Siderlock safety for Glock

Status
Not open for further replies.

jimbo555

Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2011
Messages
1,307
Location
Statesboro,Georgia
Anyone have this on their Glock? Is it durable? Advantages? Seems like having to put your finger near the trigger when your ready to fire to release the safety might not be a good idea.
 
Why reinvent the wheel? If you need an external safety, a Glock just isn't the gun for you. There are plenty of alternatives out there.
 
What about a Cominolli safety? I've certainly read many good things about them.
 
The Cominolli requires permanent changes to the gun...Siderlocks can be undone for about $14.

My advice? Handle a gun with a Siderlock and decide for yourself if it is dangerous as only Siderlock owners and folks who have trained with them have the proper perspective. If you don't like it it can be reverted to factory in minutes for little money. You'll probably have to buy one to try one and I highly recommend doing that, having it installed by a Glock Armorer, and buying an extra factory trigger assy at the same time if you don't like it.

Glock FanBoyz hate Siderlocks with a passion so be prepared to be vehemently dissuaded for even considering it - get yer advice from folks who have used one. Decide for yourself if it works for you and provides an improvement for you and your Glock using your mindset, skillset, and if it improves your Bag-O-Tricks.

Some will tell you that if you want/need a safety on yer Glock you shouldn't have a Glock. My opinion is that if you can't manipulate a Siderlock without pulling the trigger you probably shouldn't be handling a firearm but we all have different levels of skill and varying mindsets with regards to external safeties.

I find it durable and fantastic but have reverted my G26 to "stock" and I'm training hard to improve my mindset to live without it. In the end, I'll probably put mine back on. I love mine and feel that it improves a fantastic design.....There is no other "Glock" and I really like the shootability of my Glocks. I just feel a lot better with an extra margin of safety.

VooDoo
 
I'm familiar with the pros and cons of having a safety. That has been discussed at length on this forum. I'm interested in first hand experience with this particular safety. Thank you Vodoun for your report.
 
A Glock safety is called a holster and finger control. Are you going to actually put your finger on the trigger if you had a mechanical safety?
 
If you want a safety on a Glock-type pistol, you can go with a...
Ruger SR9 (or 40, etc)
FNH FNS (or whichever one of their models is striker fired, all their pistols start with FN and I get confused)
S&W M&P model with safety
XD with safety (I think they had some, correct me if I'm wrong)

I feel a manual safety on the trigger (instead of a passive safety) is just asking for trouble.
 
I'm in the camp that sort of agrees that it really is a solution to a problem that is more easily solved by purchasing another reputable firearm.

When I purchased a .40S&W, I purposely bought one with a manual safety. I wanted a striker-fired pistol that could be put on "safe" when handling in and out of the holster/bedside safe and either carried that way or flicked off and ignored.

That's one of the reasons I settled on the FNS-40. The safety is small and you can easily ignore it if you don't want to use it. That little extra bit of protection is something I wanted.

Nothing wrong with a Glock at all. However, I just feel more comfortable buying a guy with the safeties/features I need instead of trying to "fix" the pistol.
 
As a proponent of the Siderlock ('cause I have 2 Glocks and have used the Siderlock) and a Glock lover I have to say that if I could get a comparable pistol, an exact duplicate to the Glock only with an external safety, I'd certainly do that.

Glocks have an inherent accuracy in my hands and a "feel" and functionality that I really prefer and cannot find in another type/manufacture of gun. Kinda like *really* liking a Beretta Px4 platform but not getting on with the sights or the existing decocker lever so you modify them to better fit your personal desires for the gun.

This is exactly how I see the Siderlock...it's just like adding mag pinky extensions, or extended slide releases or different sights or whatever. It's just an augmentation to an excellent pistol that serves 95% of what I want. I'm not wanting a Siderlock because I'm too stupid to use the safety between my ears, I'm not disrespecting the Glock Perfection creed nor slandering Mr. Glock's engineering. I already tried other polymer pistols that have external safeties and I'm not disrespecting them either.

