Browning 1955

Ganderite

Ganderite

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 99.7%
355   1   0
Location
Farm south of North Bay
57fYsih.jpg


I have two of these. Both have a grip safety that is very stiff.

When I shoot a 1911, the grip safety is easily disengaged just buy holding the pistol.

With a 1955 I have to not only squeeze hard, but modify my grip, because a normal hold does not push the grip in there. I have a large hand.

If the grip safety spring is a flat spring, I am considering grinding it to a hour-glass shape, to make it more like a 1911.
 
Holy hell, that's, what, half an inch?

One wonders if you bought one from Numrich if a friendly welder could add material, contour it so it looked OK, and solve the problem.

Also, quit hoggin' all the sweet .32's! I feel very inadequate with my humble collection of 12(7) guns. :)
 
Do you have the same difficulty with the grip safety on an FN model 1922? I find it works fine for me since I'm used to it, but most people I let try the pistol initially can't make it go bang. Then they hate it because it weighs nothing and has a sharp recoil. Short 9mm hand loading.
 
Interesting. I have several 1922's and an FN 115, which is basically a newer 1910, and have no issue with any. I wonder whether the stronger spring was a "safety" device mandated for import?
 
Ganderite said:
I have never tried a 1922, but I suspect it is the same - stiff - and that is why others can't make it go bang.

I think a smaller hand might have no difficulty.
Click to expand...

Yes I think you've hit the nail on the head here, I was gifted a very nice occupation production FN1922 a couple years back when the previous owner found they could not reliably get the gun to fire, attributing it to the lack of grip real estate

I have had no serious issues with the grip safety and have much more medium-small size hands, I do agree though that it feels a bit stiff when compared to my Colt autos
 
I have never had a 1955, but have shot a few 1910, 1922 and don't remember a problem.
But maybe a different system?
I don't have large hands . Have you stripped down to see if there is binding? but I could see one , but not 2 jamming up.

BTW speaking of short guns , reading a book and the bad guy was using a PPK in 40. I would love to see some one shoot that, from behind a barrier.
 
Ok, so I pulled out one of the 1922's and the 115 to compare them. The main thing I notice is that the grip safety on the 1922 is flush with the back of the grip when depressed, and still projects out about 1/4" on the 115. An improved design I'd say, and yes, it is easier to depress. With the 1922, it seems more finicky as to hand position. My hand, in its natural position fits well but I can see how different shapes or sizes wouldn't.
 
My large hand does not touch the grip safety when I take a "normal" grip of the pistol.

One of those rubber Hogue "Gripper" sleeves might pre-depress it for me. I don't carry it in a pocket, so it is not very important to me. B
 
Ganderite said:
My large hand does not touch the grip safety when I take a "normal" grip of the pistol.

One of those rubber Hogue "Gripper" sleeves might pre-depress it for me. I don't carry it in a pocket, so it is not very important to me. B
Click to expand...

could you not stuff it on the inside to permanently disable it?
 
380s and 32s ....sigh .
Both of these calibers were super popular when I was a kid for people that wanted to carry protection in a smaller , less obvious package .
Women , in particular , used these calibers for personal protection .
Also , when I was a kid we played OUTDOORS and said silly things like “It’s a free world, you’re entitled to your opinion” , because our nation was safer and we had no fear of our government .
Boy , we sure are lucky to have a government to “protect” us from those evil wee guns !
Frankly , I , as a woman , feel SO empowered by the eradication of these scary calibers !
Thank you big brother !
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom