Glock modification - dumb idea or what do you think?

Hokkmike said:

What do you think?

Click to expand...

I'm a 1911 guy, pretty much all I shoot, and a fan of the 1911 with a thumb safety, but I don't think I'd put a thumb safety on a Glock.

This may be a better solution, the Striker Control Device, SCD or Gadget as it is commonly known

https://taudevgroup.myshopify.com

To add: A Glock, once holstered in a kydex holster that covers the trigger guard, is a pretty safe gun.

If you are carrying in a holster that covers the trigger, it shouldn't be a problem.

Glocks are as safe as any other pistol as long as the trigger is covered. I wouldn't bother.

I leave all my CC guns stock, as for PC I bought a Nemesis for my Shield9 and like my LCP remove the holster(from pocket) prior to inserting gun.

I believe in safe gun handling regardless of features on a firearm.

Glocks + Good Holster + Good Handling are safe.

If one “needs” a manual safety then just buy a gun with a manual safety. In no way would I install a manual safety on a Glock. There are plenty of good manufacturers of firearms that include a manual safety.

I like my Glocks the way they are but recognize they aren’t for everyone, a good reason they are so reliable is the simplicity of design.

If you "feel" the need for a safety (regardless of brand) then get one.
No different than any other striker fired gun with a trigger dongle thing. Except XDs with a grip safety also

It's all about what makes you feel better. I alternate between a G19 with no safety and an M&P40c with a safety, which I specifically bought for the safety. I wouldn't add a safety to my G19, as I think that could open a can of worms, but I haven't researched the kit, so who knows.

If your concerns are around what happens while the gun is firmly in the holster, I agree that a manual safety is not very likely to do much. If you concern is over a discharge while holstering, or if the gun gets mis-holstered in some way (such that something is in the holster along with the gun), or if the gun comes partially out of the holster while still in the pocket (all of which strike me as pretty valid concerns), then adding a safety may make sense in principle.

I care about all those scenarios/issues, so I just don't buy semi-autos without manual safeties in the first place. I would want to have a very thorough understanding of how Glock's internal "safeties" work and how this add-on device interoperates with them before I even contemplated fooling with it.

Glock and other tagalongs have done a pretty good job of making guns that don't "just go off." But there's more inherent risk of that with striker-fired guns, because the striker and sear/release are typically working across the not-fixed frame-to-slide gap. This is why Glock, and those who followed them, absolutely had to add all the "safe action" internal parts to prevent a trigger-press-less discharge. Most gun guys take the efficacy of that stuff for granted, but, as the P320 and FNS problems show, it is not actually that easy to make a striker-fired gun that has a decent-ish trigger and also not susceptible to having the sear and striker disengage without a trigger pull.

While I personally have no interest in Glocks, and do not like what their marketing spiel has done to shift certain thoughts in the gun community to views I think are misguided, you really have to tip your hat to their engineering on the issues in the prior paragraph. They got that part right, and lots of people don't understand how challenging that is to get absolutely right. I'd be pretty loathe to screw with it.

If it makes you feel better, go ahead, but even I, who 'swipes' the non-existent thumb safety off on Glocks when I shoot them sometimes, feel it unnecessary.

entropy said:

If it makes you feel better, go ahead, but even I, who 'swipes' the non-existent thumb safety off on Glocks when I shoot them sometimes, feel it unnecessary.

Click to expand...

Pretty much my opinion.

Though, I do not modify the internals of carry guns as a rule.

S&W M&P Shield 9mm with thumb safety are for sale for $249.00 on several websites. For only $165.00 you would have a compact gun designed to use the thumb safety.

Other than steel night sights, and Pierce mag base plates, I don't modify my Glocks.

If you've carried and practiced shooting your Glock for a long time, you might want to consider that in an emergency, you may forget to release the thumb safety before attempting to fire your gun. I would at least limit carry to the 365 until I'd had the modified Glock out at the range a number of times.

A major source of Glock discharges occurs when holstering. Putting your thumb on an SCD blocks the trigger bar from moving. It really is expensive and I hope a competitor gets into business.
On glocks not carried in a hard holster I would use the external brownell safety of the OP.

What I use:

The Striker Control Device (SCD) replaces the slide cover plate on your Glock pistol. When thumb pressure is applied to the SCD it blocks the rearward motion of the striker, which blocks movement of the trigger bar and prevents the trigger from moving.

Click to expand...

I made the modification of removing the "finger grooves" (more like humps or protrusions) I dislike them.
Add a manual safety to a Glock? Nope. No thanks.

The effective sear blocking grip safeties found on Browning pistols like the 1903, 1906, and 1910 pistols removed the need for a manual safety.
The ineffective finger-tip dingus on a Glock does not.
So an effective manual safety is a must.
If a manual safety is not required on guns then perhaps we should just remove or disable them on all of our other firearms.
Yup, I'm just going to carry my trusty hammerless double barrel shotgun loaded and cocked in the field with that useless thumb safety gone.

