Need halp with my new SP1, /k/. When the safety is engaged and

>>34828836
I own an SP1 too, but it's never done that. Maybe check to see if you're safety is fucked somehow?

>>34828836
>When the safety is engaged and i pull the charging handle, it feels like it scrapes by internally.

Make it not do that. It's not supposed to.

>>34828836
>he shelled out for colts new SP-1
You get what you deserve fuckface. Don't support companies that pull that kind of shit. I don't even wanna know what you paid for it.

File: 1502423226021.jpg (40KB, 960x743px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 960x743px

>>34830181
>New SP-1
Hello newfag

>>34830188
>he doesn't know colt put the SP-1 back into production and announced it last shotshow
Hello dumbfag

>>34830188
Colt brought SP1s back for a limited run, costing more than the original

>>34830181
Its a 1970's sp1. Thanks for playing.

>>34830363
>a 1970's SP-1 is "new"

>>34828836
I just looked at my gun, which doesn't do that. I noticed that with the hammer cocked, if I pushed it down even further(like when the bolt slides over it), the trigger pulled back ever so slightly towards the safety, but didn't actually contact the safety. I can also engage/disengage my safety with hammer pushed down as far as Itll go. My trigger never actually touches the safety unless I try to pull the trigger with the safety engaged.

Take your lower, cock the hammer and engage the safety. Then push the hammer down as far as you can, pull the trigger and see if it has any slack before hitting the safety(like a fraction of a mm). I'm betting yours has no slack, which I can't really see actually causing any issues, other than bothering you.

File: 1431055839357.gif (2MB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 320x240px

>>34830458
New as in he just got it. Holy fuck, bro, you're stupid.

>>34830692
No fucking shit Sherlock. But when you say "my new SP1" the assumption is that he meant new production model based on the fact that the SP1's recently were put back into production and may have issues/ blemishes/ malfunctions in the design. Dense fuck.

>>34830774
you're a fucking idiot. The new Colt's aren't called SP1s, and they aren't even shipping yet.

>>34830774
You can perform all the mental gymnastics and grammar Nazism you want, but the fact is that he meant that he just bought it so it's new to him. Enjoy being wrong.

>>34828836
When the safety is engaged you will not be able to push the hammer further down, but on fire it will be able to be pushed past the sear point. Check for slop in the trigger and hammer pins, and if there is no slack, then you may have to try to mill down the face of the hammer some, just be careful, do it a little at a time, if you go too fast it may not fire, just mill/file it some, then re assemble it and test it.

>>34828836
I'm pretty sure it's not supposed to be able to be racked when the safety is engaged.

>>34830181
>>34830206
>>34830458
>>34830774
Shut the fuck up you autistic child.

>>34831071
It can be, it's designed to be able to so that you can unload it on safe without having to put it on fire to get a round out of the chamber.