[natedog]

Does anyone here carry a DA/SA pistol (specifically, one that lacks a manual safety) with the hammer cocked, round chambered? Is it too dangerous to even consider? Provided you used proper trigger dicipline and a holster that covered the trigger guard.

[psyopspec]

I do not. Out of curiosity, why are you considering such a move? I could see the merits of only having to learn one trigger pull rather than two, but in such a case why not just carry an SA with a manual safety, or a DAO weapon?

[P95Carry]

No way Jose!!! The reason I carry DA/SA (SIG226) is because I am less than comfortable with 1911 platform - that only because I came to it late in a long shooting career.

That said - I carried my BHP C&L and that has no grip safety - that's as close as I wanna get to ''sensitivity''!!!

I think - what you suggest (thin ice accepted!) is - shall we say - ''risky'' - or to be precise - looney! :p

[Vernal45]

I carry my P99 in SA mode sometimes. Like P95 said, you obey the rules, not a problem.

[BluesBear]

Does anyone here carry a DA/SA pistol (specifically, one that lacks a manual safety) with the hammer cocked, round chambered? Hell's Bells™ no, I ain't crazy nor stoopid.

Well at least I ain't stoopid.


Is it too dangerous to even consider? Hell's Bells™ it is!

[Blue Line]

It would be foolish to carry a single action pistol (like a ruger single six) with the hammer back! The 1911AI has several built in safetys for example the "grip safety" to prevent the hammer from falling. The 1911 is meant to be carried cocked and locked, at least when the the old cowboys rode with thier single actions they only had five rounds in the gun with the hammer resting on an empty chamber.

I carry a sig 229 loaded with one in the chamber but the hammer is not cocked. Be careful - Stay Safe

[BryanP]

You're mixing the worst of both worlds if you try this. No external safety and a single-action trigger. You're begging for a ND. And it would be negligent, not accidental in this case.

Carrying in this fashion would be foolish at best.

[TheDutchman]

Starting to sound like a trick question here, DA/SA action, no manual safety=Glock

[JerGun]

DAO.

Heavy (Much heavier than SA revolvers for sure) trigger.

Even heavier trigger set-ups readily available, and easily installed.

That's a GLOCK.

GLOCKs make good carry guns.

SA revolvers DO NOT, particularly carried in that fashion.

[Walt Sherrill]

As you're a Senior Member, this must be a tongue-in-cheek question, to provoke responses. (My reasoning: anyone who's been here long enough to be a Senior Member should know the answer to THAT question.)

I've got a bunch of SA/DA guns that I carry cocked. But they all have manual safeties, which I use. That's the only way I'd even think about it.

Hammer down on a loaded chamber is perfectly safe if the gun has a firing pin block/safety, and that would be the best option for a gun that doesn't have a manual safety.

And, as I understand it, the Glock is none of the above (i.e., DA, SA, or DAO). The slide must be racked to partially load the striker. The trigger must be pulled to complete the loading process and release the striker. In other words, its neither fish nor fowl.

[hightech]

Glock is a DOA firearm. It will detonate the cartridge only if the striker is fully cocked. To fully cock the striker you must pull the trigger. :rolleyes:

[Bobby Lee]

Glock is a DOA firearm. It will detonate the cartridge only if the striker is fully cocked. To fully cock the striker you must pull the trigger.

At least we have one here that knows the Glock is not a single action.

Good job. :)

[Tom Servo]

At least we have one here that knows the Glock is not a single action.
Technically. I've always been of the mind that anything under 7lbs qualifies as SA, no matter how the mechanics work. Just me :)

[Walt Sherrill]

Glock is a DOA firearm. It will detonate the cartridge only if the striker is fully cocked. To fully cock the striker you must pull the trigger.Not really.

If the first trigger pull doesn't fire the round, a second pull of the trigger won't do anything, either.

Pulling the trigger alone WON'T fully cock the striker. It will just COMPLETE the cocking process started by slide movement. The striker must first be partially set by slide action, too.

That's why its not a pure DAO gun: no second/restrike capability. It might be argued that a true DAO gun has that ability -- the trigger does it all. I'd argue that the GLOCK is actually closer to SA than DAO (as the slide sets things in motion, just like a SA gun.)

Gun nuts haven't really come up with a good description and acronym for this "action" type, except to call it, as Glock does, "safe action."

[Mulliga]

Pulling the trigger alone WON'T fully cock the striker. It will just COMPLETE the cocking process started by slide movement. The striker must first be partially set by slide action, too.

Didn't someone do a study where they found the precocked strikers on Glocks and XDs were able to detonate the primers, even without being pulled all the way back? Can't remember if that's true or not.

Never carried a DA/SA pistol in this fashion - should be possible in the short run, but Murphy's Law being true as always, there are more possible ways a ND could happen. Note, however, that an AD (a true failure of the mechanism of the pistol) would still be extremely rare - in the final tally, the gun is only as safe as you are.

[Zundfolge]

The only DA/SA I would even consider carrying cocked is my RAP401 ... and thats only because its designed to be caried cocked and locked (that is you can engage the safety with the hammer cocked and it locks up the mechanism).

Without a manual safety designed for C&L I wouldn't even dream of carrying a DA/SA with the hammer back :what:

[spacemanspiff]

pshaawwww! ya'll just aint as professional as i am. which is why i'm the only one qualified to carry a DA/SA sig with a 2 lb trigger, here lemme show ya

bam!!!

hang on, lemme get back to ya on that.

[lyricsdad]

lol that video cracks me up everytime i hear about it..

"this is a glock 40.."

[dmallind]

Nope I'd never carry a cocked SA

I'm nothing much in technical gun knowledge compared to most of you but heck it always surprises me that people bring up Glock in these questions. I have to wonder if anyone who does has ever actually shot one. I mean essentially I have guns that fall into two platforms only - 1911s and safe action/DAO. I feel fine carrying either - the former of course with the thumb safety engaged as well as a functioning grip safety (and yep you better believe I check that grip safety every range trip). The latter - Glock, Steyr and Kahr, are loaded and one chambered with no additional safeties (the Steyr actually has a rather nifty one in the trigger guard but even though its very intuitive and fast to disengage I will leave that off if I ever carry the Steyr just to prevent possible confusion - only just yesterday actually got a holster for the thing so no carry yet).

I have not the slightest qualm about that. The trigger pull on any of them - even the very sweet pull on the Steyr - is nothing at all like an SA revolver or 1911. Poundage is after all only one aspect of the pull. My 1911 breaks at about 4.8lbs which is awful close to the Glock's stated (never verified this one) 5.5lbs, but it breaks after a hell of a lot less creep and travel - and from my limited revolver experience SA pulls were even shorter and lighter there. It takes a much more deliberate pull to fire a Glock/Steyr than any SA revolver or 1911, and given good safety awareness and a holster that covers the trigger guard that should be safe enough for anyone. Don't get me wrong I wouldn't carry a Glock loose in my pocket with a bunch of keys and a few pens and whatever, but in normal carry I can't see it going bang unless I am essentially either stupid or intentionally firing.

[Jamie C.]

...If the first trigger pull doesn't fire the round, a second pull of the trigger won't do anything, either.

Pulling the trigger alone WON'T fully cock the striker. It will just COMPLETE the cocking process started by slide movement. The striker must first be partially set by slide action, too.....

In the strictest sense of the term, Glocks are indeed "DAO" pistols.
"Double Action" meaning that pulling the trigger does two separate things; one, it finishes cocking the striker, and two, it releases the striker.

It doesn't really make any difference that the slide has to be cycled to reset this system, the trigger still has two functions to perform.

A single action trigger, on the other hand, only has one function; it releases the hammer/striker/whatever. It plays no part in cocking or partially cocking the hammer or striker.

So it makes no difference how the trigger pull feels, or how far it has to travel, even though either type of trigger can feel or appear to be like the other.


J.C.

