Another way the P-64 can discharge w/o pulling the trigger!

Info, pictures, advice...
tai
Member
Member
Posts: 63
Joined: December 29th, 2013, 1:06 am
Location: San Diego

Re: Another way the P-64 can discharge w/o pulling the trigg

Post by tai »

Okay, thanks snailman.

I did go to the outdoor range today-thanks for the warning reminder about testing the hammer pull back but I did not read your post until my return, however, I did read about it elsewhere, I believe, in this thread.

As a leftie, I held the firearm only by its grip and rested it on a raised piece of wood, and with my right thumb pulled back on the round hammer and would quickly get that thumb out of the way upon release.

I must've tested the firearm 30 times that way. The gun surprised me in a pleasant way-it would not ignite any of the Brown Bear and Fiocchi cartridges, which were the only brands I brought with me today. It was consistent with the numerous 'pencil tests' I had performed on it.

(In my pistol, the Brown Bear doesn't cycle as well as the Fiocchi. I thought the Brown Bear was also surprisingly hotter than the Fiocchi.)

At least with my firearm, I think it highly unlikely the hammer would fire part or any of the way to cocked. I just don't think it would happen with mine-but it could some day-one never knows.

Is it the little notch on the hammer that prevented the further drop to meet the firing pin? I consider it similar to a 1911 in that sense, but it's not really a safety, or is it?

Notwithstanding the foregoing, and for other reasons, I think it's generally a good idea for someone who intends to carry the weapon to have the safety engaged at all times. However, it boils down to weighing the pros and cons on an individual basis and is partly subjective.

I don't know about the rest of you, but I use the decocker/safety a lot-even on the range-and I always use it to cycle the first round! So, I am starting to get used to it.

And IMO it's more necessary than carrying a Beretta 92FS with the safety engaged. I started shooting revolver 25 years ago and due to that history one gains a confidence in carrying a DA auto without the safety engaged. With the Beretta and it's 'drop-safe' characteristics, I see no reason to engage the safety after cycling the first round unless one is concerned that an assailant might get his hands on the weapon and it might give you more time.

Once again, as a 'leftie', I am relegated to the status of 'second-class citizen'-at least with the P-64 and its decocker/safety! Oh well, can't 'cry' over it, because the same applies to all Sigs, most 1911s (excepting Tactical models), Bersa Thunders, Hi-Powers, etc.

I shot 100 rounds today and I really enjoy the firearm.

Thanks.
Last edited by tai on January 24th, 2014, 6:18 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Curly1
Elite member
Elite member
Posts: 2529
Joined: September 20th, 2011, 11:35 pm
Location: Upstate NY

Re: Another way the P-64 can discharge w/o pulling the trigg

Post by Curly1 »

You could also try shooting right handed for carry.

Would probably feel all wrong for a while but it wouldn't hurt to be an ambi shooter.
Laugh Hard and Often.

Gary
tai
Member
Member
Posts: 63
Joined: December 29th, 2013, 1:06 am
Location: San Diego

Re: Another way the P-64 can discharge w/o pulling the trigg

Post by tai »

Curly-

Agree, a reasonable suggestion but would be a PITA to learn especially on this firearm with its 'stout' recoil. :(
User avatar
dfunk
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1877
Joined: November 6th, 2005, 11:16 am
Location: Earth
Contact:

Re: Another way the P-64 can discharge w/o pulling the trigg

Post by dfunk »

Where did you see that the P64 has a transfer bar?

These people doing tests of nearly cocked hammers, have they replaced their stock springs with lighter power versions?

I honestly can't see how you could 'snag' the hammer on holstering the weapon. I certainly do understand keeping the thumb on the back of the slide and hammer as to not take the gun out of battery, though, especially with a tight/new holster.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
tai
Member
Member
Posts: 63
Joined: December 29th, 2013, 1:06 am
Location: San Diego

Re: Another way the P-64 can discharge w/o pulling the trigg

Post by tai »

In my original post of January 20, 2014 I correctly stated the manual lists some of the safeties which include a trigger bar block and firing pin block. If I elsewhere stated transfer bar block I apologize for that error.

As to your question re springs- I just bought my P-64 a few weeks ago in a private party transfer. All I can tell you is the party who sold it to me said he believed the springs were changed, but he didn't know which as he did not place any springs in the gun- a prior owner had done so.

So are you suggesting that with factory hammer spring there would be ignition doing those ''pull-back" tests?

