Posted: 6/24/2009 9:23:20 AM EDT
|
Okay, I know this subject (Swartz Safety) has been discussed ad nauseum. But, I have to make a final decision whether to leave it alone, or remove the system entirely. I have a Kimber Pro Raptor II. I have read everything I can find about the Swartz and am actually leaning towards the removal of the system. And guys, PLEASE....I'm not looking for opinions on manufacturers or Kimber bashing. I am aware that Colt activates the device on Series 80 guns via trigger as opposed to the grip safety and that Springfield instead chooses to use lighter firing pins and heavier springs, etc.....to comply with the drop-fire safety requirements. I like my Kimber. I'm keeping it.
What I'm hoping to get is some commentary based on real life experience and/or knowledge regarding the removal of the Swartz Safety system. My Kimber was purchased for the purpose of being my primary carry weapon, and it still is. That being the case, I just want to get it right. Uh, for me that is. Any positive or educational responses will be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance. |
|
I removed mine in my Kimber.
Well most the way anyways. I took out that stupid pin, and then put a series 70 firing pin in the gun. It has run fine in that configuration(it is just a range gun however) If your going to carry this gun and wanted to remove that safety I would do the modification I have done, and then do the troublesome task of removing the rear sight to remove the firing pin block. I think brownells or somewhere like that has parts to plug the holes left from that safety device if you wanted them. IMHO I have never had any problems with the two Kimbers I have owned due to the safety system. Unless you were having problems with it I wouldn't remove it, but its your gun, do as you please. |
|
Quoted:
If it works leave it alone  I have to agree with this...if you didn't know about the swartz safety would it even bother you? I have handled a Warrior and a Custom II and for the most part you can't tell the difference from a feeling standpoint. If it's piece of mind and you'd simply feel better if it was removed...go for it. Personally it doesn't bug me on my Custom II. |
|
Quoted:
I have a Kimber Custom II. First thing I did was to remove the swartz. Thanks SGB. I received a message from another member that you might be the guy to talk to about this. Just how does one go about doing this? I'm no "smith" for sure, but I can handle a relatively simple procedure. |
|
It's pretty simple, provided your Kimber cooperates. Kimber sights have been known to be a bear to remove. 1 - Drive out your rear sight (mark the sight & slide so you can return the sight to it's original position) 2 - remove plunger and spring 3 - Drive rear sight back in 4 - Remove the lift bar from the frame and clip the leg off 5 - Replace lift bar (acts as a spacer to keep things inline) and your done.  |
|
I removed all the internals. I prefer not to have something that is known to be failure prone in a carry pistol.
I drop tested it, it does fire when dropped directly on the muzzle, not when dropped at any other angle. I've been meaning to swap the FP spring for a heavier one and test again, but haven't found my spare FP springs since I cleaned my gun room. |
|
First....thanks to everyone for the feedback.
I now have 5 pretty solid votes for removing the system, 1 solid vote for "leave it alone" and one vote for "whatever gives me peace of mind". Overall and considering how much I've read and heard about this now, I can't think of another subject where the opinions are so evenly split down the middle. Maybe I need to do a poll? Anyway, I'm basically left with this: Remove the system right now: 1. The gun has extra parts that do not add to performance. 2. Although not common, failures or breakages have been documented. 3. This IS a primary carry weapon and "peace of mind" is significant. Leave the damn thing alone: 1. It ain't broke! 2. It IS safer to carry. 3. Possible liability if an accident occurs and I have "altered" a safety mechanism. Oh, what to do? Maybe a poll is in order. Thanks again guys. |
|
Quoted:
How about sell it and purchase a 1911 that doesn't incorporate a firing pin block. Yeah, thought about that. Just hate to take a beating on the resale. But, Sure do like the Wilson CQB (hard chrome) after looking around a bit. I believe no Swartz issue with those, eh? I understand Springfield is another choice. How about some suggestions there SGB? Help a brutha out here. |
|
Mostly depends on your price point. None of the Semi Customs utilize a firing pin block. Kimber makes the Warrior and SIS without the swartz and Colt makes the NRM Series 70 without a firing pin block. The Springfield TRP and MC Operator are top choices of production 1911's that are firing pin block free as well. |
