[10mmDWessonman]

I must apologize ahead of time I have a feeling I'm opening a vat of worms here and I hope no one gets upset with any of this. I was just talking to someone and took a look at my fathers Kimber, and my micro 9 and realized it's a series 80. I do not like series 80 for carry or at all to be honest. I think it's got too many moving parts to get dirty, bend or break or cause reliability issues and I am shocked as I wouldn't think Kimber would make a gun like this but it seems I was told All of their 1911's have the series 80 firing pin safety. I'm also told Sig has them on their 1911's too. I'm not knocking Kimber or Sig's quality I just do not agree with their choice in this respect, I also don't like the external ejector on the sig 1911's but that is another ball of wax we don't need to throw into the fire right now.
What are your opinions and am I alone in not liking the series 80 firing pin safety on the 1911s?

 

[msgt/ret]

I have a Kimber Custom and it is defiantly a series 70.

 

[10mmDWessonman]

Is that something new they are doing then? What model/year is it?

 

[msgt/ret]

Is that something new they are doing then? What model/year is it?

I don't know the year but the new ones are labeled Custom II.

 

[10mmDWessonman]

Well your lucky cause everyone I've seen lately are all series 80, what do you think of 70's 80's? I want to hear all opinions one or the other.

 

[gasmitty]

Back in the 80s when Colt came out with their Series 80 FP safety scheme, 90% of the shooting world decried it as forever ruining the chance to have a really good trigger on a 1911. That turned out to be far from the truth; it certainly doesn't improve the trigger, but a competent 1911-smith will provide you with a trigger on a Series 80 that even Rob Leatham or Bill Wilson would be hard-pressed to identify blindfolded as a Series 80.

"Too many parts to get dirty, bend or break..." - on paper, perhaps, but not borne out by actual service history. I don't know how many Series 80 1911s Colt sold, but I'd guess by now it's got to be several hundred thousand. Given that only a few dozen Springfield Armory XD-S had problems that resulted in a recall of about 40,000 guns, I think that if a reliability problem with Colt's Series 80 system existed it would have surfaced by now and that fact would be all over the internet.

Now if you want to get concerned about 1911 firing pin safety systems, Kimber's Swartz system might be a better target. More moving parts, and what some have described as a mechanism that's sensitive to slide timing. My Kimber Pro CDP II is so equipped, but a) in about 4000 rounds it's never had a problem, and b) there hasn't been a need to tear the gun down far enough to clean the detail parts. In all honesty, I'll probably neuter the Swartz system when the gun gets its first tear-down-to-parade-rest going over, but that won't be necessary until probably the 10K mark.

Frankly, I think you're dismissing perfectly good 1911s for the wrong reasons. If firing pin safeties or external extractors (which Saint John included in his last significant pistol design, the Hi-Power) were making guns noticeably unreliable, the market would have abandoned them big time - and that hasn't happened.

 

[PAcanis]

Like msgt said, the Kimbers labeled II have the firing pin block. I just bought a new Kimber a few months ago without. It simply says CDP Pro, as opposed to CDP Pro II. And of course the earlier ones, which are referred to as pre-II's, don't have the added safety.

 

[HotBrass45]

OP it's a good thing you discovered this issue in time. You need to get rid of those worthless paperweights and get something you can bet your life on. I'd be willing to take them off your hands for $100 apiece.

 

[AzQkr]

Post 6 is all the information the OP needs to make his own determination on carrying an 80's series. I presently have two carry 1911's, one 70, one 80's series. Trust both equally on the street.

 

[OD*]

Back in the 80s when Colt came out with their Series 80 FP safety scheme, 90% of the shooting world decried it as forever ruining the chance to have a really good trigger on a 1911. That turned out to be far from the truth; it certainly doesn't improve the trigger, but a competent 1911-smith will provide you with a trigger on a Series 80 that even Rob Leatham or Bill Wilson would be hard-pressed to identify blindfolded as a Series 80.

"Too many parts to get dirty, bend or break..." - on paper, perhaps, but not borne out by actual service history. I don't know how many Series 80 1911s Colt sold, but I'd guess by now it's got to be several hundred thousand. Given that only a few dozen Springfield Armory XD-S had problems that resulted in a recall of about 40,000 guns, I think that if a reliability problem with Colt's Series 809 system existed it would have surfaced by now and that fact would be all over the internet.

Now if you want to get concerned about 1911 firing pin safety systems, Kimber's Swartz system might be a better target. More moving parts, and what some have described as a mechanism that's sensitive to slide timing. My Kimber Pro CDP II is so equipped, but a) in about 4000 rounds it's never had a problem, and b) there hasn't been a need to tear the gun down far enough to clean the detail parts. In all honesty, I'll probably neuter the Swartz system when the gun gets its first tear-down-to-parade-rest going over, but that won't be necessary until probably the 10K mark.

Frankly, I think you're dismissing perfectly good 1911s for the wrong reasons. If firing pin safeties or external extractors (which Saint John included in his last significant pistol design, the Hi-Power) were making guns noticeably unreliable, the market would have abandoned them big time - and that hasn't happened.

Well said Gary!
But (you knew there was one coming :wink Browning did design the Hi-Power with an internal extractor, FN switched to an external extractor in 1962/'63.

 

[AzQkr]

I prefer those ring hammer over their spur p35's OD

 

[OD*]

I prefer those ring hammer over their spur p35's OD

Me too.

 

[1911srule]

Yup gasmitty has it covered well in #6. I think anyone who can shoot a 1911 well , would be well served with it as a ccw. Its served me well on active duty(series 70) and civilian carry(series 80) for...omg 35 yrs!

