close

Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Re: Worth looking at

Discussion in '1911 Forums' started by allrad, Aug 3, 2011.

  1. allrad

    allrad

    30
    0
    Jun 11, 2009
    Well I certainly got some responses to what I thought was an interesting system. Seems like some people just want to be negative for negative's sake only. I'm not "afraid" of the "C&L" look or of any of the other suggested reasons given in the responses to my post. I think it does have some advantages that should be investigated, instead of just dismissing it out of hand.
    If your pistol should ever be taken away from you, especially if you're a LEO who is in a tussel, where that's usually what the bad guy tries to do, the inability to cock the hammer, rack the slide, or pull the trigger, could give at least some time to respond instead of just being shot. The Highpower story does not say if the system had been installed by a smith or the owner of the guns. If there is definitive proof that the system is not what it's presented to be, I would like to see that evidence before I do put it into my gun.
    Until then, I am keeping an open mind and trying to find out all I can about this system.
     
  2. bac1023

    bac1023

    104,026
    3,479
    Sep 26, 2004
    PA
    If you try it, I wish you luck. Its just not for me.
     

  3. TKR Reptiles

    TKR Reptiles Thread Killer

    924
    0
    Oct 19, 2010
    Norman, OK
    It is a simple answer. If you don't feel comfortable carrying a 1911 C&L the way it was designed, you should carry something else. Plain and simple.
     
  4. bac1023

    bac1023

    104,026
    3,479
    Sep 26, 2004
    PA
    I certainly agree, Trent.
     
  5. El_Ron1

    El_Ron1 AAAAAAAAGHHH!!!

    63,128
    88
    Apr 15, 2004
    Redneck Sparta
    Must be some kinda zombah thred! :shocked:
     
  6. fnfalman

    fnfalman Chicks Dig It

    51,460
    3,825
    Oct 23, 2000
    California & New Mexico, US
    What about the Colt Double Eagle DAO thta is currently in the Colt catalog?



    I kid, I kid!!!
     
  7. faawrenchbndr

    faawrenchbndr DirtyThirty fan CLM

    36,272
    567
    Nov 24, 2005
    Troy
    I see this as a fix to a non-problem.

    If you think it would suit you, great! Give it a try and let us know how it works for you.
    No need to get bent over comments posted, opinions are opinions, NOT personal attacks on YOUR opinion!
     
  8. nolt

    nolt DONT PANIC!

    861
    0
    Aug 4, 2009
    quite a number of people that carry and/or shoot 1911s have strong opinions about them with regards to any number of subjects.

    some of them are based on knowledge and experience and some are not, but whether they are or not... i would disagree that negative comments are for 'negative's sake only.'

    some people are resistant to change. some people are totally against it. some changes to the design are improvements. the majority of changes imho do not seem to be improvements.

    edit: in most cases even if its something i disagree with i would say "interesting... thanks for the link" but in this case you've taken the link away.

    ...also:
    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Aug 3, 2011
  9. polizei1

    polizei1 It WAS Quack

    1,164
    0
    Feb 3, 2009
    Cincinnati, OH
    That makes absolutely no sense at all. In BOTH cases, the thumb safety has to be disengaged for the weapon to be fired, along with the grip safety. In this sense, it wouldn't matter if the C&S kit was installed or not. A normal 1911 won't go bang unless the bad guy disengaged both safeties.

    Think about it again...it's a stupid system that has no actual purpose, other than to be a gimmick to make money.
     
  10. rvrctyrngr

    rvrctyrngr Senior Moment

    2,989
    0
    Sep 15, 2004
    Gator Nation
    allrad, the HiPowers I bought with the SFS system came that way directly from FN Herstal...new in the box, consecutive SNs.

    One of them is still in that configuration and I can reproduce the lockup pretty much at will.

    Rest assured, if my experience with that system had been positive, I'd have reported that, as well. I can't do any better than tell you first hand what happened with it while engaged in SD-type shooting, not standing in front of a target punching holes.

    One thing I didn't say is that, the lockup problem notwithstanding, the safety is awkward to disengage even under 'normal' use, even after hundreds of drawstrokes to get accustomed to the feel of it.

    You, of course, are free to do as you see fit.
     
    Last edited: Aug 3, 2011
  11. Nakanokalronin

    Nakanokalronin JMB & MTK

    3,897
    56
    May 13, 2008
    I've heard this statement as a "pro" for other things like mag safeties as well. During a struggle for a firearm, does a person really want to disable their weapon and just let it go into the hands of the badguy? If your struggling to get it back and you win, you've now disabled your own gun which is now equally useless to you or will take extra time to get it back in the fight. If a gun is just snatched out of a holster or hand and the person didn't get a chance to engage the disabling device, I don't see how it proved to be useful.

    BTW, if your gun is well concealed and you need to use it in a defensive scenario, you should never let anyone get close enough where they could snatch it out of your hand. A struggle without drawing your weapon will leave it in the holster exactly the same way you put it in there.

    Putting the safety up on a 1911 would have the same effect as the SFS system. The exception is that the SFS system is quite easier to accomplish this which may actually be a bad thing

    In reality, the system was design for those that fear a cocked back hammer. If your scared of a cocked back hammer, carry something else.

    I would be willing to bet that people wouldn't have a problem with C'd & L'd 1911s if they where made like this, even though there is still a cocked back hammer inside that cannot be de-cocked.....
    [​IMG]

    ETA: I wish the above wasn't so darn expensive since I think its a pretty great concept. I'd own one if they weren't $3500. It could be a big brother to my 1903. :cool:

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Aug 3, 2011
  12. Nakanokalronin

    Nakanokalronin JMB & MTK

    3,897
    56
    May 13, 2008
    Delete
     
    Last edited: Aug 3, 2011
  13. +1


    SFS systems are just plain useless. They "fix" a problem that doesn't exist...

    +1 again...

    They offer nothing from an officer safety standing point over a C&L 1911.
     
  14. drc767

    drc767 Navy CSAR

    2,050
    0
    Dec 30, 2007
    Tennessee
    Sure it does.....it puts the "poor" bad guy on an equal footing with the LEO when the SFS system fails. I find absolutely ZERO positives about that system. It is a "feel good" system for the politically correct, at best. At worst, it will get you killed if it malfunctions.
     
  15. boomhower

    boomhower

    3,323
    2
    Feb 14, 2010
    North Carolina
    I'm trying to wrap my head around this but am failing miserably. The most common LEO gun out there is a Glock. I would say 99.9999% of LEO's carry with one in the tube. If it goes, the bad guy has to just pull the trigger. The 1911 has two safeties that need to be disengaged. It may look "dangerous" with a cocked hammer but that's just perception of the uninformed, at least that what it seems to me.

    It seems that I am only getting half the story so I apologize if this has already been beaten to death somewhere else.
     
  16. bac1023

    bac1023

    104,026
    3,479
    Sep 26, 2004
    PA
    Yeah, the whole concept is just ridiculous, in my opinion.
     
  17. allrad

    allrad

    30
    0
    Jun 11, 2009
    If they came direct from the manufacturer how do you know they were the C&S system? Perhaps they were not.
     
  18. First rule when you find yourself in a hole:

    Stop digging!
     
  19. polizei1

    polizei1 It WAS Quack

    1,164
    0
    Feb 3, 2009
    Cincinnati, OH
    Wait, I thought you were suppose to dig faster to get to the other side? :rofl:
     
  20. bac1023

    bac1023

    104,026
    3,479
    Sep 26, 2004
    PA
    :animlol: