1911Forum banner

1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
110 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I was at my local shop today and the clerk showed me a new loaded Springfield that had a unique feature that I hadn't seen before. The thing I noticed first about the gun were the unusual wide ambi thumb safety paddles.

Here's how it works. You rack the slide so that the hammer is cocked, then you push the hammer forward with your finger which brings the thumb safety up into the safe position. Now when your ready to fire you flick the thumb safety off and that brings the hammer back to the cocked position.

I wouldn't want it on my gun as it adds more parts but I can see it for someone that is uneasy about cocked and locked carry.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
181 Posts
Sort of a re-cocker as opposed to a de-cocker? It'll be interesting to hear the scoop on this....
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
3,114 Posts
This sounds like Cylinder & Slide's SFS system...which is similar to FN's "fast action" of several years back.

The action might appeal to those who wish to carry the pistol in a condition of readiness, but also have a horror of cocked hammers.

Rosco
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
989 Posts
That product was reviewed by handguns last month , anyway one of the gun rags. I have no use for it as it adds complexity to an otherwise beautiful design. It is great if someone feels the need for it or is an officer where they don't allow cocked and locked carry. But don't order any for my gun just yet. Also springfield can keep their damn locking msh . I would be happy if springfield had their mailboxes full of those parts ripped off guns . I know it is not a huge issue to get rid of, it just galls me that people that don't understand weapons think of all this creative stuff.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
458 Posts
Is the SA Key-lock a problem ?

Hey Quantico -- I've chosen to ignore the SA MSH key-lock... but after reading your comment, I was curious if you (or others) could elaborate on why this is a bad thing to have on the 1911... seems like you could use it, or choose to ignore it.

Does it create a reliability problem with the 1911 functioning ?

(Sincere question -- not a challenge, I'm too new with the 1911 to be arguing about various design tweaks...) --CC
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
110 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
I went back and looked at the gun again. There was a yellow tag on the trigger guard stating that it had the "SFS-Safety Fast Shooting" decocker hammer system, pistol model PX9608L. Funny that Springfield dosen't mention this item on their web site.

The clerk at the gun store said he had several people asking about retrofitting their Springfields with this system.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
989 Posts
CAP-C , I am happy to explain my reasoning. If you or others like the lock that is also fine with me.
I hate the lock because the gun looks the same locked or unlocked, in the event you need the gun it could have been left locked by mistake. Also for similar reasoning if you rely on the lock keeping your gun safe from children and you forget to lock it you could have a false sense of confidence that the gun will be ok in your dresser or above the closet or whatever and get a horrible suprise.
The lock adds complexity in how you use the gun for those reasons. Looking at the gun can't tell you if it is locked or not, mistakes can be made. You simply know a gun should be out of reach of children without the lock. It should be in the safe or a locking box or on your person. Hard to make a mistake about a gun that is ready when loaded and unsafe around kids loaded or not. I am not saying that you can't screw up and leave the gun around loaded or not when it should be locked.. I am saying that the gun is inherently in need of locking up in a secure place, and having the ils might make it easier for people to make a bad decision.
The 1911 has the grip safety and the manual safety , I have used them for 25 years with no problems , no ad's , no problems. Any parts that can effect the guns ability ( read ILS ) that don't enhance the guns reliability or accuracy are added bad parts in my opinion. Like an additional safety on a revolver that is not needed it adds parts that wear , corrode , nead lube, can fail, and must be carried around. I prefer my guns as bare as possible. I like sigs and glocks because they are simple and they work. The ultimate expression of a good gun design in my mind is the 1911. It does well without a magazine disconnector ( which I also hate ) and without a transfer bar ... that locks.. and without the added complexity of series 80 colts as well.
Adding safety devices can be mandated by law, but the ultimate responsibility is with the gun owner to keep the gun safe ... ready to fire if needed .. and away from unauthorized users. Having the ILS on a gun allows bad gun management by trusting the gun being safe / or available for defense on an added tiny part and a key that can get misplaced. I don't want that on my gun. People that want them are absolutely within their rights and I wish them the best of luck. I also hate the idea that because I choose guns without this feature or remove said feature I can be viewed as a " less " safe gun owner or " reckless" in court if I ever needed to defend myself. I hope I have represented my views in a way that allows you to understand my view on this particular device.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
989 Posts
Since I brought up the magazine disconnector, let me add something on that awful device. Cops have used the mag disconnector when they are loosing control of a gun, it allows the gun to be removed from their control ( not willingly) and made unable to fire. You think the cops like this feature ??? maybe yes maybe no. Do they trust the feature ??? I am not sure. My guess is that in a situation where a bad guy had wrestled a gun without mag from a bad guy that if he started raising the gun up toward one of the cops ... other cops would still fire on him despite knowing the mag was out. The threat of force and aiming the gun would still be viewed as justifiable cause to shoot . Interesting legal ground to be on.
Here is my big gripe about magazine disconnectors... You have a casual gun shooter that accidently leaves a round chambered. The mag comes out. The hammer dropped safely . The gun is aimed in a safe direction and trigger pulled .. nothing happens... gun is taken home and not cleaned . Later someone picks up gun and places enmpty mag in gun ... sam gun that had the trigge pulled and nothing happening... and bang / another classic case of an empty gun firing. Unfortunately I can see this situation coming up many times. Many people store guns empty, many loaded . But how many casual gun handlers are going to catch the ability of a gun they tried to fire and could not.. suddenly firing after inserting a known empty magazine in to gun. I don't like this type of technology. It scares me because I understand how easy someone that does not have a great understanding of weapons could make a huge mistake.
I also want the ability to reload a gun without making it useless for a few seconds. Those few seconds might be the wrong time to not have a working gun.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
181 Posts
I agree 100% on the issue of the magazine safety. A firearm is unloaded when the chamber and magazine are empty -- the mag safety is no substitute for this rule. It adds unnecessary complexity and, as Quantico stated, renders the weapon useless for a moment.

With respect to the ILS, I don't use it (gun safe, no kids, etc.) and I see the point of those people who are opposed to it. It does add additional complexity and it does not readily indicate the condition of the pistol (i.e.: either "on" or "off"). I do think Springfield deserves some recognition for addressing a concern (unfortunately a lawyer concern, not a customer concern) in a manner that doesn't detract from the use or appearance of the gun for those who choose not to use it. Further, it is easy to simply change the MSH to a non-ILS part.

The SFS system discussed in this thread may be a similar response to the legal environment in which gun makers find themselves or it may be a legitimate attempt to address concerns of customers who are not comfortable with Condition 1 carry. Like anything added to a firearm, the user has to evaluate the tradeoff between functionality and reliability. This very ability to easily customize the 1911 is one of the things that make them so interesting and popular in the first place.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
989 Posts
you make several good points. Springfield is making an attempt to avoid legal problems and are doing so in a system that I can easily remove from my gun . I wish it was an option instead of standard equipment, but your point is absolutely correct.
People that are not comfortable with condition 1 carry can go to cond 3 carry or frankly buy a different gun. I have been shooting 1911's almost 25 years and carried them when I had a job that allowed and required gun carry. It may be interesting that even though the 1911 is my absolute favorite gun it is a gun that requires a much higher level of training and skill to master and carry safely. I do not typically recammend 1911's to new shooters or casual gun owners. For people not ready for serious training on ongoing dedication to stay current with gun handling and practice I recommend a revolver or very basic double action auto . For many people when I am asked I don't recommend a gun at all. I tell many folks that unless they are prepared to practice and keep up skills and staore the gun safely and really enjoy it they are better off with an alarm syatem/ medico locks and solid doors/ a dog etc.

Part of my distain for the locks is that they are putting it on a pistol that really suits and appeals to highly skilled gun handliers... It's an insult like a seatbelt reminder on a formula 1 car.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
181 Posts
Quantico, you make a very good point about the nature of 1911s as being a pistol design that requires a higher level of attention, experience and skill to use and carry. I like the analogy of a seat belt reminder on a Formula One car. Why don't they need them? Simple, a Formula One driver wouldn't even consider taking a lap without a seat belt.

A 1911 definitely isn't for everyone. I am new to the 1911 world, but I knew that it was the pistol for me (due to feel, balance, trigger, etc.). The advice and experience of friends and those that contribute to this forum have helped me immensely to build confidence in the ability to safely carry a cocked and locked 1911.

I've suggested pump action shotguns to people looking for a basic home defense weapon, but you are correct that many would be better served by a non-firearms solution (security system, etc.), if they are not willing to invest the time to understand, practice with and safely store the weapon.

I think an under-stressed point is that part of responsible gun ownership is storing them correctly. I would hate to have a gun stolen, then used in a crime. The ILS system is no substitute for really securing guns to keep them out of unintended hands, just as the SFS system will not be a substitute for safe gun handling and practice.
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top