[RickBe]

I bought my P938 primarily because of its 1911-ness, and am very happy with it, 500 rounds in.

The only problem I really have with it, is that the "feature" of being able to load and unload the gun with the safety engaged, seems to have taken precedence over the safety's ease and certainty of operation when drawing and shooting the gun.

Maybe it's because I have no expectation of being able to manipulate the slide with the safety engaged, that I just don't place much value on being able to do so, but I do notice, every time I draw and put the gun into action, that the safety would be easier and more certain in its operation if it rode higher and extended even a little further away from the frame.
It's as if SIG (Colt?) decided the gun should be made "safer" at the expense of the handling qualities when shooting it.

Cylinder & Slide apparently used to make an ambi safety for the Colt Mustang that appeared to have an improved lever, but I've only ever seen a catalog photo of it, so don't know if it was really an improvement.

 

[coyotetrapper]

I always slingshot it home to chamber a round with the safety off myself. As far as sig making it safer then they forgot the grip safety.

 

[Doctor Duck]

I personally like the ability to chamber a round with the safety on. However, I agree with coyotetrapper that a grip safety would be an added safety feature.

 

[Tenring]

Agree with the Coyote and Duck.

 

[Tx45acp]

That was an important selling point for me. I use it whenever possible and have taught my wife to use that feature too.

 

[christak]

I like the 938 safety the way it is... Admittedly, I don't understand the OP's issue with the safety, but to each his own...

 

[ma6907]

I like it, as is.

 

[Sandaholic]

I appreciate being able to load and unload with the safety on. My fiancee's SAO Legion works the same and I wouldn't have it any other way. I'm one who would prefer 1911's didn't have grip safeties.

How tight is your safety exactly? I think I have read a few complaints here and there and it was at times a solvable problem IIRC. I have zero issues flicking mine off.

 

[kurrykid]

I think it's a great feature as well...

 

[Jonzim48]

I think it's a great feature as well...

+1

 

[louchia]

I like it just the way it is.
To your point of making the safety out farther from the frame, I think that would make handling the gun and safety awkward.
Also as someone mentioned, I like it w/o the back strap safety.
I do not understand concerns about load/unload w/ safety engaged. It's safe.
To each his own.

 

[Jerrysea]

I like it the way it is. You can't rack it with the safety on unless the hammer is cocked. Usually once hammer is cocked there is a round in chamber and can be fired. I think this is a good safety feature. But as the saying goes "different strokes for different fokes". If the safety was out farther the gun overall would be wider. Seems the thinner the gun is the more people like it for conceal carry.

 

[ma6907]

I like it just the way it is.
To your point of making the safety out farther from the frame, I think that would make handling the gun and safety awkward.
Also as someone mentioned, I like it w/o the back strap safety.
I do not understand concerns about load/unload w/ safety engaged. It's safe.
To each his own.

Many advocates of the 1911 pin or otherwise defeat their grip safety, anyway--Including Col Jeff Cooper. And he knew a thing or 2 about 1911s. John Browning's original design (for what became the M1911) did not include a grip safety. That was added at the request of the US Government.

 

[mikeheel]

At first, I thought it a little odd that I could rack the slide with the safety engaged, but I actually do appreciate it. IMO, that makes it safer to unload.

I would not want the safety further from the frame. This gun is meant for deep concealment. You don't want extra width.

I could go either way in terms of grip safety. I kinda like 'em on 1911s, but that's mostly b/c I'm just used to them being there. But I've read that the ergos on a gun this small are different and make a grip safety a bit more of a challenge. Regardless, I like how it feels in my hand.

 

[RickBe]

Many advocates of the 1911 pin or otherwise defeat their grip safety, anyway--Including Col Jeff Cooper. And he knew a thing or 2 about 1911s. John Browning's original design (for what became the M1911) did not include a grip safety. That was added at the request of the US Government.

The whole gun was designed at the request of the government. It's not like Browning had a safety-less 1911 on the shelf and it was adopted after a safety was added. The gun was developed over a period of years, and the thumb safety was about the last thing added. There are M1910 prototypes with and without.

My point about the P938's safety is that its function as a safety, due to the size and shape, is compromised in order to facilitate the load-on-safe feature, and while I very much value getting at the safety in a hurry, I don't value load-on-safe.

Obviously, I'm not in the majority, here.

 

[Doctor Duck]

Not wanting to argue but my curiosity begs me to ask how the safety is compromised if you operate the slide or load the chamber with the safety on? It is still on safe and will not fire is it not?

 

[RickBe]

I'm not talking about compromising "safety" as a concept, I'm talking about the operation of the safety lever - its primary function of making the gun ready to fire by disengaging it - being compromised in the interest of it not getting in the way of racking the slide.

On, say, a 1911, the typical extended safety rides along the slide when engaged, and then is depressed down along the frame when disengaged, and it falls readily under the thumb for both engagement and disengagement.

The P938's safety is riding low along the frame when engaged, and then must be depressed even lower to disengage. It's already very small, and harder to reach than necessary . . . unless you highly value being able to rack the slide with the safety engaged.

 

[Flibuoy]

It is entirely possible to take your sig safety and reshape the existing thumb area to mimic the 1911 and still remain free of slide. Conversely the 1911 safety could look and feel the much the same as it does now and not interact with the slide movement. So, take your sig safety and a 1911 safety to somebody who can cut and weld.

In the meantime I like parts of both solutions but the ability to rack the slide with safety on is a big plus to many. The motion to move safety off is not compromised in my opinion since on everything I shoot the controls are located in same location and function similarly in a defense role. My thumb doesn't look at the slide to see manufacturer...it just slides down and takes the safety off on the way just before my finger goes to the trigger which is also located in a similar position and performs the same function across my collection.

I might be missing something here.... I often do...when I said just take your safety to your guy and have it fixed your way just like at BurgerKing. Mine are all fine with me. It is your pistol, use the seat off an old John Deere on your safety if you think it will help you.

 

[RickBe]

Novak's shop makes 1911s modified to rack with the safety engaged, while still using an extended lever, so it's not like it's unheard of.

 

[louchia]

I'm with Doctor Duck on this one. I'm not at all clear as to what the safety concern is when racking the slide w/ or w/o the safety on.
Can someone please explain exactly what makes it unsafe?
I'm missing something.
Thank you.