I love my Glock 26 and my 42 and may add a G19 to the line up. They may sport Siderlocks...I can disengage them without pulling the trigger and I can disengage them without putting my finger tip near where I might accidentally pull the trigger as well. I want a Glock with an added measure of being able to disengage the trigger and I have that if I want it....takes 15 minutes to put the factory trigger back in.

I don't wanna give up my Glock platform and choose another gun because I want that. I want it on my Glock. I apologize for bucking the Glock style but I'm not an unsafe handler, I'm not delusional/misinformed and don't need to make another choice of carry guns - I already evaluated all my choices with live fire and training.

VooDoo
 
I'm thinking of buying one for my 30s Vodoun. My concern is with durability. Pushing sideways on the trigger to put the safety on and off and the effect that would have on the trigger. Maybe it's not an issue.
 
The Cominolli requires permanent changes to the gun...Siderlocks can be undone for about $14.

My advice? Handle a gun with a Siderlock and decide for yourself if it is dangerous as only Siderlock owners and folks who have trained with them have the proper perspective. If you don't like it it can be reverted to factory in minutes for little money. You'll probably have to buy one to try one and I highly recommend doing that, having it installed by a Glock Armorer, and buying an extra factory trigger assy at the same time if you don't like it.

Glock FanBoyz hate Siderlocks with a passion so be prepared to be vehemently dissuaded for even considering it - get yer advice from folks who have used one. Decide for yourself if it works for you and provides an improvement for you and your Glock using your mindset, skillset, and if it improves your Bag-O-Tricks.

Some will tell you that if you want/need a safety on yer Glock you shouldn't have a Glock. My opinion is that if you can't manipulate a Siderlock without pulling the trigger you probably shouldn't be handling a firearm but we all have different levels of skill and varying mindsets with regards to external safeties.

I find it durable and fantastic but have reverted my G26 to "stock" and I'm training hard to improve my mindset to live without it. In the end, I'll probably put mine back on. I love mine and feel that it improves a fantastic design.....There is no other "Glock" and I really like the shootability of my Glocks. I just feel a lot better with an extra margin of safety.

VooDoo


To VooDoo -

Your last paragraph indicates you are experiencing cognitive dissonance about the Sidelocker. What you just wrote is essentially: I installed the Sidelocker, but for reasons I have not stated I removed the Sidelocker, now I am training hard to not use the Sidelocker, but after training hard to not use the Sidelocker I am going to reinstall the Sidelocker because I “love” it and it improves a “fantastic design” but I will not be trained to proficiently use a “fantastic design” that has a Sidelocker installed. IMO, your recommendation of the Sidelocker is not very credible.

To Jimbo555 -

IMO having a manually operated aftermarket safety button that close to the bang switch increases the probability of an ND instead of decreasing it. If you must have a Glock with a manual safety, a thumb-safety is a much better idea. Less chance for confusion and more positive visual and tactile confirmation of engagement. On the other hand, you might consider these wise words of a famous pistol shooting trainer: “We dinosaurs prefer to put our trust in our own abilities rather than in any reliability of a mechanism which can fail.” Which is why competent Glock users train to keep their finger off the trigger until it is time to shoot. Do you really think you cannot be trained to become a competent Glock user and installation of a manual safety will compensate for insufficient training?
 
This is exactly how I see the Siderlock...it's just like adding mag pinky extensions, or extended slide releases or different sights or whatever. It's just an augmentation to an excellent pistol that serves 95% of what I want. I'm not wanting a Siderlock because I'm too stupid to use the safety between my ears, I'm not disrespecting the Glock Perfection creed nor slandering Mr. Glock's engineering. I already tried other polymer pistols that have external safeties and I'm not disrespecting them either.

VooDoo

Except it is not "just like adding mag pinky extensions, or extended slide releases or different sights or whatever." It is a radical change to the manual of arms of the Glock and is also nothing like the manual of arms of any other commonly used pistols. Manuals of Arms that have decades of user experience validating them as efficient and safe; unlike the manual of arms the Siderlock creates. VooDoo you are making yourself and encouraging others to be a guinea pig for the makers of Siderlock. I have no problem with your right to make that choice. Be careful.
 
My concern is with durability. Pushing sideways on the trigger to put the safety on and off and the effect that would have on the trigger. Maybe it's not an issue.

I have not done it tens of thousands of times so I can only speak of relative durability - it seems very well built and doesn't seem to need to apply that much lateral pressure as to wear anything out prematurely. But that's a guess. The "switch" clicks into a detente with some pressure needed but in my opinion it's not enough pressure to wear anything out in any reasonable amount of time.

VooDoo
 
I feel more comfortable with a safety but I agree Nom that a safety on the trigger is uncommon. I don't think there is a alternative to the glock 30s. For now I will continue to carry in a secure holster and keep my finger off the trigger till i'm ready to fire. Thank you all for the responses.
 
Keep doing what you're doing and you'll be fine. It will be no more safer with a siderlock than without one so long as you do your part. If your mind can slip to pull the trigger without the intention to fire, your mind can just as easily slip to not have remembered to engage that safety in the first place

Besides, adding unnecessary complexity to something you may need to depend on to safe your life one day isn't stacking the odds in your favor
 
There's a reason the term "Glock leg" is in the shooting lexicon.
Blame it all on the shooter if you wish but there are instances of a Glock going off w/o anyone's finger on the trigger.
If you're happy w/the Glock (or similar pistol) then that's great but I prefer either a manual safety or a DA/SA-DAO action (I primarily carry AIWB and I don't trust a Glock-style trigger with the muzzle pointing at my femoral artery, YMMV).
JMHO...
Tomac

ETA: Hence I can understand the OP's interest in the Siderlock.
 
Last edited:
There's a reason the term "Glock leg" is in the shooting lexicon.
Blame it all on the shooter if you wish but there are instances of a Glock going off w/o anyone's finger on the trigger.
If you're happy w/the Glock (or similar pistol) then that's great but I prefer either a manual safety or a DA/SA-DAO action (I primarily carry AIWB and I don't trust a Glock-style trigger with the muzzle pointing at my femoral artery, YMMV).
JMHO...
Tomac
Glock Leg...someone has to push something for it to go boom, or have disabled the safeties...
most often, some dang fool has removed a safety or three...as in the case at ERML...
had his smith remove two safeties...and dropped it causing a round to enter his midsection...
G-smith was fined heavily by the State, the Glock Owner banned from the range...


I use a safety if it is on a particular weapon, but won't ADD one...
this is why I have a 1952 Marlin 336RC instead of trading it in on a new one...
it shoots half-dollar groups at 100 yards, why mess with perfection for a crossbolt safety??
Much like a 1911, half-cock is good enough if you have common gun sense.

Perversely, my concealed carry pistols except for the two Glocks, have all had safeties...
starting with a Star 30P, all the way to my new S&W CS45...slide-mounted safety.

BUT, and there's a big one...I most often use the Israeli Rack when CCW'ing Glocks...
meaning there ain't one in the chamber, you simultaneously draw & rack a round, then fire...
and depending on the situation, carry my safety-mounted pistols the same way...
without a round chambered...

Reason for that?? If some turkey does manage to spot & then manage to snatch my pistol,
the first pull of the trigger results in CLICK...he won't have the chance to figure the malf out...
and if you've properly practiced the various Israeli draws, it is just as fast as a normal draw,
with the benefit of KNOWING things are ready to go.
 
Last edited:
I'm familiar with the pros and cons of having a safety. That has been discussed at length on this forum. I'm interested in first hand experience with this particular safety. Thank you Vodoun for your report.
It is amazing how many people will completely ignore this and just post the same old clichés
 
Glock leg doesn't hurt that much.

Easiest way to avoid ND's is to stop stuffing a gun down the pants and carry OWB.

As for a manual safety I don't care one way or the other. Some of mine have a manual safety, some don't. My next one won't only because I don't like the full sized M&P's safety style, I wish it was more like Rugers but not as tough to get to as my Shield's. Solution, just buy a normal M&P.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top