1911 grip safety: why?

Status
Not open for further replies.
E

ether

Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Messages
134
I just read a thread where someone asked this. Here's the answer. The grip safety helps, but does not ensure, safer one-handed hammer cocking. If the the rear part of your hand is busy cocking the hammer, it's difficult to squeeze the safety at the same time. Browning's thoughtful design tried to allow for "safely" cocking the hammer even if your trigger finger is inside the trigger guard. This concept was more valid in his original design than in the A1 model. In the A1, it's easier to mash the grip safety down with the hammer while cocking than with the original design since the A1 extended the grip safety to prevent hammer bite.

This design does not really promote safety while unholstering (expecially with military holsters of the time) since the grip safety will likely be squeezed before the trigger guard is even accessible. Most carried their pistols in these early holsters with the hammer down anyway, which is likely the reason for this design in the first place.
 
Why would you EVER cock the hammer on a loaded gun? I only have 6 1911's but have never done it, because that means you let the hammer down on a loaded chamber and that's something I would never do. Very unsafe practice.

It's just an extra safety that ensures you have a good grip on the gun before it can be fired. If you reach for your Glock in your pocket and hit the trigger it can (and has) fire. With the grip safety it won't. XD's have a grip safety and that's one of the reasons I like them and bought one.
 
I was reading an article in the current American Handgunner by Massad Ayoob about this discussion today.

There is never a reason to drop the hammer on a loaded chamber. If you carry cocked and locked, the only thing you ever do to clear the weapon is drop the magazine and rack the slide, neither of which involve dropping on a hot chamber. This is another reason to carry with the hammer back, because yes, it is unsafe to let the hammer down. A 1911 with a round chambered, and the hammer down is not considered drop-safe.

SA autos are designed to be carried with the hammer cocked and the safety on. This is why the safety won't even go on if the hammer isn't cocked. Visually, this might give some people the willies, but it's actually much safer than a Glock, carried with a round chambered, with no safeties at all.

Those who handle 1911s should be in the habit of A: Holding the hammer back when holstering, or B: Forcing the thumb safety while holstering. Many current 1911s (like my Kimber) also have a firing pin disconnect attached to the thumb safety, so pushing up on the thumb safety is double protection against accidental discharge.
 
Because the ARMY required that it be included in the design. It is my understanding that John Browning did not want to put it in the gun. His subsequent design, the Browning Hi Power, does not have the grip safety.
 
I would never consider lowering the hammer on a 1911. I have carried a 1911 from time to time and cocked\locked in the only way IMO. I know the ARMY wanted the grip safety, but I'm not overly familiar with the reasons behind it aside from rumors and speculation I've overheard various places. I like the grip safety as an added measure when carrying in case the thumb safety gets knocked off somehow.
 
re:

A quote:

>Many current 1911s (like my Kimber) also have a firing pin disconnect attached to the thumb safety, so pushing up on the thumb safety is double protection against accidental discharge.<
***************************

None that I'm aware of have a flring pin block that ties in with the thumb safety. The Swartz system operates off the grip safety, and the Series 80 Colt design operates off the trigger....but the thumb safeties don't tie in with firing pin blocking devices.
 
First, it was SOP at that time to carry the 1911 with a loaded magazine and an empty chamber. A round was only chambered (and the safety engaged) when action was imminent. It wasn't intended to be thumb cocked.

Secondly, the mounted soldier was still common and a primary user of the handgun. If the weapon was dropped, would you want a cocked and unlocked 1911 swinging by its lanyard while you were riding on the back of a galloping (or out of control) horse? The grip safety serves a purpose.
 
JB didn't know it at the time he created it, but the grip safety is one of the keys to the 1911's modularity. By altering the grip safety and MSH the pistol can be adapted to a wide variety of hand sizes and preferances.
Other handguns have only recently caught up with replacement backstraps of varying size.
As a safety it is somewhat of a belt and suspenders deal, but is easily altered for sensitivity or disabled if you don't care for it. Without the removable grip safety, those wanting more protection from hammer bite in the form of an extended tang would be forced to weld on the frame as in the case of the BHP.
I have to agree the original intent was to provide an extra measure of safety for the then new pistol which was always cocked in use. It was a sort of rough handling/drop safety. Anyone in the military has seen numerous weapons dropped and dropping something off a horse compounds the mistake. The idea of a cocked and not safed pistol bouncing around on the end of a lanyard on horseback or on foot offers many ways for gear to contact the trigger.
 
Last edited:
If you go back a couple of months in AH you will see that Walt Rauch and Ken Hackathorne disagree with Ayoob. I guess you have to have controversey to sell magazines.
 
All of Browning's automatics with an exposed hammer, starting with the first one in 1900, until about 1905 with some .45 prototypes, had neither a grip or manual safety. It was intended that the pistol be either carried with a loaded magazine and empty chamber, or with the chamber loaded and the hammer fully down. While this would be seen as dangerous to some, the fact is that many users carried Colt's series of pre-Super .38's in that caliber and Government Model .45's using the chamber loaded/hammer down mode for decades without leaving a history of unintended discharges. That's the reason that pre-war 1911/1911A1 pistols had hammers with long/wide cocking spurs.
 
