carry what you're comfortable with. I always liked the grip safety on the XD/XDS pistols because its an extra layer of safety that you really don't have to think about, but in that RARE circumstance something got close to the trigger that shouldn't have it might save your bacon.

My comment was just my opinion on the new pistol, and not meant to derail the thread

I really love my XDs so I’m sure I’ll end up with one down the road. Never any complaints on my XDs so far

quote:

Originally posted by BBMW:
Before I get into this, I'll say I prefer an active manual safety to the grip safety. Having said that, do you really think the ole' "keep the booger hook off the bang switch" concept provides enough safety? I've seen situations where it didn't.

Well I've seen plenty of situations where a safety gets people killed, so I'd rather train for the keep the finger off the trigger part which has been 100% easy and worked perfect for the last 20 plus years, so far. No accidents, no misteps, I really don't see the issue. Im not special forces, but Im decent, and I just don't see the need for a safety, nor would I ever carry a pistol for personal protection that even had a safety on it.

People have NDs with all sorts of firearms, including with / without manual safeties, grip safeties, trigger safeties.

I've even seen people who carry with an empty chamber ('for safety') have NDs.

The best safety is the one between your ears. Choose a firearm that you want to use, then plan and train accordingly.

quote:

Originally posted by EasyFire:
Wonder if there will be a patent infringement issue?

I really doubt it. Remember Keltec P11 is the original small compact double-stack 9mm that can hold 12+1 and it came out in 1995. God Bless

Does proper handling improve safety? Of course. Do you think any human can guarantee they won't have either a brain fart that causes an unintended finger on trigger moment, or some sort of random foreign object situation that causes a trigger pull. Not having a manual safety creates a situation where a single failure creates a unintentionally discharge. With a manual safety, it take two sequential failures to have a discharge. This is vastly less likely.

As far as not deactivating the safety when necessary, this has to be trained into muscle memory, which is training, repetitions, and consistency.

quote:

Originally posted by sns3guppy:

quote:

Originally posted by BBMW:
Having said that, do you really think the ole' "keep the booger hook off the bang switch" concept provides enough safety? I've seen situations where it didn't.

Do I think that proper handling is safe? Yes.

If one doesn't handle the firearm properly, then no amount of manual safety will compensate.

On a concealed carry pistol, I prefer no external safety. It's a feature I appreciate about the P365, G43, etc.

I'll carry the G43 or the P365 all day long in a pocket holster without concern, and I do.

quote:

Originally posted by BBMW:
Does proper handling improve safety? Of course. Do you think any human can guarantee they won't have either a brain fart that causes an unintended finger on trigger moment, or some sort of random foreign object situation that causes a trigger pull. Not having a manual safety creates a situation where a single failure creates a unintentionally discharge. With a manual safety, it take two sequential failures to have a discharge. This is vastly less likely.

As far as not deactivating the safety when necessary, this has to be trained into muscle memory, which is training, repetitions, and consistency.

"Muscle memory" is a bullshit concept made popular in gun rags. Muscles have no memory.

There are no guarantees in life. Not even with mechanical firearms safeties.

You've created a fallacy in your statement. You say that a single failure will cause an unintended discharge in a weapon without a safety. This is untrue, as a blanket statement.

You go on to say that two failures must occur for an unintended discharge. Again, as a blanket statement, this is also untrue.

There is no substitute for proper handling under any circumstance, regardless of gimmick, gadget, or design.

A mechanical safety is never a replacement for poor handling.

If one has taken the weapon off safe, the safety is useless. There is no guarantee that the safety will prevent a discharge, but if one has drawn the weapon and disengaged the safety, as one does when presenting the weapon, the safety becomes irrelevant.

I have had safeties disengaged in the holster, by being bumped or brushed against. I have had safeties fail to make the weapon safe. I have had weapons discharge as the safety is disengaged. The "safety" can act as a false sense of security. In the worst case, it can either interrupt the function of the firearm in use, or disguise a potential problem, and reduce safety.

As stated before, there are certainly applications and uses for mechanical safeties, and requirements for them. Generic blanket statements regarding them gloss over the many exceptions, each of which deserves consideration for its validity.

There is, however, no such thing as "muscle memory." Just habit. I type a lot. I'm a fairly fast typist. My rated speed is limited by mistakes, which even after decades of an enormous amount of writing and typing, still occur with regularity. Ain't no muscle memory, and it doesn't matter how many times you do something; there are no guarantees that the next action, even under pressure, will be correct. A manual safety won't fix that.

"Manual safety" is sometimes another way of saying "false confidence."

So anyway... patents and grip safeties aside, how about that hellcat?

Whether muscle memory or training or habits I can say for certainty those things have an effect on me.

When I started running timed / “stressed” scenarios I found that I would never turn off a safety and that is even with me ALWAYS starting my first round with a 1911 or similar with safety on. I just simply don’t shoot those types of firearms often.

I also always used the slide release/lock to release the slide on a reload. I told myself just make sure to grab the slide if you have to using gross motor skills. Once again under timed / stress even with me saying to myself grab the slide....I would always use the slide stop.

So for me learned repetition absolutely takes on a subconscious role.

I shoot a lot of DA/SA and cut my teeth on that.....hence I decock and ride the hammer to holster every......Glock.

I never said that a manual safety was a replacement for safe gun handling, but it's a good supplement to it.

