Another View: Ruger Magazine Disconnect Safety and Holsters with Attached Mag Pouch

It is Sunday, so it is time to debunk a couple of myths. 

Myth one: there is no practical reason for Ruger, on most of their semi-auto pistols to include a magazine disconnect safety. (The LCP is an exception to this rule.)

While it is true that many people do not like this feature, that is not to say that it is without merit or was included solely to meet certain state requirements for sales. I thought this for a while, but some blogger (and I'm sorry I don't recall who or I would certainly give credit here) pointed out that a very good reason it is there is to provide a safety in the circumstance when the magazine is removed and there remains a round in the chamber.

In order to rack the slide to remove the loaded round, on a Ruger one must put the manual safety on FIRE. So, at that point, the gun is cocked, a round is in the chamber and it's off safe. Nudge the trigger, or perhaps drop it and it lands the wrong way, and bang! you have a negligent discharge, with possibly injury or worse. So, with the magazine disconnect in place and operational, even though the manual safety is off, and a round is loaded in the chamber, the gun won't fire. One can rack and remove the round with a safety still operative.

I think most people who remove the magazine disconnect safety mechanism from their guns do so because they envision a situation in which, for some reason or other, the magazine drops from their gun when they are about to fire a round in a desperate circumstance. I'm not sure why this would happen, although I'll bet there are many who can concoct scenarios in which it would. I think the odds are extremely slim and, personally, I'd rather have an extra margin of safety operative for the many times I will be removing a round from the chamber of my loaded Ruger and trust that my magazine will be in place when I need to fire the weapon.

Myth two: Using a holster that incorporates a built-in mag pouch is more of a liability than an asset. This reasoning is based on the notion that if one has the holster on the same side of the body as the shooting hand, reaching across the body with the other hand for the magazine is either impossible, awkward, slow or just plain wrong.

Obviously, if one wears such a rig and carries either cross-draw or appendix, this argument loses all force. It's no more difficult to reach for the mag in those positions with the non shooting hand than it is to reach behind your hip with the same hand for an extra mag. And, as I've noted here before, there are many good reasons (myth busters, too) for a concealed carry being in the cross draw position.

I have a Remora holster for my LCP with the built in mag carrier, provided kindly by Alan of Remora for me to test this theory. I've been wearing it strong side, at about the 3:30 to 4:00 position for the LCP. The magazine rides a little forward of this at 2:30 to 3:00 o'clock, depending. Now, I have found that it is absolutely no issue to reach the top of my right hip with my left hand and pluck the magazine from the holster. In fact, with a two hand grip on the gun, my weak (left) hand is equally distant from a magazine worn on either hip, and it is closer to the mag that sits on, or in front of my right hip. When I wear a mag holder on my left side, for comfort it's usually somewhat behind the left hip, putting it actually farther away from my left hand than the mag on the holster.

An actual advantage of having a holster with an attached mag holder is two fold. One, when you grab the gun and holster, you also automatically grab an extra magazine. Two, especially with the Remora holster, the holster/mag pouch combination is longer and "flatter" than the holster alone, providing more friction area to keep it in place, and more area to spread the load making it even more comfortable.

Well, that's it for myth busting today. I'll be looking for more myths to bust, or at least expose as time goes on.

Thanks for reading, and be safe.

Versacarry Mag Release Issue - Update

As you will see a few posts back, I had an issue with the magazine in my Ruger SR9c being unintentionally ejected when I bent over sharply while carrying in the Versacarry "medium" rise holster.
I contacted the Versacarry folks about this, then set about trying to analyze what happened. As the photo will show, when I had the Versacarry and SR9c  in my normal cross draw position, while wearing my usual Wrangler jeans, the mag release button on the Ruger is positioned right underneath the sewn end of a belt loop and the heavy Bear Creek gun belt I normally wear. When I bent over sharply it put pressure on the mag release button sufficient to trip the mag release.

Mag release button exposed, but not in danger of being depressed. This is not my normal cross draw carry position but somewhat further back to illustrate the position of the various components: holster, belt loop, belt and button.

