New Mossberg MC1sc Subcompact 9mm Pistol




Ricci

uber Member
Forum Supporter
#2
I love my Shield for EDC but wouldn’t mind checking one of these out at that price point.
Not sure how I feel about the cross bolt safety option and clear mags.
 

titanNV

NRA Endowment Member
Administrator
Forum Supporter
#5
Does that pertain to just this pistol's mag, or a blanket statement for all smoke/clear mags?
 

Ricci

uber Member
Forum Supporter
#6
Definitely blanket comments re: clear mags. I do not know anyone who has the new Moss mc1. Most of the clear ETS Glock mag reviews have been pretty darn good.
Generally the negative comments about clear mags are just that; general-"not as durable", stuff like that. I don't have any yet.
 

JimBianchi

Daddy
Forum Supporter
#7
I have a 31rd-ish smoke-clear glock style mag that came with a used rifle I bought last year.

It runs fine, in all guns and is drop free, sometimes you can't get more than 29rds in it, but the butt plate chipped when I ejected it over a concrete slab in practice reloads.

My Glock 33rd mags have had much worse treatment and are much older with no issues.

The clear mag stays in the safe for now.
 

jfrey123

I aim to misbehave...
Staff member
Moderator
Forum Supporter
#8
Name brand Glock mags are steel lined because gen-1’s wouldn’t drop free when fully loaded and inserted into the handgun, plastic bulged holding the rounds under pressure. That was, maybe, 30+ years ago and I would hope a new all plastic pistol mag is taking advantage of new technology in polymers.
 

nikk

New member
Forum Supporter
#9
The MC1 is an interesting gun but...

I don't like 2-piece triggers (is there a name for them?)
I mentally refer to them as "broken" triggers...

AND I hate the goofy disassembly.!
 

MAC702

LEGEN...wait for it... DARY!
Commercial Sponsor
Forum Supporter
#10
So the model with the "cross bolt safety," if I'm seeing the picture (link in OP) correctly, has a finger operated safety behind the trigger instead of a thumb-operated safety on the slide or back of frame? I can't think of another pistol offhand with that design. Hmmm.
 

Kinoons

Obsessed Member
Forum Supporter
#12
So the model with the "cross bolt safety," if I'm seeing the picture (link in OP) correctly, has a finger operated safety behind the trigger instead of a thumb-operated safety on the slide or back of frame? I can't think of another pistol offhand with that design. Hmmm.
Not exactly the same, but the fiveseven has a rotational safety mounted on the frame above the trigger where your finger should be resting when you’re holding a pistol. It’s an interesting placement, and makes sense. However since no one else does it that way it takes a good long time to get used to.
 

MAC702

LEGEN...wait for it... DARY!
Commercial Sponsor
Forum Supporter
#14
Good catch.
That is a weird place for the safety.
There's a reason the M1 Carbine was modified from a push-button safety, to a rotating one. it was located near push-button magazine release and very easy to push one when you meant to push the other, even when you know which one's which. It's difficult to stop the muscle memory.

I had to borrow a gun for an IDPA match once and used an HK USP. The magazine release is a down motion instead of into the frame. Every single time I had a slide-lock reload, I tried pushing into the frame first even though I told myself not to. Then, when that didn't work, I could force myself to push down instead of in. And then muscle memory took over again. A thumb down meant safety or slide release, not mag release, so I would drop the slide instead of the magazine. EVERY TIME, no matter what I told myself to actually do. I got to laugh at myself in the middle of every stage.
 

Teresa

uber Member
#15
Cannot verify first hand but have been "told" they do not hold up for long. Would like to find out for myself!:)
I use the ets mags, never have any problems, in fact I find the ets & jagemann magazines are better then glock 43 factory mags. Remember only reason why glock added metal liner to mags was for drop free in American Market, no structural losses were the reason for the change. If plastics were that good back then, how damn good are they now?