Glock Cominolli thumb safety

TennJed · January 20, 2013, 06:34 PM

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

batmann · January 20, 2013, 07:22 PM

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.

dayman · January 20, 2013, 07:42 PM

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.

blackamos · January 20, 2013, 08:06 PM

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.

Mrgunsngear · January 20, 2013, 08:28 PM

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.

Chrysolithos · February 14, 2013, 01:35 AM

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.

dajowi · February 14, 2013, 08:48 AM

I sent a Glock 36 to Ten Ring Precision to have the Cominolli safety installed. It worked as advertised without any issues.

mesamay2003 · February 14, 2013, 06:28 PM

I had one installed on my EDC Glock 30...works great, just as advertised...love it.

BuckRub · February 15, 2013, 10:42 PM

Funny, I buy Glocks because they have no safety!

Dan-O · February 16, 2013, 12:05 AM

^^^^

Exactly!!

jason_iowa · February 16, 2013, 12:20 AM

No gun is "safe" added manual or mechanical safeties just add the illusion of safety.

Bulldawg55 · February 16, 2013, 12:34 AM

I installed the Cominolli safety on my G33 because I use it with a Clipdraw belt clip. My two bestest buddies insisted on it!

mesamay2003 · February 18, 2013, 10:15 PM

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...

2ndamd · February 19, 2013, 02:13 AM

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.

Sir Loads-A-Lot · February 19, 2013, 07:57 AM

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.

Gaerek · February 20, 2013, 10:27 AM

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.

Fishbed77 · February 20, 2013, 10:35 AM

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.

chris in va · February 20, 2013, 03:42 PM

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.

Gaerek · February 20, 2013, 05:55 PM

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.

9mm · February 20, 2013, 05:56 PM

A gun made without a safety, then installed? Why don't you install a safety on your revolver?

RoundsAMinute · February 20, 2013, 06:01 PM

Best "safety" is the carrier of the gun and his/her thinking.

Pistoler0 · November 15, 2019, 05:00 PM

"" A gun made without a safety, then installed? Why don't you install a safety on your revolver? ""

A vehicle made without a winch, then installed? Why don't you install a winch on your Prius? --- Similar rhetorical question, no?

In any case, I may not want a winch on my Prius, but I may install the winch on my F-150. I know, I could buy a Jeep with a winch already installed at the factory, but I want an F-150 with a winch in it.

Likewise I do not want to install a thumb safety on a revolver, but I want it on a Glock. I know that I could buy a striker fired Springfield XD Full Size with a factory installed thumb safety, but what I want is a Glock with a safety on it.

Some do not like winches on their trucks, some do not like safeties on their guns, some do not like mustard on their hamburger.

I personally like winches, safeties and mustard, and I like to put them wherever I want, and one of the many reasons why the USA is so great is that we all have choices to do or do not as we please.

Behold my exercise in free choice:

Which I daily use for this:

.... notice how in addition to the thumb safety I hold my thumb on "the gadget" which works like holding the hammer down on a DA pistol while re-holstering.

Probability of Glock leg =
Chance of: depressing the trigger + thumb safety off + also not pressing on "the gadget with thumb" = 0.00000000001 %
The only way it could be lower is with no round in the chamber.

""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.""

ok, what would happen if you forget to depress the trigger when you have to fire?

Chance of: needing to fire a shot + not disengaging thumb safety = chance of doing so with a 1911 = (almost) chance of forgetting to depress the trigger itself.

Rifles have safeties, carbines have safeties, the AR15 has a safety, many pistols have safeties. If your firearm has a safety you will not forget to disengage it any more than you will forget to press the trigger.

Put a safety wherever you wish, and don't have a safety where you don't want it, that's it.

FAS1 · November 15, 2019, 06:07 PM

I started buying Glocks and was the first person that I personally know to buy one of those plastic POS's (as my friends called Glocks at the time). I bought a Gen2 G17 for home defense because I did not want an externally manipulated safety on my home defense gun and 17 + 1 rounds were unheard of at that time. Anyway, I trained a lot and wanted it to be second nature to handle the gun quickly but safely. My carry gun is a G26 so I have a common platform and I wouldn't have any safeties on either still.

The Gadget is interesting to me and I can understand someone using it especially with AIWB and re-holstering. Accidentally getting clothing in the way can and does happen, but usually because we get to complacent in the process. If it's intended to counter your finger on the trigger, then it would seem just as probable that you might forget to put your thumb on the gadget as it would be to not have your finger on the trigger. Probably would be just that one time when Murphy is paying attention.

precision_shooter · November 15, 2019, 07:13 PM

You all do realize this is a 6+ year old thread that you dug up and posted on? Necrothreadia is Alive and well these days.

**JohnKSa** · November 15, 2019, 09:11 PM

I think we can let this one rest in peace, especially since the information that brought it back to life has also been posted on several other threads.