I would speculate with mine that a reduced power hammer spring was indeed installed because my DA pull is not all bad. It's just a little bit heavy, but not alarming in any sense. The SA pull is very light, almost a hair trigger. I would not be surprised if the recoil spring is heavier than original factory.

Can you tell me what it's called or what it is that prevented ignition- when I cocked back the hammer a bit- just shy of fully cocked- and let go, without ill effect, those 30 or so times? I know this is common with many 1911s with or without transfer bar safeties.

Or are you attributing that solely to a possible lighter hammer spring? I should tell you that an inspection of spent casings show primer strikes that are well-defined.
User avatar
dfunk
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1877
Joined: November 6th, 2005, 11:16 am
Location: Earth
Contact:

Re: Another way the P-64 can discharge w/o pulling the trigg

Post by dfunk »

If by 'trigger bar block' you're referring to the fact that the safety keeps the disconnector in the down position, then I guess it does have this. I've not heard of it specifically referenced that way in the past.

Typically when the recoil spring is replaced, the extra power firing pin spring (comes with recoil spring from Wolff) is also replaced. Combine this with a lighter power mainspring and you have, in my opinion, a good start for light strikes. But, to address your question or concern -

If you thumb back the hammer, safety off, finger off the trigger, to the point that it almost cocks (let's assume that it's as close to the sear catching as possible) then let go - the gun should not fire. There are 2 hooks on the hammer that the sear nose sits on. When the gun is at rest, the hammer hook closest to the trigger should sit with the sear engaged (A). Any forward pressure on the hammer from the rear shouldn't move the hammer forward past this first hook. At this point, the hammer is not touching the firing pin. This is often confused with a true half cock because of their similarities. I guess it's pretty close to a series 70 if the comparison must be made.

You can see this pretty clearly in this shot
Image

When the hammer is cocked, the sear nose is engaged with the second (main) hook. I'm sure you already know this, but here it is anyway.

Image

When the trigger is pulled rearward, the trigger bar pulls disengages the sear from the hammer and allows the hammer to drop to it's fullest range. The trigger bar keeps the sear out of the way for the hammer hook A to clear the sear. As the slide comes back to chamber a new round, it glides across the disconnector which disconnects (heh) the trigger bar and the sear, allowing the gun to once again be cocked.

Image

When the safety is activated, the firing pin lug is captured by the barrel of the safety preventing any forward (and rearward) movement, as well as activating the disconnector, which interrupts the interface between the sear and the hammer (causing the hammer to fall, but catching on hook A).

If the safety is OFF and the gun is dropped, particularly on the muzzle, there is a chance (I'm not statistician) that the pin's inertia could light off a round.

Image

Hope this helps.

For those with more experience than I, please correct me if I'm wrong.
losingle
Junior member
Posts: 15
Joined: January 4th, 2014, 2:25 pm

Re: Another way the P-64 can discharge w/o pulling the trigg

Post by losingle »

Thanks for the pictorial confirmation of our pencil/live testing. The jean snag must have included a failure of some kind. Currently running a 18lb mainspring and wolf extra recoil/firing pin spring without encountering light hits. Pretty well documented down to 16 lbs mainspring without experiencing misfire on this forum and others. I encourage folks to use the safety
tai
Member
Member
Posts: 63
Joined: December 29th, 2013, 1:06 am
Location: San Diego

Re: Another way the P-64 can discharge w/o pulling the trigg

Post by tai »

dfunk wrote:If by 'trigger bar block' you're referring to the fact that the safety keeps the disconnector in the down position, then I guess it does have this. I've not heard of it specifically referenced that way in the past.
...

When the safety is activated, the firing pin lug is captured by the barrel of the safety preventing any forward (and rearward) movement, as well as activating the disconnector, which interrupts the interface between the sear and the hammer
dfunk-

Thank you for posting and for this site.

In response to your first comment quoted I am only referring to the actual nomenclature or language used in the manual. It's contained in Table 1 on page 4 of the Official Manual under Safeties and lists "trigger bar block".

Perhaps some things have been 'lost in translation'... I really don't know- that is why I've been asking throughout this thread and have yet to be satisfied but your last post is very helpful.

Thanks for the pictures and explanation in that last post. At some time, I really WOULD like to do a detail strip of the pistol so that I can understand it better but I believe that would be much dangerous territory for me.

(I've done trigger jobs on my own S&W revolvers but I believe the difficulty factor in a detail strip of this firearm might be equivalent to field-stripping a Ruger MkII and more importantly- reassembly of one. Gosh, that must've taken me 12 hours to master and included the manual, many YouTube videos, trial and error, etc. Uggghhh...

