When was "Condition 1" for 1911 invented??

[Retired]

Originally Posted by BILLCALLEY

The military, most unarguably, would NEVER allow Condition 1 carry -- not now, not then, not ever.

I believe local commanders had the authority to designate which carry condition would be used by the men in their units.

For example, at my overseas duty station, the MPs always carried their 1911s cocked and locked. They chambered a round in the presence of the NCOIC when they came on duty. Yet back at the support area (PX, bowling alley, etc.) the MPs carried their 1911s unloaded in the holster, with two loaded magazines carried in a belt pouch.

Never say never.

[TEA]

FWIW, I remember reading a few accounts many years ago about Glocks firing when dropped.

[motorsporting]

This has been a great thread. Coincidentally, my FIL just got his CCW and we were discussing the C1 theory last night as he's now considering what he wants to get/carry. He was shocked, as a former Army officer stationed in Korea during the 60s, that I carried C1. He was very clearly told not to do this while stationed there as a tanker. I tried to explain the safeties and how they worked compared to "modern" safeties/Glocks. I think he is stuck, as previously has been discussed, on the visual "unsafety-ness" of the cocked hammer. Although I really think C3 is undesirable, the speed and necessity of quickly responding to imminent danger is paramount for me, I told him he would need to be comfortable with whatever he decides.

[Dave Waits]

You'll find no hard evidence that Condition 1 is the correct way to carry a 1911. But, if you look at the operation and interrelationship of the parts of the gun intuitively, you soon discover that, in a properly operating 1911, Condition 1 carry is as safe as condition 3 and a lot faster to bring the gun into play. If all is correct, the gun cannot function unless both safeties are disengaged. Dropping it and having it go off is also a fairly moot subject as both the primary hooks and the half-cock hooks on the hammer would have to be sheared by the sear, plus the Thumb-Safety would have to be broken for that to happen. This won't happen if dropped directly on the hammer from an average height of three to four feet(Gun on your waist).

The theory of a 1911 discharging if dropped on the hammer is paranoia at it's best, either in Condition 1 or 2. In Condition 2, a properly-fitted Hammer is flat against the firing-pin stop. There is no way to transfer enough power to the pin to sufficiently strike the primer for function to occur. In Condition 1, as I stated earlier, you'd have to shear both hammer hooks and defeat the thumb-safety, which blocks hammer movement.

Now, some will argue that a loose thumb-safety can change the argument but, although this to some extent is possible, I stated at the beginning that it won't happen in a 'PROPERLY Operating 1911. A loose or sloppy Thumb-safety is poor maint. or poor fitting, not a normal situation and, certainly not a part of a properly maintained and operating 1911.

The Good Colonel was merely taking the design to it's logical operating-end when advocating Condition 1 carry.

[oldman45]

Dave, your points are correct. My only addition is you left out the part about the grip safety.

To be fired, a 1911 must:

1 Be cocked.
2. Have the thumb safety off.
3. Have the grip safety depressed.
4. Have the trigger pulled.

If any one of these things are not present, it will not fire.

Show me proof that a dropped 1911 will fire by being dropped. I was in the US Army many years ago with a couple hundred other idiots. We dropped ours often on hard surfaces (by accident) and not one ever went off.

[moxie]

As recently as 1973, in Vietnam, the most common carry was Condition 3. Some of us carried in Condition 2, going to Condition 0 when "in hand." But I didn't know anyone in that era who advocated or employed Condition 1. Just the way it was. Over the years Condition 1 has become popular but Condition 3 is also used by many. Seems no one uses Condition 2 anymore, and very few have even heard of Condition 0. And with beavertails, Condition 2 is tough to even do properly. I don't know what the guys in the sandbox have been doing. Anyone have real experience?

[CavCop]

When and why did the series 80 come about and why did Kimber go to a series II?

Durring and after WWII, I dont think many people carried 1911's and dont think there were conditions to the carry. The masses that used 1911's were law enforcement in the 70's, when the revolvers were mixing with semi-autos. By the 80's S&W and Glock had entered.

I will say that Jeff Cooper came up with the carry conditions in the late 70's when teaching Law Enforcement.

[Onegoodshot]

Originally Posted by Kodadek

An ordnance manual and the want of a thumb safety are not proof. It's entirely subjective. I'm not saying it wasn't but your evidence isn't proof positive. It's merely what you've chosen to see/believe to be proof positive.

History is a wonderful thing, I agree. History however is not always hard cold fact. If anything, before I decided to attend gunsmithing school I learned as an anthropology major that history is rather subjective. Nor is an addenda added after the production and issue of the weapon any sort of proof.

