Posted: 8/26/2008 11:43:32 PM EDT
|
I purchased a Wilson Combat Commander-type hammer and installed it on my stock RIA 1911A1 FS without a problem. THEN I started to do some research(yea, I do alot of my projects in that order unfortunately). I started to notice that whenever I saw a commander-style hammer, I saw a beaver-tail grip safety. I don't WANT a beaver-tail on my GI model, but I do want a ring hammer. I called Wilson, they said, "Nope, can't use that hammer without our properly relieved grip safety". But it appears that I can! This is my current situation. -Hammer goes to full cock by hand without touching the grip safety with about a 1/16" to spare with the safety depressed. -The hammer goes to full cock by hand without touching the grip safety with about 0.005" to spare with the safety not depressed. -The slide does move the hammer far enough past full cock to depress the grip safety slightly with the safety not depressed. -The slide does not move the hammer far enough past full cock for the hammer to touch the grip safety with the grip safety depressed. My question to you guys is: Why shouldn't I keep this configuration?(Is there something I'm missing? A safety concern? Inertia of hammer battering the grip safety?) |
|
You can try what you have and see what happens but my guess is you will need some sort of 'relief' on the grip safety or have to use the shorter tang Commander model. In years past some manufacturers did use ring hammers on full size 1911s and when they did they used a full length standard grip safety tang with a relief cut where the hammer almost touches. (NOT a beavertail) Remember, dry fire and live fire will give completely different dynamics, and under recoil you mey (or may not) find the hammer bouncing off of the standard GS tang and not coming to full cock sometimes. I would try it with a range toy but not with a CCW or serious use pistol...not worth the potential reliability problems involved in my opinion. I have no idea if anyone makes such a grip safety any more...beavertails are 'in' nowdays. Here is a not so great pic of one of these relieved GS tangs on a Randall 1911... www.sightm1911.com/lib/review/randall.htm |
|
Colt has used commander type hammers on Commanders and Officer Models for decades with a standard grip safety. You actually have it backwards, most beavertail grip safeties require a commander hammer. There are one or two that do not, I think S&A and/or Kings makes one that will work with a spur hammer. |
 My experience has been different. The Commanders I know and own sport the classic "ring" hammer and a shortened tang grip that is similar yet clearly different than the USGI standard grip tang. The edges of the bastard (tang) are notorious for putting a "snakebite" into the hands of those with a high grip like myself.  Remington Rand USGI  Colt Combat Commander  ...In the hand Since the original Colt Commander tang is a PITA for many, the beavertail has been the choice for the classic ring or modern skeletonized oval hammers today and it is likely that nobody makes the original part for that reason (I know for a fact that the "modern day Commanders from Colt have a different bizarre looking tang on them). If you are looking to do a retro project, you are going to have do do some scouring for a used Colt Commander grip safety or for a rare manufacturer that would make one of these. |
Here's a good close in shot of what I had to do with a GI grip safety and a standard commander style hammer. I honestly don't see how you could possibly use an unmodified GI safety with it. ETA: It had to be further relieved after this photo to prevent contact while shooting. |