TexasCHLforum.com

jmra wrote:

G.A. Heath wrote:I'll be honest, I don't like those inserts that go behind the trigger on a Glock at all. First off many people do not realise that you must put it in with an empty chamber (striker has to be cocked in order for it to fit), and they are asking for an ND every time they put it in a loaded firearm (loaded meaning "with one in the chamber"). Secondly, Glock owners/carriers often whine that they don't like manual safeties because "It's an extra step that you might forget under high stress". Yet fumbling around with a piece of plastic trapped between the trigger and the frame which requires you to put your finger INSIDE the trigger guard before you are ready to fire seems like a good idea to those same folks. The third, and final reason, I really don't like it is because anyone who feels a need for such a mechanism is not completely comfortable with their firearm and needs to spend more time familiarising themselves with it. Simply put if you don't trust the gun to function safely in the manner its designed then you need to get a different gun and/or more training with that gun.

The guy wants additional safety feature for his glock. Don't like this recommendation? Find him another one...and stop whining.

...we're not whining...and our gimmick/gizmo search functions are disabled...YOU find him one...using the one between his ears and a good, sound holster is all we can come up with...the guy asked for help...we're helping...

jmra wrote:No reason to be afraid of the the glock. The glock will not go bang unless you pull the trigger. If you don't want the glock to go bang, don't pull the trigger.

If you do go with an external safety you will need to spend many hours at the range otherwise when you do need the gun to go bang you are going to pull the trigger and nothing is going to happen.

I'm never in too much of a hurry to make sure the glock does not go bang when I don't want it to go bang. When the only thing that stands between me and death is the time is takes for me to pull my gun and fire a round I don't want to have any more steps in that process than are absolutely necessary. An external safety adds an additional step to that process that can and has been skipped in life or death situations.

I for one do not buy into the idea that you need to carry the gun that you are the most comfortable with. I do buy into the idea that you need to carry the gun that you are the most efficient with when your life depends on it.

...this one nails it...that's why I like the decockers...nothing for me to fumble with...if the design of the gun doesn't have a safety, don't "add" one...

jmoney wrote:How many rounds have you fired through your carry 3" kimber without a single error? the answer should be 0, and it should be 0 after at least 2000 rounds. People have fluctuating standards for what is considered reliable, but after listening to a few of these instructors teaching handgun classes, I am inclined to agree with them. For example, my new g19 had 2 ftes using 115 gr ammuntion within the first 1k rounds. I immediately would not use this weapon with that gr weight of ammunition for any self-defense purposes. However, after moving to 124 gr, 2k rounds, 0 Problems. I now can feel very confident that this weapon is always going to perform.

Just because "your" kimber 3" has been suitable does not discount the several reliabilities issues that have been reported in a 3" single stack 1911 style pistol, there are good reasons why the top 1911 makers do not even consider making a 3" model.

What is misleading, is telling someone that there are no reliability issues with a 3" 1911, and anyone they pick up will run flawlessly, because that is simply not true.

...he didn't say that...he said HIS has...let's stick with the facts, which are often DIFFERENT from our opinions...ANY type/brand of pistol can have issues...I've known Glocks that suck, and Glocks that were 100% reliable...they're machines...some are better than others...you're hitting on the true answer, while jumping around blasting other peoples' proven reliable choices...choose a gun, test it till YOU are comfortable with it, and carry it with confidence...even the best guns have occasional problems...either with the gun or ammo...or the shooter's handling of it...that's why they have warranties and gunsmiths...the Glock that I re-qualified with last week had several stovepipes...big deal...learn the weapon and how to clear them...and go on...

jmoney wrote:Then I would say that you have a suitable CCW weapon, as long as you continue to check it after replacing any part for consistency. I am not making the statement that any and all 1911 style pistols under the commander length of 4.25 are terrible weapons and there is no reason to own them. What I am saying is that as one shortens the barrel and slide length below 4.25 there are timing issues, where every little thing has to work just right. While other striker fired pistols at this same length are more reliable as many have less parts, this was a real problem on 1911s. Companies, especially those like kimber, which have mass produced these smaller 1911 pistols have for the most part eliminated these timing issues, however they still can and do exist on some of them. Take the many people that have SA handguns from taurus and love them, however they are the brand of SA weapon besides a few of the cheaper berettas, and recently sig, that I consistently see experience problems at the shooting range. I remember when I took my CHL shooting exam, and literally every single person who brought their shiny new taurus out there had continual malfunctions, and the instructor finally just swapped their pistols out with some of his own.