[Jim Watson]

Anyone?
Jeff Cooper said there was some super duper high speed low drag ultimate extreme secret ninja warrior 100% ex-seal government agency that carried BHPs in Condition Zero with no ADs reported. (Well, he didn't use all the magazine cover adjectives but he did say there was such an outfit.) But I'm not one of them and I'm not telling you to do it.

[dmallind]

I agree - and I carefully avoided calling the Glock either DAO or SA. I personally think it has more in common with DAO but I defer to the smiths on the board for such technical niceties.

All I mean is that in terms of practical safety I think it does matter how far a trigger has to be pulled and certainly what force is needed to do so because it's much less likely to come up against foreign objects or sloppy handling that cause the force and distance required. For example if you - foolishly - put a Glock in a pocket against a AA battery that somehow gets inside the trgger guard and pushes the trigger in, say, .35", you're fine. Stupid and risky, but not injured. If you do the same thing with a cocked SA revolver you have a hole in your pocket and most likely your leg too.

[Walt Sherrill]

In the strictest sense of the term, Glocks are indeed "DAO" pistols.
"Double Action" meaning that pulling the trigger does two separate things; one, it finishes cocking the striker, and two, it releases the striker.But it isn't that simple.

You've redefined "double action" from the more conventional definition which was "using the trigger to set and release the striker or hammer" to something subtly different: the trigger is now used to "finish setting and releasing the striker."

Where'd that "finish settting" come from? <grin>

I'll agree that with some DAO the slide must be jiggled to make a second trigger pull possible. But not all of them are that way. In most of them aren't.

The CZ 100, CZ75B DAO, SIG DAO models, including the new DAK trigger-equipped models, can all be fired by pulling the trigger again. They are TRUE DAO guns. As are many revolvers. The SA/DA guns can also be fired by pulling the trigger a second time, if the first pull doesn't work. Ditto DAO revolvers, and their DA/SA brethern.

But that's not true of a Glock.

I'd argue that if the Glock were a true DAO, you'd be able to fire it, ammo willing, by simply pulling the trigger again. But a Glock wont let you do it until you've moved the slide 3/8th of an inch or so.

With a SA gun, the striker or hammer spring must be "loaded" or compressed before it can be released by the hammer. That's true of a Luger. Its also true of a Glock. Yet nobody calls a Luger a DAO gun... The fact that a Glock must go a bit farther and load the spring a bit more doesn't change the fact that it wouldn't work if the slide hadn't already done most of the work.

As I said before, the Glock is neither fish nor fowl: it has traits of both a DAO gun and SA gun.

[Jim Watson]

I think Glock's success has been in convincing customers, especially police departments who tend to written specifications, that their Safe Action is operationally and legally equivalent to DAO, whatever its mechanical linkages.

[eab]

As told to me and our AFROTC detachment by one of our Sergeants who was in the USAF security forces previously, and by a nurse who visted and was deployed to Iraqi.

All USAF personal who are required to carry an M9 carry it with a round chambered, safety off and cocked. So if you need to shoot all you do is pull it out aim and pull the trigger, nothing else.

[model 649]

Did your decocker break? If thats why one would carry this way, then get it fixed, or use another gun till it is fixed. This appears to be to be risk with potentially disastrous consequences if you mess up. The worst part, for me, is that THAT type of ND is easily and completely avoidable, especially in fast action. So? was this a trick question?
Josh

[Jamie C.]

But it isn't that simple.

You've redefined "double action" from the more conventional definition which was "using the trigger to set and release the striker or hammer" to something subtly different: the trigger is now used to "finish setting and releasing the striker."

Where'd that "finish settting" come from? <grin>

Not gonna argue semantics with you, Walt, or "split hairs".

The fact is, a Glock's trigger is involved with both the cocking of the striker AND releasing that striker. That, by definition, makes it a "true" Double action, albeit one with a very short trigger stroke. What it doesn't make it is a "conventional" double action.

Think about this for a second.... If you take a typical double action revolver... say a Smith & Wesson with the firing pin mounted on the hammer.... then set the hammer up as a rebounding-type hammer with the cocking notch moved back so that the trigger only picked it up if the hammer was in the "rebounded" position.... how would this be different from Glock's system really? Sure, there's no slide to push the hammer back to "rebounded", and it isn't needed because of the rebound spring, but it would certainly behave in the same way as a glock does, if the revolver got dirty enough for the firing pin to stick in the frame and not allow the hammer to return to where it needs to be for the trigger to catch it. You'd have to pull the hammer back manually and "re-set" the system, to get it to work. ( And this whole flaw is probably a good reason why you don't see any "rebounding hammer" revolvers. )
And this type of revolver would also have a shorter trigger stroke, due to the hammer already being partially cocked.


This make any sense to you folks?

J.C.

[Walt Sherrill]

The sergeant either got it wrong (probably the case) or you misunderstood.

I guarantee you that NOBODY in the military is required to carry a weapon with a round chambered, hammer cocked, and safety off. You won't even find that in a combat zone. Hammer down, perhaps... With the Berretta, that would be perfectly functional and safe.

(With the M9, you really don't have the option of cocked with safety on...)

As for Jamie C's response, above -- you get the last word. I won't argue further. That doesn't mean I agree, but it's clear I'll not convince you of anything, either.

[eab]

I got it wrong, I misunderstood my Sergeant I guess. Looked it up some more

http://64.233.179.104/search?q=cache:kZeXsVflFisJ:glocktalk.com/sitemap/topic/179007-1.html+USAF+m9+carry+locked+cocked+and+loaded&hl=en&client=firefox-a

(post by DMF) and USAF carry round chambered, safty off, hammer down.



My bad :o

[No_Brakes23]

Starting to sound like a trick question here, DA/SA action, no manual safety=Glock Uhm, that description fits my SIG P232, but it has a decocker. The only time it is gonna have a round in the chamber while cocked is when I am shooting it, or milliseconds before I decock it.

As for carrying the M9 cocked and unlocked... :confused:...that's not the way the Navy or Marine Corps does it, and I bet that's not the way the other three branches do it either. I was taught cocked and locked on the M9. Not callin you out at all, eab, just saying somebody got their info wrong somewhere along the line. The military goes out of its way to prevent NDs, and EVERY SINGLE ONE that occured while I was reading the safety reports was because of a safety violation. Carrying a DAO in that condition is a clear violation of the four rules.

[gbran]

If the SA/DA has a hammer, you can cock it just as fast as you can decock it. Just as fast as you can release a 1911 safety.

[Dienekes]

EAB, it's been a long time since I was a sky cop, but I think somebody was blowing smoke. Small arms proficiency was never a big issue in the USAF and just the thought of herds of minimally trained people running around with cocked and unlocked M9s is enough to give me nightmares. Sorry--I don't believe it.

The only outfits that ever carried cocked and unlocked were supposedly the British and Australian SAS with BHPs, and even that is shrouded in mystery. Those guys are incredibly good at what they do, but it sure would test my faith in the guns themselves and my fellow troopers.

I suppose it would be tiresome to point out that a DA revolver fits in well here if you think you can take care of the problem in six rounds...

[coylh]

Really elite special forces carry their 1911's with two rounds chambered, a condom over the barrel, and skateboard tape on the trigger.

[BluesBear]

If the SA/DA has a hammer, you can cock it just as fast as you can decock it. Just as fast as you can release a 1911 safety. :confused: :scrutiny:


Maybe YOU can cock a hammer as fast as YOU can release a 1911 safety.
But for the rest of us on this planet, releasing the 1911 safety is MUCH faster.

[Walt Sherrill]

Thumb cock just as fast as you can release a safety?

Obviously written by someone who has never tried it with an electronic timer.

And there's no question as to which method is safer... It isn't thumb-cocking during a rapid, stressful, or contested draw.

