The Unofficial P64 Resource Forum

spart wrote: It's pretty clear to me that you guys have put this design up on a plinth.

Funny, I was simply concerned of your own safety.

To each his own. Just because no one is terribly impressed with your modification doesn't mean anything. The P64 is a good enough design that suits my intended use for the gun. Like I said before: I don't see having a cocked n locked P64 as an improvement (The safety is backwards). No reason to get upset or insult folks. What did you expect: Wow that is ingenious how did you come up with such a clever idea? People are not raving over your idea so you get angry? Please, we are all adults here at least most of us are.

I modified my P64 5 years ago, the month I bought it, because with my arthritic trigger finger the gun was useless. I shaved enough off the lower edge of the disconnector that it could not trip the single action sear when the safety was engaged. Carried it that way (cocked and locked) up until I sold it, with a note tag to the new owner. Never any issues and "safety up for off" was never a problem during draw/shoot practice. I think I posted the idea here back then, but no one asked for details. My PA - 63 and PA-63 AP-9 were both modified similarly, and for the same reasons. The latter is on my hip right now. "To each his own"! --"Ivan"

PS: I have no idea how my profile came up "female" while I wasn't looking. Am not, never was.

Cool, I can see the advantage, I can also see where it isn't for everyone. The P64 is the only gun I have with a safety that works this way. All other handguns do not have a safety or functions like the Makarov (1911s and CZs). If I could modify that I would, but I don't get excited about this one. Shame you didn't post before the newbe got upset.

Yeah, Ol' spart's response was uncalled for no one was saying anything bad to him, you were discussing it's pro's and cons Oh well.

S PARTS would be more like it.

Maybe we can part it out when he totally buggers it all up!



Fritzhund

Except the most sought after parts (after mags and springs) are the safety and disconnector.

Modifying a mechanical device that can shoot a good size hole in your thigh or other appendage if it fails is a risky proposition.

I taught a safety course during one of my active duty tours. The common thing among mishap reports (we don't have accidents in the Navy - just mishaps) was overriding or by-passing a safety device or ignoring and/or short cutting a safety procedure. I guess I'll stick with the guys who believe that it designed that way for a reason.

No disrespect to spart who tried to improve a "$150 surplus pistol" but unless he is a Master Armorer or gunsmith he is just another mishap report waiting to be written.

rottenrick wrote:Yeah, Ol' spart's response was uncalled for no one was saying anything bad to him, you were discussing it's pro's and cons Oh well.

Agreed, he did seem to take offense over nothing. This is after all a discussion board. Sounded like he was expecting a certain response, and was offended when he didn't get it.

An old saying, if it ain't broke don't mess with it. I can see replacing parts that are defective, worn or broken! Many of us here are not trying to be negative. And yes we do like our P-64s Polish pistols.

An example of a modification is what Beretta did to the M9 Military pistols that had slides that tended to crack in half, thus making the rear part of the slide shoot back off the rear into the shooters face.

They put a slide catch in the shape of a circular disc to catch the cracked slide. It was for the safety of the individual carrying and using the weapon in combat or during qualification.

We basically checked the slides after that and kept close tally on how many rounds went down range. Spart hope that you understand that members are concerned for your safety. Sgt P.

Personally I wish all DA/SA pistols had the Condition 1 option. I simply don't care for the transition between the two.

To the old guard here, is this particular modification OK?

Don't think I'd call my self old guard. Norm and Dick Funk might be and there opinions seem pretty clear above.
I've heard of this and a DOA mod on the board. I wouldn't do either but thats just me. I don't like DOA pistols or traditional slide mounted safeties (mentioned a few times above) even though I own a sample of both. I'm also not crazy about a cocked-n-locked pocket pistol. I carry a 1911, condition 1 on a belt holster without issue, but having one bouncing around in my pocket doesn't give me warm fuzzies.

Stover,

No, no C&L in anything but a holster sir...

KG
Exactly, and the P64 is primarily a pocket pistol to me. So, C&L is a no go. BTW: I use a holster even for pocket carry.

Just on the safe side...I wouldn't carry...or suggest carrying with the hammer pulled back already. It just seems to me as if you're asking for trouble. I almost like the slightly stiffer pull of the first round...gives me assurance that I'm pulling the trigger at what I want to pull it at.