Nobody is saying that those of you who have these weapons should go and throw them away, but to simply claim that these reliability issues do not exist is silly

...noone has claimed that...and if they had, would have been no sillier than making a blanket statement like you did about 1911s with barrels less than 4.25"...there are ways to be extremely dogmatic without being offensive...it's good to learn them when in a social setting...like this forum...we can argue all day long without offense...if we choose our statements carefully...

speedsix wrote:

jmra wrote:

G.A. Heath wrote:I'll be honest, I don't like those inserts that go behind the trigger on a Glock at all. First off many people do not realise that you must put it in with an empty chamber (striker has to be cocked in order for it to fit), and they are asking for an ND every time they put it in a loaded firearm (loaded meaning "with one in the chamber"). Secondly, Glock owners/carriers often whine that they don't like manual safeties because "It's an extra step that you might forget under high stress". Yet fumbling around with a piece of plastic trapped between the trigger and the frame which requires you to put your finger INSIDE the trigger guard before you are ready to fire seems like a good idea to those same folks. The third, and final reason, I really don't like it is because anyone who feels a need for such a mechanism is not completely comfortable with their firearm and needs to spend more time familiarising themselves with it. Simply put if you don't trust the gun to function safely in the manner its designed then you need to get a different gun and/or more training with that gun.

The guy wants additional safety feature for his glock. Don't like this recommendation? Find him another one...and stop whining.

...we're not whining...and our gimmick/gizmo search functions are disabled...YOU find him one...using the one between his ears and a good, sound holster is all we can come up with...the guy asked for help...we're helping...

you do know that smiley thing means I was joking?

...it looked like a vacuum cleaner salesman with his butt shut in the door...thanks for explaining...

Hey guys thanks for all your help. I have it sorted out now. Being new to CC I have/had many questions. I thank everyone for their comments.

No need to argue the point.

Chuck

speedsix wrote:...it looked like a vacuum cleaner salesman with his butt shut in the door...thanks for explaining...

Not sure I understand the vacuum salesman thing but if means that my comments were offensive it was not my intent and I offer my apologies. I was actually attempting humor (obviously unsuccessfully).

RockingRook wrote:Hey guys thanks for all your help. I have it sorted out now. Being new to CC I have/had many questions. I thank everyone for their comments.

No need to argue the point.

Chuck

Sounds like you have some really nice options for carry. Please let us know how each one works out for you. I would be interested in your opinion of the t-blok when it comes in. The only thing I know about it is what I have seen on the website I linked you to. If you wind up not liking it please let me know so that I don't point anyone in that direction in the future.

Thank you for sharing this journey with us.

AEA wrote:Forget the word "decocker" and never use that word again!

Save your money and buy a Springfield EMP in .40.

Check out the Ruger SR9 or SR40. they have thumb saftey. I love my SR9
EMP is awesome. The perfect anti-glock
you can get an XDM or M&P with thumb saftey's as well.

EDIT: Didn't realize this post was already a week old...oh well. What did you go with?

RockingRook wrote:The other day I purchased a Ruger SR 9c. Took it to the range today and fired 200 rounds of various ammo. It comes
with 2 mag. a 17 round mag and a 10 round. Plenty of fire power. All my carry ammo is now Winchester Supreme Elite in the 9 mm I have the +P JHP
in the 124 grain. For my .40 cal I have the same ammo in the 165 grain. I fired 50 rounds of that ammo through the SR 9c and the Glock 27 .40

Not a hitch!! The gun worked great and it seems to be very accurate. So far I am happy with it. It is a very nice gun but
I may be partial to Rugers. I have had a Ruger P-89 for a lot of years but it is just
too big to carry comfortably so it is now my "house gun."

I will be alternately carrying the Sr 9c and the Glock 27. I have been carrying the Glock 27 with round chambered for the past couple days.
Felt kind of strange but I am trying to get over it by practice and constantly reminding myself "keep your finger off the trigger". I
never do put my hand on the trigger but rather place my finger on the front of the trigger guard.

The SR 9c has what looks like a Glock style trigger and it also has a manual safety. Which I like!! I had been carrying my Beretta with
a manual safety but when it came apart on the range I went back to the Glock. BTW, Beretta will be sending me a new gun to replace
the one I had since it is not repairable.

Hi Chuck,

I'm glad you liked the SR9c. I also was hesitant about not having a manual safety - or at least a grip safety like an XD9 - on light trigger pull carry weapon. I also went with the SR9c and I absolutely love it.

Now that I have been carrying a bit longer (just over a year now), I don't think I would have the same reservations with a carrying a gun without a manual safety. But, I still just love the feel of the SR9c. It is one of the skinnier double stack 9mm's. Although I have big hands, Glocks, XD's, M&P's all feel just a bit too thick to me. The angle of the grip to the barrel feels a bit more like a 1911 to me as well. I don't know who to explain it, but it just feels right.

That said, what doesn't feel right to me is the magazine disconnect safety. Not only does prevent you from firing a chambered round if the mag is dropped, it also should not be dry fired because of possible damage to the mag disconnect mechanism. I recommend removing it - it only takes a few minutes:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvS-LhKLw2Q" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Bulldog1911 wrote:

AEA wrote:Forget the word "decocker" and never use that word again!

Save your money and buy a Springfield EMP in .40.

Check out the Ruger SR9 or SR40. they have thumb saftey. I love my SR9
EMP is awesome. The perfect anti-glock
you can get an XDM or M&P with thumb saftey's as well.

