Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
1/22/2020 12:12:56 PM
Posted: 9/13/2009 6:15:27 PM EST
Somebody here mentioned in a thread about building an 80% lower without drilling the safety selector hole and not having a safety. Kinda like a Glock style AR15.

Is it really that easy or does something with the LPK need to be messed with. Would this in any way affect reliability at all?

Has anybody ever done this?
Link Posted: 9/13/2009 6:26:44 PM EST
Originally Posted By cdogg44:
Somebody here mentioned in a thread about building an 80% lower without drilling the safety selector hole and not having a safety. Kinda like a Glock style AR15. lolwut

Is it really that easy or does something with the LPK need to be messed with. Would this in any way affect reliability at all? it would work fine, doesn't affect reliability.

Has anybody ever done this?


Link Posted: 9/13/2009 6:39:51 PM EST
could you not pull the trigger far enough, without the selector to stop it, that the disconnector won't catch the hammer?
Link Posted: 9/13/2009 7:09:13 PM EST
AR-15's not a Glock. It's a single action weapon, and needs a safety.
Link Posted: 9/13/2009 7:21:49 PM EST

This should be reposted in GD for carnage maximization.
Link Posted: 9/13/2009 7:39:37 PM EST
Originally Posted By Social_Zombie:

This should be reposted in GD for carnage maximization.


It would be fun, wouldn't it?

I wrote about 10 more lines in my last post before I realized what forum this was...
Link Posted: 9/13/2009 7:52:50 PM EST
This is an ingenious idea. I think you should try it. And yes it is entirely possible.
Link Posted: 9/13/2009 8:14:19 PM EST
Don't see why it wouldn't work. Especially if you sliced the trigger lengthwise and stuck a Glock style trigger safety in there. Most AR triggers are sloppy enough to accommodate it.
Link Posted: 9/14/2009 5:23:26 AM EST
Considering that drilling that hole is one of the easier operations on an 80% lower, having no safety on a single action rifle isn't wise, and it would have no effect on improving trigger pull (actually it would add shitloads of over travel...), it begs the question.... Why?
Link Posted: 9/14/2009 5:35:35 AM EST
Originally Posted By Bretshooter:
blah blah blah it begs the question.... Why?


It elicits the response "Why not? It hasn't been done before has it?"

Link Posted: 9/14/2009 7:09:08 AM EST
Originally Posted By yolop:
Originally Posted By Bretshooter:
blah blah blah it begs the question.... Why?


It elicits the response "Why not? It hasn't been done before has it?"



Because it's dangerous? Because the weapon is designed to have a safety, perhaps?
Link Posted: 9/14/2009 7:55:20 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/14/2009 7:57:16 AM EST by cdogg44]
Here is the thread where I heard of the idea of no safety:

http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=4&t=448412

Just being honest I don't know enough about the safety systems present in an AR15 and a Glock pistol to tell you exactly what the differences are and why they are each set up the way they are. I know an AR15 has a hammer and a Glock uses a striker setup, but beyond that I'm limited on my knowledge.

However, if all the safety on an AR15 does is just stop the trigger from being moved, then I don't see why not having that would be such a big deal. A Glock pistol has several safeties and is a very safe pistol if you drop it but no matter what if you pull the trigger it fires. Trigger discipline becomes the safety.

I just asked the question because it seemed like a cool idea to build a smooth sided gun with no safety selector. Like I said earlier, I really don't have a good enough understanding of what goes on in the guts of an AR15 to make it fire, but it seems to me that if the safety selector was deleted (and lets say the trigger pull remained unchanged) then all you'd have is trigger discipline as a safety and is that such a big deal?

***This idea is for fun for a gun to be used as a range toy. I (usually) don't jump out of helicopters or storm houses in full swat gear with AR in hand for a living.
Link Posted: 9/14/2009 9:34:52 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/14/2009 9:37:35 AM EST by Russ4777]
Why would you even consider doing this? A weapon without a safety is an accident that hasn't happened yet. I have finished several 80% lowers and it is not difficult to drill the selector & detent holes. Do it!

Without the selector in place you are going to have excessive overtravel. The nose of the trigger would then make contact with the floor of the fire control well as the overtravel stop.
Link Posted: 9/14/2009 9:38:04 AM EST
Originally Posted By cdogg44:
Just being honest I don't know enough about the safety systems present in an AR15 and a Glock pistol to tell you exactly what the differences are and why they are each set up the way they are. I know an AR15 has a hammer and a Glock uses a striker setup, but beyond that I'm limited on my knowledge.

However, if all the safety on an AR15 does is just stop the trigger from being moved, then I don't see why not having that would be such a big deal. A Glock pistol has several safeties and is a very safe pistol if you drop it but no matter what if you pull the trigger it fires. Trigger discipline becomes the safety.

I just asked the question because it seemed like a cool idea to build a smooth sided gun with no safety selector. Like I said earlier, I really don't have a good enough understanding of what goes on in the guts of an AR15 to make it fire, but it seems to me that if the safety selector was deleted (and lets say the trigger pull remained unchanged) then all you'd have is trigger discipline as a safety and is that such a big deal?

