Armory Sponsor
Posted: 4/18/2015 1:03:37 AM EDT
|
Am I correct to assume CZ's product "ambi control delete" is merely a cap to put on one side of the safety selector?
If so, I doubt I'd spring for it even though the safety digs into the hand pretty good while shooting, but not enough to "delete" the use of ambi controls. I'm sure someone will come up with a lo-pro safety and fix the issue. Worst case just shave it down on one side. Anyone else thinking the same thing? https://shop.cz-usa.com/ProductDetail/19167_Scorpion-Evo-Ambi-Control-Delete |
| I haven't had a chance to fire an Evo yet, but every magazine review that I have read complained about the safety digging into the finger. Considering that magazines essentially make money by giving good reviews, this is pretty damning. At least it appears that CZ has listened to the complaints and come up with a fix. IMO, this piece should be included with the gun for those that do not want the ambi safety. |
|
Quoted:
I haven't had a chance to fire an Evo yet, but every magazine review that I have read complained about the safety digging into the finger. Considering that magazines essentially make money by giving good reviews, this is pretty damning. At least it appears that CZ has listened to the complaints and come up with a fix. IMO, this piece should be included with the gun for those that do not want the ambi safety. Its only really an issue on the factory pistol setup. Once you install a stock its not that big a deal. With a stock the weight is no longer resting on your hand, thus grinding the safety into the finger. |
|
Quoted:
I haven't had a chance to fire an Evo yet, but every magazine review that I have read complained about the safety digging into the finger. Considering that magazines essentially make money by giving good reviews, this is pretty damning. At least it appears that CZ has listened to the complaints and come up with a fix. IMO, this piece should be included with the gun for those that do not want the ambi safety. To be fair, the gun was obviously never really intended to be shot like a pistol for long. They expected people to arm brace or SBR them and fire them like a rifle. When you do that the safety is not really an issue at all. This is a problem created by our stupid rules that we have to work with. The delete is just really a stop gap while you wait for your stamp. |
|
Quoted:
To be fair, the gun was obviously never really intended to be shot like a pistol for long. They expected people to arm brace or SBR them and fire them like a rifle. When you do that the safety is not really an issue at all. This is a problem created by our stupid rules that we have to work with. The delete is just really a stop gap while you wait for your stamp. Quoted:
Quoted:
I haven't had a chance to fire an Evo yet, but every magazine review that I have read complained about the safety digging into the finger. Considering that magazines essentially make money by giving good reviews, this is pretty damning. At least it appears that CZ has listened to the complaints and come up with a fix. IMO, this piece should be included with the gun for those that do not want the ambi safety. To be fair, the gun was obviously never really intended to be shot like a pistol for long. They expected people to arm brace or SBR them and fire them like a rifle. When you do that the safety is not really an issue at all. This is a problem created by our stupid rules that we have to work with. The delete is just really a stop gap while you wait for your stamp. The safety doesn't rotate as much as the full auto A1 version. It should have been redesigned with a little more thought when bringing out the S1 semi auto version regardless if it's pistol or SBR. |
|
Quoted:
The safety doesn't rotate as much as the full auto A1 version. It should have been redesigned with a little more thought when bringing out the S1 semi auto version regardless if it's pistol or SBR. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I haven't had a chance to fire an Evo yet, but every magazine review that I have read complained about the safety digging into the finger. Considering that magazines essentially make money by giving good reviews, this is pretty damning. At least it appears that CZ has listened to the complaints and come up with a fix. IMO, this piece should be included with the gun for those that do not want the ambi safety. To be fair, the gun was obviously never really intended to be shot like a pistol for long. They expected people to arm brace or SBR them and fire them like a rifle. When you do that the safety is not really an issue at all. This is a problem created by our stupid rules that we have to work with. The delete is just really a stop gap while you wait for your stamp. The safety doesn't rotate as much as the full auto A1 version. It should have been redesigned with a little more thought when bringing out the S1 semi auto version regardless if it's pistol or SBR. What? The S1 safety has the exact same throw as the A1 in semi auto mode, it just doesn't have the two further positions. It's designed for an intended use, and it just doesn't work as well when you are using it a way it wasn't designed for. They are making the delete for the people who don't want to use it the way it was designed for, seems more than good enough to me. |
|
Quoted:
What? The S1 safety has the exact same throw as the A1 in semi auto mode, it just doesn't have the two further positions. It's designed for an intended use, and it just doesn't work as well when you are using it a way it wasn't designed for. They are making the delete for the people who don't want to use it the way it was designed for, seems more than good enough to me. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
To be fair, the gun was obviously never really intended to be shot like a pistol for long. They expected people to arm brace or SBR them and fire them like a rifle. When you do that the safety is not really an issue at all. This is a problem created by our stupid rules that we have to work with. The delete is just really a stop gap while you wait for your stamp. The safety doesn't rotate as much as the full auto A1 version. It should have been redesigned with a little more thought when bringing out the S1 semi auto version regardless if it's pistol or SBR. What? The S1 safety has the exact same throw as the A1 in semi auto mode, it just doesn't have the two further positions. It's designed for an intended use, and it just doesn't work as well when you are using it a way it wasn't designed for. They are making the delete for the people who don't want to use it the way it was designed for, seems more than good enough to me. What? The two more positions allow the safety to rotate further so how exactly is that "the exact same throw"?  In fire mode, the switch is purposely tucked in at 90 degrees from the gun on the A1 but sticks out at only 45 degrees on the S1. CZ has already admitted that they didn't catch the design flaw in testing due to wearing gloves.