EDIT: Didn't realize this post was already a week old...oh well. What did you go with?

Actually its the XD-45 that has the thumb safety as an option, the other XD products (including the XDm) do not have a thumb safety.

[/quote]Hi Chuck,
I'm glad you liked the SR9c. I also was hesitant about not having a manual safety - or at least a grip safety like an XD9 - on light trigger pull carry weapon. I also went with the SR9c and I absolutely love it.

Now that I have been carrying a bit longer (just over a year now), I don't think I would have the same reservations with a carrying a gun without a manual safety. But, I still just love the feel of the SR9c. It is one of the skinnier double stack 9mm's. Although I have big hands, Glocks, XD's, M&P's all feel just a bit too thick to me. The angle of the grip to the barrel feels a bit more like a 1911 to me as well. I don't know who to explain it, but it just feels right.

That said, what doesn't feel right to me is the magazine disconnect safety. Not only does prevent you from firing a chambered round if the mag is dropped, it also should not be dry fired because of possible damage to the mag disconnect mechanism. I recommend removing it - it only takes a few minutes:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvS-LhKLw2Q" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; [/quote]

Yes, I really like the SR 9c. It is a really nice shooting gun and I find it to be very accurate. About the magazine disconnect safety. I will get to doing that but I need to evaluate for myself my need to "dry fire" or not.
I know if I show someone that pistol [like my son] the first thing that is done is to check out the trigger pull. For me I like keeping everything the way it was built to be and not mess with it.
More times than not I wind up screwing things up. A long time back I attempted to do a trigger job on my Savage .270. It had a 10 b trigger pull which is much too stiff for hunting. I was told it was a simple operation so I attempted
it and I got the trigger pull so light that when I closed the bolt the gun would fire. I then took it to a gunsmith and for $50 they would do a nice trigger job on it as well as all my rifles. Getting them down to 2.5-3 lbs.
Right now I will leave it be and maybe later do something if I indeed do not like it.

Thanks for the link!!

I was under the impression that the SR 40c was out but it is not. I picked up the 9 sort of hesitantly but after firing it and checking out the ammo [Winchester Supreme Elite +P 124 bonded JHP] I figured it does indeed match up
ballisticly pretty well with the .40. With the 17 shot mag it has a lot of fire power. I was anxious to shoot it because I read that the SR 9c has had "light strike problems" so I wanted to see for myself. After 200 rounds now I have not had
that problem so maybe Ruger has fixed the problem with the newer guns. I will fire it a lot more I am sure, and if it continues to perform as it has thus far it is an exemplary gun.

Chuck

Dry firing is a great (and cheap) method of improving your marksmanship. It helps you diagnose issues with your trigger pull such as flinching and gets you used to the weight and length of pull of the trigger.

You can always leave the mag disconnect in there and purchase some Snap Caps that will enable you to dry fire without risk of damaging the disconnect.

Also, the SR40c is out. Here is one place that carries it:

http://www.kygunco.com/products2.cfm/id ... .5%22-15rd" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Glad you like the SR9c, that is one of the guns I've been considering for a carry gun.

[/quote]Sounds like you have some really nice options for carry. Please let us know how each one works out for you. I would be interested in your opinion of the t-blok when it comes in. The only thing I know about it is what I
have seen on the website I linked you to. If you wind up not liking it please let me know so that I don't point anyone in that direction in the future. Thank you for sharing this journey with us.[/quote]

I will let you know. For $19.95 I figured it was worth giving it a try. If, for some reason, it does not then I figure I have not lost much. Since going to CCL class and applying for the license I have spent $$$ on
IWB holsters and a fanny pack. All of my holsters are pretty top quality leather IWB and yes they do have trigger guards. I have one from High Noon holsters that is for my Glock 27. It is molded for that gun and that ran me $90 or so.
Since then I have purchased some leather holster for much less and some of them will accommodate a couple different modes therefore, cheaper. I have an assortment of handguns, including 5 models of the Glock from 9 MM to .45.
They are really great shooting guns. I have 2 Rugers, the P-89 and now the SR 9c. I really like both of them. I have the Beretta Storm PX4 SC my replacement gun should arrive within the next 2-4 weeks. I also have The CZ 9mm P-07 Duty
pistol, it is the first composite that CZ put out. Nice shooting but a little too bulky. They call it a compact I think it is more full sized. Then I had the Colt 1991 .45, not for shooting although I have shot it numerous times, it was my gift
to my son. I had it engraved "To Thomas from Dad". He has a son named Thomas and hopefully he will hand it down. My Ruger Super Blackhawk .44 mag was for hunting and definitely not for carry. A really good gun for feral hogs here in Texas.

I have been collecting guns for many years and when I was in the military I would have to sell the ones I had because of many deployments and no place to keep them. I retired from the AF in '85 and permanently in '97
and since then I have been accumulating many different rifles and pistols. My rifle cabinet is full and with the addition of the Ruger SR I had to purchase a bigger electronic lock box for my pistols.

My wife is filling the house with shoes and I am filling it with guns.

Chuck