Alllen Bundy
Member
Maybe we should call the Glock trigger dongle an "inertial Trigger Safety", because it's intent is to keep the trigger from moving when the pistol is dropped.
"The trigger safety is designed to prevent the pistol from firing......... if the trigger is subjected to any pressure that isn’t a direct firing pull."
So where they agree with you, they are correct, anywhere they don't, it's BS.That part is marketing BS.
Given that trigger safeties were pretty rare before Glock came along, your argument borders on the ridiculous. Since they popularized the concept of a trigger safety, what people think of when they think of a trigger safety is almost certainly something that operates like a Glock trigger safety.And THAT is hardly what most people think of as a trigger safety.
Glock popularizes the concept of a trigger safety and tells us what they designed it to do and here you are, decades after the fact saying that you know better than they do why they designed it and that because they disagree with you and your terminology, they're misleading people and maybe even defrauding them. I know you don't intend to be humorous, but can't you see how laughable this is?To call it a "trigger safety" is misleading at best and outright fraud at worst.
I see that at least you apply the "Alllen Bundy Standard" uniformly. Any terminology you disagree with is wrong, even if its the terminology assigned by the entity who designed and manufactured the part it refers to.Sig NEGLECTED to mention the word "trigger".
If the safety covered the entire trigger face, you might have a reasonable argument. But it doesn't--in fact, the trigger safety only covers a relatively small percentage of the trigger face. Anything that catches on the edges of the trigger won't disengage the trigger safety and the gun won't fire. Anything that hits the trigger with initially light pressure will tend to ride up the trigger bow to the top of the trigger and the trigger safety only extends about halfway up the trigger bow. It's clearly possible for pressure to be applied to the trigger without disengaging the trigger safety.
Given that trigger safeties were pretty rare before Glock came along,......
Any terminology you disagree with is wrong, even if its the terminology assigned by the entity who designed and manufactured the part it refers to.
I'm saying that it works like Glock says it was intended to work. You know, because it does...So what you are saying is that the trigger dongle kinda sorta works as a trigger safety.
By design.If you pull the trigger on a loaded Glock the gun goes BANG!
Since it does exactly what Glock says it was intended to do, it's as precisely as effective as it was intended to be.Not a very effective trigger safety.
You know, Alllen, it's clear that you feel like you are privileged to redefine any terminology that you disagree with, but that's just not true. I don't know why you think it would be, but just so it's clear, I'll say it again. You don't have any authority to redefine terms in common usage. You just don't. You can keep trying, but all you are doing is demonstrating your disconnection from reality and the more often you do it, the wider the disconnection appears to be.A drop safety dongle located on a trigger does NOT make it a trigger safety.
Like this, for example. There is no 'trigger safety' on your P365.2425.When the trigger safety on my P365 is engaged it does NOT go bang when you pull the trigger.
For one thing, I didn't say they didn't exist, I said they were rare. For another, since you have made up and are using your own definition for the term 'trigger safety', the meaning of your assertion is not clear which makes your assertion mostly meaningless until you put out the Alllen Bundy Glossary of Firearm Terms so that people, if they care to, can interpret your statements.Rare? My Model of 1917 rifle had a trigger safety over 100 years ago. So did my first .22 rifle in the middle 1960's
The 1911 does not have a trigger safety.Model of 1911 pistol. Interesting that when you engage the trigger safety...
So, that entitles you to get it wrong too? Because manufacturers are not infallible, you are now free to redefine any terms that they use any time you feel like it? How does a person arrive at a conclusion like that?Manufacturers get it wrong often enough.
The fact that one shouldn't blindly accept everything said by someone in authority doesn't imply:ALWAYS question authority!
Alllen, Alllen, surely you can see that Fender was just questioning authority. They self-appointed themselves to be the final authority on the usage of those two terms and therefore what they said goes regardless of what anyone else says. Just like you have self-appointed yourself to be the final authority on an apparently ever-increasing number of firearm terms and what you say goes, regardless of what anyone else says. I don't see how you can indict them for what they did when you're using exactly the same modus operandi.Case in point. Fender incorrectly... Every other manufacturer of that era correctly...
I'm the Op , thanks for getting us back on topic!I bought a Sig P365 right before the pandemic kicked off. I liked everything about it - nice night sights, high cap mags, small package, and the price was right. I immediately bought a holster and spare mag for it. My other carry guns at the time were a Glock 19, Glock 26, and Ruger LC9s Pro. The goal of the P365 for me was to replace the Ruger LC9s Pro.
Problem was I couldn't hit anything with the P365. Shooting at my backyard 25yd 10 inch gongs, all my shots were going into the dirt in front of the gongs. Getting closer to my gongs I was still hitting dirt. I'm 47 years old and have been shooting pistols since I was 12. If I'm not close to hitting my target in the 1st couple magazines or cylinders, that gun is getting sold. Plenty of folks shoot just fine with their P365's. I am not one of them nor will I waste ammo and practice on trying to learn a new trigger / sights, etc. Especially when I have other handguns I can hit a 25yd gong with.
I'm so glad I didn't sell or trade in my Ruger LC9s Pro!!! I pocket carry the Ruger in shorts in the summertime. It is significantly lighter weight in the pocket compared to the Sig P365.
I easily sold the P365 on consignment during the plandemic at a local gun shop for what I had into the gun. Being I'm left handed, I lost out on the holster.
Another friend of mine brought his P365XL with red dot sight over to my house to shoot. I shot decently well with that pistol. However, the sun was at just the right position to wash out the red dot sight, effectively making it useless.
I have since picked up a Glock 43X and added the metal Shield Arms mag release, 4 x 15rd Shield Arms magazines, and 3 dot Tritium Night Sights. The 43X is bigger than my Ruger and the P365. However I can hit my gongs at 25yds with it.
View attachment 1139525
I have small hands for a man so the grip size is generally not an issue for me.I think I'm leaning towards the p365 instead of the XLI have a Glock 43, 43X, Sig P365, and 365XL.
Of those 4, my preference is the 365 XL, even though I have many more years carrying Glocks than anything else. I think Glocks are great guns. My bedside gun is a Glock. But for carry, I like the 365 better, and the XL even more. I like the XL better than the regular 365 better because the grip is a little easier to get hold of, and more comfortable. I think the XL grip is still a little shorter than the 43X grip, which makes it a little easier to conceal, and more comfortable when sitting down. The grip doesnt hit the back of the chair or car seat as much.
My Sigs don't have the thumb safety, and I don't consider there to be a safety difference between the Sig and Glocks.
I have small hands for a man so the grip size is generally not an issue for me.I think I'm leaning towards the p365 instead of the XL
Given that trigger safeties were pretty rare before Glock came along, your argument borders on the ridiculous. Since they popularized the concept of a trigger safety, what people think of when they think of a trigger safety is almost certainly something that operates like a Glock trigger safety.
I have a Glock 43, 43X, Sig P365, and 365XL.
Of those 4, my preference is the 365 XL, even though I have many more years carrying Glocks than anything else. I think Glocks are great guns. My bedside gun is a Glock. But for carry, I like the 365 better, and the XL even more. I like the XL better than the regular 365 better because the grip is a little easier to get hold of, and more comfortable. I think the XL grip is still a little shorter than the 43X grip, which makes it a little easier to conceal, and more comfortable when sitting down. The grip doesnt hit the back of the chair or car seat as much.
My Sigs don't have the thumb safety, and I don't consider there to be a safety difference between the Sig and Glocks.
That reminds me of the other thing I disliked about the P365 - the frame stippling. It was really rough on the skin. It was instantly noticeable carrying it under an un-tucked t-shirt against the skin.
It's not just the grip. The size overall of the P365XL is close to my Kimber Micro9 which is a fine gun but not a pocket pistol in my opinion.You might find an indoor range with both for rent. Try before you buy. That would've save me some $$$. I live in the sticks but could've gone to the big city of Springfield, Mo and rented them.
It's not just the grip. The size overall of the P365XL is close to my Kimber Micro9 which is a fine gun but not a pocket pistol in my opinion.
Glock popularizes the concept of a trigger safety and tells us what they designed it to do and here you are, decades after the fact
I'm so glad I didn't sell or trade in my Ruger LC9s Pro!!! I pocket carry the Ruger in shorts in the summertime. It is significantly lighter weight in the pocket compared to the Sig P365.
Probably need to start a new conversation based on your claim. Sig is certainly not perfect and has some growing pains with their very popular models, but they also have advanced the technology of firearms more than any other company in the last few years. I have only a few Sig firearms (P-320, P-322, P-365X) but compared to my other firearms (Glock, Ruger, IWI, Dan Wesson) they perform very well.Sig has become the Disney of the Gun Industry...Lots of glitter to cover the flaws.
I'm considering an Sig P365 as my next 9mm purchase. My question is what model Glock is the closest in size to the 365 and of the two which would you recommend?
I'm considering a Sig P365 as my next 9mm purchase. My question is what model Glock is the closest in size to the 365 and of the two which would you recommend?
Iver Johnson had a trigger safety before ol Gaston was born.
View attachment 1139699
Yup, they were pretty innovative.Iver Johnson had a trigger safety before ol Gaston was born.
I'm sure SIG was well aware of the value of a trigger safety, but wanted to avoid using one given how much flak Glock has taken over the years about it. I suspect Ruger had a similar idea that they were going to avoid using a Glock-type trigger safety when they originally released the SR9 with their own trigger safety design using a trigger shoe approach. Unfortunately that backfired as they later were forced to do a recall to retrofit the pistol with a very "Glockish" trigger safety....Sig should have.