Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 14 of 14

Thread: Firing pin block or lightweight FP for carry?

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    326
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by El Pistolero View Post
    Series 80 all day long. Every other fighting pistol has a firing pin safety but for some reason it's blasphemy on the 1911.
    It doesn't affect trigger pull like some would have you believe.


    Yes & no, I have tested the pull on 2 different 1911's with and without the plunger/spring
    installed in the slide. On a Sig it was close to a pound, Colt was 8oz. Plunger springs vary in tension

    I adjust the sear spring to compensate.
    Last edited by clarkz71; 07-09-17 at 11:42.
    Glock 19 Gen 5
    Colt Combat Commander

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    48
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    When the Bureau specified the "Pro" years ago I believe their requirement was for the gun to withstand a muzzle drop from 48 inches off concrete without discharge- can't find the written spec though. SA passed with a titanium firing pin.

    IMO, only drawback to Colt's firing pin disconnect is more internal parts and you generally have to get an oversize plunger lever (marked "N") to do a "Series 70" quality trigger job- but it can be done. In my experiences, the standard production Colt plunger levers can require quite a bit of rearward movement of the trigger bow to disconnect the plunger from the firing pin. The Swartz style firing pin disconnect system that's in Kimbers and Smith&Wessons is a no go, in my opinion. I've have handled a few Swartz systems where you can depress the grip safety enough for the trigger bow to clear and release the hammer, but the grip safety is not depressed enough to deactivate the plunger in the slide... big time no-go for me. A poor grip under stress with a gun like that = a deadly malfunction in a defense situation.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    549
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by the.batman View Post
    I've have handled a few Swartz systems where you can depress the grip safety enough for the trigger bow to clear and release the hammer, but the grip safety is not depressed enough to deactivate the plunger in the slide... big time no-go for me. A poor grip under stress with a gun like that = a deadly malfunction in a defense situation.
    Agree. Have seen the grip safety not get properly depressed when going to the weak hand. In that situation with a Series 70 or 80 gun, it is simply addressed and the cause is somewhat obvious.

    In the condition described above with the Swartz linkage, the hammer falls and requires significantly more time and attention to address - and can happen repeatedly. There could be several reasons the gun failed and a badly timed grip safety is not the top of the list. Also if you've gone to using the gun weak hand (only) addressing a hammer-down failure may be serious.

    If Series 70 isn't safe enough (I think it can be). Series 80 lockwork can be configured to behave.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    2,506
    Feedback Score
    7 (100%)
    Kimber Series II's should all be recalled far as I'm concerned.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •