Us worldly folks don't refer to it as the "Mexican Carry" but rather the "Border Belt". I have never carried anything in the Border Belt since I booted a S&W Model 60 across the produce aisle in the local grocery after it slid down my shorts. Nothing like the thought, "Hey, that's MY gun skidding towards the bananas!" to make you stop doing foolish things.
I feel uneasy about Glock's safety
- Thread starter Nick_90
- Start date
- Status
Jamie C.
Member
Here we go again.....
No it does not. Not even slightly.
There are two other separate devices inside a Glock that prevents it from firing if dropped. One is the Firing Pin Safety, the other is...get this.... the DROP SAFETY.
You can read all about 'em right here: Glock "Safe Action"
The only thing that little "flapper" of the trigger actually does is to prevent something from moving the trigger by snagging on the outside edges. Any other force that acts squarely on the trigger face will deactivate the "trigger safety". Doesn't matter if it's a finger, a twig, a holster strap, or...inertia.
And given that the trigger it's self only weighs about a half ounce or so, I hate to think how high up a Glock would have to be dropped from for inertia to cause the trigger to effectively "weigh" 5.5 pounds, or even 3.5 pounds and fire the gun, even without the "trigger safety" in place. I'm also betting the force required to do this would be more than enough to destroy the gun anyway, as well as overcome the much lighter spring on the "trigger safety" first. ( Anybody want to take a Glock trigger apart and weigh it and the safety, and see if it's true or not?
)
Sorry, but in my opinion, the dohicky on the trigger is nothing but a marketing ploy by Glock, put there so they can claim a certain number of "safety devices", and offers very little in the way of true safety. I believe Glock could stop putting them on their pistols and there wouldn't be any appreciable increase in accidental or negligent discharges.
J.C.
No it does not. Not even slightly.
There are two other separate devices inside a Glock that prevents it from firing if dropped. One is the Firing Pin Safety, the other is...get this.... the DROP SAFETY.
You can read all about 'em right here: Glock "Safe Action"
The only thing that little "flapper" of the trigger actually does is to prevent something from moving the trigger by snagging on the outside edges. Any other force that acts squarely on the trigger face will deactivate the "trigger safety". Doesn't matter if it's a finger, a twig, a holster strap, or...inertia.
And given that the trigger it's self only weighs about a half ounce or so, I hate to think how high up a Glock would have to be dropped from for inertia to cause the trigger to effectively "weigh" 5.5 pounds, or even 3.5 pounds and fire the gun, even without the "trigger safety" in place. I'm also betting the force required to do this would be more than enough to destroy the gun anyway, as well as overcome the much lighter spring on the "trigger safety" first. ( Anybody want to take a Glock trigger apart and weigh it and the safety, and see if it's true or not?
)Sorry, but in my opinion, the dohicky on the trigger is nothing but a marketing ploy by Glock, put there so they can claim a certain number of "safety devices", and offers very little in the way of true safety. I believe Glock could stop putting them on their pistols and there wouldn't be any appreciable increase in accidental or negligent discharges.
J.C.
B
Boss Spearman
Guest
'Sorry, but in my opinion, the dohicky on the trigger is nothing but a marketing ploy by Glock, put there so they can claim a certain number of "safety devices", and offers very little in the way of true safety.'
Then why did they also adopt it for the Springfield XD series?
Then why did they also adopt it for the Springfield XD series?
Jamie C.
When a firearm is dropped, at impact it can experience a substantial deceleration. Even small, light parts such as the trigger will momentarily "weigh" much more than normal. Under such circumstances, the momentum of the trigger itself can be enough to cause the trigger to operate. The trigger lever prevents the trigger from moving under its own momentum during a drop (or actually at the point of the sudden stop.)
The drop safety prevents the striker from moving forward under its own momentum, but if the trigger operates under its momentum, it will deactivate the drop safety and the other internal safety as a matter of course.
So, to be perfectly drop safe, the trigger lever is necessary.
