[Guest]

Would it have been that much trouble for KT to have made this safety feature into the slide of the P11? Is it something that could now be added and those that wanted it could purchase the upgraded slides? After installing an old Smith and Wesson magazine finger extension onto the 10 round mag the other night I fell in love with the P11 all over again. But, becasue all of my pistols seem to have a firing pin safety it is something that I have become accustomed to. Yzguy posted the drop test results on his web site and they say that it is unlikely to happen, but IT STILL CAN HAPPEN that if you drop it correctly it will go off. Flyer, if you can create a slide stop where there wasn't one why can't you get busy on a firing pin safety.

 

[Flyer]

Installing a firing pin stop would be a MAJOR operation!
The P-11 is no more prone to drop-fire than any other pistol of it's type, and far less than most... I don't see the need for one.
Remember, we're not talking about a 1911 carried cocked and locked here, with hammer poised and ready to drop...
To really feel you need a firing pin safety is akin to being sure you're going to drop your pistol from a decent height one day.
Flyer

 

[Guest]

than any other pistol of it's type

I am curious as to what other types of pistols you would consider to be like the KT. I have Glocks, Sigs and Smiths and they all have firing pin safeties. I personally, other than an old Victory Model 38S&W, don't think that I have ever owned any firearms without a firing pin safety. I guess what puzzles me is that in this day and age of liability conscious gun manufacturers, I always wondered why KT would make a gun that doesn't have one. From my limited gun smithing, mostly with Glocks, it doesn't appear to be something that would affect the size of the pistol to the point that it would affect concealibility. I too don't plan to drop my pistol and after numerous foot chases with a weapon out I have yet to drop it. However, it does happen and it has been shown to happen with the KT's. Remember the old saying, If it weren't for bad luck, i'd have no luck at all!. If it can happen it usually will happen to me.

 

[Flyer]

Guns of it's type = .38 and .357 snubbies, mostly... and the Kahrs or Millenium autos.
Remember... a snubby HAS no firing pin block!
Flyer

 

[Guest]

NOT TRYING TO START A WAR HERE!!! I have (2) Kahr's and I think that they both have firing pin blocks, also my Smith 442 airweight bodyguard has some sort of mechanism that covers the firing pin until the hammer is fully to the rear. I think that this was to keep it from having an AD with a half cocked revolver.

The modern 9mm-class pocket guns are "drop-safe" and proper to carry with a round in the chamber.

This was taken from an article on the KAHR PM9, from their web site. Maybe if KT decides to make their single stack auto they could incorporate this into thier design plan. Flyer, Glock uses a plunger system to block the operation of the firing pin unless the trigger is pulled. I am confident with your knowledge of how these KT's work that you could come up with something....

Regards.

 

[Flyer]

No war, just lively discussion!
Most of the modern revolvers have a "transfer bar" safety that prevents the hammer from contacting the firing pin unless the trigger's pulled back... usually in the form of a bar that lowers from behind the firing pin as the trigger is pulled fully to the rear. Charter Arms was the first revolver manufacturer to offer this; all others followed suit.
Note, though, that this merely prevents the HAMMER from hitting the pin, in case it's DROPPED on the hammer. It doesn't lock the firing pin at all.
The P-11's hammer is completely concealed, so there's zero chance of this happening.

 

[Guest]

So is it that KT doesn't have a firing pin block becasue they feel that since the firing pin is fully enclosed, there is minimal chance if a direct hammer hit that would cause the gun to go off? I was always under the impression that if the gun was dropped muzzle first that it was possible to get an AD. If the latter is the case than you are correct there is really no need for a firing pin block. It would seem that the only way to engage the trigger would be intentionally. I understood from the drop test that the AD's were from dropping the gun on the muzzle.

 

[flyandscuba]

I think it is because the hammer of the KTs basically have no mass of their own (unlike that of a 1911 or revolver), it is the lightning fast strike from the spring and hammer that moves the firing pin.

Am I wrong in remembering that some of the ADs resulting from dropping of P-11s were those where someone decided to cut off a few coils of the firing pin spring?

However, my P7 has no hammer at all (uses a striker) but yet I believe that it has a firing pin safety...