[rockstar.esq]

Not to Hijack a thread or anything, it just bothers me that there is such an incredible amount of talk surrounding "learning the trigger". I mean talk about overthinking everything! The first pull is harder than the others. How much learning is required? Practice with both, cock the hammer if you've got the time otherwise the only sound should be BOOM. All of this debate seems to stem from some belief that accuracy will be compromised. We are talking about sidearms, and if you are LEO or civilian that mostly means defensive use. As such you don't need 50yd accuracy for an initial "defensive shot". The much lauded 1911 SA platform has it's fans praising it's simple to use safety system and smooth consistant trigger. Why then do we have people freaking out about the trigger on a Glock? The Glock has the easiest safety of any gun I've ever seen. Back to the accuracy thing, 1911 proponents will say their trigger leads to better accuracy. From what I see, the 1911 only gets apprasied based on "combat accuracy". Everything else is held to a different standard. Based on the group sizes I have seen, it seems that the DAO system is best for experts. My DA group sizes are larger than my SA groups but both are small enough to get the job done from a defensive standpoint. Hell I can even manage a perfect group every time if I only fire one shot!

[Bobby Lee]

Didn't someone do a study where they found the precocked strikers on Glocks and XDs were able to detonate the primers, even without being pulled all the way back? Can't remember if that's true or not.

The XD is a true single action. The striker is fully cocked and if the striker should somehow fall without a trigger pull, which is not likely, it WILL fire.

The Glock is basically DAO. The striker is not under enough spring pressure when it is carried to fire if somehow the striker fell without a trigger pull which is almost impossible anyway.

The vast majority of modern carry guns are safe no matter if they are SA DA or DAO IF they are carried as they are designed to be carried.

[Bobby Lee]

The fact is, a Glock's trigger is involved with both the cocking of the striker AND releasing that striker. That, by definition, makes it a "true" Double action, albeit one with a very short trigger stroke. What it doesn't make it is a "conventional" double action.

So far I have never seen any pistol that could not be classed into the three basic types.

SA DA and DAO.

For some reason some of the newer striker fired autos tend to confuse some but they are all either SA or DA.

The Glock is basically DA because the above quote is 100% correct.

The Springfield XD and the Steyr are SA. They are carried with fully cocked strikers. Their trigger pulls release a fully cocked striker allowing it to fall.

[Greymoor]

No Sir,

I carry my P229 uncocked with a round chambered. The 11-12 lbs. trigger pull is a bit of an insurance policy against a casual snag of the trigger while reholstering of drawing the weapon.

[Walt Sherrill]

For some reason some of the newer striker fired autos tend to confuse some but they are all either SA or DA.
Its not always confusion. There are subtle differences.

Until Glocks happened on the scene, pulling the trigger on a DA gun did everything.

With one of those traditional DA guns, if you had a round that didn't go bang (hard primer?) pulling the trigger a second time might (if it was just a light strike) make it go bang with the next trigger pull. You've seen it happen with .22s a lot, I'll bet.

Some DA Only semi-autos work that way, whether they're hammer fired or striker-fired. The CZ-75B DAO model does it. As does the CZ-100, which is striker fired. Both of these guns have a "restrike" ability, so they are DAO guns in the "conventional/traditional" sense of the term.

Some "DA Only" guns don't work that way -- and Glocks (and others) are in that group. If the round doesn't go bang, you MUST RACK the slide to make it ready to go bang again -- just as you would with a SA gun (unless you thumb a hammer, if one is available.)

With these guns, THE TRIGGER DOESN'T DO ALL THAT IS REQUIRED TO FIRE THE GUN. If the slide isn't moved (and the hammer can't be pulled back), a second shot isn't possible.

Is that a TRUE DAO gun?

Only if you change the long-standing definition of Double Action to mean something different -- and that's what some here are doing. If you want to chane the definition, then fine -- but don't attribute this difference of opinion and definition in this discussion to a simple matter of "confusion" -- it isn't confusion.

[Johnny Guest]

I understand the topic deals with a DA/SA pistol, but - -

Dienekes in post #32, above, wrote: The only outfits that ever carried cocked and unlocked were supposedly the British and Australian SAS with BHPs, and even that is shrouded in mystery. Those guys are incredibly good at what they do, but it sure would test my faith in the guns themselves and my fellow troopers. As mentioned elsewhere, several years back, Col Cooper did comment in one of his columns about Brit SAS carrying BHPs cocked and unlocked. It is worth noting, though - - This was early on in the anti-terrorist operations, while the gear was still being sorted out. If you'll recall, the "modern" incarnation of the long-drop holster, strapped securely to the leg (a la the original 1912 .45 holster) was popularized by the SAS.

Some items to consider:
1. This was all back before the BHP extended thumb safety was readily available, even as an accessory. The old "standard" safety was quite small and a bit difficult to operate at speed.
2.This type holster is normally VERY secure, with a safety strap running across the rear of the slide, between firing pin and hammer. the trigger is also covered.
3. Back then, SAS was considered THE most highly trained and intensively indoctrinated group around. In a military situation, with extremely motivated troops, really strict weapons handling discipline is a viable thing. In such an enviornment, a major safety violation doesn't mean, "Bad letter in your 201 file," or even, "Three day suspension." It can mean being tossed out of the elite group and a return to parent unit in disgrace. Even military court proceedings.
4. I have no documentation of this, but it is logical to think - - These troopies chambered and holstered their sidearms IMMEDIATELY before an "action op" at about the same time they were chambering their MP5s and fusing the breaching charges - - preparing to go in and KILL people in the next little while. They did NOT strut around the NCO club in their tac gear.

Yeah, under THOSE very narrow and restricted conditions, I think cocked-and-unlocked would be viable.

Disclaimer: I own NO insider information. My AFROTC training was long, long ago, in a galaxy far, far away. I have NOT trained with the SAS, Special Forces, SEALs, nor at IMNOC (International Mall Ninja Operations Center.) I just do a lot of reading . . .

Best,
Johnny

PS-- As a footnote - - It is twenty-five years since the Iranian Embassy seige in London, during which SAS came to wide public notice. Interesting information at - -
http://www.dbzworkshop.com/sas.htm

[Bobby Lee]

With these guns, THE TRIGGER DOESN'T DO ALL THAT IS REQUIRED TO FIRE THE GUN. If the slide isn't moved (and the hammer can't be pulled back), a second shot isn't possible. Is that a TRUE DAO gun?

How the gun operates when it is unloaded does not make much difference.

My car has power steering but it does not work unless the engine is running.

Using your logic then my car must not have "TRUE" power steering.

[Bobby Lee]

These troopies chambered and holstered their sidearms IMMEDIATELY before an "action op" at about the same time they were chambering their MP5s and fusing the breaching charges - - preparing to go in and KILL people in the next little while. They did NOT strut around the NCO club in their tac gear.

They also do not walk around in WalMart looking for dog food and a garden hose with their weapons in that condition.

[Walt Sherrill]

How the gun operates when it is unloaded does not make much difference.

My car has power steering but it does not work unless the engine is running.

Using your logic then my car must not have "TRUE" power steering.Don't know what any of this has to do with power steering or an unloaded gun... The example I cited was a loaded gun that didn't fire properly -- the primer didn't ignite the powder.

But, if HOW the gun OPERATES is the criteria, tell me how a GLOCK differs from a SA Browning?

You rack the slide and pull the trigger in the same way.

You experience the same trigger pull every time with both guns.

If the gun doesn't fire for some reason, the fix is the same for both guns: rack the slide and THEN pull the trigger.

The only practical difference, with the Glock, is that there's no exposed hammer. (The Browning safety is functionally duplicated by the two-stage Glock trigger, although the two safeties sure work in a different ways.)

If the Glock doesn't fire -- what do you have to do to make it fire again?

Simple -- you treat it like its an SA gun, rack the slide, get rid of the bad round, and pull the trigger.

With a true DA gun you'd just pull the trigger again, and it MIGHT ignite the primer. If it didn't work, you'd treat it like a Glock, rack the slide and try again.