As far as trigger snags, the trigger lever in combination with the oversize trigger guard, actually makes the trigger virtually snag proof. As you pointed out, an item snagging the side of the trigger can't make the gun fire. But even if the snagging item contacts the trigger face itself, the design of the safety lever still makes a snag unlikely. At initial contact with the trigger, the snagging item will have a tendency to ride up the curve of the trigger to a point near the frame. The trigger safety, however, can only be deactivated by pushing on the trigger near the tip of the trigger. The safety lever only extends about halfway up the trigger curve.
Boss,
S&W also decided that a similar "useless" feature was necessary on their Sigma Series pistols.
When a firearm is dropped, at impact it can experience a substantial deceleration. Even small, light parts such as the trigger will momentarily "weigh" much more than normal. Under such circumstances, the momentum of the trigger itself can be enough to cause the trigger to operate. The trigger lever prevents the trigger from moving under its own momentum during a drop (or actually at the point of the sudden stop.)
The drop safety prevents the striker from moving forward under its own momentum, but if the trigger operates under its momentum, it will deactivate the drop safety and the other internal safety as a matter of course.
So, to be perfectly drop safe, the trigger lever is necessary.
As far as trigger snags, the trigger lever in combination with the oversize trigger guard, actually makes the trigger virtually snag proof. As you pointed out, an item snagging the side of the trigger can't make the gun fire. But even if the snagging item contacts the trigger face itself, the design of the safety lever still makes a snag unlikely. At initial contact with the trigger, the snagging item will have a tendency to ride up the curve of the trigger to a point near the frame. The trigger safety, however, can only be deactivated by pushing on the trigger near the tip of the trigger. The safety lever only extends about halfway up the trigger curve.
Boss,
S&W also decided that a similar "useless" feature was necessary on their Sigma Series pistols.
The XD and the Glock have the same safety features, except the XD adds the grip safety (and better ergonomics). If you are worried about safety, consider the XD.
For one thing, the presence of the grip safety allows you to get an action job instead of a "New York trigger."
For one thing, the presence of the grip safety allows you to get an action job instead of a "New York trigger."
Jamie C.
Member
Okay fine.... let's do a little math.
Since I don't currently have a Glock laying around that I can take the trigger and trigger bar out of and weigh, I'm going to have to guess a bit and say both those items weigh roughly 1/2 ounce, together. (Anybody has a more accurate weight, let me know and I'll adjust things accordingly. )
Now, 1/2 oz. is 218.75 grains. ( 7000 grains = 1 pound or 16 ounces )
Let's call it 219 grains, just to keep it simple.
Objects dropped in earth-normal gravity fall at a rate of 32 feet per second, per second.
So, given all of that, we'll assume we drop our Glock from 32 feet above a hard surface, and roughly one second later it lands, facing perfectly vertically, on a hard surface.
Here's roughly what you get, energy-wise ( Remember, these figures are for the trigger and trigger bar themselves, not the whole gun ):
219 x 32 x 32 x 0.000002218 = 0.497399808 ft/Lbs
Almost exactly one-half pound.
Not quite enough to overcome a 3.5 pound trigger pull, is it? And certainly not enough for a 5.5 pound pull.
Also, remember that this is from 32 feet high. You could cut the number by 1/10th and be in the right ball park for a 3.2 ft drop.
Okay.... how 'bout momentum?
here you go :
219 x 32 = 7008
7008 / 226,000 = 0.03100885 Lbs/Sec.
Sorry, but it seems to me that a device that prevents a situation that isn't going to occur anyway can't really be called a "safety".
And unless you plan on going sky diving with your Glock, it's not looking like you'll manage enough force from simply dropping it to make it fire, even WITHOUT that silly little flap in the trigger.
Oh, and all the formulas for figuring energy, momentum, etc. can be found here: Ballistic Formulas
Oh, and Boss Spearman,
That's easy. As has been demonstrated by some people's opinions on the device, Glock apparently did a VERY good job of convincing people that it was needed, and that their pistol was somehow much safer for it being there.