In the normal cross draw position, the mag release button is directly under the end of the belt loop and can also get pressure from the top of the stiff gun belt. As you can see, the magazine (empty) has been partially ejected. This was a result of bending sharply at the waist as if picking something off the floor.

Now, this is a situation that required a number of factors to come together simultaneously, something that is very unusual. My take on this is that when using any holster with which the magazine release button is exposed (i.e., not protected against actuation) check to ensure that there will be nothing pressing on the button while the gun is in the carry position you have chosen. If so, move the gun and holster, or use a different holster in that place. For the Versacarry line, the simplest solution would be to choose one of their holsters with a lower or higher ride which would move the mag release button to another place. I would, of course, test this with an unloaded gun just to make sure. In fact, if you use any holster that exposes the magazine release button, test it thoroughly to ensure that does not happen to you.

So, some after the fact testing and analysis shows that this issue was not simply the result of carrying my SR9c in a Versacarry holster, but carrying a semi-automatic handgun in any holster in which the magazine release is exposed. Take a look at your normal carry with this in mind.

Be safe.

Initial Impressions: Little Foxx Holster for the SR9c

Little Foxx Holster with the Ruger SR9c

Tuckable J clip

After learning about Foxx Holsters from a posting on The Ruger Pistols Forum, I contacted Raymond, the owner and brain trust behind the company and discussed reviewing one of the line. I like hybrid holsters and have used and tested a few. These appeared to be well made and not overly large, and more intriguing, is Raymond's policy of zero shipping charges and his unconditional warranty. You can also try it for fourteen days to see if it is the right one for you. All this for $39. Hard to beat!

We settled on the Little Foxx model since I am primarily interested in cross-draw carry. I received a new Little Foxx Holster on Monday.

http://www.foxxholsters.com

Prompt shipment. It arrived in a bubble padded heavy envelope and in perfect condition. This holster is obviously made by someone who takes pride in his work. It was solidly constructed, smooth edges on the kydex and the leather. Leather edges of the backing are smoothed and dyed as well.

All of the rivets holding the kydex to the holster are flush and undamaged. The SR9c fit is right on and the moulding is perfect right down to the sight channel. The big, heavy low-profile kydex clip is fastened to the bottom of the kydex shell with two Chicago screws providing solid lockup and good alignment. The bottom attachment allows the holster to be worn either with the shirt tucked or not. I like that. I also like it that the clip does not have a "tail", which I find may catch on overgarments with hems, like some sweaters or sweatshirts.

Little Foxx, back side - the one next to you.

The SR9c is held somewhat loosely in the holster when the gun and holster are not attached to the belt and inside the waistband. This, I believe, is a design feature. When properly worn, the tension of the belt (and you should always use a belt made specifically for carrying a gun in a holster to get the best benefits from your holster regardless of make) and the fact that the leather backing will give a bit to conform to your body shape, tightens the kydex around the gun enough to make very positive retention yet an easy and smooth draw.

The Foxx holster was comfortable from the first wearing, and has proven to remain so over the intervening days I've been using it, and it is my main carry holster in order to provide good feedback and data for this review. At this point, I am carrying in my usual cross-draw position. If you will look back in the archives here, you will see posts concerning cross-draw and why I believe it has gotten an uncritical hearing and a bad rap. See especially the article by Mr. Campbell I've referenced for an experienced LEO's opinion. So, because that's my preferred carry position, I'll be evaluating the holster against my other IWB cross-draw carry units.

The primary competition for the Foxx holster is the N82 Tactical Pro IWB.

I have taken some comparison photos to illustrate the differences between the two holsters.

N82 Tactical Pro and the Little Foxx

Little Foxx superimposed on the N82 Tactical Pro for a size comparison.