And the single/dual point is a real thing. Can a safety come off accidentally? Yes. But that alone won't cause a discharge. The carrier would ALSO have to have gun handling failure. Can someone who usually practices good gun handle have a brain fart and accidentally pull the trigger when he does not intend to? Very much so. Everyone once in a while we have someone issuing a mea culpa bout blowing a hole in their floor accidentally. And that's only the people who admit it. The term "Glock leg" didn't come into the lexicon for no reason. Having to have two chained failures to have a unintended discharge greatly reduces the chance of it happening. If you don't want to believe this, you can just go on deluding yourself.

Think about this. As a carrier, a person is going to handle a loaded, chambered handgun very often, as part of their daily routine. Over decades that's going to create so many situations when bad gun handling could cause an accident, that even if they have a very low rate of bad gun handling incidents, there's go good chance at some point, one will happen. On the flip side, how many times in his life is a particular carrier (especially civilian) likely to actually fire his gun in self defense. If he's unlucky, once? Very unlucky twice? It's a very rare circumstance. Given both of the above situations, what's more important, making sure the carrier doesn't accidentally shoot himself or someone around him, or ensuring he won't have a training failure taking the gun off safe in real defensive shooting situation? I would say the former.

As to muscle memory, it's a slang term for having trained to do a repetitive process so much/often that it become unconscious and automatic. And that's what someone who carries a gun with a safety needs to do. And if they do it, they won't have a problem if/when they need to draw the gun defensively.

If you don't believe me come up with a documented situation where someone was injured or killed because they didn't get their gun off safe. I can easily show you situations where someone shot themselves that a safety would have prevented.

quote:

Originally posted by sns3guppy:

quote:

Originally posted by BBMW:
Does proper handling improve safety? Of course. Do you think any human can guarantee they won't have either a brain fart that causes an unintended finger on trigger moment, or some sort of random foreign object situation that causes a trigger pull. Not having a manual safety creates a situation where a single failure creates a unintentionally discharge. With a manual safety, it take two sequential failures to have a discharge. This is vastly less likely.

As far as not deactivating the safety when necessary, this has to be trained into muscle memory, which is training, repetitions, and consistency.

"Muscle memory" is a bullshit concept made popular in gun rags. Muscles have no memory.

There are no guarantees in life. Not even with mechanical firearms safeties.

You've created a fallacy in your statement. You say that a single failure will cause an unintended discharge in a weapon without a safety. This is untrue, as a blanket statement.

You go on to say that two failures must occur for an unintended discharge. Again, as a blanket statement, this is also untrue.

There is no substitute for proper handling under any circumstance, regardless of gimmick, gadget, or design.

A mechanical safety is never a replacement for poor handling.

If one has taken the weapon off safe, the safety is useless. There is no guarantee that the safety will prevent a discharge, but if one has drawn the weapon and disengaged the safety, as one does when presenting the weapon, the safety becomes irrelevant.

I have had safeties disengaged in the holster, by being bumped or brushed against. I have had safeties fail to make the weapon safe. I have had weapons discharge as the safety is disengaged. The "safety" can act as a false sense of security. In the worst case, it can either interrupt the function of the firearm in use, or disguise a potential problem, and reduce safety.

As stated before, there are certainly applications and uses for mechanical safeties, and requirements for them. Generic blanket statements regarding them gloss over the many exceptions, each of which deserves consideration for its validity.

There is, however, no such thing as "muscle memory." Just habit. I type a lot. I'm a fairly fast typist. My rated speed is limited by mistakes, which even after decades of an enormous amount of writing and typing, still occur with regularity. Ain't no muscle memory, and it doesn't matter how many times you do something; there are no guarantees that the next action, even under pressure, will be correct. A manual safety won't fix that.

"Manual safety" is sometimes another way of saying "false confidence."

OK, it's been well-covered. Let's get back to the actual subject of the thread.

Sorry. Took it far afield.

I really don't need another subcompact, but I'm looking forward to trying one anyway.

I am VERY satisfied with the G43, but found that I really like the G43X and G48.

I just wanted to try the P365, and ended up really liking it.

I definitely don't need a "hellcat," but it's a good excuse to pick up another pistol. We shall see.

I like it. I will try it. I hope this is the beginning, as I bet they all will offer something similar. I am OK even with 10 as lang as it is thin. That being said, it looks like 13 and even 15 is doable with new mag configurations.

Just no. No more new Springers.

I am trying to find out when it will be available for purchase and haven’t has any luck. Anyone know?

I sent some out to dealers on Tuesday. First production run was supposedly 200, so there are 200 available now. More to come next week.

My old LGS in GA just posted on their FB page that they had them in stock.

Small pistols -- with short "geometry" for the action -- are more prone to failures to feed and eject rounds. They can be ammo sensitive. That's the territory Springfield/HS Produkt has ventured into with the Hellcat. Maybe someone should do a 5000 round test with it to see how it fares.

The Hellcat is a direct challenger to the P365. Problems with the P365 after intro have been discussed fully on this forum, but they seem to have been straightened out and it reportedly sells well. The Hellcat, if it can get through its introductory period without experiencing similar issues, will be a success. Everybody should have a small pistol, particularly if we go to a 10 round max under any new laws -- this could be it.

Instead of seeing how many rounds they can pack in, I would prefer someone to come out with a thinner pistol. If Heizer can make a 45, that’s only.8” wide, you would think that someone would come out with a thinner 9mm. For inside the waistband, as far as I’m concerned, thinner is better!

quote:

Originally posted by RoverSig:
Maybe someone should do a 5000 round test with it to see how it fares.

The only thing that it would address is that specific serial number pistol...not every "hellcat."

The P365 had numerous demonstrations and tests, some thousands of rounds...at first problems cropped up early, but later pistols went several thousand rounds before the striker broke. Endurance tests and torture tests tell us...nothing.