I'm guessing that somebody connected with designing the XD, being no dummy, decided to go along with such thinking, rather than fight it and lose sales because their gun was viewed as somehow being "less safe" than a Glock.
No proof of this, however, but knowing how marketing tends to work, I think it's a safe bet.
J.C.
Half a foot pound is not the same thing as half a pound.
You have to calculate the number of G's caused by the deceleration of the impact and then scale the weight of the trigger assembly by that factor.
Since you're on a roll with the math, be my guest.
You have to calculate the number of G's caused by the deceleration of the impact and then scale the weight of the trigger assembly by that factor.
Since you're on a roll with the math, be my guest.
denfoote
Member
Hey Nick,
Cutting through this morass is easy!!!
If you are concerned about your new Glock, get one of these and have it installed!!!
It's still just a mechanical device and you still have to keep yer booger hook off of the bang button, but it should bring you the peace of mind you so desperately seek!!!
Click on the link.
http://www.cominolli.com/glocksafety.htm
Cutting through this morass is easy!!!
If you are concerned about your new Glock, get one of these and have it installed!!!
It's still just a mechanical device and you still have to keep yer booger hook off of the bang button, but it should bring you the peace of mind you so desperately seek!!!
Click on the link.
http://www.cominolli.com/glocksafety.htm
Jamie C.
Member
*sigh*
Okay, John.... How fast does a Glock's trigger assembly stop when it's dropped from 32 feet high and lands on concrete? 1/10th second? 1/100th? How 'bout a thousandth?
Given the elastic nature of a Glock's polymer frame, and the "give" in the springs, I'm guessing it'd be closer to the 1/100th than the 1/1000, as far as "peak force" goes.... ( Remember, the whole pistol's gonna stop, then rebound, while the trigger assy. is being slowed by the striker spring, before the trigger bar reaches the "link" in the trigger. )
Any guesses?
J.C.
( So much for a "simple" explaination, huh? )
Okay, John.... How fast does a Glock's trigger assembly stop when it's dropped from 32 feet high and lands on concrete? 1/10th second? 1/100th? How 'bout a thousandth?
Given the elastic nature of a Glock's polymer frame, and the "give" in the springs, I'm guessing it'd be closer to the 1/100th than the 1/1000, as far as "peak force" goes.... ( Remember, the whole pistol's gonna stop, then rebound, while the trigger assy. is being slowed by the striker spring, before the trigger bar reaches the "link" in the trigger. )
Any guesses?
J.C.
( So much for a "simple" explaination, huh?
)Extra safeties in the "Springfield" equal safety?
The majority of Glock NDs are from reholstering--no? The grip safety on the "Springfield" does nothing to prevent that--proper firearm training does.
Anyone who feels safe through unnecessary increases in mechanical complexity need to realize that things fail--be it through out of spec parts, corrosion build up on inferiorly treated metal, carbon build up, ect. That "safety" may prevent you from using your pistol. The grip safety is a 100 year old design that Browning was smart enough to drop in the BHP.
The majority of Glock NDs are from reholstering--no? The grip safety on the "Springfield" does nothing to prevent that--proper firearm training does.
Anyone who feels safe through unnecessary increases in mechanical complexity need to realize that things fail--be it through out of spec parts, corrosion build up on inferiorly treated metal, carbon build up, ect. That "safety" may prevent you from using your pistol. The grip safety is a 100 year old design that Browning was smart enough to drop in the BHP.
There are a lot of design features in the BHP that are there for one main reason:
The 1911 patents were still in force at the time and Colt had the rights.
Browning had to work around his own designs!
Further, Browning died in 1926, and the BHP was not released until 1935. Who knows if the BHP would have had a grip safety if Browning had been alive after the 1911 patents expired to release the BHP.
