as seen in this months American Handgunner magazine.
https://americanhandgunner.com...fety-net-the-gadget/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4t69VcNx-58

This message has been edited. Last edited by: bendable,

Have not installed the one i purchased yet, but i have a 19 i just put together that i will test it on.

A couple of years ago when they were raising money, the backplates could be purchased for about twenty bucks (if I recall correctly), for those willing to get in on the ground floor. Now they're about eighty. It's not a bad idea and I think they'll sell, but I don't think I'll be using them.

My safety is in my finger and brain, not on the pistol. The existing safeties will be more than adequate, with a firing pin safety, trigger safety, etc. I do not want a manual safety between me and a shot fired, and my solution for reholstering is practice, care, and common sense. There is also the question of changing grip to place the thumb over the rear of the slide.

I understand that there are many that teach placing the thumb over the rear of the slide, or over the hammer, when reholstering, and this works well with those who follow that path.

That interests me, and I also wonder if that effects trigger pull weight at all.

If you don't put pressure on the back of the slide, it has of impact on trigger weight at all. It only allows you to put pressure against the firing pin to prevent rear movement; if you press on the rear of the slide, you're putting pressure on the striker. The more you press, the harder it is to press the trigger; block the striker's rear movement, the trigger can't move, so it becomes an indirect trigger block; it prevents the weapon from firing during holstering or reholstering.

Interesting. So it is pushed out by the rearward movement of the striker during the trigger press. Still though, it is another moving part interacting with the trigger system, so for the same reason there is a 25 cent trigger job, there's reason to believe adding this back plate would change the trigger pull, even if ever so slightly.

I like it, and I want to get one for my duty weapon, as my two reservations about Glocks are 1) the grip angle, and 2) something getting lodged in the trigger guard during re-holstering. #2 applies to all striker-fired handguns with no external safeties, I know, but I carry hammer fired guns off duty so I'd just need this for the work gun.

If anyone has done a before/after in regards to trigger pull/weight/smoothness, lemme know, as that's the last piece for me.

People rally against locks and magazine disconnects and (on the 1911) firing pin safeties, but somehow this thing is a "good idea"? Seems like an unnecessary additional point of failure in a platform that is exceedingly safe as-is.

banned these from my department.

Another point of failure.

quote:

Originally posted by DaBigBR:
People rally against locks and magazine disconnects and (on the 1911) firing pin safeties, but somehow this thing is a "good idea"? Seems like an unnecessary additional point of failure in a platform that is exceedingly safe as-is.

There are plenty of people on both sides of the issue. Those who brought ti to market, and tested are pretty well thought of, and it was in the works for years.

For Appendix carry it offers so merit i believe.

i.i.u.c. these are only used while re-holstering,
am I to understand that there were a.d.'s during re-holstering and someone was injured , at your dept.?

quote:

Originally posted by bendable:
i.i.u.c. these are only used while re-holstering,
am I to understand that there were a.d.'s during re-holstering and someone was injured , at your dept.?

I don't think he's saying that. I think he's saying that this is just an additional part that could fail, potentially causing the weapon to be inoperable.

quote:

Originally posted by Chowser:
banned these from my department.

Another point of failure.

^ This.

Fundamentals. Finger off trigger unless shooting. 26 and larger on the gen 4's have a rectangle on the frame for you to place your finger at rest or reholstering. Reholstering, very slow and deliberate. Practice presentations with a snap cap until your entire hand is sore.
Reholstering, practice, practice, then practice 1000's more times.

I'm sure JJ will chime in with some education on the subject.

The gadget has nothing to do with putting your finger on the trigger, it's not a safety in that sense. The design is for the re-holstering aspect, especially for those who might carry aiwb. Half the people on this forum will edc aiwb a hammer fired gun and ride the hammer when re-holstering, just for that reason. Riding the hammer will give you the same level of safety in the event you feel the trigger getting snagged. All this is (the gadget), is a design for the same level of safety when re-holstering but for those who use a striker fired handgun that doesn't have a hammer that you can ride to detect something catching the trigger.

It makes perfect sense in that context if you prefer that method of carry. Nothing wrong with that as an option.

quote:

Originally posted by Draggun:
Nothing wrong with that as an option.

As long as it doesn't affect the functioning of the pistol. I'd say there's potential for failure to fire with this gadget installed.

quote:

Originally posted by Chowser:
banned these from my department.

Another point of failure.

I would have to agree.

I was in on the first round once product was ready for shipment. Todd Green and Tom Jones et al tested the product over a period of many months. It works for me with no issues over the course of 2000 + rounds in my 19. I'm used to the thumb-on-the-hammer holstering technique with my H&K's. Perhaps not for everyone but simplifies holstering for me. (I carry iwb, not aiwb.)

I believe this was the device that Todd Green was heavily involved in testing and development.

I think it has some merit for those who carry AIWB which was the primary target market.

Seems like a very well tested and quality device and good to have options for those looking for such.

I am testing a Gadget on a 19 and a 26. Close to 500 rounds and no problems. Seems like a very well thought out product.

I have examined this product in some depth, and do not believe it presents an unreasonable risk for failure.

On the other hand, every ND while reholstering a striker gun which I have witnessed, investigated or looked into would have been prevented had this concept been available, and used by the shooter. Several of these incidents involved extraneous objects that worked the trigger in the holster in some way or other. The old "booger hook...bang switch...I'm highly trained..." mentality regarding safety practices is bankrupt in my view.

I'm tired of hearing about such people shooting themselves avoidably. And they do, make no mistake.

-Bruce

As a disclosure, I am one of the SCD beta-testers. I've had one for several years and I received the test unit for free. I bought several units with my own money. I receive no royalties. I do not have an access to all test information, only Tom Jones does. I believe there have been a half million rounds put through the test units without any issues. I know three more beta testers personally, one is a member here, they have not had any issues.

It was never available for 20 bucks, even on a fundraising stage.

It doesn't affect trigger pull weight. I presume that theoretically it should but practically the added resistance is negligible. I don't think that there is a pull gauge in existence that can detect the difference.

If it breaks off, the gun remains functional. The locking piece is sturdier than the OEM plate. The "additional failure point" is unclear to those of us who actually have used it since it is a very simple and robust device of a minimal, if any complexity, and has not showed up in real use. I presume that if someone gets ahold of your gun and welds the gadget shut, it will become inoperable.

The concern of an additional debris ingress point remained theoretical as well. At a minimum, that ingress point is much smaller than that left by half-cock resting triggers of many DA/SA guns like CZs (and SIGs, I believe?), 4.1LEM HKs, and definitely less so of a 1911.

I an unaware of any instance of a gun firing with SCD properly engaged but the SCD does require more deliberate and precise pressure applied to it than a hammer on DA/SA or LEM gun.

From my standpoint, it is a robust, easy to use device that shares a manual of arms familiar to me from using hammer fired guns, and it offers an additional level of safety without affecting functioning and reliability of a gun. I am also an AIWB carrier so this may have something to do with my choice.