 

[Guest]

I have Kahr's and Glocks that have no hammers but they have firing pin blocks. If the AD were from weapons that had been altered than that is one thing, I was under the impression from Yzguy's site that his test were with an unaltered gun. It just seems that a firing pin block, while the P11 doesn't have it would be a nice added safety feature that KT could put into future designs. I guess what is driving this is that my deapartment won't allow KT's, eventhough we carry Smith and Wesson 9mm autos because it doesn't have a firing pin block. These are the only weapons that I know of that are not Smith's but will accomidate their magazines. Ever wonder why that is :?: Also, what would be the likely hood that KT could design a P11 that also took Beretta mags, or Glock...like the sub rifles do....hmmmmmm

 

[Jim Isom]

Might want to take a look at this site. The test was done for several makes/models of handguns. The test was a four foot drop onto a 1 inch thick rubber mat over concrete. I think yzguy's test were MUCH tougher being, as I recall, directly onto concrete. A couple of Taurus', a couple of Kimbers, and a Sig failed the test. Here's the link:

http://www.nlectc.org/pdffiles/pistolsbulletin2000.pdf

 

[Guest]

Wow, I was glad to see that my daily carry 5946 passed all of the test. I wonder why they didn't test the KT's. In fairness i'll re-read yzguy's test and see how they compare. I am suprised to see that I currently own a good amount of the pistols that were tested. Thanks again for the site...

 

[Jim Isom]

This test was done for handguns typically issued to LEOs. Don't think many issue Kel Tecs. I wish yzguy would test the P11 using the same criteria (1inch rubber mat, etc). I'll bet the P11 wouldn't drop fire at four feet.

 

[flyandscuba]

Interesting that the HK USPs weren't included. I have several departments using those in various calibers.

 

[yzguy]

I think the original FP or Hammer blocks were incorporated to keep a blow to the rear of the exposed hammer from touching off a round. Because the KT's hammer and FP are totally exposed, this is not an issue.

I'm not sure that drop fires were considered with the original FP/hammer blocks...

Am I wrong in remembering that some of the ADs resulting from dropping of P-11s were those where someone decided to cut off a few coils of the firing pin spring?

a 100% Stock P-11 can drop fire from as little as 4 feet (with a stock FP spring NOT A CUT ONE):
http://www.1bad69.com/keltec/droptestresults.htm

Depending on the design of the pistol (FP spring weight, FP weight, and hammer shape/position/weight) the hammer may or may not have anything to do with drop fires. My series 70 (no FP block) 1911 drop fired from 2 feet in the clocked and locked position (hammer had nothing to do with it).

The P-11 design leaves the hammer resting on the FP however. So when dropped you not only have the momentum of the FP, but also that of the Hammer, and some more force from the preload of the main spring. All of these combined contribute to the ability of the P-11 to drop fire. I also tested my P-11 without the hammer installed to see if it would drop fire without the Hammers assistance. It would not, even with a clipped (weakened) FP spring from up to 8 feet.

Because the P-32 has a hammer block, the hammer does not rest on the FP, and add to the momentum as it does in the P-11 design. The P-32 will not drop fire from 10 feet (even after multiple drops on the same case).

So in the P-11's design, EITHER a hammer block OR a FP block would virtually eliminate the possibility of a drop fire because the FP alone can not overcome the FP spring without the hammers assistance.

I do differ a bit from Flyers opinion (does not happen often ). I do agree that it is not a large concern, but it is still a POSSIBILITY. If I could get a FP or hammer block in my P-11 that was reliable, totally internal, and automatically disengaged when pulling the trigger, I would have it. If there is one more accident that I KNOW CAN happen, and I have a way to prevent it with no drawbacks..... WHY NOT??

This test was done for handguns typically issued to LEOs. Don't think many issue Kel Tecs. I wish yzguy would test the P11 using the same criteria (1inch rubber mat, etc). I'll bet the P11 wouldn't drop fire at four feet

A 1 inch thick rubber mat is to vague a description for me to accurately duplicate, so trying would really not prove anything.... I am however pretty sure it would pass that test in stock form though....