And, similarly, switching the mag release button over on a Taurus PT92 in order to prepare it for private sale nearly drove me nuts. I messed it up and had to engage my gunsmith on it and he nearly gave up on it. What a 'mess' that was... lol now, but not then... ha!)

Later:
Figure 2B on what would be page 6 of the manual depicts the safety engaged and states:
"SAFETY LEVER ON: Trigger bar blocked, firing pin locked in place, will not fire."
[emphasis added].

That's helpful! So it could be said the Safety ON position acts as the 'trigger bar block' .

What about the firing pin block? Would that be related also to engagement of the safety?

If the writer of the manual in Table 1 meant by the words 'firing pin block' that the firing pin is 'locked in place' (see Figure 2B) by engagement of the safety, then I think I'm beginning to understand what the safety does, and that the safe carrying of the handgun is solely dependent on using it assuming a dropping of the weapon on any part of it and especially on its muzzle.

With safety ON, would a drop of the pistol directly on its muzzle entirely avoid a possible discharge? I am asking dfunk and others this question due to his comment there's a chance of it igniting with the safety OFF, but no statement is made to the contrary if the safety is ON, and I don't want to assume anything.

This is not directly related to the facts that OP raised but I think it's important for newbies to the firearm to grasp. I do thank the OP for the posting of this thread!

I think it may be fair to state that the weapon is not at all drop safe....with the safety ON, there's no doubt it is much closer to that, but is it likely to be 'drop safe' under today's standards? As a layman this much I can deduce- with the safety ON, there's no way the trigger will pull the hammer, and the firing pin is locked in place.

Assuming the foregoing is correct, e.g., with safety ON, firing pin locked in place and trigger disabled, what would not make it as safe as today's pistols? The only thing that comes to mind with today's pistols and my limited knowledge would be perhaps they are 'drop-safe' with their safeties OFF?

For instance, with the Beretta 92FS there is an automatic firing pin safety that prevents firing pin from striking a primer even if firearm is dropped on its muzzle. AFAIK, no such automatic safety exists on the P-64-but will engaging the safety on this weapon have the same effect, though it requires manual activation?

In light of the second paragraph I quoted from dfunk here, it seems the decock/safety on the P-64 is solely responsible for trigger bar block and firing pin block? Or, is anything else going on?

Replies appreciated!
Last edited by tai on January 27th, 2014, 1:41 am, edited 1 time in total.
manicmechanic
Veteran member
Veteran member
Posts: 650
Joined: November 19th, 2006, 8:28 pm
Location: michigan, down the river

Re: Another way the P-64 can discharge w/o pulling the trigg

Post by manicmechanic »

I believe with the safety on the firing pin is trapped, so dropping on muzzle should not cause an unwanted ignition.
User avatar
dfunk
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1877
Joined: November 6th, 2005, 11:16 am
Location: Earth
Contact:

Re: Another way the P-64 can discharge w/o pulling the trigg

Post by dfunk »

tai wrote: Later:
Figure 2B on what would be page 6 of the manual depicts the safety engaged and states:
"SAFETY LEVER ON: Trigger bar blocked, firing pin locked in place, will not fire."
[emphasis added].