Pulling the trigger again would work with a SIG DAO gun, with a SIG using the DAK trigger, with a 75B DAO, and many other guns. It won't work with a Glock or with any SA gun.

You keep implying its simple but your examples/metaphors don't support your argument.

I wonder why folks call the Glock a DAO gun? The more I think about it, the more it looks like a SA, to me.

What's that old saying? Oh, yeah: "if it quacks like a duck and waddles like a duck..."

[Jamie C.]

You know, a Double Action revolver doesn't "second strike" a dud cartridge unless you manually roll the cylinder back around to re-position it.

But then again, pulling the trigger on a DA revolver actually does 3 things ( "loads" a cartridge into place to be fired, cocks the hammer back, then drops the hammer ), so maybe it should really be called a "Triple Action revolver. :scrutiny: :eek: :what:

Honestly, the only "long standing" definition of a "double action" is that pulling the trigger does more than one "job", and only really covers how the gun is designed to work when operating properly. It has nothing to do with the length of pull, or the "weight" of that pull.

And a cartridge not firing is not considered "proper functioning", thus any manual of arms that has to be performed to get it back into action doesn't have any bearing on how that weapon's trigger actually functions.



J.C.

[Walt Sherrill]

I agree.

(But remember, too, that if you KEEP pulling the trigger on a revolver, the cylinder WILL roll the dud round into position, again, and if you were having an emergency, it MIGHT just fire that dud round... I've had it happen at the range more than once.)

If we use YOUR definition of action types -- that the action description defines how the gun is designed to work when its operating properly -- I'd argue that the Glock works like a SA gun (except that it can't be decocked.)

[trickyasafox]

ill carry cocked locked and ready to rock ONLY if i have had a few drinks to settle my nerves. . . .


WARNIGN EXTREMELY BAD SARCASM

[Jamie C.]

If we use YOUR definition of action types -- that the action description defines how the gun is designed to work when its operating properly -- I'd argue that the Glock works like a SA gun (except that it can't be decocked.)

How so? All a SA trigger does is release the hammer or striker. It doesn't have to move that hammer or striker back any at all for it to have enough power to set off the primer. In other words, your finger pulling the trigger doesn't impart any energy for the hammer/striker spring to store, as it does with a Glock.


And for what it's worth, Glock could have set their guns up to "re-strike" a primer quite easily... but it would have been at the cost of a longer trigger stroke, since all that the partial "pre-cocking" that the slide does really accomplishes is to prune down the length of pull.

Want an idea of what that system would behave and feel like? Then go take a good look at the Taurus Millennium and the 24/7. Either one's trigger pull can also be lightened to the same weight as a Glock's is, BTW. It's just a matter of changing out a spring. ( The Millennium and 24/7 use a "simplified" version of Glock's system, without the "shortened pull" option or the internal "safety ramp" that Glocks have. )

Oh, and one other thing... If a person took a 1911 and set it up to have a 3/4 inch trigger stroke that came in at 10 pounds of pull.... wouldn't it still be a single action? Even though it FELT like a double action? ( Only a complete idiot would do this though, in my opinion. )


Anyway, as I said a few posts back, what a gun's trigger pull feels like...weight and stroke length.... has noting to do with whether it's DA or SA, and can be most confusing.


J.C.

[natedog]

I don't think having second strike capability is much of an advantage at all, except for range shooting. Let's say you're defending yourself with your DA/SA pistol, and you front sight-press on an assailants torso, and get a click. Are you going to pull the trigger again on a round that's already proved itself to be problematic, that might still not ignite- and then if it doesn't, then rack the slide? I wouldn't, takes too long. It'd be much faster to skip all that and just tap-rack-bang and start fresh. YMMV.

[Bobby Lee]

I'd argue that the Glock works like a SA gun (except that it can't be decocked.)

The Glock is only "cocked" when you take up the first stage of the trigger pull.

If one pulls the Glock trigger all the way through the "first stage" but does not pull it the rest of the way through the second stage and releases the trigger then he just "decocked" his Glock.

[Walt Sherrill]

The Glock is only "FULLY" cocked when you complete the second part of the trigger stroke. Its similar to some guns that have a half-cock mode.

(My CZs have that option. Starting from half-cock, which is safe because of the firing pin block, shortens the trigger pull and lightens the trigger weight. All of the CZ decocker models START from half-cock.)

In the Glock the striker spring is partially loaded by slide movement, too. With a SA gun, the hammer spring is FULLY loaded by the slide movement. But neither will fire unless the slide has moved first (or you've thumb-cocked the SA gun).

With the DA/SA guns, you can decock and start again without slide movement. Just pull the trigger. You don't have to move the slide.

With most DAO guns you can start agains, too. Just pull the trigger. You don't have to move the slide.

Try that with a SA or Glock.

(Dry fire practice with a Glock is a pain, as a consequence.)

[Bobby Lee]

Honestly, the only "long standing" definition of a "double action" is that pulling the trigger does more than one "job", and only really covers how the gun is designed to work when operating properly. It has nothing to do with the length of pull, or the "weight" of that pull.

Thank you.

[Mark13]

Speaking of the original question....

The chance that you would need to use your pistol to defend yourself is so remote, I mean the military doesn't even do what you are suggesting in war zones, that to carry as you are suggesting is crazy. Perhaps, and I mean this in a good way, anyone considering this should re-evaluate their mindset and whether they should be carrying a gun.

[mmike87]

This is just wrong on so many levels. If you want a SA/DA gun that can be SAFELY carried C&L get an HK USP - it has a decocker AND an external safety, so you truly have the best of both worlds.

I would NEVER carry ANY of my SIG's C&L. I shoot better with the DA first shot, anyway.

[Dr.Rob]

Yes, sort of... the franken Colt/Seecamp/Viking gun can be de-cocked and the safety applied into a detent... as soon as you start to apply pressure on the DA trigger the safety drops down. In SA mode it works just like a 1911... with a really odd trigger pull.

[BluesBear]

It seems that the .45 GAP is more readily accepted than the term safe-action.

Why is it that some people can so readily embrace a new technology yet they INSIST that it be defined with pre-existing terminology? :confused:

The Glock self termed "Safe-Action" firing system is NEITHER a traditional double action (DA/SA), traditional double action only (DAO) or traditional single action (SA) system.

Why can some people just accept it and go along with Gaston and refer to it as Safe-Action? Or Hell's Bells™ why not just call it Glock Action (GA)?

Just because you insist on calling it something it is not will not make it so. :banghead:

[Old Fud]

I own a 1985 Taurus PT99. I'm told this is the original Beretta "wonder-nine".
i.e. 9mm double-stack DA/SA with frame-mounted ambi-safety. (and the adjustable sights which are the difference between a PT92 and PT99)

The only way you can charge your weapon and set it up to operate "DA" is to pull the trigger on a live round, catch the hammer and gently lower it.

Excuse me??????? :uhoh:
Is this what Police officers all across America and every soldier in the past 25 years have been doing in the locker room as they gear up for their daily stint?

This is SAFE???

Or was/is that weapon intended to be carried cocked-and-locked?

Fud

[Jamie C.]

It seems that the .45 GAP is more readily accepted than the term safe-action.

Could be because "Safe-Action" is a trade marked marketing term and not an actual mechanical descriptive of how the gun operates. After all, "Safe" is a subjective term, especially where a firearm is concerned.

Why is it that some people can so readily embrace a new technology yet they INSIST that it be defined with pre-existing terminology?

Good question. Especially in light of the fact that a Glock's action is just a slightly different twist on an old system.



Just because you insist on calling it something it is not will not make it so.

That is correct, and pretty much what I've been saying here the whole time.


J.C.