I carry a Colt Cmder and the only way I carry is locked and cocked. I will admit I dont think you should pick one up from your local shop and slip it into a IWB holster out in the car if your not familiar with it yet. I carry that way now but it took some training and familization with the the entire rig not just the weapon system. I believe that not carrying it locked and cocked isnt much difference than carrying it with out one in the pipe. If I need it i want it to go in as few motions and possible and the Grip safty is a big part of me feeling safe about carrying that way.
 
"I only have 6 1911's but have never done it, because that means you let the hammer down on a loaded chamber and that's something I would never do. Very unsafe practice."

Yep...it sure is! That's my ony ND (in the house at that!). I almost shot my wife's computer!
 
You can decock a 1911 without blowing away the computer if you'll use your off hand thumb to block the hammer drop, remove your finger from the trigger after breaking the sear, then lower the hammer slowly. ALWAYS make sure the gun is pointed in a safe direction!

However, I never saw a reason to decock the 1911. I always carried it condition one or condition three in the field. I never carried it for CCW, didn't have a permit back then, but if I did, it'd be condition one. The AMT I had was a series 70 style, no hammer block. That makes decocking even more perilous.
 
Graveyard

mljdeckard...As a 15-year veteran of the graveyard shift...I completely understand. :cool:

I read it that Ayoob had said it...Which didn't make sense, because he understands the gun pretty well.

MCGunner...Lowering the hammer on a pistol with or without a firing pin blocking system is no different. In order for the sear to release the hammer, any passive safety system is disengaged. Series 80 Colt works off the trigger...Trigger must be pulled. Swartz-type works off the grip safety...Grip safety must be depressed in order for the trigger to move. No difference.

Not pickin' on ya...Just didn't want anybody to think that lowering the hammer on a 1911-pattern pistol was any less hazardous with a FP blocking arrangement.

For the record, it can be done without incident...but it does make an incident much more likely.
 
Under current practices and procedures, there is never a good reason to lower the hammer on a live round in any single action auto pistol. However, if you simply must for whatever reason do so don't point it at the waterbed or anything else of value.
Carrying an SA auto with the hammer down on a live round is slower than condition three and not as safe.
 
Here's an added thought. When the 1911 was designed, did ANYONE contemplate going cocked & locked with it? My understanding is this carry method developed much later, and JMB never expected people to do it.
 
What many people don't understand is, Browning was a brilliant engineer and a good businessman. He was not a soldier, lawman, or gunfighter.

Browning designed what would sell. In the case of the M1911, he designed what the customer (the US Army) wanted. The Army had a better understanding of what would make a good cavalry pistol than Browning -- but Browning had a better understanding of how to translate those requirements into a working and reliable handgun.

The Army needed redundant safeties for mounted operations -- and they did have a history of accidents with decocking loaded guns, such as the M1873 SAA. The Army never endorsed hammer-down-on-a-loaded-chamber (Condition 2) carry, but only Condition 3 (empty chamber, loaded magazine) and Condition 1 (Cocked-and-locked.)
 
I think cocked and locked is mentioned in several early military manuals as the prefered state in the face of imminent action. Most of the military carried in condition three normally.
If you carry concealed you are expecting imminent action, and don't have the time of preparation for forming the ranks prior to a cavalry charge or going over the tops of the trenches.
 
it's there for me. I'm a lefty and I never use the thumb safety.
Gee Mom, it's just like a Glock .
It's called "Condition 0"

AFS
 
Last edited:
jc2 thats is the best explanation I have heard and it makes a lot of sense.

Didn't the first 1911's have a lanyard ring on them?
 
Didn't the first 1911's have a lanyard ring on them?
Click to expand...

All M1911s and M1911A1s (as opposed to clones for the civilian market) had lanyard loops at the bottom of the mainspring housing. Early M1911 magazines also had lanyard loops on the magazine floor plate -- so a cavalryman could reload and not lose the magazine.
 
While this would be seen as dangerous to some, the fact is that many users carried Colt's series of pre-Super .38's in that caliber and Government Model .45's using the chamber loaded/hammer down mode for decades without leaving a history of unintended discharges. That's the reason that pre-war 1911/1911A1 pistols had hammers with long/wide cocking spurs.


Thank you OLD FUFF I have a gun Mag from early 80's that gives instruction on how to lower hammer for carry or storage. Growing up I never saw a C&L 45 unless somebody at range getting ready to shoot. Always hammer down . I can cock my USGI very fast on draw and its no trouble.
(yes It can be done it times of stress also , Its called practice.)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Gordon
  • Locked
BHP safety
2
Replies
35
Views
2K
Frank Ettin
Frank Ettin
A
  • Locked
R.I.A. 1911 clone safety problem
Replies
9
Views
838
1911Tuner
1
C
  • Locked
Why a grip safety on a 1911?
2
Replies
47
Views
4K
Sam
S
H
  • Locked
Do people just NOT make short tang 1911 grip safeties?
Replies
7
Views
3K
Oro
O
0
  • Locked
1911 hammer bite?
Replies
16
Views
1K
NMGonzo
N
Back
Top