Very thoughtfully and articulately stated. I have SCDs on all the Glocks I either drill with or carry because of the reholstering issue.Originally Posted by matto
I even modified a Glock SCD to fit my MR920 because I could change the backstrap to point like a CZ, but otherwise be a Glock internally. Would have suggested that if you were carrying a 19.
I know some don’t like aftermarket parts but a G43x with an S15 magazine is kind of a perfect carry gun.
Haha. You hypocrite.So what inspires you to carry the P-07? I also have one of those. I like it, but I like (love) the P-01 more. My hangup is that it's 28 oz (unloaded) which is wider and 8 oz heavier than the G48. And despite similar height/length dimensions, the G48 somehow has a 4.17" barrel vs 3.75 on the P-01/P-07. On paper the Glock wins in almost every way. My P-01 is my favorite pistol, but I can't figure out how to make it disappear when carrying it like my P365 does in a Keepers Cornerstone holster.
Right, I'm with you. And thanks for the link!
Ok I'm officially interested. What is this thing? [googling now] Is it a modified glock, or it's own gun?
I'm in a 10-round ban state, so a G43x is the best I can do anyway.I know some don’t like aftermarket parts but a G43x with an S15 magazine is kind of a perfect carry gun.
Holy crap, that sounds ideal! But it's an 80% kind of thing. Not sure I want that as my carry gun. I'll have to read more. But thanks for the pointer!
The P-07 (with CGW parts) has become my favorite gun. I have 3 of them. It feels very similar to the Shadow2s I compete with--and practice with the most. (The P-01 and regular Shadow feel more similar to me.) The P-07 is one of the simplest TDA guns available, and spare parts are cheap. It's nearly as easy to detail strip as a Glock. As well, I prefer the polymer P-07s easily replaceable steel subframe inserts to the P-01's aluminum frame. I find it easy to conceal even under a smedium t-shirt with a JMCK AIWB WC 2.5. And I'm not a huge dude.
That said, I could be very happy with a P-01.
Haha. You hypocrite.
“There is no growth in the comfort zone.”--Jocko Willink
"You can never have too many knives." --Joe Ambercrombie
The Glock grip angle is a feature not a bug, and the sooner you embrace that the better you will do with a Glock. If you do think it is a bug, better to go with something else.
Likes pretty much everything in every caliber.
MR920 is like a modified Glock, but is its own gun.
I didn’t want to modify a carry gun initially so that was my way around that.
It pretty much uses Glock internals except for the extractor mechanism. Everything else swaps over.
Even though they say it doesn’t work with SCDs, it does if you thin the lip of the rim a little.
MR920, P01 and G43x.
I wonder if the 80% thing is to keep costs down and get around that Sig grips aren’t serialized but Glock frames are?
I like my P01 for shooting (also with CGW parts), but I get lazy for carry and carry a manual safety P365x.
Maybe I’ll put in the forged striker I have lying around.
So here’s a question and I have to say that I am ignorant of how it works.
The “foot” of the striker on a Hellcat has been a breakage and failure point.
I don’t know how the safety mechanisms work on that gun, but when people have broken strikers it’s just been that the next shot doesn’t go and they notice no strike.
So possibly by extension (and I’m just pulling this out of my ass so help me with the thinking it through):
If a P365 striker foot broke off, it’d probably break off early in the striker loading cycle and not actually load the striker spring, right? It’d probably break with slide cycling impact rather than let loose under static tension under full load I would think....
So even if it broke it’d probably just result in no strike rather than inappropriate strike don’t you think?
Some things can't be unseen.
Okay. So I did some googling and a metallurgist said this:
“Metallurgist here. The likelihood of that part searing off in a catastrophic failure while under normal cocked tension would be incredibly slim, like dying in a plane crash slim. Proper tempering of the metal makes it hard, but still somewhat flexible. If that part was going to shear off in this manner, it would happen from the shock of firing the handgun, which would cause that part to shear off completely, and not allow it to recock during cycling. The striker is not in a position where it could gain the leverage required to begin cracking from one side, failure of this part would have to be all or nothing. If the striker is case hardened, which I'm pretty sure that it is, the inside is much softer than the outer shell, a process designed to prevent the metal from shearing in the event of a surface crack or imperfection. Lastly, the rear end of the striker contains a fair amount of the striker's weight. Reducing that weight, plus dragging against the striker block, would probably be more than enough to prevent enough force to ignite a primer.
I understand your concern, but you're talking about a seriously fringe case of crazy bad failure with many variables and safety nets needing to fail in order for your proposal to happen.”
That made me feel better about failure of that part.
Yes! The hellcat breakages are an example that this can happen. Of course it could be that sig uses better manufacturing processes and theirs would never break (of course) but the concept of redundant safeguards is fundamentally accepted concept in the design and engineering of safety critical systems.
Fortunately the hellcat does not have the same single point of failure design that the sig does. Here's a video describing.
https://youtu.be/PuFVonprghc
Reply With Quote