[Walt Sherrill]

"Safe-Action" is a trade-marked name clearly developed for marketing purposes. But, the term does describe a slightly DIFFERENT method of making the gun go boom

I've looked around the web and the definitions of DA I've found all say about the same thing, to wit: double action -- a handgun mechanism in which a single pull of the trigger cocks and releases the hammer.

Now of course, we're talking about a semi-auto pistol and not a revolver, and the term can be applied to striker-fired weapons as well as hammer-fired ones.

With a Glock, a single pull of the trigger does not cock and release the striker of a Glock. Don't believe me? With the gun empty and the slide closed, pull the trigger once. If you racked the slide the first time, you'll hear the striker released.

Now, pull the trigger again and tell me what happens...

Try the same drill with a Single Action semi-auto, and tell us what's fundamentally different about those two mechanisms and how they behave.

[Jamie C.]

Walt, you seem to be all hung up on the fact that there's no re-strike capability with Glock or other pistols that use this type of mechanism, as if this ability, or lack of it, has some bearing on how the process of dropping the striker actually works when that system is "in battery".

And yes, although this ability is one of the characteristics of a typical or "conventional" DA trigger, it is NOT a defining one.

The fact that a Glock, and this pistol (http://hem.passagen.se/dadkri/Wist-94.htm) both have a secondary "out of battery" condition ( meaning that having the slide not closed completely is not the only situation that can render the trigger mechanism inoperative ) instead of a "second strike" available, does not affect how that trigger works when "in battery".

As for comparing a SA to a Glock... sure, there's a similarity between a SA and a Glock with an empty chamber, or with the striker down on a "dud" round. So what? It's not designed to function correctly, and as intended, in that condition.
Is it a PIA to perform dry fire practice with? Sure. But it is with a SA gun too. ( I doubt very seriously that any designer takes "dry fire" into consideration when they're designing a pistol. They only want it to work with a live round under the firing pin, and ammo in the mag or cylinder, since what it does when empty isn't part of the "job description." )

You mentioned that CZ's decocker guns start from half-cock, after they've been de-cocked. Okay. Does this mean that if CZ had decided that they ONLY wanted their guns to be operable from this position, and set the draw bar up to only catch the hammer if it was there, that the trigger WOULD NOT be a double-action any longer?

Or what about HK's "LEM" trigger system? It has a re-strike capability, but not with the same short and light trigger pull that it's intended to use when in "normal operating mode". If it had also been set up without this function, would it suddenly be "not a double action pistol"?

Sorry, but I'll stick by what I've already said: How a gun appears to function, how the trigger pull feels or looks, or what has to be done to get that trigger mechanism into it's primary functioning mode has nothing to do with what's really going on inside the pistol. And the old adage about "looks like a duck, walks like a duck" doesn't mean you aren't dealing with something else, like say... a goose. ;)

Oh, and something I should have added to my response to BluesBear... Take a good look at a HK VP-70, a Sauer Behorden ("Authority") Model 1930, as well as a few of John Browning's pistols, and tell me how much is really "new" in a Glock. I don't know about you, but it looks like a case of several older features, put together in one pistol, to me.


J.C.

Edited again because I keep finding that I've left something out, here and there... :uhoh:

[MarquisDS]

If I didn't have the money for Hemorrhoid Surgery or a Podiatrist....
:banghead:
This is a trick question right.....

[Walt Sherrill]

I think it IS the equivalent of a DAO gun. Its also the equivalent of a SA gun -- but Glock would have no reason to push that point.

The Glock is also functionally equivalent to a DAEWOO DP-51 in SA mode, with hammer lowered. The only difference is that the DAEWOO allows a second strike, because its a true SA/DA gun with a hinged hammer.

Jamie C: you keep subtly changing and refining your definitions of the standards or conditions that define an action type. (Now its limited to how the gun works when the gun is in battery -- when I always thought double-action defined the whole process.)

I've not seen YOUR definitions used by anybody but you. Show us some other credible sources who use the same definitions as you do, on the web or elsewhere, and I'll concede the point to you.

[Jamie C.]

No Walt, I've not "subtly changed and refined my definitions" at all. I think I've been pretty consistent in saying that it's what the trigger DOES, not what it DOESN'T DO.

And I guess you didn't click on this link (http://hem.passagen.se/dadkri/Wist-94.htm) when I posted it before.

If you had, you would have seen this:

http://hem.passagen.se/dadkri/Pictures/Wist-94_1.gif

And also this :

"WIST-94 is a semi-automatic pistol chambered for 9mm Parabellum round. It uses the Browning cam-lug system of operation. The polygonal-rifled barrel is locked to the slide by three locking lugs machined into the upper part of the barrel. The frame is made from polymer plastic while the slide is constructed from steel. The trigger mechanism is similar to the one used in Glock pistols: striker-fired double-action-only (DAO). After racking the slide back and after each shot fired the striker is held semi-cocked allowing for lighter trigger pull than conventional double-action. The only safety used is an internal automatic firing pin safety that unlocks the firing pin only in the final stages of the trigger pull. WIST-94 is fed by a 16 round magazine. The magazine catch is reversible for use by left-handed shooter. Slide release lever is located at the left side of the gun. The sights are fixed and are equipped with tritium inserts for low-light situations. Wist-94L is also equipped with a laser sight mounted in the upper part of trigger guard."

And there is also this article on the Sigma, which uses the same type of system as the Glock: Guns Magazine (http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BQY/is_5_51/ai_n13469643)
It was written by Charlie Petty, a gun writer that's been around quite some time. He makes this comment, in the article "One of the things we weren't anticipating is how hard it is on your trigger finger to shoot a whole bunch of rounds with a DAO trigger of a little over 10 pounds."
Remember, the Sigma has to have the striker re-set by the slide too.

And there's this article on Walther's P99: Walther P99 (http://remtek.com/arms/walther/model/p99/)
This comment can be found there : "AS with the Glock, Sigma and most other double action, striker-fired autopistols, there is no manual safety on the P99."

And finally, there's this article:
Choosing the Defensive Handgun (http://outdoors.net/site/features/feature.aspx+Forum+Firearms+ArticleCode+111+V+N+SearchTerm++curpage+111)
The following comment is made there:
"Glock/Sigma: These are striker-fired and have no external hammer. Carried fully loaded. Fired by simply pulling the trigger. Trigger pull is heavier than SA, lighter than most DAs. No manual safety. (The Glock and Sigma are actually DAOs, although their triggers are partially pre-cocked by movement of the slide. Since they are different enough in feel from other DAs and DAOs, they are often considered a separate type.)"

I expect though, that the last part is all you'll see, Walt, even though Mr. Freburg doesn't say WHO considers them a separate type of system, and whether these people are usually conversant in firearms design or not.
I do find it interesting that he points out that this opinion is based on how the trigger pull feels.


Is this enough for you, or are these sources not "credible" enough for you?



J.C.

[Walt Sherrill]

Well.... at least we've gotten this far without throwing rocks at each other. That means we've got two hard-headed adults here, as opposed to two hard-headed kids. <grin>

None of those are explanations of the DEFINITIONS of DAO. They are simply restatements of your position from a different person. Just because they call it a DAO gun doesn't mean its a double-action gun. It could just mean they've got it wrong, too. <grin>

Put simply: just because my "experts" and I call something "X" doesn't mean that it is truly "X" -- it just means we've chosen to call it that. We might be right, or we might just misunderstand what "X" really means. To resolve the matter, we would need a proper generally-accepted definition of "X" so that we can see if it really applies. The same holds true for this discussion.

I asked for authoritative definitions because I said YOUR definitions were suspect -- and subtly changing as we move forward.

In fact, as you note, your "experts" do as much to support MY position as yours -- as indicated by the point you emphasized: "[S]ince they are different enough in feel from other DAs and DAOs, they are often considered a separate type." (Hell, the SIGMA is almost a direct copy -- so of course its nearly the same. That's why Glock took S&W to court over the SIGMA.)

As others have noted, the difference noted above is more than just feel.