 

[yzguy]

oh, and for those that don't know how I did mine, I put the pistol in this pvc contraption:

and covered the grip to avoid scrapes and scratches on it. Probably not something I'd do with an expensive 100% gun, or something that was extremely accurate, but no problem for a carry piece.

oh and in this thing they were dropped directly onto concrete, muzzle first.

for more on how I did it:
http://www.1bad69.com/keltec/droptest.htm

 

[Flyer]

Yo yz,
It's not that I disagree that a firing pin block would be a good idea... it's that it would be an extensive mod that would probably take a lot of R&D.
KT is best suited for that!
Flyer

 

[yzguy]

yes, but a Simpler idea of the hammer block would not be that hard.... I've already got the idea in my head, just have to work out the details....

First this is how it would work (KT could probably do it a bit better, but for an "add on" thing this is how I'd do it, or at least my latest theory on it). It would ONLY catch the hammer and hold it away from the FP (just barely) if the hammer was pulled back (read, the slide racked) while the trigger is in the fully forward position. This is what happens when you chamber a round. The difference between my idea and the P-32/P-3AT design, is that I would not have the hammer catch on the FP block after every shot, only the initial loading of the pistol (that is when you are carrying it). If the trigger is held back while you rack the slide it would act the same as it does now (the hammer would come to rest on the FP when the slide returns forward). This accomplishes 2 things, 1) makes the design more simple and 2) eliminates the possibility of the "2 reset points" that the P-32/P-3AT have. It would also make the first pull slightly shorter than all the rest (because the hammer would be starting in a "slightly cocked" position), but just a little.

Now on to how (Flyer may actually be able to make this easier than myself )....

This will require the addition of 4 parts, one hole in the frame, and some hammer modifications (all in all if a drop in kit were to be made, the only modification to a stock P-11 would be to make the hole in the frame, the kit could come with all needed parts and a modified hammer).

Think of how the "half cock" on a 1911 works, especially about how the hammer and sear interact. The hammer would need a notch cut out (I'm thinking somewhere in the lower front of the hammer) to form a ledge for the sear to catch on (maybe not as dramatic of a lip as the "1/2 cock" catch but more than the "full cock" catch). The hole would be forward of the hammer axis hole and a bit lower (or maybe even below, where ever space permits). This hole will be all the way through the frame. A mini sear will go up into the middle of the frame and a pin through the new hole in the frame and the sear. Also a pretty light to medium spring (kinda like the one for a hammer block on the P-32) would put rotational force on the sear pushing it up towards the hammer (clockwise when looking at the right side of the pistol). Of course the new "Catch" on the hammer would be where the mini sear engages it on the bottom, but forward of where the trigger bar currently makes contact.

Now we have a sear that will catch the hammer and hold it off the fp all the time. Now we just need a way to fire it.

Remove a little thickness off of the right side of the hammer. Now make a flat plate with a hole in it to take up this thickness. The shape of this plate will kinda be a spiral, so that when the plate is rotated clockwise (while looking at the right side) it does not touch the sear, but as you twist it counter clockwise it begins to push it away. Then at the bottom of the plate a little piece to hang down and catch the "L" of the trigger bar. This makes it so the trigger bar rotates this new plate counter clockwise on the hammer axis which moves the sear out of the way, but when the trigger is allowed to move forward the sear (because it is under spring pressure) rotates the plate back and allows the sear to engage the hammer.

probably not the clearest thing, but my home computer is down right now, so I can't post stuff on my site to show pics of what I am talking about maybe Flyer will see what I am talking about.

 

[yzguy]

ok to clarify a bit, I originally misstated the direction of the sear, it should be under spring tension counter clockwise when looking at the right side (direction of the small arrow).

the flat plate (the thing on the right side) goes along side of the hammer (hammer axis goes through hole in the plate) and the distance between the edge of the plate and the hole varies (kinda hard for me to draw, but the hole is off center on purpose). So that when placed along side the hammer the transfer bar will catch on the piece that is sticking down, and as you pull the trigger it rotates and pushes the sear up and away from the hammer.

Here is a very rough sketch of the hammer, sear and plate:

 

[Flyer]

Yep, I see what you're getting at here...
Tellya what, though... why not just skip the entire "disconnector" portion of the mod and have the hammer catch after every shot like a P-32?
True, you'll lose your second-strike capability... but it's rare to have a misfire anyway, and you'll instantly improve and shorten the trigger pull!
Flyer

 

[Shotar]

True and in failure mode, you would simply revert back to the clearing drill one would use on any other auto loader. If this mod could get me a P-32 like pull I'd go for it. Even better as a Keltec available factory upgrade.