Though in the end the original intent matters not at all. Condition one works, has been proven to work, and continues to work. It's fast, reliable, and pretty damn safe. There are and will always be accidents, flukes, and negligent discharges. Could it happen to you? Could it happen to me? Absolutey. The human animal is destined to royally screw the pooch and our inventions, as they are man made are also capable of failure and imperfection.

I've met other "As JMB intended" types. Some swearing he intended C&L others hammer down. I don't rightfully care what he intended. He was a man, he is dead as you and I will both be one day. He was not omnipotent, nor was his final design of any weapon the apex of what it could be.

Use of reason, the most powerdul weapon we have as our collective resource.
Kodadek, well put!

[Dave Waits]

Originally Posted by CavCop

When and why did the series 80 come about and why did Kimber go to a series II?

Durring and after WWII, I dont think many people carried 1911's and dont think there were conditions to the carry. The masses that used 1911's were law enforcement in the 70's, when the revolvers were mixing with semi-autos. By the 80's S&W and Glock had entered.

I will say that Jeff Cooper came up with the carry conditions in the late 70's when teaching Law Enforcement.

Basically Cav, the Series 80 Safety System and the re-invented Swartzblock System(Kimber, Colt originally developed it in 1934) came about so they could meet Californias' firearms tests to get put on the list of allowable guns that could be sold in the State. Springfield passed by going to a light titanium Firing-Pin and a heavy spring.

[Dave Waits]

Originally Posted by oldman45

Dave, your points are correct. My only addition is you left out the part about the grip safety.

To be fired, a 1911 must:

1 Be cocked.
2. Have the thumb safety off.
3. Have the grip safety depressed.
4. Have the trigger pulled.

If any one of these things are not present, it will not fire.

Show me proof that a dropped 1911 will fire by being dropped. I was in the US Army many years ago with a couple hundred other idiots. We dropped ours often on hard surfaces (by accident) and not one ever went off.

Sir, the third line of my post reads as follows;
"If all is correct, the gun cannot function unless both safeties are disengaged."
You must have missed it.

[CavCop]

Originally Posted by Dave Waits

Basically Cav, the Series 80 Safety System and the re-invented Swartzblock System(Kimber, Colt originally developed it in 1934) came about so they could meet Californias' firearms tests to get put on the list of allowable guns that could be sold in the State. Springfield passed by going to a light titanium Firing-Pin and a heavy spring.

So the series 80/Kimber II was done in 1934 and brought about in the 80's to sell guns in CA? I did not think CA had any major laws till the mid 90's.

In the late 80's every sporting good store sold guns in CA and the Calico 9MM and other evil weapons were sold along with all the cheap Loricin/Cobra/Davis compacts. This is news to me.

From what I recall the Melendez brothers shooting was when their gun laws went silly.

[Cannibul]

Originally Posted by Rustin

Judging by your signature, your really into correct grammar and spelling (even though your user name is intentionally misspelled). You know what I meant. Would the word uncertain work? I'm sure you've got a big vocabulary, which word am I looking for?

Basically, I would be a little concerned. I thinks. Now you've got me confused!

Wary or leery would be the word you're looking for. Don't feel bad. I see weary used all the time when people should be using leery or wary.

[Cannibul]

Originally Posted by CavCop

So the series 80/Kimber II was done in 1934 and brought about in the 80's to sell guns in CA? I did not think CA had any major laws till the mid 90's.

In the late 80's every sporting good store sold guns in CA and the Calico 9MM and other evil weapons were sold along with all the cheap Loricin/Cobra/Davis compacts. This is news to me.

From what I recall the Melendez brothers shooting was when their gun laws went silly.

The Swartz safety was used by Colt in the early 30's. Kimber didn't exist back then. They use a variation of the Swartz safety.

The series 80's came about in the 1980's from Colt.

[Seldomseen]

I would say gun users started in the 1920's and 1930's. Returning vets knew how to use the 1911 and it was popular the criminals during Prohibition and the Depression.

[JetBlackGT]

Originally Posted by iShoot

actually there is

History is a wonderful thing.


From CW Clawson's book, Collectors Guide to Colt .45 Service Pistols Models of the 1911 and 1911A1: Page 7 -- In 1913 an addenda was added to the Army Ordnance Manual for the 1911 emphasizing not to carry the pistol in the holster with the hammer cocked and the safety lock on except in an emergency as it was not the intended purpose of the safety lock.


.

It obviously was the intended purpose of the safety.

Guess why?

