The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Handguns: The Semi-automatic Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old January 20, 2013, 06:34 PM   #1
TennJed
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 26, 2010
Posts: 1,523
Glock Cominolli thumb safety

Browsing the Internet I saw some things about Gocks with a Cominolli thumb safety. I know all about how glocks are already safe and they were not designed for thumb safety so you can save bandwidth and just not post if you have never used one or know any actual results for with the thumb safety. If you want to mention they are unneeded, why not just skip this thread and move along to another one. Seriously I do understand the concept of glock not having a thumb safety and if you want a thumb safety get another gun, but this product has been around for a few years now, so smoneone must be buying it and I am wondering the results. Most research I have done on it brings up threads with people just bashing the idea. I would like to avoid that if possible and get some actual info on it.

I am wondering does anyone know any actual problems that have happened as a result of these safeties? Any actual accounts of they causing problems with a glock? Anyone have one that can report how it has functions? Has it stood up the test of time? Is is still "tight" or did it loosen up over time.

Any feedback from owners or any actual incidents cited would be appriciated.
Thanks
__________________
Find out just how tall I am
By jumping in the middle of a river

Last edited by TennJed; January 20, 2013 at 06:48 PM.
TennJed is offline  
Old January 20, 2013, 07:22 PM   #2
batmann
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 14, 2004
Location: Greenwood, IN
Posts: 689
I own a Glock 22 and while I have NO experience with the mentioned add on safety, I feel that it is a bad idea.
I you decide to try it, please keep us posted on how it turns out.
batmann is offline  
Old January 20, 2013, 07:42 PM   #3
dayman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 18, 2011
Location: The Woods
Posts: 1,080
Didn't Glock make some guns with thumb safeties for a military contract (England maybe) a few years back. So, it should be possible - from a mechanical standpoint - to do it without effecting reliability. Is the commercial safety just a copy of the one that Glock engineered, was it the reverse, or are they completely unrelated?
For day to day carry - the role a Glock would play for me - I prefer not to have a mechanical safety, but I would definitely be interested to know how, and how well the cominolli safety works. So good luck, and I"ll be sure to follow this thread.
__________________
si vis pacem para bellum
dayman is offline  
Old January 20, 2013, 08:06 PM   #4
blackamos
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 19, 2000
Location: Michigan
Posts: 572
I have never used the thumb safety but have shot a Glock with the lone wolf side of trigger safety. All though would not install one myself if your inclined to add a safety to a Glock that is not a bad way to go.
__________________
Know of that you speak,
Amos
blackamos is offline  
Old January 20, 2013, 08:28 PM   #5
plouffedaddy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 13, 2011
Location: Carolina
Posts: 3,238
Quote:
Didn't Glock make some guns with thumb safeties for a military contract (England maybe) a few years back.
Correct; G17s for Israel. They are still in use by some small units and they occasionally pop up on gunbroker as well from time to time.
__________________
Mrgunsngear's Youtube Channel
Certified Glock Armorer
plouffedaddy is offline  
Old February 14, 2013, 01:35 AM   #6
Chrysolithos
Junior Member
 
Join Date: February 13, 2013
Posts: 1
I have had experience with 2 types of safeties on my Gock 30s. The first one was installed at the insistence of a gunsmith who was doing a trigger job on my first Glock in August 1008, a Gen 2 30. http://www.siderlock.com/ I used it for over three years carrying it daily. Easy to use and made me feel better about carrying with one in the chamber. BUT! Note that using the Siderlock violates one of the four basic safety rules. Finger off of trigger until you are shooting the gun. And then I heard from the gunsmith that installed it that it had caused a slam fire in one case. And finally, when I showed it to Massad Ayoob at a MAG40 class last year, he didn't think it was very safe. So I took it off.

I then installed a Cominolli safety on my new Gen 3 30. Installing it is not a job to try if you are not comfortable completely dismantling your Glock but I had no problem. (But I've also taken the 1 day Glock armorer's course.)
I have been carrying it for 7 months now and like it just fine. It's very easy to move the safety off with the thumb as the gun is drawn. (Just like my 1911) It has a nice tactile click when activated in either direction.

There is definitely pros and cons about adding a manual safety to a Glock, but for me, when I read about LEOs who are still alive because the person who managed to get their gun from them was unable to kill them with because they couldn't find the on switch, convinced me that it was an extra layer of safety worth having.
Chrysolithos is offline  
Old February 14, 2013, 08:48 AM   #7
dajowi
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 2, 2005
Posts: 976
I sent a Glock 36 to Ten Ring Precision to have the Cominolli safety installed. It worked as advertised without any issues.
dajowi is offline  
Old February 14, 2013, 06:28 PM   #8
mesamay2003
Member
 
Join Date: February 5, 2013
Posts: 20
I had one installed on my EDC Glock 30...works great, just as advertised...love it.
mesamay2003 is offline  
Old February 15, 2013, 10:42 PM   #9
BuckRub
Junior member
 
Join Date: October 3, 2012
Location: Central Texas
Posts: 1,046
Funny, I buy Glocks because they have no safety!
BuckRub is offline  
Old February 16, 2013, 12:05 AM   #10
Dan-O
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 3, 2011
Location: Kansas City
Posts: 377
^^^^

Exactly!!
Dan-O is offline  
Old February 16, 2013, 12:20 AM   #11
jason_iowa
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 30, 2011
Posts: 686
No gun is "safe" added manual or mechanical safeties just add the illusion of safety.
jason_iowa is offline  
Old February 16, 2013, 12:34 AM   #12
Bulldawg55
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 12, 2010
Location: GEORGIA
Posts: 196
Glock Cominolli thumb safety

I installed the Cominolli safety on my G33 because I use it with a Clipdraw belt clip. My two bestest buddies insisted on it!
Bulldawg55 is offline  
Old February 18, 2013, 10:15 PM   #13
mesamay2003
Member
 
Join Date: February 5, 2013
Posts: 20
I installed the safety on my Glock 30 as an added safety when reholstering, plus I am used to 1911's so it doesn't bother me...
mesamay2003 is offline  
Old February 19, 2013, 02:13 AM   #14
2ndamd
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 27, 2005
Posts: 619
I too have considered this option.
I was heckled for asking.
Some good responses said
Ten Ring Precision does a very good job.
I never tried it though.
G30s and G21s are natural still.
But, i still consider it from time to time.
Watching thread for more info.
__________________
Molon Labe
2ndamd is offline  
Old February 19, 2013, 07:57 AM   #15
Sir Loads-A-Lot
Member
 
Join Date: July 17, 2010
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 88
TennJedd...
I know this is all about Glock's being more safe and you should do what your common sense tells you to do.
I put a similar post on a forum recently about having a Murabito Safety on a S&W revolver for my wife's carry. Nearly everyone was against the idea but I did it anyway. The best thing I ever did. There is no differance from having a manual safety on a DA semi and a revolver. Good luck.
Sir Loads-A-Lot is offline  
Old February 20, 2013, 10:27 AM   #16
Gaerek
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 3, 2012
Location: Arizona
Posts: 939
If you want a gun with a safety, there are dozens of manufacturers, and hundreds of handguns that have them on them. Personally, I have an issue with adding something to a carry gun that fundamentally changes how the gun operates. If I wanted a gun with a safety, I'd buy a gun with a safety. Part of the reason I picked a Glock as a carry gun is because it doesn't have a manual safety.

Manual safety devices are an illusion of safety. They don't take the place of good firearm handling practices but some people think they do. Bottom line, a gun won't go off if you don't touch the trigger. Guns can still go off, if you touch the trigger, even with a safety.
Gaerek is offline  
Old February 20, 2013, 10:35 AM   #17
Fishbed77
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 23, 2010
Posts: 2,691
Quote:
No gun is "safe" added manual or mechanical safeties just add the illusion of safety.
All modern guns are perfectly safe.

They are inanimate hunks of metal.

Some users, however, are unsafe.
Fishbed77 is offline  
Old February 20, 2013, 03:42 PM   #18
chris in va
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 26, 2004
Location: Louisville KY
Posts: 12,527
Quote:
. Manual safety devices are an illusion of safety. They don't take the place of good firearm handling practices but some people think they do. Bottom line, a gun won't go off if you don't touch the trigger. Guns can still go off, if you touch the trigger, even with a safety.
Awesome! Let's take off the thumb and grip safety from 1911's with that line of thinking.

Quote:
.Part of the reason I picked a Glock as a carry gun is because it doesn't have a manual safety
Sure it does...on the trigger face.
chris in va is offline  
Old February 20, 2013, 05:55 PM   #19
Gaerek
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 3, 2012
Location: Arizona
Posts: 939
Quote:
Awesome! Let's take off the thumb and grip safety from 1911's with that line of thinking.
Last I checked, we were talking about Glocks.

Last I checked, the safety on the 1911 was part of the design.

Last I checked, the trigger on most 1911's is FAR easier to pull accidently than that of a Glock (which is what we're talking about).

Last I checked, I don't normally carry a 1911 for just this reason (as in, I don't trust mechanical safeties).

Next?

Quote:
Sure it does...on the trigger face.
I don't trust that safety for anything. It will provide some measure of safety in some circumstances, but if anything is pressing directly on the trigger, that safety does nothing.

My point was that I didn't want to have to fumble with a safety when drawing to fire. I don't have to fumble with that safety. My finger goes to trigger, safety is disengaged without thinking about it.
Gaerek is offline  
Old February 20, 2013, 05:56 PM   #20
9mm
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 9, 2011
Location: Land of the Free
Posts: 2,711
A gun made without a safety, then installed? Why don't you install a safety on your revolver?
__________________
See user title
9mm is offline  
Old February 20, 2013, 06:01 PM   #21
RoundsAMinute
Junior Member
 
Join Date: February 19, 2013
Posts: 8
Best "safety" is the carrier of the gun and his/her thinking.
RoundsAMinute is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:59 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.11957 seconds with 9 queries