***This idea is for fun for a gun to be used as a range toy. I (usually) don't jump out of helicopters or storm houses in full swat gear with AR in hand for a living.


Because if you drop a glock is has a 2 things keeping the trigger from bouncing from the shock and letting the firing pin strike the primer. The trigger safety, which prevents the trigger from moving backwards unless depressed. And a firing pin safety, preventing the firing pin from striking the primer in case the sear lets the pin go.

If you drop an AR without the safety on the trigger could let go and fire a round. Please put a safety on.
-Thomas

Link Posted: 9/14/2009 12:18:09 PM EST
Originally Posted By cdogg44:
Here is the thread where I heard of the idea of no safety:

http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=4&t=448412

Just being honest I don't know enough about the safety systems present in an AR15 and a Glock pistol to tell you exactly what the differences are and why they are each set up the way they are. I know an AR15 has a hammer and a Glock uses a striker setup, but beyond that I'm limited on my knowledge.

However, if all the safety on an AR15 does is just stop the trigger from being moved, then I don't see why not having that would be such a big deal. A Glock pistol has several safeties and is a very safe pistol if you drop it but no matter what if you pull the trigger it fires. Trigger discipline becomes the safety.

I just asked the question because it seemed like a cool idea to build a smooth sided gun with no safety selector. Like I said earlier, I really don't have a good enough understanding of what goes on in the guts of an AR15 to make it fire, but it seems to me that if the safety selector was deleted (and lets say the trigger pull remained unchanged) then all you'd have is trigger discipline as a safety and is that such a big deal?

***This idea is for fun for a gun to be used as a range toy. I (usually) don't jump out of helicopters or storm houses in full swat gear with AR in hand for a living.


Good on you for admitting that you don't know everything.

As for the safety, look at what many soldiers and LEOs have on their uniforms. It's an assortment of straps, belts, buckles, loops, cuffs, hooks, snaps, pockets, and what not. Unlike a pistol, which generally rides safely in a holster that covers the trigger guard, a rifle trigger is generally just flapping in the breeze.

IMO, I'd be more concerned about a piece of gear pressing against the trigger of an AR than an errant finger.

While you intend this to be a range gun, maybe there's a slight chance you'll take a carbine class in the future. In such a case, I can't fathom an instructor allowing such a rifle in their course.
Link Posted: 9/14/2009 12:35:15 PM EST
I think I posted doing that on my next 80% a few months back. For a range rifle, the only safety is no magazine and the bolt pulled back. I never use a safety in the first place. Safe to me is is either loaded and ready to fire - and knowing it - , or no mag and with the bolt or slide back. NO inbetween.

In any case if I wanted to put that safety in, it is 20 minutes on the mill.

I am in the middle of a move and shop machine time is not available.

Link Posted: 9/17/2009 10:33:10 PM EST
... just asking for it ...
Link Posted: 9/18/2009 7:15:57 AM EST

Originally Posted By cdogg44:
Here is the thread where I heard of the idea of no safety:

http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=4&t=448412

Just being honest I don't know enough about the safety systems present in an AR15 and a Glock pistol to tell you exactly what the differences are and why they are each set up the way they are. I know an AR15 has a hammer and a Glock uses a striker setup, but beyond that I'm limited on my knowledge.

However, if all the safety on an AR15 does is just stop the trigger from being moved, then I don't see why not having that would be such a big deal. A Glock pistol has several safeties and is a very safe pistol if you drop it but no matter what if you pull the trigger it fires. Trigger discipline becomes the safety.

I just asked the question because it seemed like a cool idea to build a smooth sided gun with no safety selector. Like I said earlier, I really don't have a good enough understanding of what goes on in the guts of an AR15 to make it fire, but it seems to me that if the safety selector was deleted (and lets say the trigger pull remained unchanged) then all you'd have is trigger discipline as a safety and is that such a big deal?

***This idea is for fun for a gun to be used as a range toy. I (usually ) don't jump out of helicopters or storm houses in full swat gear with AR in hand for a living.

You want to eliminate a safety mechanism "for fun" and because it seems like "a cool idea", despite freely admitting that you are "limited" in knowledge and "don't have a good enough understanding"? Here's hoping that you don't show up anywhere that I shoot.

Seriously, don't try to out-engineer the engineers. Stick to your day job. You are correct that a Glock pistol has 3 safeties - a trigger safety, a firing pin safety, and a drop safety. An AR-type rifle has none of these.

At least this thread was good for a laugh.

