CBOB Thumb safety problem?

[WyoBob]

I picked up my new Dan Wesson CBOB today. I thought I looked it over pretty well but, maybe not. The safety plunger doesn't contact the thumb safety like it does on my two Springfield's. The safety works just fine but it seems like there should be more contact of the plunger with the safety. The safeties on my Springfield's are thicker and have full contact with the plunger.

Here' a couple of pics. (Some day, I'll figure out how to post thumbnails.)

Problem or not?

WyoBob

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v620/WyoBob/Guns/DSCN1868.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v620/WyoBob/Guns/DSCN1871.jpg

[niemi24s]

FWIW, my old WWII Gov't Model's plunger pin centerline is about even with the outer surface of the thumb safety.

Yours looks a bit above the outer surface, but if it does its job with the thumb safety - I guess there's no problem unless it makes removal of the thumb safety a lot more difficult.

Blueprints for all those parts are available in our Tech Issues sections if you want to try to figure out what might be too thick, thin, etc..

Regards

[WyoBob]

Thanks, niemi.

Here's a picture of my Springfield and CBOB straight on. As you can see the plunger tube is much closer to the (thicker) safety of the Springfield. The safety action on the CBOB seems OK but, because of the shape of the contact surface that the plunger travels on, it appears that there is a lot of downward pressure on the plunger as opposed to the "in-out" motion of my Springfield's and STI. I'm a bit concerned this might lead to premature wear on the interior of the plunger tube.

Cloudpeak

Springfield

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v620/WyoBob/Guns/DSCN1875.jpg

Dan Wesson CBOB

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v620/WyoBob/Guns/DSCN1874.jpg

[niemi24s]

The DW safety looks like it has less material in the area above the end of the plunger cmpared to the other one.

Try swapping thumb safeties between the guns and if the problem goes with it to the Springfield I'd recommend a call to DW.

Like you I'm thinking it'll either cause premature wear on the inside of the plunger tube and/or maybe cause the plunger tube to loosen on the frame.

Regards

[snuffy33]

My CBOB looks exactly that yours. I've also wondered about plunger tube wear.

[Bladeandbarrel]

you guys are worried about plunger tube wear?????

[WyoBob]

The DW safety looks like it has less material in the area above the end of the plunger compared to the other one.

Try swapping thumb safeties between the guns and if the problem goes with it to the Springfield I'd recommend a call to DW.

Like you I'm thinking it'll either cause premature wear on the inside of the plunger tube and/or maybe cause the plunger tube to loosen on the frame.

Regards
You are correct, Dan. The material has been thinned down over the entire flat surface of the safety. There's no reason to do this that I can see. I think it would sure be preferable for the plunger "button" to have full contact with the forward face of the safety. The safeties on my other 3 1911's are all full enough thickness so that the plunger is essentially centered. ("other three 1911's". That almost sounds like I'm a collector. But, the two Springfields will be sold. Not 'cause I don't like them but because I always tell my wife when I buy a new gun that I'm going to sell something. And she says, "but you never do." :D )

The left half of the ambi safety wouldn't fit in the Dan Wesson but I did make an improvement, I think. First, I very, very slightly changed angle of the "dog leg" where the "button" travels so it mimics the contour of my other 1911's more closely and, most importantly, I swapped the spring/plungers assembly from the Springfield to the CBOB and the CBOB's to the Springfield. I think that pretty much solved the problem and the safety seems like it works a tad better. As you can see from the pictures, the Springfield plunger is "square" while the CBOB is "round". Putting the Springfield plunger in the CBOB gives much more contact with the safety and now my feeling is that there is considerably less downward pressure on the plunger and plunger tube.

I took it out yesterday and put 108 rounds of my 200 SWC cast reloads that I worked up for my 5" Springfield through it. The trigger is great at 4 1/4#. I shot a couple of groups at 7 yards off hand and they were around .65" (if you throw out a couple of flyers). The rest were fast shots at my 6" paper "plate" targets just to check feed and function. It was cold and the wind was blowing around 35 mph and I'm still not over a cold that's lasted 1 1/2 weeks so I hope to do better in the future under better conditions. I do think I'm going to have to do something different with the sights. I can't get a very good sight picture with the Trijicon sights but they sure are pretty in the dark!

All reloads fed but one that had a sliver of lead ahead of the case mouth. Must have missed that as I try to check each round. I will be loading rounds for the CBOB just a bit shorter as they stick above the barrel hood by .010" to .015".

I really like the GI guide rod setup and now see why people change out the Springfield two piece full length rods. The front strap checkering is great and I like the the fact that the grips blend into the front strap as opposed to stopping short as they do on the Springfields.

And, lastly, I really like the "commander" sized pistol. I think this is the pistol I've been looking for :D

WyoBob

[WyoBob]

you guys are worried about plunger tube wear?????

Well, yeah. After all, I don't have anything else to worry about :)

You "had to be there" but the safety was really putting downward pressure on the plunger due to the "button" almost slipping off the front engagement surface and the shape of the "hump" or "dogleg". I've read enough about plunger tube assemblies coming loose and didn't figure this condition was doing any good in that regard. IMO, the plunger action should be fore and aft, not down.

Anyway, it seems to work better with the switch of the plunger/spring assembly and slight re-contour of the leading edge of the safety. The plunger tube could have used a bit more length which would helped support the plunger "button", as well.

WyoBob

[niemi24s]

The material has been thinned down over the entire flat surface of the safety.What I was referring to wasn't so much the thinness of the material but its profile.

To my eye, to get the DW to look like and act like the Springfield one, it needs more material as shown here: http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p232/niemi24s/ThumbSafetya.jpg The plate could be a little thicker too, I suppose.

But, if that's the way DW makes them - what's a fella to do?

Maybe you should send DW the pictures and then give them a call.

Regards

[WyoBob]

What I was referring to wasn't so much the thinness of the material but its profile.

To my eye, to get the DW to look like and act like the Springfield one, it needs more material as shown here: http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p232/niemi24s/ThumbSafetya.jpg The plate could be a little thicker too, I suppose.

But, if that's the way DW makes them - what's a fella to do?

Maybe you should send DW the pictures and then give them a call.

Regards

One of these days, I'm going to learn how to draw squiggly lines on photos :) That's cool and helpful.

I very slightly rounded the corner at the point where you started drawing at the top. So slightly, that I doubt you could tell in a before and after picture. That coupled with changing the plunger assembly out has things looking and feeling better.

Thanks!

WyoBob

[log man]

One thing you can count on, the safety in post#1 is much more likely to cause plunger tube failure as can be seen it is wedging under the plunger due to being below center of the plunger. The harder it gets the more potential damage it can do. I would ask for a new safety and if its the same I would buy an after market, Ed Brown, WC etc. Or if you wish to leave it as is I would buy a replacement plunger tube and the staking tool.

LOG

[Jim Bellino]

I believe DW uses a Brown TS as OEM(I could be wrong)...I noticed on my Brown Kobra Carry that the TS has a thin flange like the one in question and same type of min. engagement with plunger also but to date has never been a problem....I had expected the plunger to eventually override the flange but it has never happened and plunger tube has never come loose. I guess it depends on how well DW has staked the plunger tube.