Posted: 3/1/2005 10:38:07 AM EDT
|
I have a question about my new Smith and Wesson 1911. With the firing pin safety it has, is it ok to carry the gun with a round in the chamber and the hammer down? Before the flaming starts, I know it is meant to be carried "cocked and locked", but I would like to know this. I want to understand completely how that safety works... Thanks for the help.... |
You answered your own question.  Ok, seriously.....it's OK, unless the grip safety is depressed. Grip safeties are pretty easy to unintentionally depress...... |
|
So what you all are saying, as long as the grip safety is not depressed, a blow to the hammer should not discharge the round in the chamber. Correct? Depressing the grip safety moves the firing pin block? Again, I don't want to argue styles of carry, I just want to know the thing works.... |
If I understand it, the s&w firing pin block is de-activated by the grip safety...therefore, the grip safety has something to do with it. Please explain if I'm wrong. |
Um....so you were wrong...but it didn't matter. Now, moving on to that whole blow-to-the-hammer, and/or what-if-it's-dropped thing...... Are you SURE about that, butterbean? |
I would take your word for it, but you're wrong about half the time. Meantime, I'll just carry cocked&locked the way it was meant to be. |
The part in red I agree with. But ND's do happen while lowering the hammer. YMMV. edit: besides, you're just so fun to argue with..... 
|
|
Lemme take a stab...the rebounding firing pin is held back by a spring, with the hammer down, it is only pushed forward a little, far too short to cause ignition from a blow to the hammer...if you have either type of FPS (trigger activated or grip safety activated), it's the same answer. Where the FPS comes in to play is when (if) the muzzle is struck, either by dropping or another hard blow of some sort, the inertia could cause the firing pin to move forward with enough force to ignite the primer, not so with a FPS equipped 1911. Hammer down on a live round may be perfectly safe...getting it to that condition may be a little risky with oily or sweaty hands, FPS or not. |
Correct but this is the same no matter if the gun is cocked and locked or with the hammer down. I think this is even less likely to happen hammer down than cocked and locked because with the hammer down the firing pin is closer to the primer so the firing pin should have less velocity if it hits the primer. Think about it. |
With a firing pin block you would be correct. On the original design the firing pin operates by inertia. in·er·tia resistance to change: the property of a body by which it remains at rest or continues moving in a straight line unless acted upon by a directional force A strong enough blow to the hammer on a 1911 at rest could initiate enough force to allow the firing pin to detonate the primer. I've never seen it happen and I don't care to test it .
|
Why wonder about it? I have done this test with at least ten different 1911 pistols. None would fire a primed case by severe blows to the hammer. And I hit them MUCH harder than the hammer could ever be hit by just dropping the pistol. Just try it and then you can post real world experience rather than theory. Also if you drop the 1911 on the hammer muzzle up the firing pin will not try to go farward. Inertia will force the firing pin away from the primer. |
Try dropping it or hitting it on the muzzle. Also.....sure, with the hammer down, you have less velocity (possibly)...but much more mass. |
I would be interested in the results of your Helicopter Drop Test if and when you perform that. 
|
I want to see the video of cornbread being dropped from the helicopter. |
|
So I see you guys would rather depend on your "feelings" and your theory and general hearsay and internet bullshit written by morons than actually do some sort of tests yourself. I don't trust internet bullshit and I damn sure don't trust any from anyone on this board because you have proved to me many times that you people don't have a fucking clue. It is clear from many threads here some of you don't even know the basic difference between SA and DA but you seem to think you are qualified respond to questions on handgun design and safety. |
We still love you.  (and most of us still know how to carry a 1911.....) |
|
I was carring 1911 before a lot of you were born. I no longer depend on antique designs for the defense of myself and my family. Back when I did carry the 1911 it was cocked and locked. Not that I don't like antique designs because I do shoot a flintlock some but it is not my choice of a personal protection firearm. If one wishes to carry a 1911 hammer down then it is fine with me. If it bothers you then don't do it but try to get over it if someone else wishes to do so. I would rather see some of the new guys that have the same experience and general knowledge as you seen to have carry hammer down myself. |
Bless your heart.  |
??? SA = sorry ass? DA = dumb ass? As far as testing goes, if the manufacturer advises against doing something dangerous with the weapon, I'm obliged to trust that they've done enough testing and know what they're talking about. |
The vast majority of the owners manauls that comes with new guns tell you NOT to carry their gun with a round in the chamber. I am sure most of you take that advice also? |
. . . hmmmm Hey, Southern Shooter, how do you like that S&W 1911? Have you compared to others? (Colt, Kimber, Etc.?) I've been intrigued by them since they first came out but haven't managed to put the cash for one yet. They seem really well made and had me wondering why S&W never made these sooner. Thanks |
Like some of us care what you think, or have you not gotten that yet ?