That's helpful! So it could be said the Safety ON position acts as the 'trigger bar block' .
Sure. In my own anal-retentive mind, a 'block' indicates that a specific part prevents another part from moving. The trigger bar is effectively pushed down and out of the way so its little cocking shelf can't make contact with the hammer or sear.
tai wrote: What about the firing pin block? Would that be related also to engagement of the safety?
It would have to be. The firing pin has a little lug on it that is captured by the safety when it's rotated into the ON position. There's nothing else going on with regards to the FP. There is no passive safety.
tai wrote: If the writer of the manual in Table 1 meant by the words 'firing pin block' that the firing pin is 'locked in place' (see Figure 2B) by engagement of the safety, then I think I'm beginning to understand what the safety does, and that the safe carrying of the handgun is solely dependent on using it assuming a dropping of the weapon on any part of it and especially on its muzzle.
Yep, you've got it.
tai wrote: With safety ON, would a drop of the pistol directly on its muzzle entirely avoid a possible discharge? I am asking dfunk and others this question due to his comment there's a chance of it igniting with the safety OFF, but no statement is made to the contrary if the safety is ON, and I don't want to assume anything.
The idea is that it will not, however, shit happens and things break. If the little lug of the firing pin sheers off, then there's nothing holding it back from its full travel.
tai wrote: I think it may be fair to state that the weapon is not at all drop safe....with the safety ON, there's no doubt it is much closer to that, but is it likely to be 'drop safe' under today's standards? As a layman this much I can deduce- with the safety ON, there's no way the trigger will pull the hammer, and the firing pin is locked in place.
If you mean today's standards == California's standards, then I don't think the P64 is on the list. I definitely don't trust the P64 like my 1911.
tai wrote: For instance, with the Beretta 92FS there is an automatic firing pin safety that prevents firing pin from striking a primer even if firearm is dropped on its muzzle. AFAIK, no such automatic safety exists on the P-64-but will engaging the safety on this weapon have the same effect, though ti requires manual activation?
Nope, no passive or automatic safety exists.
tai wrote: In light of the second paragraph I quoted from dfunk here, it seems the decock/safety on the P-64 is solely responsible for trigger bar block and firing pin block? Or, is anything else going on?
If you take the slide off and really examine the gun, you'll see what's going on. As the safety rotates, it simultaneously captures the firing pin while pushing down the disconnector. This drops the hammer, allowing it to slam against the now-rotated safety (this is how most safeties break - brittle steel and frequent decocking). The safety has trapped the firing pin and has also rotated a larger portion of material between the hammer face and the firing pin.

The talk of the lug on the firing pin got me thinking about a post that Junius made earlier on in this thread: firing pin length. If the firing pin is out of spec, or was intended to be made long and then fitted to the gun, there is a good chance that manually cocking the hammer back to 'almost cocked' and releasing (safety off and finger off the trigger) it could light off a round, even if the first hook caught the hammer as designed. As long as the striking end of the FP protrudes from the rear of the slide through the safety enough, you've got a decent chance of this behavior.

My FP is 46.64mm in OAL. From the circular shoulder to the striking face at it's tallest point, mine is 9.76mm.

Insert foot in mouth here...
I should also say that re-reading some of my posts made earlier in this thread kind of made me face-palm myself. There was definitely some things I was wrong about and I gave some advice based off of memory and not inspecting the gun like I should have. I should also say that since the static part of the website was built, it's been neglected. I'll do my best to get it updated this year with more accurate and useful info. Sorry! :roll:
tai
Member
Member
Posts: 63
Joined: December 29th, 2013, 1:06 am
Location: San Diego

Re: Another way the P-64 can discharge w/o pulling the trigg

Post by tai »

manicmechanic wrote:I believe with the safety on the firing pin is trapped, so dropping on muzzle should not cause an unwanted ignition.
Thanks for your comment, manic.

(My questions or comments should be understood with the assumption that parts of a given firearm are in good working order.)

So, 'manic-man'- would it be a fair and accurate statement that manual engagement of the P-64 safety concerning the firing pin acts in the same manner as the automatic firing pin safety common on many modern pistols? It has the same effect, only it is 'manual' and not 'automatic'?

Anyone else welcome to chime in as well.
Last edited by tai on January 27th, 2014, 12:53 am, edited 1 time in total.
tai
Member
Member
Posts: 63
Joined: December 29th, 2013, 1:06 am
Location: San Diego

Re: Another way the P-64 can discharge w/o pulling the trigg

Post by tai »

Okay, dfunk, thanks for taking the time.

What I have gleaned from your comments and others has led me to conclude as follows...please let me know if anyone is in disagreement with the following:

1. The gun has a manual decocking/safety lever;
2. When left down the safety is ON and active;
3. When the safety is ON:
a. the trigger bar is blocked (and trigger rendered useless)
b. the firing pin is blocked (locked in place and not 'really' subject to spring pressure).
These are the only safety mechanisms present in the gun, unless one considers the LCI also to
be a safety. I don't, but the manufacturer lists it under the same heading;
4. When the safety is OFF, the trigger bar is not blocked and the firing pin is not blocked;
5. When the safety is OFF, a person carrying the weapon does not have any active gun safeties;
6. The P-64 has no passive safeties (I don't know if I agree with that-see remainder of my post, below);
7. Concerning the firing pin- with the P-64's manual safety ON, it has the same effect as modern day pistols' automatic firing pin safety-no AD, even if dropped on muzzle.

I hope that my understanding of the basics (without going into disconnector statements, etc.) is correct. If not, please point out my misunderstanding.