In fact, feel isn't really an issue, as far as I'm concerned -- a gun can be made to feel a lot of different ways, and that his little or no bearing on the type of "action" it uses. The fact that it feels different is irrelevant.

But, even that "expert" (and most members of THR would probably NOT consider a gun mag writer an expert) seems to feel the Glock action might be "neither fish nor fowl," too -- the point I originally made, many messages back.

Find some definitions of what traits make a DA(O) gun "DA(O)," and you'll prove your point or disprove mine. A properly thorough definition of DA will suffice.

[Bobby Lee]

I've looked around the web and the definitions of DA I've found all say about the same thing, to wit: double action -- a handgun mechanism in which a single pull of the trigger cocks and releases the hammer.

Then according to the definitions of DA you have found on the web a Glock IS a DA.

[Walt Sherrill]

A single pull of the Glock trigger does NOT cock the striker. The striker spring must FIRST be partially cocked by slide movement. Once pulled, the trigger will not reset the striker UNTIL the slide moves and partially cocks the striker spring, again. The trigger doesn't do it all.

The difference between the Glock and MOST DA guns, is that with most DA guns the trigger completely cocks and releases the striker or hammer. Over the years, that was MY understanding of a DA or DAO action: the trigger did it all. (Perhaps that's wrong, but I've been unable to find a different description of DA.)

On the other hand, the difference between the Glock and MOST SA guns, is that the SA gun's slide FULLY cocks the striker spring or main spring, and the trigger releases it all. The Glock slide partially loads the spring, while the trigger completes the process and releases it all.

It looks and acts like both a DA gun and a SA gun.

[Bobby Lee]

double action -- a handgun mechanism in which a single pull of the trigger cocks and releases the hammer.

When I remove my Glock from it's holster and point it downrange and pull it's trigger, the trigger both cocks and releases the striker firing the round in the chamber.

My Glock is DA.

[Walt Sherrill]

Not quite. If you think its truly a double action gun, try dry-fire practice. Tell me pulling the trigger (only) cocks the striker.

If, when you point your gun downrange, you encounter a hard primer -- its been known to happen -- your DA gun suddently turns magically into a SA gun.

Then you must move the slide far enough to preset the striker spring -- or rack the slide and eject the round. That's because pulling the trigger a second time, won't cock the trigger -- unless you've first moved the slide..

With other DA guns you could just pull the trigger again, and it might fire.

(In self-defense situations, I'll agree that its probably best to rack the slide, but at the range, where nothing is at risk, and you might just be punching paper, doing a second trigger pull is acceptable.)

The trigger ALONE doesn't cock the striker spring. The SLIDE'S movement partially cocks it, and the trigger completes the process. If the slide doesn't move, the striker doesn't get cocked at all.

[bakert]

As a newbie here you all have got my head spinning with a lot of the questions and explanations. Gonna have to read this whole thread again in the morning when I'm more alert. By the way, my carry gun is a Ruger P97 with the hammer down on a loaded rd when in my waistband. Hammer back my -----!:banghead:

[Walt Sherrill]

Your P-97 is a true DA/SA gun. It'll work when you pull the trigger. It has a firing pin safety, too, so carrying it hammer down is perfectly safe, as long as you keep your finger off the trigger. The slide doesn't have to move. <grin>

The only thing really still being debated here is the Glock "safe action" trigger -- and its not at all like your P-97's trigger.

[Graystar]

It is my understanding that the earliest guns that could fire both with and without first manually cocking the gun actually had two triggers. One trigger could only release the hammer, while the second trigger could only cock and release. A single trigger that could perform the function of either trigger of a double trigger gun, was known as a double action trigger.

Therefore, the most accurate definition of a double action pistol is one in which the trigger can operate in two distinct ways.

As a Glock trigger can only operate in one way, it is more accurate to say it is a single action pistol.

In any case, I think it is foolhardy to carry a gun WITHOUT one in the chamber and either a DA gun or the hammer cocked on a SA gun. If you don’t carry your gun such that you can’t present and fire in an instant, then make sure you carry a heavy gun because all you’re gonna have time for is to hit the BG with it.

[Jamie C.]

*sigh* Now why did I know this was gonna happen?

Walt, you said "Show us some other credible sources who use the same definitions as you do, on the web or elsewhere, and I'll concede the point to you."

I did exactly that.
The articles I linked to are by people that use the same definition that I and many other do. If they didn't they wouldn't have made the comments I quoted in my post.

And nowhere in there did I say they were experts, gunsmiths, mechanical designers, or anything of the like. This is solely your doing.
I only pointed out that Charlie was a gun writer that had been around a good while. ( All of us are no doubt aware of how gun writers like to go on ad nauseum about all the little differences in each gun or action type. It's one of their tricks to fill up the space between the ads. ( we laughingly call those spaces "articles or "stories".)) It therefore stands to reason that if a gun is NOT of a certain type, they'll spend a great deal of time telling you the "why and how" of it. They can hardly do this if they haven't made the effort to know, themselves, can they?

And you even go so far as to insist that "It could just mean they've got it wrong, too. ", as if there's no possibility that YOU are the one that's wrong.
This I find to be hysterically funny, and incredibly arrogant. Especially since you haven't posted the first source other than yourself to support your side of the contention.


Oh, and Walt... I myself have a degree in mechanical drafting/design, and worked for more than 16 years in that capacity. I grew up with a father, grandfather, and one uncle that are machinists, and even spent time as a machinist's apprentice ( Decided I liked my fingers well enough to want to keep all of 'em, and chose a slightly different path, after noticing how many folks in the shop were missing digits. ). I've also done quite a bit of gun smithing in the last 25 or 30 years, and worked with and for a local 'smith here, for a couple of years. I've been a shooter for more than 35 years, as well as having been both a soldier and a Sheriff's deputy.

And although I don't consider myself an "expert" at much of anything... I don't believe I need one to tell me whether or not a pistol is double or single action. ;)

Now... I'm quite sure that no matter what "evidence" or "proof" I come up with, you're going to find reason to argue with it.

And that's okay by me. I'll leave the folks that read this to decide for themselves, or to ask any gun smith they choose for their opinion on the subject.

However... ( You knew there was gonna be a "however", didn't ya? :evil: ) I stand by what I have said from the very first, and the one thing that you cannot and have not bothered to even try to disprove: That if a gun's trigger acts ONLY to drop the hammer or striker, that it is indeed a single-action... and that if that trigger is involved with both the COCKING and RELEASING of that hammer or striker, that it is a double-action.

And this sir, is the definition of the weapon's trigger or "trigger system", if you will, and nothing more. It doesn't matter what else the gun does or doesn't do, or if it turns into a single-shot, after that first shot is fired.



Oh... and since I got involved with this debate, and never answered the original question, I'll do it now.... Hell no, I will not carry a single-action weapon with the safety off, or a DA/SA "cocked and unlocked".
Doing so is one sure way to invite unwanted holes in things.



J.C.

[Kestrel]

I like to carry a pistol cocked and UNLOCKED, after I've had a lot of cold medicine and operating on very little sleep.

Sometimes, I'll let a pistol in this condition slide around on the floorboard of the truck, while I'm driving late at night in a rain storm. Maybe throw a couple of wrenches and some screwdrivers on the floorboard along with it.

I also don't mind leaving a cocked and UNLOCKED pistol in the bottom of a rucksack, on a long, tiring hike. There's usually lots of padding in there, with all the loose matches, open cans of sterno and loose fishhooks.

[Bobby Lee]

It seems to me that if one wishes to carry a "cocked" pistol and does not wish to have to bother with a manaul safety that they may forget about if TSHTF then they need to buy a gun designed to be safety carried in this condition.

Such a gun is the Springfield XD.

100% single action and no manaul safety for one to forget about under stress.

Or I guess there could be someone here that could assume the XD is not SA but their opinion does not change the facts.

