Springfield XD Forum banner
1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
30 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
(this is my first 1911, bare with me)

I have a DW CCO that I absolutely love! I am waiting for a CBST to arrive so I can replace my G19 with CCW. Me being a southpaw raises a question.

The thumb safety isn't ergonomic for me in a defense situation. I have heard stories of southpaws leaving it that way or getting an ambi safety.


Which would be better: to carry Condition 2 (round in pipe, hammer down) or get an ambi safety installed on the pistol and carry Cocked/Locked. I just hate to have to modify the pistol. I would have to take it to a gunsmith. I have the fear that changing it over might result in a safety malfunction over time.

I have heard of people carrying Condition 2 if they are left-handed. I would think that would created added seconds to cock it rather than disengage the safety.

Whats the census?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,795 Posts
Since an unloaded gun is almost worthless I would vote for the ambi safety. Folks change from ambi to single side safety all the time. No reason to think it would cause reliability issues that I can think of off hand.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,595 Posts
Trade the 1911 for an XD, that way the only thing that will be tricky is dropping the slide during reloads....

:)


I vote for Ambi Safety, remember that thumbs tend to fumble in high stress situations, your better to fumble with an ambi safety than fumble with the hammer, if you fumble wrong, and the hammer drops, causing a possible AD/ND
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
22,465 Posts
I carry one in the pipe, hammer back and no slide safety on. I rely on the grip safety and the fact that my holster covers the entire trigger area. Im starting to train myself ( since im a lefty and its really hard click off the slide safety unless I do it before the draw ) that I click off the safety when I put my hands on my hips if im talking to someone. But I could see how in the need to draw quick that does leave an extra step to remember. So when im with the family I carry with the safety ( holding my kids and what not ) one but when I travel alone I leave the safety off.

Dont know if that smart but its how I do it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
110 Posts
Ambisafety for sure. And I say so simply because flipping off the safety as you draw can be done much more easily than thinning the hammer back. But hey, if you can do it quickly and effectively and don't want to have your gun worked on go for it. Even still, ambisafety is a much safer bet.

Sent from my Eris using Tapatalk
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
261 Posts
Call me crazy, call me ignorant - but I have never heard of/seen/experienced a safe manner of dropping a 1911 hammer onto the pin with a load chambered. Is there a generally accepted safe practice for doing so?

If I am correct in that, then Ambi is the way to go.

I know I have seen some HKs with de-cocking mechanisms. Does the CCO have something similar I am unaware of?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
316 Posts
Call me crazy, call me ignorant - but I have never heard of/seen/experienced a safe manner of dropping a 1911 hammer onto the pin with a load chambered. Is there a generally accepted safe practice for doing so?

If I am correct in that, then Ambi is the way to go.

I know I have seen some HKs with de-cocking mechanisms. Does the CCO have something similar I am unaware of?
No it doesn't and I agree with you. While some people do it,it's just another chance for an ND. Good choice on the ambisafety!! Nice choice on the CCO as well. A VBOB can't be far behind. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
778 Posts
^^?
Hammer resting on the bullet?
the hammer hits the firing pin, which does not protrude from the breech face because there is a firing pin spring spring.

http://www.m1911.org/loader.swf

although i would also recommend the ambi there is nothing unsafe about the hammer down on a loaded chamber, it is the cocking action that can cause difficulty under stress.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
261 Posts
I am not sure I understand the past few comments, although MikeC seems to agree with me.

As I understand things:
-Yes, most 1911s do have a two step hammer process.
-The hammer when released fully (as in firing, or if the 1/2 cock fails) strikes one end of the firing pin (springs in there to restrict violence of motion.)
-The firing pin, if experiencing full motion moves (forward) as a result of the hammer blow, striking the primer, causing ignition of charge, then the bullet heads out the end of the barrel with the big $*& hole.

As such, my speculation is that manually releasing a hammer from full to half cocked position, is inherently dangerous as there is only a small spring and notch involved that MIGHT slow the pin down enough to disallow ignition (of course, predicated on the hammer slipping from control) in negligent discharge fashion.

Notes on my speculation:
-My main 1911, or the one with the most valuable premium parts, has a highly serrated hammer. That said, I would not want to risk a ND should that serration slide from a sweaty or otherwise slick thumb, as I attempt this process of releasing the hammer to 1/2 manually, whilst a live round is chambered.
-MikeC seems to agree with me, but I am still open to the possibility that I do not at all know everything about 1911 models from various manufacturers, however we have never seen one with a de-cocking mechanism, that would allow this to be done safely.
-The entire concept of decoupling from a physical (blocking and solid metal) safety, and moving to relying on a spring (and its lack of failure) to avoid a firing pin strike is contrary to any rudimentary understanding of mechanical engineering. Coiled tensioned wire vs. Solid block of steel? No comparison.
-This entire thread is interesting as an intellectual exercise of methods, and possibilities but lets get one thing very straight for any rookies out there - YOU, and only YOU, are responsible and accountable for the safe use of your firearm. If you intend to deviate from the normal use, for the love of everything holy, your own rear end, and the rear ends of everyone within bullet flight distance of you, make sure that you investigate it thoroughly, use your own reasoning, take anything you find on an internet forum with several million grains of salt, and the go back to the bible:
Here are the four inviolate rules of firearms safety as codified by Jeff Cooper (1920-2006) and instructed at Gunsite Academy (nee American Pistol Institute)… memorize them! Make them an integral part of your life, for you will be tested on them as long as you will be around firearms.

  1. All guns are always loaded!
  2. Never let the muzzle cover anything you are not willing to destroy!
  3. Keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are on the target!
  4. Always be sure of your target!
Get an ambi-safety if it works better for your personal ergonomics and biomechanics... Its the way the firearm was specifically designed to be made safe.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
519 Posts
^^ No what I meant was point the muzzle in a safe direction let the hammer all the way down, and then while still holding in safe direction half cock the hammer thereby making it easier/faster in case of defense to safely cock the hammer to engaged if need be. Please correct me if I am wrong, it was just my speculation.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
261 Posts
^^ No what I meant was point the muzzle in a safe direction let the hammer all the way down, and then while still holding in safe direction half cock the hammer thereby making it easier/faster in case of defense to safely cock the hammer to engaged if need be. Please correct me if I am wrong, it was just my speculation.
Hey Cobra,

I personally (and others may differ) think there are two fallacies in your logic.

1. A negligent discharge even in a safe direction, is less than optimal in my book. Why position yourself to have a potential for doing so? You are asking a tool to perform in a manner not intended by the design. Doing so "safely" is still a failure in training yourself for repetitive success patterns long term.
2. Again, cocking the hammer is an operation not intended by design. The hammer itself in 1911s is a vestigial remainder of older designs that used hammers as an operating mechanism. In the 1911, as designed, one doesn't use a hammer to operate, one uses a slide which then engages the hammer. In actuality, this could have been written out of the design (with difficulty admittedly) a century ago by JMB. So, now you have used the hammer incorrectly in an attempt (see my post above, regarding my feeling that this is incorrect) to make the firearm safer when using it in unintended fashion (again, do we want to trust a spring, or a block of steel.) And now, you propose adding complexity to a situation that includes fear/panic/adrenaline/bad guy/threat to life, by asking us to draw, COCK (likely one handed, and with additional chance of hammer slippage without aiming,) aim, fire. In my thinking every nuance additional step of complexity exponentially increases the likelihood of failure.

To be clear, I am not at all trying to be combative or obnoxious about this, I just think your approach is perhaps more optimistic than it should be, but less likely to succeed considering general factors.
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Top