Link Posted: 9/18/2009 11:01:40 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/18/2009 11:04:42 AM EST by speedballalice]
One reason among many why the Glock action is considered safe is because it is a striker fired weapon that stays in a half cock sate. Meaning it is never fully cocked until the trigger is pulled and reaches the end of its travel. An AR is single action in design and therefore is is either un-cocked (useless) or fully cocked and locked (ready to go). In my opinion an AR without a safety would be a ticking timebomb. The only way to carry it safe would be with an empty chamber, and that is unacceptable.
Link Posted: 9/18/2009 1:58:06 PM EST
Originally Posted By speedballalice:
One reason among many why the Glock action is considered safe is because it is a striker fired weapon that stays in a half cock sate. Meaning it is never fully cocked until the trigger is pulled and reaches the end of its travel. An AR is single action in design and therefore is is either un-cocked (useless) or fully cocked and locked (ready to go). In my opinion an AR without a safety would be a ticking timebomb. The only way to carry it safe would be with an empty chamber, and that is unacceptable.



every FCG part and more would have to be re engineered in order for it to be safe.You cannot use the stardard parts for your mod it will not be safe and an accident ready to happen.Don't come to my range with it or you'll be banned .

Link Posted: 9/18/2009 2:43:39 PM EST

Originally Posted By joshki:
AR-15's not a Glock. It's a single action weapon, and needs a safety.

Would Glocks not be considered single action? Technically, at least. I know they're striker fired and all.

Link Posted: 9/18/2009 3:21:30 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/18/2009 3:28:20 PM EST by 240shwag]
Originally Posted By RedHotChiliPepper:

Originally Posted By joshki:
AR-15's not a Glock. It's a single action weapon, and needs a safety.

Would Glocks not be considered single action? Technically, at least. I know they're striker fired and all.



Sort of. The striker isn't cocked enough to strike the primer until the trigger begins to travel rearward, then it begins moving rearward until the sear lets it go.

Its technically called a "preset" action.
Link Posted: 9/18/2009 3:24:58 PM EST

Originally Posted By RedHotChiliPepper:

Originally Posted By joshki:
AR-15's not a Glock. It's a single action weapon, and needs a safety.

Would Glocks not be considered single action? Technically, at least. I know they're striker fired and all.


No, as someone already explained the striker isn't fully cocked until you pull the trigger. Also Glocks have several internal safeties. The AR doesn't. The manual safety is the only one on the AR, that's why it'd be a bad idea to delete it.
Link Posted: 9/18/2009 3:33:23 PM EST
Fellas...deep breaths.....calm down...

I saw someones idea and though it was interesting so I posted up the topic. I haven't drilled or built anything!

While I agree it may not be the smartest idea out there it is at least interesting to me. And as far as building a "cool" "range toy" for "fun" I really don't see why it's that big of a freaking deal. Yeah I don't know it all and that's why I asked the questions. I didn't know that without a safety it would add a lot of trigger movement and the poster above made a great point about all the belts, buckles, and stuff on a typical leo or .mil uniform.

In the end whether we've got a safetyless AR15, a Glock, or even a paintball gun if we follow the basics and treat every weapon as it is loaded and don't point it at something we would not want to destroy we're gonna be just fine!
Link Posted: 9/18/2009 3:36:35 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/18/2009 3:39:23 PM EST by 240shwag]
Originally Posted By cdogg44:
In the end whether we've got a safetyless AR15, a Glock, or even a paintball gun if we follow the basics and treat every weapon as it is loaded and don't point it at something we would not want to destroy we're gonna be just fine!


Still wrong. Accidents happen. If you were to load the gun up and chamber a round and accidentally drop it and it kills an 11 month old infant somewhere, I don't think its parents are going to be very happy.

All we can do to avoid accidents is make them less likely to happen, hence the safety. Its not interesting, its stupid.
Link Posted: 9/18/2009 3:38:05 PM EST
1 AR = fantastic weapon
+
2 Glock = shitty weapon

In this case 1 + 2 = <1
Congrats, that's better than dividing by 1!

Link Posted: 9/18/2009 3:55:57 PM EST
Originally Posted By 240shwag:
Still wrong. Accidents happen. If you were to load the gun up and chamber a round and accidentally drop it and it kills an 11 month old infant somewhere, I don't think its parents are going to be very happy.


100% agree. Just like accidentally not placing the gun on SAFE when you stick it in the closet and your kid comes home and shows it to his buddy and kills his friend playing Rambo. I'm just sayin

And stuff can be stupid and interesting and you never have to do it. I think skydiving is interesting but dumb in a sense so I haven't ever done it or plan to.

Like I said, I haven't built a thing, but this thread has given me many good reasons of why it shouldn't be done and also why it can't reasonably be done and still function smoothly. Which was the whole reason I asked it to begin with.

Link Posted: 9/19/2009 5:34:48 PM EST
I understand your question being sort of hypothetical. But, you have to understand my (and others) knee jerk reaction to it. Anytime I work on a firearm and it is unfinished/unsafe I think to myself, what would happen if I died tomorrow and this fell into some "firearm dumb" persons hands? I feel responsible to finish it on the spot or place it somewhere labeled unusable/unsafe. An inadvertent pull of the trigger is all it would take to end a life, and even the safest and most "firearm savvy" of us have stupid moments. Im not too proud to admit I have had a moment or two, and have witnessed first hand what people are capable of doing accidentally.

FWIW I like Glocks for the range (I think they are great pistols) but would rather carry a cocked and locked 1911 or DA Sig Sauer. I just never felt like it was the best/safest choice for me, to each his own. I firmly believe in an empty trigger guard until needed, but shit happens.
Top Top