Home Forums Classifieds GT Store Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups


Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-17-2012, 23:44   #21
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 529
Which thumb safety profile do y'all prefer? Must be extended and ambi for my use. I have a very high tang grip and my thumb rides the safety.

I am a lefty so the answer is easy, ambi but I contour them my way. I like to thin them a bit and reshape to my liking.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
TTM65 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2012, 23:56   #22
Armchair IPSCer
Disregarded9-side's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 1,037
I love the idea of shaping one to match my own thumb, but at this point I'm doubtful that my 'smithing skills would result with product that would be as nicely finished as I'm looking for. The Ed Brown seems as long as I'd like with a good shape, but it's hard to gauge how wide it is without handling it--the strong side safety that came on the Loaded is just slightly too wide for my tastes, I'd rather it be about the width of the one on the right.
Disregarded9-side is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-18-2012, 06:36   #23
Lifetime Membership
Badass Member
Travclem's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Lubbock, TX
Posts: 6,801
Originally Posted by TTM65 View Post
Which thumb safety profile do y'all prefer? Must be extended and ambi for my use. I have a very high tang grip and my thumb rides the safety.

I am a lefty so the answer is easy, ambi but I contour them my way. I like to thin them a bit and reshape to my liking.
My favorite is the Wilson Combat Bullet Proof non ambi.
Sent from a payphone in a whorehouse in Mexico.

Last edited by Travclem; 10-18-2012 at 06:36..
Travclem is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-18-2012, 08:18   #24
Senior Member
MD357's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 4,079
Nope. QC is horrible on these guns. You're entitled to disagree, but my experience couldn't have painted this picture more clearly. Colts obviously didn't used to cost over a G, and they also used to be much better pistols.
Regardless of what you have seen, you're just one anecdote relative to the entire history.

However, the reality is that modern day QC is significantly BETTER than it used to be, naturally, there are some companies that are exceptions. Again someone has to be uneducated in the history of how these things used to be built to think that they aren't built better now than they were through the years. This includes steel treatment, tolerances, etc.

I love the platform, and obviously having turned multiple failing pistols into a working ones I have a more than decent knowledge of 1911s. No matter if you, I, or anyone else had purchased the aluminum framed Kimber I did, the magazines with steel followers would be eating chucks out of the frame. When I called their CS about it, they had no problem admitting right off the bat that this was a known issue. Shipping the pistol with these mags is terrible business practice, poor quality control. Consumers obviously don't care, as they continue to sell these 'guns faster than they can make them; new Kimbers are always on back order.
Not really gonna defend Kimber as the make their own grave. Several OTHER good companies making 1911s. I will say this, and it solidifies my original statements. The further a company gets away from the original design, the more variables you will have. Kimber loves to do this. On the flip side, Colt is making them better than they ever have.

Implying that I'm incompetent doesn't prove that the 1911 is infallible in all forms, it simply proves that you're being unkind and not remotely thoughtful--that's not in any way a personal attack, just fact. If you read, and comprehended, half of what I said in this thread alone you'd realize your remarks to be wholly without reasonable foundation. And your comments are forgiven, so let's get back to celebrating the piece we all love. All of this has nothing to do with my OP.
Sorry, it's just my experiences, so it's not an attack, or being unkind. I've seen guys that have "been shooting 20 years" jam a glock 17 with 15K flawless rounds through it.

I do consider that a fact; especially when a life is on the line. Without test firing 100-500 rounds, no cheap 1911 can be trusted to protect your life. Some more modern handgun designs many people feel are much more trustworthy. Ask Bill Wilson, or simply read one of his books. Ask Travis Haley. Ask Masad Ayoob. The 1911 can be an extremely reliable gun when it works correctly, but they're picky animals. It's not as if this is the first time you're hearing this. The gun can't even be considered reliable without a cleaning after every 500 rounds (again, Bill Wilson's words, not mine).
Bill Wilson is selling/telling you need a $3000 gun so I'll take that with a grain of salt. Now aside from these names and without regurgitating the talking heads of the last 10-15 years. I have some questions for you....

What happened in the initial 1911 army trials? How many rounds did it fire over two days? What did they do when it began to get hot? How many reported malfuntions?

Now again..... opinions on the internet and anecdotes aside including mine. The 1911 has made it through several wars, conflicts, etc across many different terrains without significant problems. Enough to defend the lives of many downrange. Now considering this, one has to realize that those guns were not up modern day standards of quality 1911 producers across the board. The steel used, small parts, and tolerances are ALL significantly better in todays times and most importantly..... so are the mags.

So again the notion that it's an artform to make one is laughable, and so is the opinion that out of the box, you've got spend north of $1k to have one work.
MD357 is offline   Reply With Quote


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:41.

GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
GT Store

Users Currently Online: 896
233 Members
663 Guests

Most users ever online: 4,867
May 19, 2015 at 1:03