Old Stumpy said:

The effective sear blocking grip safeties found on Browning pistols like the 1903, 1906, and 1910 pistols removed the need for a manual safety.
The ineffective finger-tip dingus on a Glock does not.
So an effective manual safety is a must.
If a manual safety is not required on guns then perhaps we should just remove or disable them on all of our other firearms.
Yup, I'm just going to carry my trusty hammerless double barrel shotgun loaded and cocked in the field with that useless thumb safety gone.

Click to expand...

You do know that a Glock has two other safety mechanisms other than the trigger dingus right? A Glock will not fire unless someone or something pulls the trigger. The trigger dingus is part of preventing inertia from a drop, and incidental contact to the main trigger shoe from activating the firing pin. That is only one of the 3 part safety on a Glock.

Your comment like most others about the Glock safety design is more about proving your bias then operating in a discussion with facts.

The most "risky" part of a Glock safety design is the exposed trigger (which is oddly enough found on all firearms); this "risky" part can be solved with good holsters, and judicious handling when holstering and placement of trigger finger.

Link?

I think that might be the Camonili (sp) safety that you also need to buy a jig for.

I'd be a lot more inclined to get a really good kydex holster that covers the trigger or/and buy a different gun that has an external safety than I would be to mess with the internals of a carry gun. There's options out there.

Old Stumpy said:

If a manual safety is not required on guns then perhaps we should just remove or disable them on all of our other firearms.

Click to expand...

Not really sure of the motivation behind this exaggeration. No one said a safety isn't needed on any gun. If you don't like them, that's fine. There's lots of options out there.

I'm a Glock guy and have no issue with them as long as they are in a proper holster. But that is not always possible or practical for them to always in the holster. There are times when the gun is un-holstered, carried in a less desirable holster, or stored in a night stand or glove box. I'm also a 1911 guy and appreciate the 1911 style thumb safety. As much as I like Glock, I think they would be a better pistol with that style safety. It doesn't have to always be used, but is there if needed. And anyone used to using a 1911 will tell you that the safety it isn't a handicap at all.

My concern is that I'm not certain about how well a modification would work. There are several options for striker fired guns with a good quality safety. I have the Sig M17 and specifically went with the one with the safety and have since added a 365 with the safety. I like both a lot. The 365 comes with two 10 round magazines and I've added two 12 round magazines. The 365 has pretty much replaced my G19 and G43. With the 10 round mags it carries IWB just as easily as my G43, and with the 12 round mags gives up very little to the G19 when carried OWB. And they make 15 round mags for it.

In addition to Sig, S&W also offers their M&P pistols with a similar safety. As does Ruger. I don't like the Ruger version as well, but it is there.

jmr40 said:

I'm a Glock guy and have no issue with them as long as they are in a proper holster. But that is not always possible or practical for them to always in the holster. There are times when the gun is un-holstered, carried in a less desirable holster, or stored in a night stand or glove box. I'm also a 1911 guy and appreciate the 1911 style thumb safety. As much as I like Glock, I think they would be a better pistol with that style safety. It doesn't have to always be used, but is there if needed. And anyone used to using a 1911 will tell you that the safety it isn't a handicap at all.

My concern is that I'm not certain about how well a modification would work. There are several options for striker fired guns with a good quality safety. I have the Sig M17 and specifically went with the one with the safety and have since added a 365 with the safety. I like both a lot. The 365 comes with two 10 round magazines and I've added two 12 round magazines. The 365 has pretty much replaced my G19 and G43. With the 10 round mags it carries IWB just as easily as my G43, and with the 12 round mags gives up very little to the G19 when carried OWB. And they make 15 round mags for it.

In addition to Sig, S&W also offers their M&P pistols with a similar safety. As does Ruger. I don't like the Ruger version as well, but it is there.

Click to expand...

Hey, if you can give me the same travel and clean break of a 1911 on a Glock I'll take the safety every time.

With a standard Glock trigger? Nah, not for me. Had that on a SR9c, very good gun and the safety was easy to use if you were used to a 1911, but ultimately not needed IMO if you handle and holster the gun with the proper respect required of handling any loaded firearm (and yes, we treat them all as loaded).

Also, I am fully against not using a safety feature that is on a firearm. I've have thumb safeties disengaged in the holster numerous times and it stands to reason engaging one (that was holstered "off") is equally likely. Drawing a potentially disabled (via safety device) firearm without practicing the muscle memory to disengage it every time is foolish in my eyes.

So if it has a safety, I use it. If I don't want to, I get a different gun (or change it to a decocker only variant with a Beretta or similar)

The guy who almost shot my foot was holstering a 1911. Don’t mess with the gun, buy or use a different gun.

I still wonder about all those revolvers without manual safeties, why is that?

GEM said:

I still wonder about all those revolvers without manual safeties, why is that?

Click to expand...

There's a pretty gigantic difference between a Glock trigger that moves about half an inch, maybe less, and produces no big external movement of gun parts and takes about 5 pounds of pressure to depress, versus a DA revolver trigger with 2-3 times the travel length, 2.5-4 times the pull weight, and is very obviously rotating a cylinder and moving a hammer.

If you want to argue that Glocks are entirely safe, barring user error, that's one thing. Saying that their lack of a safety is functionally equivalent to a revolver's DA pull is just silly.