The 1911 patents were still in force at the time and Colt had the rights.
Browning had to work around his own designs!
Further, Browning died in 1926, and the BHP was not released until 1935. Who knows if the BHP would have had a grip safety if Browning had been alive after the 1911 patents expired to release the BHP.
Why guess? I'm waiting for you to do some more math!
Here's something to think about while you're working out the numbers. The striker is a relatively small light part--very roughly comparable in weight to the trigger assembly. Yet Glock felt the need to put a drop safety on the striker and you tacitly acknowledge the wisdom of this feature. Presumably that says that Glock designers felt that it was possible for the gun to be dropped in such a fashion that the striker could not only move forward, but could move forward with enough force to "pop" the primer.
It would seem reasonable that if (in the absence of the proper safeties) the striker can develop enough energy from a drop to actually fire the gun that the trigger might also move around a surprising amount from the same kind of deceleration forces. Ok, that's as close to guessing as I'm gonna get.
Jamie C.
Member
I'm afraid that without knowing the physical properties of the polymer frame, or the required numbers from it, I'm stuck guessing. But you knew that already, didn't ya?
Then again, I'm seriously considering just buying another Glock, removing the trigger safety, and doing some drop testing.....
It'd be much more educational, I think, than page upon page of mathematic formulas. Probably a lot more fun too.
Besides, I don't see you generating any real "proof" of your side of the argument.
( This last part really is meant as a joke. I don't think any of this is going to prove a damn thing other than that some of us have entirely too much time on our hands. 
)A relatively small light part that's already partially spring-loaded in the general direction of the primer....
I don't know if the trigger bar could be jarred out of position and "drop" the striker or not, but if it did manage to "get lose" from the trigger bar, either because of a worn sear or the sear breaking, it'd have the extra energy of the partially compressed striker spring to add to the momentum of the fall. And that might very well be enough to set a round off. And without the trigger having to move at all, as well.
As far as the striker possibly setting a cartridge off from the unset position.... I wanna know how you got a live round in the chamber without setting the striker.
Or was it a dud you forgot to clear? ( Hehehe... hey boys, there's you "second strike capability".
)Oh and one other thing.... something I should have though about earlier.... How are you gonna drop our hypothetical Glock on it's butt so that it lands on it's center of mass/center of gravity, and not have the slide jarred out of battery?
I've been looking at a pic of a G19, and honestly, short of dropping it on some sort of projection, I can't figure out how to get it to land so that the forces line up in the right direction, or don't get bled off by rotation... ( The butt on all Glock models stick out at least a little past the rear of the slide. )
The best I can come up with is for it to land on the back corner of the slide. And even at that it's going to require much more force because of the angle. Also, the amount of ammo left (or not) in the mag is going to change the balance so that it may just rotate and bleed away the energy anyway.
Here, here's a pic... take a look and see what you think:
The Black line at the bottom represents a flat hard surface.
The Red arrow is the the direction that force is required in to move the trigger.
The Yellow spot indicates the first point of impact if dropped "flat".
The Blue and green spots indicate the second/third points of impact, when the gun "rolls" off the primary impact point.
The Yellow arrow on the muzzle indicates the direction of rotation at impact.
The Green arrow indicates the secondary direction of force. It's also pretty close to the direction of force should the gun be dropped with the back edge of the slide landing first.
I didn't bother indicating a center of mass, since that varies with the amount of ammunition in the magazine.
So how 'bout it John? How are we gonna drop this thing so it'll go "Bang!"?
J.C.
Attachments
Glocker
Member
Glocks is for people who can handle reality, all other guns are for people who can't handle reality
1911 guy
Member
LEO's and Glocks
Those NDs by LE officers (who are at least as proficient as any average citizen)
I call B.S. on that one. Most cops I know shoot less than anyone else I know, including qualifying and informal shooting. Some outright scare me with lack of knowledge and unsafe handling. I'm sure some are top notch, but being a cop is not a cure for stupidity and ignorance.
