does Smith and Wesson produce guns with magazine disconnects and without them, those are questions the manufacturers will have to answer if needed.

This seems like a pretty weak argument in light of all the 1911-design based guns in Open, Limited, L-10, and Single Stack without firing pin block safeties and pinned beavertail grip safeties.

Most folks competing with 1911 based guns that came with the firing pin block safeties probably throw those parts in the trash the first time they take the gun apart.

Edited March 19, 2009 by ciscoip

[Fireant]

Whoa just a minute there. If we can not remove it(the FPB) why does USPSA make us bypass it at the LAMR? To do so safely, you hold the hammer, pull the trigger, let go of the trigger and lower the hammer to the half cock. That way if the hammer slips it will rest on the FPB. If USPSA were concerened about the safety they would not make you hold the trigger all the way back bypassing the FPB just to get the hammer fully down. Right?

[clown]

half cock? i lower my cz hammer all the way down. then again, maybe i'm just reading the post wrong.

[Gary Stevens]

I am not aware that USPSA forces you to do anything other than put your gun in the specified starting condition per the rulebook and the WSB.

[Fireant]

Well if there is another way to get there please let me know. At the LAMR there is no other way to get the hammer all the way down other than bypassing the FPB. Why is this not considered unsafe? I mean we are defeating the purpose of the block right?

[Gary Stevens]

The situation you are talking about is taking place in a controlled manner. The situation I am speaking of is one that would occur in an unintentional manner.

[Fireant]

Guns produced without the FPB, don't need them. Guns produced with them do need them.

This actually falls into two different areas. First of all information was provided that if parts get worn, or are improperly fit at the beginning, the firing pin can possibly impact the primer without the FPB. Second this puts USPSA in a difficult position to allow a part to be removed that's single purpose is to prevent the firing pin from impacting the primer.

Now one could ask why does CZ produce guns with them and without them, or why does Smith and Wesson produce guns with magazine disconnects and without them, those are questions the manufacturers will have to answer if needed.

The situation you are talking about is taking place in a controlled manner. The situation I am speaking of is one that would occur in an unintentional manner.

I thought the LAMR was a controlled situation all the time, not just when you have a FPB? When else would you have a loaded gun on a stage? Are they not both controlled? I thought a worn or improperly fit part would be like any other gun at the match. You either make it safe, get your back up or you are finished. Why make it any different for production then for the other divisions?

[Gary Stevens]

Probably because I can't find anybody who would be named in the lawsuit that is willing to put up everything they have or everything they ever will have so that someone can have a half pound better trigger pull.

[Dan Burwell]

Where's that popcorn emoticon?

I am just glad USPSA sees a magazine disconect for what it really is: a feature. NOT A SAFETY!!!

[Fireant]

I don't know, if the design is so inherently unsafe, why do they make the CZ85 without it? Do you really think that there is less of a lawsuit if someone ad's into someone else with a dropped gun that has the grip safety dissabled?

[Gary Stevens]

The manufacturer stands responsible for what they manufacture.

As to the grip safety question it is a valid question. Just not one that is going to be addressed with this divisional rule, since we are speaking of Production at this time.

[Fireant]

I'm still not buying. A mag disconnect saftey will keep a shooter from AD'ing during a reload. Since you can not pull the trigger with the mag out. Same saftey issue to me, just at a different point in the COF. We use other parts of the rule book to come to an over all picture of the sport. So, to outlaw modifying a safety in one section (an internal safety at that) by claiming it is for safety and then allow an internal safety modification in another division shouldn't fly. Don't you think?

[Dan Burwell]

Of course most S&W smiths probably can't read, so.... :roflol:

Hey now that just wasn't very nice

S&W has let some M&Ps out of the factory without the laser etching on the slide. Plus how are you going to tell if someone has their gun refinished, any bead blasting completly removes the etch.

[Nik Habicht]

I don't know, if the design is so inherently unsafe, why do they make the CZ85 without it?

Roger --- different gun, designed that way from the factory. (Yeah, I know --- virtually identical design --- but the onus with a safety issue will be on the shooter and the factory and not on USPSA....)

[Nik Habicht]

I'm still not buying. A mag disconnect saftey will keep a shooter from AD'ing during a reload. Since you can not pull the trigger with the mag out.

Way back when I asked during a new shooter safety course, just how much faith I should place in a safety --- in fact I was asking specifically about a mag safety on a S&W 910. The instructor asked me one question: "Would you load the chamber, drop the mag, and would you then be comfortable pointing the gun at your head and pulling the trigger?" I said "No." He replied --- "there's your answer..."

So --- I'm not certain that a mag disconnect will always prevent a shooter from ADing during a reload, but I know for certain that if the shooter keeps his finger off the trigger he won't AD.....

Same saftey issue to me, just at a different point in the COF. We use other parts of the rule book to come to an over all picture of the sport. So, to outlaw modifying a safety in one section (an internal safety at that) by claiming it is for safety and then allow an internal safety modification in another division shouldn't fly. Don't you think?

I'm guessing that if the Board were to re-write all the divisional rules, you'd see similar language in all divisions. If I were writing the rules, I'd have a tough time permitting the disabling of manufacturer provided safeties.....

[XRe]

S&W has let some M&Ps out of the factory without the laser etching on the slide. Plus how are you going to tell if someone has their gun refinished, any bead blasting completly removes the etch.

Not to mention if they replace the whole slide w/ an aftermarket (do they have those for M&Ps, now???).

Now here's a really twisted question I just thought of... (ducking the brick that Bruce Gary is no doubt throwing at my head just this moment... ) What happens if you have a gun - say an SP-01 - that you replace the slide on using a slide that would be legal by the rulebook (same length, contour, caliber), but said slide is not made with the appropriate cuts for the FPB? In other words, by the rules, a shooter could legally replace the top end of an SP-01 with the top end from an SP-01 Shadow - but now the gun has no ability to even have a working FPB. Is the gun now considered OK (all safeties available to be installed on the gun are there), or is it in violation of 22.2?

I suspect the official answer is the latter, and that you cannot replace the slide in that fashion - but if that's the case, perhaps the 21.4 interpretation should be amended to make it clear that the replacement slide must also support all factory designed safety mechanisms on the original pistol?

[ChuckS]

Guns produced without the FPB, don't need them. Guns produced with them do need them. --- snip ---

Yup,

My point exactly. And following the same logic guns produced without Magazine Safetys, do not need them but guns with them do need them.

An alternative solution would be for USPSA to declare the FPB not a safety, since it is not even called a safety, unlike the Magazine Safety that USPSA says is not a safety.

Later,

Chuck

[Gary Stevens]

Guns produced without the FPB, don't need them. Guns produced with them do need them. --- snip ---

Yup,

My point exactly. And following the same logic guns produced without Magazine Safetys, do not need them but guns with them do need them.

An alternative solution would be for USPSA to declare the FPB not a safety, since it is not even called a safety, unlike the Magazine Safety that USPSA says is not a safety.

Later,

Chuck

Can't do it because it directly affects the movement of the firing pin.

Edited March 20, 2009 by Gary Stevens

[ChuckS]

Gary,

I liked your pre-edit post better

I have to go get some clips so I can do reload practice for my next qualifier.

Later,

Chuck

PS: I will probably look into "directly" tomorrow

[HoMiE]

Gary,

I liked your pre-edit post better

I have to go get some clips so I can do reload practice for my next qualifier.

Later,

Chuck

PS: I will probably look into "directly" tomorrow

What class you going to shoot in?