|
|
Quoted:
Am I correct to assume CZ's product "ambi control delete" is merely a cap to put on one side of the safety selector? If so, I doubt I'd spring for it even though the safety digs into the hand pretty good while shooting, but not enough to "delete" the use of ambi controls. I'm sure someone will come up with a lo-pro safety and fix the issue. Worst case just shave it down on one side. Anyone else thinking the same thing? https://shop.cz-usa.com/ProductDetail/19167_Scorpion-Evo-Ambi-Control-Delete How often are you going to weak-hand shoot a Evo pistol? Take the safety off for now and use the new part, reinstall when you get your stamp. |
|
Quoted:
What? The two more positions allow the safety to rotate further so how exactly is that "the exact same throw"? In fire mode, the switch is purposely tucked in at 90 degrees from the gun on the A1 but sticks out at only 45 degrees on the S1. CZ has already admitted that they didn't catch the design flaw in testing due to wearing gloves.Quoted:
Quoted:
What? The S1 safety has the exact same throw as the A1 in semi auto mode, it just doesn't have the two further positions. It's designed for an intended use, and it just doesn't work as well when you are using it a way it wasn't designed for. They are making the delete for the people who don't want to use it the way it was designed for, seems more than good enough to me. What? The two more positions allow the safety to rotate further so how exactly is that "the exact same throw"? In fire mode, the switch is purposely tucked in at 90 degrees from the gun on the A1 but sticks out at only 45 degrees on the S1. CZ has already admitted that they didn't catch the design flaw in testing due to wearing gloves.I said the same throw in semi auto mode, you can't remove words from what I say to try to make a point, it doesn't work that way. The A1 has three fire modes, you can't just ignore the ones that make you wrong. In Semi auto mode the levers move exactly the same distance. Not a design flaw. Usage error. |
|
Quoted:
I said the same throw in semi auto mode, you can't remove words from what I say to try to make a point, it doesn't work that way. The A1 has three fire modes, you can't just ignore the ones that make you wrong. In Semi auto mode the levers move exactly the same distance. Not a design flaw. Usage error. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What? The S1 safety has the exact same throw as the A1 in semi auto mode, it just doesn't have the two further positions. It's designed for an intended use, and it just doesn't work as well when you are using it a way it wasn't designed for. They are making the delete for the people who don't want to use it the way it was designed for, seems more than good enough to me. What? The two more positions allow the safety to rotate further so how exactly is that "the exact same throw"? In fire mode, the switch is purposely tucked in at 90 degrees from the gun on the A1 but sticks out at only 45 degrees on the S1. CZ has already admitted that they didn't catch the design flaw in testing due to wearing gloves.I said the same throw in semi auto mode, you can't remove words from what I say to try to make a point, it doesn't work that way. The A1 has three fire modes, you can't just ignore the ones that make you wrong. In Semi auto mode the levers move exactly the same distance. Not a design flaw. Usage error. Usage error? . Apparently you missed the point where CZ admitted that it was a design flaw that they missed... so it's safe to say you don't know what you are talking about. CZ says you are wrong. LOL
|
| No, CZ is just not in the habit of telling customers that they are doing it wrong, that is not good PR. Easier to suck it up and put out a cheap part to placate people rather than risk alienating anyone. I know what I am talking about, but I am able to see through the marketing BS that you don't seem to be ale to. I bet you think Extenze really will make your willie grow overnight. Seriously, the gun was designed as and intended to be a rifle, not a pistol. It's not their fault that people don't want to use it as it was actually designed to be used. It's not a flaw because it works perfect as is, when it is used as designed. This is like saying the Ariel Atom has a serious design flaw because it sucks as a road car, even though it is not intended to be a road car, even if it can be. Or that your cheap Chinese glassware is flawed because it explodes when you put it in the oven. Just use it as designed and the "flaw" is solved. |
|
Quoted:
No, CZ is just not in the habit of telling customers that they are doing it wrong, that is not good PR. Easier to suck it up and put out a cheap part to placate people rather than risk alienating anyone. I know what I am talking about, but I am able to see through the marketing BS that you don't seem to be ale to. I bet you think Extenze really will make your willie grow overnight. Seriously, the gun was designed as and intended to be a rifle, not a pistol. It's not their fault that people don't want to use it as it was actually designed to be used. It's not a flaw because it works perfect as is, when it is used as designed. This is like saying the Ariel Atom has a serious design flaw because it sucks as a road car, even though it is not intended to be a road car, even if it can be. Or that your cheap Chinese glassware is flawed because it explodes when you put it in the oven. Just use it as designed and the "flaw" is solved. You are completely missing the point. It isn't about pistol vs rifle at all. It's about using a switch that was designed for four positions for two positions. The "throw" comes up short in the firing position and interferes with the trigger hand... in any configuration... although lessened with the use of a stock. It isn't "perfect as is" no matter what you claim. It is a design flaw because the switch lever is simply clocked wrong for the S1. Yes, we all get that the safety still rides at an angle in semi auto modes on the A1.... because it is unavoidable. CZ admitted that they missed it during testing and they even explained why they missed it. Call it "marketing" or penis pills or whatever you like. It doesn't matter to me. The safety issue is not THAT big of a deal but I will still be correcting it with an aftermarket part that doesn't "delete" a feature of the gun. It's already being machined. |
|
Quoted:
Can anyone tell me how to remove the right side safety? I don't see any screws. Thanks Remove the entire trigger group assembly from the gun per the instructions, flip the safety. There is a hole in the top of the safety that lines up with a notch in the top of the gun. There is a little set screw in there, 1.5mm metric IIRC. Unscrew it all the way (it is very long) and the safety will slide right off. |
Armory Sponsor