The safety does not work/cannot be engaged with the hammer down. There is no other possible use of the safety except with a round in the chamber and the hammer cocked. If you have the hammer cocked over an unloaded chamber, it does not need a safety at all. So the safety is only for one condition and one only. Loaded, hammer back.

Condition 1.

Again, loaded with hammer down, safety DOES. NOT. FUNCTION.

[JetBlackGT]

Originally Posted by oldman45

Show me proof that a dropped 1911 will fire by being dropped. I was in the US Army many years ago with a couple hundred other idiots. We dropped ours often on hard surfaces (by accident) and not one ever went off.

If I recall, these guys ruined a lot of guns. Drop tests caused the gun to go off almost every time. Only when dropped onto the muzzle. IIRC, the firing pin would fall forward and it's own weight was enough to pop off a primer.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_QkWEiX2eE

[CavCop]

Originally Posted by JetBlackGT

It obviously was the intended purpose of the safety.

Guess why?

The safety does not work/cannot be engaged with the hammer down. There is no other possible use of the safety except with a round in the chamber and the hammer cocked. If you have the hammer cocked over an unloaded chamber, it does not need a safety at all. So the safety is only for one condition and one only. Loaded, hammer back.

Condition 1.

Again, loaded with hammer down, safety DOES. NOT. FUNCTION.

Years ago, I was told by some old time Vets that the safety on the 1911 was like a decocker on a Sig. You used it when done shooting, to make the weapon safer, till you got a chance to clear it. Dont know how true that is, but based on what I know of Military and Cavalry, I think it was used that way.

[iShoot]

Originally Posted by JetBlackGT

It obviously was the intended purpose of the safety.

Guess why?

The safety does not work/cannot be engaged with the hammer down. ......

You need to read the rest of the quote and your questions will be answered.


Why do 1911 folk get all butt-hurt when they find that so-called 'condition 1' was never part of the 1911 design??



It is an accepted method of 1911 carry, not the only method.

[Dave Waits]

Originally Posted by Rosco Benson

Yup. It's a Bruce Nelson #1 Professional....with an FBI-cant for some reason.

Of course it was made by Bianchi and, for some unknown reason, called the "Askins Avenger".

Rosco

sorry Roscoe, I've seen photos of Askins wearing one and the captions all read that it was a holster he designed, Bruce Nelson was never mentioned. These photos appeared in, I believe, old Guns and Ammo or Shooting Times magazines. Besides, 'The Professional is a similar,but different, holster. Here's a pic of one;


Here's another Photo from Milt sparks' site, according to them it's 'The Professional'. Again, similar but, not the same.


further, my holster wasn't made by Bianchi, it was made by Lane of LASCO Leather. The 30-degree FBI-Cant allows for both a quicker,smoother draw and presentation and it's less printable.

[Dave Waits]

Originally Posted by CavCop

So the series 80/Kimber II was done in 1934 and brought about in the 80's to sell guns in CA? I did not think CA had any major laws till the mid 90's.

In the late 80's every sporting good store sold guns in CA and the Calico 9MM and other evil weapons were sold along with all the cheap Loricin/Cobra/Davis compacts. This is news to me.

From what I recall the Melendez brothers shooting was when their gun laws went silly.

no Cav, reread my post, Kimber re-invented, actually I should say, used the Swartzblock which was originally invented by a Colt Engineer in 1934.The Series 80 firing-pin safety is a completely different design that does the same thing. For a gun to be sold in California, it must be on the List of allowable guns, it must now pass a ten foot drop test.

[higgy1911]

While the 1911 has obviously been carried condition 1 by many since its arrival in the ranks and on the market, and clearly the US calvary had a need to carry it that way, I wonder why the early designs appear with a spur hammer and no safety. This would seem to indicate a condition 2 expectation on the part of the designer, changing that according to the needs of the customer by adding a manual safety , grip safety, etc.

Personally I think the advantage and superiority of condition 1 is readily apparent, regardless of who when what or where, though it's history is interesting.

I also tire of hearing about the dangers of condtion 2. If you are halfway payng attention its not at all dangerous. There just isn't any reason to do it. But if it strikes your fancy feel free. Point the gun in a safe direction and ease the hammer down. Nothing to it. No more dangerous than any other manipulation of the gun. If you really feel like lowering the hammer on a live round is so dangerous that it should be avoided, I don't see how you aren't frightened to death to manipulate the gun at all. Caution mitigates the risk to such a high degree, just as with other aspects of gunhandling, that one need not avoid the process for saftey's sake.

That said, I still can't come up with a good reason to put the gun in condition 2.

[Kodadek]

Originally Posted by iShoot

You need to read the rest of the quote and your questions will be answered.