January 20, 2013, 06:34 PM	#1
TennJed Senior Member Join Date: September 26, 2010 Posts: 1,536	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.

January 20, 2013, 07:42 PM	#3
dayman Senior Member Join Date: April 18, 2011 Location: The Woods Posts: 1,197	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

January 20, 2013, 08:06 PM	#4
blackamos Senior Member Join Date: August 19, 2000 Location: Michigan Posts: 580	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

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!

February 19, 2013, 02:13 AM	#14
2ndamd Senior Member Join Date: December 27, 2005 Location: Brownsville thru El Paso Posts: 636	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. __________________ Museum of South Texas History: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IoSggAWEK4g

January 20, 2013, 07:22 PM	#2
batmann Senior Member Join Date: November 14, 2004 Location: Greenwood, IN Posts: 773	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.

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.

February 14, 2013, 08:48 AM	#7
dajowi Senior Member Join Date: November 2, 2005 Posts: 1,196	I sent a Glock 36 to Ten Ring Precision to have the Cominolli safety installed. It worked as advertised without any issues.

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.

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!

February 16, 2013, 12:05 AM	#10
Dan-O Senior Member Join Date: August 3, 2011 Location: Northern Colorado Posts: 969	^^^^ Exactly!!

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.

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...

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.

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.

February 20, 2013, 05:56 PM	#20
9mm Senior Member Join Date: January 9, 2011 Location: Land of the Free Posts: 2,834	A gun made without a safety, then installed? Why don't you install a safety on your revolver?

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.

November 15, 2019, 05:00 PM	#22
Pistoler0 Senior Member Join Date: November 15, 2019 Location: Conifer, CO Posts: 632	"" A gun made without a safety, then installed? Why don't you install a safety on your revolver? "" A vehicle made without a winch, then installed? Why don't you install a winch on your Prius? --- Similar rhetorical question, no? In any case, I may not want a winch on my Prius, but I may install the winch on my F-150. I know, I could buy a Jeep with a winch already installed at the factory, but I want an F-150 with a winch in it. Likewise I do not want to install a thumb safety on a revolver, but I want it on a Glock. I know that I could buy a striker fired Springfield XD Full Size with a factory installed thumb safety, but what I want is a Glock with a safety on it. Some do not like winches on their trucks, some do not like safeties on their guns, some do not like mustard on their hamburger. I personally like winches, safeties and mustard, and I like to put them wherever I want, and one of the many reasons why the USA is so great is that we all have choices to do or do not as we please. Behold my exercise in free choice: Which I daily use for this: .... notice how in addition to the thumb safety I hold my thumb on "the gadget" which works like holding the hammer down on a DA pistol while re-holstering. Probability of Glock leg = Chance of: depressing the trigger + thumb safety off + also not pressing on "the gadget with thumb" = 0.00000000001 % The only way it could be lower is with no round in the chamber. ""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."" ok, what would happen if you forget to depress the trigger when you have to fire? Chance of: needing to fire a shot + not disengaging thumb safety = chance of doing so with a 1911 = (almost) chance of forgetting to depress the trigger itself. Rifles have safeties, carbines have safeties, the AR15 has a safety, many pistols have safeties. If your firearm has a safety you will not forget to disengage it any more than you will forget to press the trigger. Put a safety wherever you wish, and don't have a safety where you don't want it, that's it. Last edited by Pistoler0; November 15, 2019 at 05:18 PM.

November 15, 2019, 06:07 PM	#23
FAS1 Senior Member Join Date: December 9, 2010 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 541	I started buying Glocks and was the first person that I personally know to buy one of those plastic POS's (as my friends called Glocks at the time). I bought a Gen2 G17 for home defense because I did not want an externally manipulated safety on my home defense gun and 17 + 1 rounds were unheard of at that time. Anyway, I trained a lot and wanted it to be second nature to handle the gun quickly but safely. My carry gun is a G26 so I have a common platform and I wouldn't have any safeties on either still. The Gadget is interesting to me and I can understand someone using it especially with AIWB and re-holstering. Accidentally getting clothing in the way can and does happen, but usually because we get to complacent in the process. If it's intended to counter your finger on the trigger, then it would seem just as probable that you might forget to put your thumb on the gadget as it would be to not have your finger on the trigger. Probably would be just that one time when Murphy is paying attention. __________________ *Glenn* *FAS1 SAFE*

November 15, 2019, 07:13 PM	#24
precision_shooter Senior Member Join Date: September 8, 2007 Location: DFW, Texas Posts: 2,475	You all do realize this is a 6+ year old thread that you dug up and posted on? Necrothreadia is Alive and well these days. __________________ "Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes...Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man." - Thomas Jefferson, 1776

November 15, 2019, 09:11 PM	#25
JohnKSa Staff Join Date: February 12, 2001 Location: DFW Area Posts: 24,972	I think we can let this one rest in peace, especially since the information that brought it back to life has also been posted on several other threads. __________________ Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?