Those NDs by LE officers (who are at least as proficient as any average citizen)
I call B.S. on that one. Most cops I know shoot less than anyone else I know, including qualifying and informal shooting. Some outright scare me with lack of knowledge and unsafe handling. I'm sure some are top notch, but being a cop is not a cure for stupidity and ignorance.
Jamie,
Yeah, it would have to land at an angle such that the back of the slide contacted a very hard surface before anything else touched. You'd lose some force to the vectors, but probably more than make up for it by eliminating the cushioning effect of the frame hitting first.
I suspect that a lot of the safeties on guns these days are to pass acceptance tests by various agencies and militaries, not to prevent real-world accidents.
Yeah, it would have to land at an angle such that the back of the slide contacted a very hard surface before anything else touched. You'd lose some force to the vectors, but probably more than make up for it by eliminating the cushioning effect of the frame hitting first.
I suspect that a lot of the safeties on guns these days are to pass acceptance tests by various agencies and militaries, not to prevent real-world accidents.
Actually it does. When using the XD, you holster your gun using the lower portion of the grip (the part without the safety). That way you are not depressing the grip safety when you push your gun into the holster. I push the back of the slide when holstering my XD.
Jamie C.
Member
Hey John...
Yep, that might do it, if the connection between the frame and slide doesn't have too much "give" to it. But considering how some people talk about the polymer frame absorbing shock and reducing felt recoil, I have to wonder. Especially since most of the parts that would allow the gun to fire are housed in the plastic part.
I'm really gonna have to buy another Glock, one of these days, and put this to a test.... Personally, I'm betting I end up beating the gun all to hell without ever getting it to drop the striker.
Yep. And with as sue-happy as the world has gotten, and as mechanically ignorant as most people seem to be, it's little wonder that there are so many unnecessary bits and pieces added to firearms these days. Seems the world is too busy trying to create "smart guns", rather than trying to come up with "smart people".
If our grandfathers had the same mindset that seems to be so prevalent these days, I doubt Sam Colt would've ever sold the first SAA. It would have been declared far too dangerous for the general public to possess.
Hey Litework...
Sounds like you use good technique and good gun handling skills in re-holstering your pistol. Both of which negate any need for a safety device.
Someone else, though, who attempts to re-holster an XD with their hand still in the firing position, and with their finger still on the trigger, is negating the safety device. And in that case, nothing in the world is gonna keep the gun from going off.
J.C.
For the life of me, I cannot understand why you feel comfortable carrying a SIG but not a Glock.
As you yourself acknowledged, there is negligible difference in the trigger pull between the two firearms.
How would you feel about a Beretta, which is also a DA/SA firearm?
How about 1911's?
Short length of pull?
A Glock???
I see you've never shot a 1911.
As you have eluded to, the biggest problem with people is their inability to keep their finger off the trigger when they holster. The benefit of the XD, as I see it, is it is still unable to fire even if you were to get your shirt wedged inside your trigger guard. The remoteness of this event is almost worth the miniscule risk. However, I do find myself unholstering and reholstering quite a bit as I venture into and out of establishments that do not permit CCW. I felt a little uneasy about holstering my Glock 23 IWB in 5 o'clock. Someone once suggested sticking my finger behind the trigger; I just don't want my finger anywhere near the trigger when my rear, at least a portion of it,is at stake. When I'm in the woods, I carry a Glock 20 OWB with confidence.
dasmi
Member
This discussion is so tired.
If you don't feel comfortable with a Glock, don't buy one. If you already bought one, sell it, trade it, give it to me. If you don't like Glocks, don't buy one.
If you don't feel comfortable with a Glock, don't buy one. If you already bought one, sell it, trade it, give it to me. If you don't like Glocks, don't buy one.
Jamie C.
Member
You'd rather we do the "caliber wars" thing, Dasmi?
J.C.
J.C.
dasmi
Member
Yes, actually.
- Status