Why do 1911 folk get all butt-hurt when they find that so-called 'condition 1' was never part of the 1911 design??



It is an accepted method of 1911 carry, not the only method.

Actually, it was. Look at two models, predecessors of the 1911.

The 1910 hammerless had a thumb safety, no barrel bushing, etc...however, the Army did not want a hammerless semi-auto. Now, what would be the intent of a hammerless firearm with a thumb safety might I ask? What was JMB thinking? No freaking clue brother, I don't hold seances, wear a pentacle, or have a third eye. If you have ANY of these things or you were born with a caul I implore you to summon the guy and ask him.

Then the 1910 was designed, JMB left it with a grip safety but no thumb safety. The slide release had a plunger tube, it had a pushing but to take the bushing fully out and remove the plug, spring, and guide rod one had to remove the slide. No thumb safety? Maybe he was thinking old school revolver, hammer down, maybe he thought a grip safety would keep the thing from going off cocked. Once again, we'll never know.

The US Army Ordnance department decided it wanted a safety on the weapon, so JMB once again retooled his design and produced what is now the model 1911. Why would the Army want a thumb safety? Well, the reason is obvious. However no one ever bothered to take down JMB's thoughts for posterity. The Army took delivery of the first five hundred units in January of 1913 and added the addenda against cocked and locked carry, which tells me some folks thought it seemed like a good idea, and then some other folks decided it wasn't such a good idea. Once again, it was a letter on the subject of doctrine, not the manufacturer's or the engineers intent.

Butthurt? Hardly. Don't care in the end what, how, why, or when it was intended to be used. I know it works in what is now known as conditioned one, cocked and locked, or C&L if you're too lazy to say the second one. I know that it's a silly and contrived argument. I used to argue that a 1911 without an 80's style or Schwartz safety was not a 70's series style, until I realized that in the end it didn't matter. I respect that John Moses Browning built simple, rugged, reliable weapons that have stood the test of time-Consider how many people were carrying a Colt Peacemaker a hundred years after its inception to the number of folks that carry the 1911-I also being a stupid, ignorant, redneck-yokel of the first, second, and third order don't particularly care how he intended it to be carried; however, I do have the good grace to look at everything put in front of me and shrug my shoulders, shake my head, and say "Uh...I dunno George." I then have the good grace to shrug, pour a double of Jim Beam Black and kick back to some Nazareth or Blue Oyster Cult, maybe a little Zeppelin.

[CavCop]

In the 1950 to 1980 Fairbairn, Applegate, and Sykes, were the authority on shooting. Even in the 1990's their methods were pushed by the Marines. They were taught and taught to carry semi-auto 1911's unchambered, what we would call Condition 3 today, and what is seen as the Israeli carry. Together they came up with FSA or FAS methods.

It is not till around 1976 that Jeff Cooper started to teach about firearms, and he was a huge 1911 fan. Its reported that he is the guy that instructed and coined the Conditions of Carry for the 1911. Around that time Condition 1 was debated for being safe. By the 1980's Condition one was seen as safe and used by most Police that carried 1911's (cocked and locked).

Jeff Cooper can take the credit for the 1911 Conditions of Carry. The Military even picked it up. Thats what I have found out and thats what I am sticking with.

[Kodadek]

Originally Posted by CavCop

In the 1950 to 1980 Fairbairn, Applegate, and Sykes, were the authority on shooting. Even in the 1990's their methods were pushed by the Marines. They were taught and taught to carry semi-auto 1911's unchambered, what we would call Condition 3 today, and what is seen as the Israeli carry. Together they came up with FSA or FAS methods.

It is not till around 1976 that Jeff Cooper started to teach about firearms, and he was a huge 1911 fan. Its reported that he is the guy that instructed and coined the Conditions of Carry for the 1911. Around that time Condition 1 was debated for being safe. By the 1980's Condition one was seen as safe and used by most Police that carried 1911's (cocked and locked).

Jeff Cooper can take the credit for the 1911 Conditions of Carry. The Military even picked it up. Thats what I have found out and thats what I am sticking with.

Agreed, he coined the term. Though I feel it is doubtful that he was the first guy to ever lug one around that way it does seem that he is the first one to coin the term Conditions of Carry.

[CavCop]

Originally Posted by Kodadek

Agreed, he coined the term. Though I feel it is doubtful that he was the first guy to ever lug one around that way it does seem that he is the first one to coin the term Conditions of Carry.

No doubt people carried in many different ways. The Military seemed to be very safe in how they worked with the 1911 and other weapons. The intresting thing was the Military always taught high ready, till several years back they went to low ready.