Additionally, and this has NOT been adequately addressed in this thread, what does one call the feature that stops that firing pin from striking the primer of a cartridge if:
A. Safety is OFF;
B. hammer cocked back just shy of fully cocked AND
C. finger not touching the trigger AND
D. hammer is let go or slips yet STOPS shy of striking the firing pin in such manner that primer of a cartridge does not ignite?

What was it called in generation 70 1911s? It's the same is it not? Is it a 'safety'? I would say 'yes' because it is a design feature of the gun that prevents ignition if finger slips while cocking back the trigger. I would consider it to be a 'passive safety', but not sure if that terminology would be appropriate.

Would you say it has to do with hammer 'safety notches' (my own nomenclature because I don't know what to call them)?

I always thought and had read the hammer would fall to a 'half-cock' or 'quarter-cock' position, but dfunk says there is no such thing on this firearm.
Last edited by tai on January 27th, 2014, 1:16 am, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
dfunk
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1877
Joined: November 6th, 2005, 11:16 am
Location: Earth
Contact:

Re: Another way the P-64 can discharge w/o pulling the trigg

Post by dfunk »

1-7 are correct. You say you're unsure of #6, but if it is false, then so is #5.

The little red Polish Army manual (I know, I know, I really need to scan this thing) states that the hammer hook I was referencing, and the one you're asking about, is named "Tooth arrester." This coincides with its function of catching the hammer shy of its full travel.

In all 1911's, not just series 70, it's a half cock. I personally don't give the hook in the P64 this name because when you speak of a half cock, people tend to assume they can cock the hammer and feel and hear this portion of travel (not to mention leaving the gun in a half-cock state). The hammer is not held the same way with regards to location, although the function in both is to prevent the hammer from making contact with the firing pin.
tai
Member
Member
Posts: 63
Joined: December 29th, 2013, 1:06 am
Location: San Diego

Re: Another way the P-64 can discharge w/o pulling the trigg

Post by tai »

Immediately upon pulling the trigger, and I mean immediately, I hear the 'click' of the tooth arrester, same when I cock the hammer back with my thumb. The slightest back pressure activates it. I guess it would be the equivalent of half-cock but it's too close to the firing mechanism.

In any event, with this slight pressure backward, the hammer 'locks' itself from any forward movement. To me, that is very similar to a 'quarter' or 'half' cock type of thing, more so the former. But 'quarter-cock' may just be a misnomer.

However, I look at that 'tooth arrester' as a 'passive' safety. Without pulling the trigger at all, one can push forward on that hammer and feel spring pressure. Once the tooth arrester deploys, hammer can not go forward without a heck of a lot of pressure which I am not going to mess with...

Notwithstanding the foregoing, I don't recall the manual describing function of the tooth arrester. Maybe it's discussed-I will look in my 'little red Polish manual' which happens to be a pdf file, at least for most of us newbies to the firearm!

Oh, I may be mistaken that you were referring to the P-64 manual. Perhaps you were not?

Later: Oh, you must have the original Polish Army Manual because in going to the P-64 manual on the within website: viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1535 you state it's not a reprint of the original Polish Army Manual.

On another note: BTW, I checked out the 75 page Assembly Manual here on the website and there is NO WAY I will ever do a detail strip and reassembly of THIS firearm! No way!!! :( :?

Back on topic, you would agree the tooth arrester serves the identical purpose of the half-cock on a 1911. In the event of a catastrophic failure of the gun where the hammer falls without pulling the trigger, that tooth arrester serves the same purpose as half-cock on a 1911, correct?

I see that tooth arrester as a automatic (passive) safety, whereas the manual decocker/safety is an active safety.

So, if I were asked what were the safeties on this firearm, I would say two active and one passive. The former-trigger bar block, firing pin block (both manually activated by the decocker/safety) and the tooth-arrester (automatic safety, hence a 'passive' safety-deactivated by a full pull of the trigger).

Agree, or not?

One of the Beretta manuals (92A1) describes the half-cock position in part intended as an accidental discharge preventive hammer drop catch. The tooth arrester apparently serves the same function as a 'hammer drop catch'.

Would you agree?
User avatar
dfunk
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1877
Joined: November 6th, 2005, 11:16 am
Location: Earth
Contact:

Re: Another way the P-64 can discharge w/o pulling the trigg

Post by dfunk »

Let me ask you this - have you taken the grips off the gun and observed the action? These guns weren't made by robots, so we've seen tons of strange variance on this forum.

The shot below is the gun at idle, slide and grips removed. Note how the tooth arrester notch and sear are linked.
Image

Does yours look like this?
Post Reply