And we know your're NOT!!!!!  .........your opinions are just that only opinions. No more valid than mine or any others on this board. Differance is most of us don't get hostile and abusive when someone doesn't agree with us. ... ... .....  ... ... .... don't you have some 1911's to beat up or something?
|
|
Ego, I like it alot. I have owned a 70's model AMT and a Springfield GI in the past. I have a lot of experience shooting a 70 series Colt, but I have never owned a Colt or Kimber. I spent several months reading here and magazine articles about the different 1911's before settling on this one. Fit and finish are excellent, shoots tight groups to point of aim, and it has several custom features that you would have to pay extra for on other models. There was only a $10 difference between the Kimber and the Smith, but the Smith came with 2 Wilson mags and the Kimber with only one. It may be dumb to end up basing a decision to buy on just that, but that was how close these 2 were. I just thought it was a better value for the money. It may break tomorrow, but with only 200 rounds through it so far, I am still happy with my decision. I didn't mean to start a war here, but I think one should know how every part on your firearm works. I know this type safety is not on the 70 series Colt's and I just wanted to understand how it worked without completely taking it apart. Thanks |
This really cracks my shit up. You talk about whacking the hammer of a 1911 to see if it will discharge and then spout off about how conclusive your test is and how everyone else's "opinion" doesn't mean shit. I hate to tell you, but from what you have told us you really don't know shit about scientific testing and your "test" is worth about as much as anyone's opinion. Now, I could be wrong, so I will give you the chance to vindicate your "test" results. Unfortunately, Mr. Wizard, ARFCOM does not have a peer review committee to screen you claims. First: What was your testing hypothesis? Second: What was the criteria that you elected to use to test your hypothesis? Third: What did you select as your population and how did you select your sample? Fourth: How did you attempt to control the other variables? Finally, my research design and analysis professor pounded this into my head for two years so I will pass it along to you. CORRELATION DOES NOT EQUAL CAUSATION SBG |
|
Some people that fail to understand the 1911 pistol's design claim that a blow to the hammer will fire the pistol if it is carried hammer down. Now just how would YOU go about testing the gun to see if this could happen? Would you soak it in salt water? Would you run over it with a bicycle? Or would you do the simple test such as placing a primed case in the chamber and seeing for yourself if a blow to the hammer would fire the primed case? I really don't see any other way to do a test such as this. Unlike some of you I now KNOW for a fact that any 1911 I own can not fire from a blow to the hammer. |
I suppose I would start with a statistically valid (this is a key phrase) sample of guns, with FP return springs of varying weights and conditions. I'd also want them to having firing pins of various types, representing the gamut of what is available commercially. Then, I suppose I would determine the number of ways in which said blow could be delivered (much more than just 'hammer to the hammer') and design a test that would fairly recreate each scenario. Next, I'd use a a selection of cases containing a variety of commonly-used primers. To be a statistically valid test, covering the whole range of conditions likely to be found in 1911-land, you'd soon have a test involving dozens of combinations of 'treatments'. Eventually...one of them would go off. Of course.....I suppose we could avoid all this by carrying at half-cock if we wouldn't carry in condition one. Or, if we were really smart, we'd just carry it in condition 1 in a properly designed holster, and be as safe as a baby in a blanket.
|