The Foxx is considerably smaller and lighter than the N82. The Foxx uses lightweight kydex for the shell while the N82 uses a moulded thicker plastic. The kydex has 'give', the moulded plastic does not. With belt and body pressure, the Foxx kydex shell conforms a bit to the gun shape and this helps to 'lock' the pistol into the holster against the leather. The N82 depends on a small part of the moulding of the plastic shell to engage the front of the trigger guard to hold and retain the gun in the holster. This works well, but in order to release the trigger guard from the protruding plastic part in the trigger guard, one has to grasp the butt and give a small inward twist to release the pistol before it can be drawn. This is not as onerous as it sounds, but it is one other motion required to draw that is not present in other designs, like the Fox.

At this point, comfort is a toss-up. The Foxx is light, somewhat flexible and no larger than it needs to be. The top part of the slide is covered by leather but the grips are not. Some might call this a combat grip, but I prefer to think of it as an open grip. Combat, like 'tactical', is a term better applied to law enforcement or the military than a civilian rig meant for concealed carry. I might have to draw my weapon in self defense, but I don't plan to be going into combat with it. For that, I'd rather have a rifle.
Even with the open grip design, which I prefer, the Foxx is comfortable.

The N82 uses a kind of neoprene sandwich, with soft leather against the body and leather against the gun. The neoprene inside provides a good level of 'softness', comfort is a better word, and prevents sweat from migrating through to the weapon. However, I suspect the leather backing on the Foxx will provide an equally effective sweat barrier. No part of the gun touches your body with the N82. This does contribute to the outstanding comfort of the holster, but adds mass, area and closes the grip area to an extend. Combined with the need to twist then draw I find this is an inhibiting draw factor compared to the Foxx and similar 'open grip' holster designs. Bear in mind, however, that these factors are highly personal. What might be a negative for one person may have no effect, or be a positive attribute to another. I can only state my personal preferences.

Back sides of both holsters. The N82 showing the result of sweat marks from last summer.

So, it is early in the game but at this point I like what I see. And what I feel. The only negative issue relates to my cross-draw preference. I've come to find that most holster makers do not consider the effects of the cross draw position in their designs. And, I'm not speaking of strictly cross-draw designed holsters, but only for those that are designed to be worn IWB and can be positioned effectively in the cross-draw position. I've yet to examine other IWB holsters for this aspect other than the Foxx and a short while ago, the Versacarry. (See this blog: Versacarry Review and Field Notes post.)

In short, some holsters may position the Ruger SR9/40 series semiautomatic pistols such that, in the cross-draw orientation, the magazine release button is underneath the waistband material and the belt. If the belt is thick, as a good gun belt should be, and the wearer bends forward sharply, the pressure of the body pushing the gun and holster outward against the belt, can cause the magazine release button to be depressed enough to eject the magazine. This is definitely not good.

Note the top of the J clip, where the top of the belt will be, in the cross-draw carry, positions the belt over (covering) the magazine release button. This can, in certain circumstances when bending severely forward, press the button and release the magazine. However, the J clip is adjustable to prevent this.

If carrying the SR9 series in the cross-draw orientation, radical negative cants, such as pictured above, should be avoided to eliminate the magazine release issue possibility.

I have verified this issue with the Versacarry. With the Foxx holster, if the clip is positioned with too much negative cant (possible by using a left-hand carry clip on a right-hand cross draw orientation - see the photo above) this can happen as well. However, with the normal clip positioned in its most up-and-down (straight drop) orientation, the configuration of the clip, holster and gun is such that the magazine release button should never drop below the top of the belt line. So, there should be no concern about this if the proper clip is used and positioned right.

With the proper clip and orientation, the top of the belt should never rise above the magazine release button.

For most people, this is not a concern since only a small minority of us cranks insist on carrying cross-draw. (Good luck getting to your weapon in a hurry when you are belted into your seat or sitting down wearing a shirt, sweater and/or coat and your pistol is somewhere behind your hip.) Sorry, had to get that in... However, I do wish makers of good IWB holsters that can be worn cross-draw take into consideration protection of the magazine release where appropriate to do so.

I've only begun to evaluate the Foxx IWB for my SR9c. I will continue to give it a real-world field test and report back here on my findings. At this point, I am very pleased with the holster and anticipate it will become a regular in my small lineup of IWB holsters for this gun. And, I forgot to mention, the Foxx holster