[Insta-Gator]

I just learned today that the Super Carry does not have the Swartz safety.

I don't see a reference on the web site on which has or does not have the Swartz fp safety.

Are there other models that don't?

Some compare this design to the model 1 Kimbers. Does it matter? If so, how/why?

 

[Chuck43]

I just learned today that the Super Carry does not have the Swartz safety.

I don't see a reference on the web site on which has or does not have the Swartz fp safety.

Are there other models that don't?

Some compare this design to the model 1 Kimbers. Does it matter? If so, how/why?

Any Kimber model that ends in II has the Swartz safety.

 

[Insta-Gator]

Any Kimber model that ends in II has the Swartz safety.

Then according to the list of models on the web site, the Micro, Master, and Super are not II, nor is the Classic Carry Pro.

Why would anyone object to a firing pin block, unless it caused operational problems.

 

[Marshall]

When I took both my PCII apart to replace the recoil springs {with the slide off} I noticed when I squeezed the grip safety a little pin popped out of the top of the frame. Is that the Schwartz Safety??

I know I was told that when I put the slide back on to make sure it wasn't sticking out so the slide wouldn't break it off and the gun wouldn't fire.

 

[Chuck43]

That's the actuator for the safety, the safety is in the slide.

 

[Insta-Gator]

The piece that comes up pushes the firing pin block up so it can go forward when the hammer strikes the firing pin.

 

[Chuck43]

By Jove, I think he's got it, yes, he does, he's got it.

 

[Insta-Gator]

Well, Kim's got it, anyway.

I still don't quite understand the serious objections to the series II or mod 80 from some in the 1911 world. If it works as designed, and apparently it does, then why would the gun be perceived as 'better' without it?

 

[Islander]

I'm sure it's perceived like the internal lock on new Smith & Wesson revolvers. Not the original design so therefore it's not good. I don't have a problem with either one.

 

[Lineman]

Some of us grumpy old folks have a hard time cottoning up to new fangled changes!!!

However, as in the movie Space Balls, you should, "USE THE SWARTZ"!!!

 

[PorscheVille]

Some of us grumpy old folks have a hard time cottoning up to new fangled changes!!!

Haha. I read somewhere that the Swartz safety was introduced in 1937 which of course predates Kimber. I think it is a bit funny how bent out of shape some people get about small design modifications to an internal mechanism yet they will add lasers. I guess since I own a 4-inch Pro model with a Swartz safety, I must be a heretic to purists. But I expect any technology to go through improvements and design updates over time. But when you look at the 1911, 95% of the design is unchanged since it was first introduced. What I have read on other forums that refer to Kimber and Smith & Wesson as crappy guns is obviously the rants of haters.

 

[Chuck43]

Haha. I read somewhere that the Swartz safety was introduced in 1937 which of course predates Kimber. I think it is a bit funny how bent out of shape some people get about small design modifications to an internal mechanism yet they will add lasers. I guess since I own a 4-inch Pro model with a Swartz safety, I must be a heretic to purists. But I expect any technology to go through improvements and design updates over time. But when you look at the 1911, 95% of the design is unchanged since it was first introduced. What I have read on other forums that refer to Kimber and Smith & Wesson as crappy guns is obviously the rants of haters.

Let's face it, some people just aren't happy unless they have something to bitch about.

 

[Nellybelle]

The original Swartz safety on the Colt is activated by the trigger I believe.
The additional resistance with the Colt trigger and Swartz safety has caused some to curse it and think it increase trigger pull and messes up the feel of the Colt trigger.

The Kimber safety is not a true Swartz safety but everyone refers to it as such. However I believe it is activated by the grip safety and causes no added resistance to the Kimber trigger.

Those who know more than I can correct me if I am wrong. But I think this is pretty much the way it is.

If it says II on the slide it will have the "Swartz Safety" . If not it doesn't.

 

[Chuck43]

The original Swartz safety on the Colt is activated by the trigger I believe.
The additional resistance with the Colt trigger and Swartz safety has caused some to curse it and think it increase trigger pull and messes up the feel of the Colt trigger.

The Kimber safety is not a true Swartz safety but everyone refers to it as such. However I believe it is activated by the grip safety and causes no added resistance to the Kimber trigger.

Those who know more than I can correct me if I am wrong. But I think this is pretty much the way it is.

If it says II on the slide it will have the "Swartz Safety" . If not it doesn't.

You're right Dan, the Swartz safety on a Kimber is activated by the grip safety.

 

[Lineman]

Sheeesh!!!!

Let's face it, some people just aren't happy unless they have something to bitch about.

Some people wouldn't be happy if you hung them with a new rope!!!

 

[bigdog10]

I have a Kimber Classic Custom with no Swartz safety and personally I don't see the difference with any other 1911 that I've fired. the only issue is that there is one more thing that could go wrong. let the hanging begin.

 

[Chuck43]

I have Kimbers both with and without the Swartz Safety and I personally can't see any difference in the way they perform. It's really simple, if someone doesn't like the safety system just don't buy the gun.

 

[PorscheVille]

If it keeps me from shooting myself in the Swartz then I'm for it.

As, for trigger pull, my Pro Carry II trigger pull is short and sweet. In fact, watching someone else shoot it for the first time is funny. First shot, they're not ready for because they are used to a long pull. Second shot, they realize how smooth and light the trigger is. Third shot, they're hitting the bullseye and smiling. Then they don't want to give it up. Then they want to know how much I paid for it and where I got it.

 

[Insta-Gator]

If it keeps me from shooting myself in the Swartz then I'm for it.

As, for trigger pull, my Pro Carry II trigger pull is short and sweet. In fact, watching someone else shoot it for the first time is funny. First shot, they're not ready for because they are used to a long pull. Second shot, they realize how smooth and light the trigger is. Third shot, they're hitting the bullseye and smiling. Then they don't want to give it up. Then they want to know how much I paid for it and where I got it.

Ain't it the truth.

 

[Mike240]

The original Swartz safety on the Colt is activated by the trigger I believe.
The additional resistance with the Colt trigger and Swartz safety has caused some to curse it and think it increase trigger pull and messes up the feel of the Colt trigger.

The Kimber safety is not a true Swartz safety but everyone refers to it as such. However I believe it is activated by the grip safety and causes no added resistance to the Kimber trigger.

Those who know more than I can correct me if I am wrong. But I think this is pretty much the way it is.

If it says II on the slide it will have the "Swartz Safety" . If not it doesn't.

The Swartz differs from the Colt Series 80 system. The 80 system is trigger activated. The Swartz is grip activated and was when Colt used it briefly. The SW non E series guns had a fps that grip activated too but it was the Mochak design. All three have different patents.