| You can also bypass the Swartz by installing a 70 series firing pin. I would also install an xtra power firing pin spring. I have not done this but have read several that did without a problem and the Swartz cannot engage. However, for me, if I were carrying it, I would probably remove it. When I bought the Eclipse the swartz block had been removed. The lever was still installed. Worked fine. When I sent the slide in to Kimber for sight replacement, they re installed the Swartz. Still no problems. But it's a range gun. I carry a Springfield Champion that does not have any firing pin blocks. |
|
Quoted: Mostly depends on your price point. None of the Semi Customs utilize a firing pin block. Kimber makes the Warrior and SIS without the swartz and Colt makes the NRM Series 70 without a firing pin block. The Springfield TRP and MC Operator are top choices of production 1911's that are firing pin block free as well. I am pretty sure that ALL of the Springfield models are firing pin block free. I'm not implying that you missed that, only that it was unclear from the above post. Also, all but the pro have their proprietary small diameter firing pin. I have never heard of anyone having difficulty with that though. It would be nice to have a good list (possible new thread) of all the modifications from the stock GI spec (especially things like firing pin blocks, etc) made on popular production 1911s. MAX |
|
Quoted:
Mostly depends on your price point. None of the Semi Customs utilize a firing pin block. Kimber makes the Warrior and SIS without the swartz and Colt makes the NRM Series 70 without a firing pin block. The Springfield TRP and MC Operator are top choices of production 1911's that are firing pin block free as well. I take Semi Custom to mean WC, Brown, Baer, etc? You know, I think there may be a TRP in my future. Truth is, that's precisely what I intended to buy, but after some discussion with the guy at the gun store (good guy, by the way), we steered over to the Kimbers for reasons that I don't specifically recollect at the moment. Anyway, I must retract what I stated earlier about keeping the Kimber. I've never really warmed up to the bushingless "I need a paperclip" to disassemble thing either. But for the record, it shoots like a dream. Had I done what I intended in the first place, we wouldn't be having this discussion. Oh well, live and learn. Any strong feelings about one of the semi customs? |
| I voted "potentially problematic: remove" before I saw the "I would not even consider such a pistol", though it amuses me that you aren't looking for bashing when you add that to your poll. So aside from the fact that I would never own this kind of pistol, I have heard the Swartz fail to engage with the same remote but real frequency as the lawyer lock on the S&W revolvers. That's enough for me to pull that out first thing on a defensive weapon. A range toy, maybe not. |
|
Quoted:
I voted "potentially problematic: remove" before I saw the "I would not even consider such a pistol", though it amuses me that you aren't looking for bashing when you add that to your poll. So aside from the fact that I would never own this kind of pistol, I have heard the Swartz fail to engage with the same remote but real frequency as the lawyer lock on the S&W revolvers. That's enough for me to pull that out first thing on a defensive weapon. A range toy, maybe not. Thanks for the opinion. It certainly makes me more comfortable with my feelings about this issue. On the bashing thing....I was just trying to avoid a bunch of "Kimber sucks" replies. My focus is strictly on the subject of the Swartz style mechanism, regardless of the manufacturer. I understand how that choice might be interpreted as conflicting with the statement though. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Mostly depends on your price point. None of the Semi Customs utilize a firing pin block. Kimber makes the Warrior and SIS without the swartz and Colt makes the NRM Series 70 without a firing pin block. The Springfield TRP and MC Operator are top choices of production 1911's that are firing pin block free as well. I take Semi Custom to mean WC, Brown, Baer, etc? You know, I think there may be a TRP in my future. Truth is, that's precisely what I intended to buy, but after some discussion with the guy at the gun store (good guy, by the way), we steered over to the Kimbers for reasons that I don't specifically recollect at the moment. Anyway, I must retract what I stated earlier about keeping the Kimber. I've never really warmed up to the bushingless "I need a paperclip" to disassemble thing either. But for the record, it shoots like a dream. Had I done what I intended in the first place, we wouldn't be having this discussion. Oh well, live and learn. Any strong feelings about one of the semi customs? Don't think you can go wrong with a Baer. And generally they run a little lower than the WIlson's or Brown's. |
What's brought you to this epiphany ? Is there story about a pond full of alligators here someplace......