[Walt Sherrill]

Bobby Lee: IDPA considers it SA, too, much to the frustration of many shooters who bought them thinking they were buying Stock Service Pistols. (By IDPA calling it a SA, that forces them into the the "tougher" Enhanced Service Pistol division.)

Jamie C: I have from the first asked for credible sources or accepted definitions. You've offered neither.

The only definitions you've offered keep getting enhanced: the first one said the trigger "completed cocking the striker spring," then was later enhanced to say the defnition only applied to how the gun operated when it was battery, or words to that effect.

I don't think I'm being too unreasonable. Give us a credible definition of DA or DAO from a credible source -- not a home-made definition that you continue to modify as you go.

You cited two writers, and one of those conceded that some folks don't consider the Glock to be a standard DA or DAO gun. How about some definitions from gun books or technical websites, about what constitutes a DA or DAO gun? I'm really not asking for a lot. The definitions I've found are much less obtuse than the ones you've been citing.

Wikipedia, a fairly credible source says the following: "The term double action was originally applied to revolvers. In the 19th century revolvers were often classified as to how their hammers were cocked. They were either "thumb-cocked", in which the hammer had to be cocked for each shot by the thumb, or "trigger-cocked", in which a long pull on the trigger first cocked the hammer and then released it to fall and fire the weapon."

Another source says "double-action" originally meant the gun could be thumb cocked or trigger cocked, hence the "double" action.

A trigger pull, alone, doesn't do that with the Glock, as an attempt to dry fire it will show. The slide has to be moved, just like a striker-fired SA gun (such as the Luger.)

A GLOSSARY OF FIREARMS TERMINOLOGY on the web, http://www.building-tux.com/dsmjd/tech/glossary.htm says that a double action gun is one in which pulling the trigger both cocks the hammer and releases it. It doesn't say the term only applies when the gun is loaded: it describes how the hammer (or striker) works.

Even the Fjestad Blue Book's glossary describes DOUBLE ACTION as a weapon where the hammer can be cocked and dropped by a single pull of the trigger. (It goes on to note tha most DA guns are really DA/SA guns, with subsequent shots having the hammer [striker] cocked by the slide -- with slide cocking making that part of the "action" SA.) It also says that A DAO gun is not cocked by the slide, but only by the trigger.

Got a better set of definitions?

[Kestrel]

I even enjoy carrying a J-frame revolver, cocked, sometimes. I usually just shove it in my pocket, along with my keys, some chapstick and a lot of change... With the hammer ALL the way back. Even like to ride an off-road motorcycle like that - on particularly rough trails...








:p

[Bobby Lee]

A GLOSSARY OF FIREARMS TERMINOLOGY on the web, http://www.building-tux.com/dsmjd/tech/glossary.htm says that a double action gun is one in which pulling the trigger both cocks the hammer and releases it.

The more you try to prove your point the more you are showing you are wrong.

[BluesBear]

After racking the slide back and after each shot fired the striker is held semi-cocked allowing for lighter trigger pull than conventional double-action. That statement, by the manufacturers of the WIST94, is an admission that their system is DIFFERENT from a "conventional" double action.


Why the big hangup? Why not just give Gaston his due and call a spade a spade. Or in Glock's case an entrenching tool.


I can't think of a single Double action pistol that didn't have a hammer before Gaston redefined perfection.
Can anyone name me one double action striker fired pistol before the Glock Action came to light?
No the Sauer 38H doesn't count. It actually had a hammer although it was concealed entirely inside the slide. (and yes it could be cocked and de-cocked)

I may be wrong, but I believe that prior to the Glock all striker fired pistols were what we call single action. Perhaps striker fired pistols SHOULD have been called something else to differentiate them from a hammer fired single action pistol. Striker fired pistols are not new. They're well over 100 years old.

As for the restrike issue. There have also been many single action hammer fired pistols where the hammer was contained inside the slide.
A few that immediately come to mind are;
The Colt Woodsman series
The Colt 1903 Pocket Hammerless .32 and 1908 Pocket Hammerless .380
High Standard Supermatic, Olympic and such
The Remington Model 51 .380

With these pistols you have to draw back the slide to recock it. But the hammer is then fully cocked. Not half cocked or "pre-tensioned".



Hey! I have an idea.
Let's just start calling the Safe Action pistol "Half-Cocked". :D







Now let's play nice. We don't want anyone going off pre-tensioned. :neener:

[Jamie C.]

I may be wrong, but I believe that prior to the Glock all striker fired pistols were what we call single action.

http://world.guns.ru/handguns/hk_vp70m.jpg
The VP-70 (Volks Pistole model 70) had been developed by HK around 1968, and the production began in 1970. It is a blowback operated, striker fired, double action only pistol. It also has a "plastic" frame.

And if I'm not mistaken, pre-dates Glock by at least a bit.


As I said earlier, when you really take a close look at a Glock, there's not really all that much that's "new" about it.


J.C.

[CPS1]

I love these Glock SA/DA threads :D ....

A little story:

Two tribesmen stand on a cliff. A F-15 soars overhead. But neither man has ever seen a plane before. The first tribesman thinks it's a bird because it flies, and the only thing he has ever seen fly is a bird. The second tribesman thinks it's a lion because it roars and the only thing he has ever heard roar is a lion. So they argue back and forth for days on end about the strange thing in the sky. Tribesman1 is so fixiated on flight that he never considers the roar. Tibesman 2 is so fixiated on the roar he never considers flight. In the end they both give up dejected, believing the other to be wrong.

If it has some but not all of the characterisitics of SA and some but not all of the characteristics of DA, perhaps it's neither.

BTW... for the sake of your manberries, please don't carry a sig charged with the hammer back.

[Bobby Lee]

This "debate" does have a lot in common with your tribesmen story.

If one has no ability to understand the basics of gun design then he must rely on "tribesman logic" to describe the action of the Glock.

If one knows and understands the fact that the trigger pull of the Glock pistol both "cocks" and releases the striker then you know the Glock is basically a DA. It may or may not fit what some may think a traditional DA is but it is still DA.

If you don't already know this then you could use 'tribemans logic" to assume from it's looks and "feel" that it is something else.

[Graystar]

If one knows and understands the fact that the trigger pull of the Glock pistol both "cocks" and releases the striker then you know the Glock is basically a DA. The Glock can only be a DA if you grossly construe both of the accepted definitions of DA.

In the first definition, which I think is the more historically accurate definition, a DA trigger performs in two distinct ways...release only, and cock and release. The Glock trigger always performs the same way, so it fails that definition.

In the second definition, where the trigger performs both a cock and release, the accepted definition of the “cocking” of a DA trigger has always been from a fully released state. Indeed, such a double action would have no value if it required some sort of pre-cocking.

Finally, the value of the DA trigger has always been in its ability to initiate a full firing sequence, whether the previous sequence was successful or not. This ability is truly what defines a DA trigger.

In thinking that the Glock is a DA trigger, you’d be missing the forest for the trees. You’d be defining DA by a single mechanical feature (questionably applied) and ignoring the history of the definition of DA. As the Glock fails to meet any of these definitions, it’s classification (if one must classify it) should be as an SA pistol.

[Walt Sherrill]

I agree with the little vignette, above.

And I've never tried to say it was a SA gun. (I have written, here, that its more LIKE a SA than DA -- but that's not the same as calling it a DA gun.) I have said it wasn't truly a DA gun.

Several of us have said that the Glock Safe Action has characteristics of both SA and DA actions but is not fully representative of either. To use the images from above, it isn't a bird (DA), it isn't a Lion (SA), its a Jet (Safe Action -- for want of a better term.)

As previously noted, the trigger does NOT cock the striker. Pulling the trigger "completes" the cocking process and releases the striker, but can do so only if the slide has already moved and pretensioned the striker spring. Without that slide movement, the trigger does NOTHING. If you disagree, pull the trigger a second time, after the striker has been released.

Once the striker has been released, the steps required to fire the gun a second time are exactly the same as those required to fire a SA striker-fired Luger: you must rack the slide and pull the trigger.

Interestingly enough, I spent some time visiting various web sites yesterday, trying to see how they described the Glock action. Some sites call it a SA gun, a few call it "DA-like", and still others call it a DAO weapon. A couple of other sites make the point that it is not a conventional DA or DAO action.

[DT Guy]

Hate to go back on-topic :) , but:

Take a S&W revolver apart and stare at the single action sear nose for a while. Just stare at it. Now ask yourself if you want THAT to be the only thing between your anatomy and a bullet.


I pick 'no', myself.


Larry

[mrhuckins]

I always carry a .357 mag revolver cocked on a loaded chamber in my thunderwear. Anything else is for whimps.

[Jamie C.]

I think we've established that Glocks and S&W's Sigma are pretty much the same gun.... so with that in mind, go take a look at Smith & Wesson's 2005 catalog. It can be down-loaded here. (http://customersupport.smith-wesson.com/contentbuilder/layout.php3?contentPath=content/00/01/31/06/03/userdirectory29.content&)

You'll notice that it gets the same code for it's trigger type as the rest of S&W's "DAO" guns; "AD".
The code for a single-action is "AS".
The code for single/double action is "A2"
And the code "AT" is for "Traditional Double action".

Also, if you'll go have a look on page 9 of the Sigma owner's manual, found here, (http://customersupport.smith-wesson.com/contentbuilder/layout.php3?contentPath=content/00/01/31/06/03/userdirectory53.content) you'll find the following list of terms and definitions:

AMMUNITION - RIMFIRE - Ammunition which contains the
primer material in the rim. Among the most common rimfire
handgun cartridges are the .22 Short, .22 Long, .22 LR, and
.22 Magnum.
CALIBER - The diameter of a bullet, designated in hundredths or
thousandths of an inch (.357) or in millimeters (9mm).
DECOCK - The process by which the hammer or striker is safely
lowered.
DOUBLE ACTION - A firing action where a single pull of the trigger
draws the hammer or striker to the rear then releases it, firing
the handgun.
DOUBLE ACTION ONLY - A firearm that can only be fired in
double action (cannot be fired in single action).
PISTOL - A handgun that contains multiple cartridges in a magazine.
REVOLVER - A handgun that contains multiple cartridges in a
cylinder that revolves at the rear of the barrel.
SINGLE ACTION - A firing action where the hammer or striker is
released from the cocked position by pulling the trigger.
TRADITIONAL DOUBLE ACTION - A firearm that can be fired
either in double action or single action.

Remember that Smith & Wesson has been around a pretty good while, and didn't need to come up with a cutesy-assed term for how their gun worked, as a marketing ploy, like ol' Gaston did when he introduced his polymer gun, some 20+ years ago. ( I figure Glock saw the reception the VP-70 got, and knew he was going to have to present his gun as being something "different", in order to have any chance at all. )


And Graystar..... I never miss the forest for the trees.
I'm the kind that likes to climb right up in the middle of those trees, see how they're put together, how they "work", and how they are the same or different from the others around them, so I'll know exactly what kind of forest I'm in. ;)


J.C.

[Walt Sherrill]

And what is your point? That a firm trying to sell a product is the ultimate authority on proper gun terminology?

First of all, I don't personally know that the S&W Sigma models have the same striker mechanism as the Glocks. Do you know that? Perhaps they are TRUE DAO guns. Do they have the same trigger design.

On the other hand, S&W apparently didn't know enough about gun design to avoid a major lawsuit from Glock for copying SOME of Glock's design features. (S&W apparently paid up, big time. Key parts of the SIGMA, like the barrel, were interchangeable with the Glock models. Don't know about the trigger.)

I've also seen Remington rifle magazine ads that called magazines "clips."

As best I can tell, a mag isn't a clip. And a Safe Action isn't DAO, although people misuse THAT term, too.

[Hawk]

Does "almost" count?

The first firearm I ever carried regularly was a P7. The routine was always the same: insert mag, rack, stuff in holster.

Holster just recently showed up for my P239. Next day rolls around, I'm on "A.M. autopilot". Insert mag, rack, ..., for just a moment there "something's not right" ... ah... decock, stuff in holster.

Almost, but not quite. A good reminder to pay attention in such matters. :p Perhaps "A.M. autopilot" is not the best time to shift manual of arms.

[Bobby Lee]

According to the ATF the Glock is DA.

IDPA considers it DA.

Police Depts that will not allow their people to carry a single action pistol and require DAO pistols will let their people carry a Glock.

What is that?

Because Glocks are DA. :cuss:

[Clean97GTI]

When you consider the mechanism of a Glock, you can see that it is not a true DA firearm. It is a blend that Glock has named safe-action.

Now, does anyone care to discuss the specifics of FN's RSS system. (repeatable secure striker) ;)

[Bobby Lee]

"DOUBLE ACTION - A firing action where a single pull of the trigger
draws the hammer or striker to the rear then releases it, firing
the handgun"

How many time must this FACT have to be repeated before some of you understand it?

I know I could eaisly take any first grade class in any school in the US and spend ten minutes teaching this to the kids and make them understand because it is such a simple thing.

Why is it that so called adults can't seem to be able to understand something this simple.

[Jamie C.]

So you don't think Smith & Wesson knows anything about double-action revolvers and autos, Walt? :what:

Oh, and my point?
Not much.... just pointing out what one of the oldest U.S. gun makers has to say on the subject of what a "double-action" is or isn't. They kind'a helped establish the term waaaay back before anybody even knew what "polymer" was, ya know....

And the Sigma's striker has to be re-set if it falls on a dud primer or an empty chamber.


I'd paste up a link to an article on it, but the only ones I can find are by gun writers.... :rolleyes:



J.C.

P.S. I think S&W did very much recognize that Glock's design is a good one, and did copy it as closely as they could......and very much hoped that no one would notice just how close their copy actually was.

But then they got caught.... :eek:

[Jamie C.]

Bobby Lee...

I'm starting to see how the "gun grabbers" convinced so many people that "full auto" weapons were the same as "semi auto" weapons...

Gun-hating gun-grabber:
"See, look at this M-16A2.... black, ugly, got a handle on top and a "high capacity" magazine sticking out the bottom." *picks up empty M-16, pulls trigger* "See? it only went "clink" one time."
*Puts down M-16, picks up AR-15*
"Now look at this civilian rifle... Same black color, same "ugly", same handle on top, same magazine..... *pulls trigger**CLINK* ....and the same "one clink"....."
"Must be the same gun."

This is the same kind of "logic" that's been used here, when people talk about how a pistol functions WHEN IT'S EMPTY.
And a bad/defective round counts, at least as far as the gun's mechanism is concerned, as "empty chamber".

But anyway.... it's still an interesting conversation. ;)


J.C.


Edited 'cause I go lost in the "alphabet soup" of gun names/numbers, there for a second.... :uhoh:

[mrhuckins]

Ummm, what happened to the topic of "Treading on thin ice: Anyone ever carry a DA/SA pistol with the hammer cocked?" that we were supposed to be discussing?

[Jamie C.]

It's still here, mrhuckins... And I think we've even all answered it.

But you're probably right.... we probably should start our own thread if we're gonna keep discussing various types of pistol actions/types....

Maybe a general "Gun innards and terms" thread? :p


J.C.

[mrhuckins]

I started one here:

Is the Glock SA, DA or DAO (http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=137598)

[JoeRapture]

My former father in law carried his Beretta 92 cocked with the safety off! He was a detective seargent in a local jurisdiction. Seemed like a bad practice to me!

[psyopspec]

My former father in law carried his Beretta 92 cocked with the safety off! He was a detective seargent in a local jurisdiction. Seemed like a bad practice to me!

Did he ever try to explain the reasoning behind carrying that way?