 

[5lima30ret]

Back in the 80s when Colt came out with their Series 80 FP safety scheme, 90% of the shooting world decried it as forever ruining the chance to have a really good trigger on a 1911. That turned out to be far from the truth; it certainly doesn't improve the trigger, but a competent 1911-smith will provide you with a trigger on a Series 80 that even Rob Leatham or Bill Wilson would be hard-pressed to identify blindfolded as a Series 80.

"Too many parts to get dirty, bend or break..." - on paper, perhaps, but not borne out by actual service history. I don't know how many Series 80 1911s Colt sold, but I'd guess by now it's got to be several hundred thousand. Given that only a few dozen Springfield Armory XD-S had problems that resulted in a recall of about 40,000 guns, I think that if a reliability problem with Colt's Series 809 system existed it would have surfaced by now and that fact would be all over the internet.

Now if you want to get concerned about 1911 firing pin safety systems, Kimber's Swartz system might be a better target. More moving parts, and what some have described as a mechanism that's sensitive to slide timing. My Kimber Pro CDP II is so equipped, but a) in about 4000 rounds it's never had a problem, and b) there hasn't been a need to tear the gun down far enough to clean the detail parts. In all honesty, I'll probably neuter the Swartz system when the gun gets its first tear-down-to-parade-rest going over, but that won't be necessary until probably the 10K mark.

Frankly, I think you're dismissing perfectly good 1911s for the wrong reasons. If firing pin safeties or external extractors (which Saint John included in his last significant pistol design, the Hi-Power) were making guns noticeably unreliable, the market would have abandoned them big time - and that hasn't happened.

^^^THIS!^^^

 

[ThirdShift]

Smitty said all that needs to be said about 70 vs 80.

I have a Kimber with the Schwartz (intentional Spaceballs reference) system. It's going bye bye one of these days. I have both Series 80 and Series 70 1911s. However, the one I'm building now is a Series 70.

I prefer the 70, but it's certainly not a dealbreaker if it's an 80. I certainly can't tell the difference when I shoot them.

 

[10mmDWessonman]

Back in the 80s when Colt came out with their Series 80 FP safety scheme, 90% of the shooting world decried it as forever ruining the chance to have a really good trigger on a 1911. That turned out to be far from the truth; it certainly doesn't improve the trigger, but a competent 1911-smith will provide you with a trigger on a Series 80 that even Rob Leatham or Bill Wilson would be hard-pressed to identify blindfolded as a Series 80.

"Too many parts to get dirty, bend or break..." - on paper, perhaps, but not borne out by actual service history. I don't know how many Series 80 1911s Colt sold, but I'd guess by now it's got to be several hundred thousand. Given that only a few dozen Springfield Armory XD-S had problems that resulted in a recall of about 40,000 guns, I think that if a reliability problem with Colt's Series 809 system existed it would have surfaced by now and that fact would be all over the internet.

Now if you want to get concerned about 1911 firing pin safety systems, Kimber's Swartz system might be a better target. More moving parts, and what some have described as a mechanism that's sensitive to slide timing. My Kimber Pro CDP II is so equipped, but a) in about 4000 rounds it's never had a problem, and b) there hasn't been a need to tear the gun down far enough to clean the detail parts. In all honesty, I'll probably neuter the Swartz system when the gun gets its first tear-down-to-parade-rest going over, but that won't be necessary until probably the 10K mark.

Frankly, I think you're dismissing perfectly good 1911s for the wrong reasons. If firing pin safeties or external extractors (which Saint John included in his last significant pistol design, the Hi-Power) were making guns noticeably unreliable, the market would have abandoned them big time - and that hasn't happened.

Thank you very much, I am new to owning 1911's and I honestly wanted to know, working the physics out in my mind the idea of the 70 series I like better but you are right if it was a problem it would be all over. As for the external extractors for me it's an ascetic thing. I never thought they were unreliable.

 

[ghost tracker]

When one has as many "rings on their tree" as I do, the (19)70's and (19)80's music gets kinda' muddled-up anyway. :blink:
I feel that same way about 1911...trigger configurations. :yup:

(*"It's got a good beat, you can dance to it. I give it a 10".)
*with special thanks to "American Bandstand". :biggrin2:

 

[gglass]

For a non-custom 1911, it is very hard to beat the quality, cost and specs of a Springfield Armory 1911. SA 1911's have never needed a Schwartz or Sires 80 drop safety to be safe. By utilizing a low-mass, titanium Firing Pin and a strong FP spring, the SA 1911's pass all safety testing... No additional parts needed.

 

[PAcanis]

For a non-custom 1911, it is very hard to beat the quality, cost and specs of a Springfield Armory 1911. SA 1911's have never needed a Schwartz or Sires 80 drop safety to be safe. By utilizing a low-mass, titanium Firing Pin and a strong FP spring, the SA 1911's pass all safety testing... No additional parts needed.

Is SA using titanium firing pins now? I thought Ruger was the only non-custom maker doing this.
Of course, SA has that Internal Locking System. Not a deal breaker either, but it's there.

 

[gasmitty]

For a non-custom 1911, it is very hard to beat the quality, cost and specs of a Springfield Armory 1911. SA 1911's have never needed a Schwartz or Sires 80 drop safety to be safe. By utilizing a low-mass, titanium Firing Pin and a strong FP spring, the SA 1911's pass all safety testing... No additional parts needed.

That's certainly a simple approach which I prefer, and which will wind up in my Kimber eventually.