Why do people say Glocks and other striker fired pistols are not Single Action?


PDA






Philo_Beddoe
March 5, 2010, 12:31 PM
In order for the trigger to reset the slide has to "cock" or reset the striker.

How is this any different then a single action BHP or 1911 with the exception that they have external hammers?

A true double action semi auto does not need the slide to cock the hammer, if you dry fire a Berretta 92 and then pull the trigger without operating the slide the hammer cocks and releases itself. That is a true double action trigger. The slide does not need to operate or hammer pulled back manually to cock and fire the weapon.

I know glock calls their pistols "safe action", but this almost sounds like a marketing strategy to get around police department bans on single action autos.

If you enjoyed reading about "Why do people say Glocks and other striker fired pistols are not Single Action?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Philo_Beddoe
March 5, 2010, 12:39 PM
Found this on the web too.

Why Glocks are NOT Double Action


http://members.cox.net/guntraining/glocks.htm

zhyla
March 5, 2010, 12:42 PM
Doesn't really matter what you call it. But I think the difference between a Glock and a 1911 is there is no case where a Glock with a round in the chamber can not be fired by pulling the trigger.

Avizpls
March 5, 2010, 12:45 PM
where as the 1911 is well known for randomly firing without any interaction on the trigger. 4srs?

oasis618
March 5, 2010, 12:49 PM
where as the 1911 is well known for randomly firing without any interaction on the trigger. 4srs?
I think what he was getting at, however akwardly, was that the trigger on a 1911 can be pulled without the weapon firing because of the grip saftey as well as the manual safety.

Shawn Dodson
March 5, 2010, 12:53 PM
I understand wht you're saying although I regard Glock as DAO.

Cycling the slide resets the trigger mechanism and keeps it under spring tension. The striker is not cocked, it's merely under some spring tension to keep the mechanism engaged. (Purists will disagree with me and say the striker is partially or half cocked.)

Pressing the then trigger "cocks & drops" the striker.

Jim Watson
March 5, 2010, 12:56 PM
"I know glock calls their pistols "safe action", but this almost sounds like a marketing strategy to get around police department bans on single action autos."

I am cynical enough to agree with this, but they are working from the basis that a Glock is not at full cock when at rest; the trigger stroke draws the striker back the remainder of its travel.

The original importers of the XD described it as functionally single action, which is why you see few in police holsters even after Springfield took over and touted its safety features.

The S&W Plastic M&P has been successfully promoted to goverment agencies even though its striker cam-back during the trigger stroke is very small. A tuned competitive gun like my Burwell is essentially single action.

JoeSlomo
March 5, 2010, 01:03 PM
"I know glock calls their pistols "safe action", but this almost sounds like a marketing strategy to get around police department bans on single action autos."

I am cynical enough to agree with this, but they are working from the basis that a Glock is not at full cock when at rest; the trigger stroke draws the striker back the remainder of its travel.


Agree.


Welcome back Jim!

bds
March 5, 2010, 01:24 PM
A true double action semi auto does not need the slide to cock the hammer

If you disassemble the Glock and actuate the trigger (reset the trigger by pushing forward on the connecting rod), you will see that Glock trigger needs to push back the striker pin (like cocking the hammer) for every shot.

A single action trigger simply releases a hammer (striker pin) that was cocked. Glock trigger is not like this since it needs to push back (cock) the striker pin (hammer) with each shot.

DA/SA trigger that has a decocker will shoot SA when hammer is cocked and shoot DA when the hammer is decocked.

So essentially, Glock has a DAO trigger that feels light like a SA trigger with a short trigger reset. That's why it is a good match shooting pistol for shooting fast double taps that will group very close. Often, match shooters will "lighten" the trigger pull/release for this reason.

Philo_Beddoe
March 5, 2010, 02:34 PM
Doesn't really matter what you call it.


yes it does in some situations

some police depts do not allow single action triggers and in competition IDPA and IPSC divide pistols into SA and DA classes

Why a single action Springfield XD is allowed to shoot production division (which requires a double action) in IPSC, but a Browning hi power is not, is beyond me.

Philo_Beddoe
March 5, 2010, 02:39 PM
Glock trigger is not like this since it needs to push back (cock) the striker pin (hammer) with each shot.

Then why do you have to rack the slide after you dry fire to reset the striker?

Call it half double action or whatever, but its not a true double action in my opinon in the sense that all that is needed to fire it is to pull the trigger.

Pre-set strikers and hammers apply only to semi-automatic handguns. Upon firing a cartridge or loading the chamber, the hammer or striker will rest in a partially cocked position. The trigger serves the function of completing the cocking cycle and then releasing the striker or hammer. While technically two actions, it differs from a double-action trigger in that the trigger is not capable of fully cocking the striker or hammer.

Examples of pre-set strikers are the Glock, Ruger SR9 and Smith & Wesson M&P pistols.
Examples of pre-set hammers are the Kel-Tec P-32 and Ruger LCP pistols.

Tilos
March 5, 2010, 02:55 PM
The glock slide resets the trigger mechanism.
That's the reason the slide needs to be racked to dry fire.

Watch this:

http://www.genitron.com/Basics/Glock23/P2Glock.html

The top view of the connector is what shows how the slide "resets" the trigger.

It will answer any questions.:uhoh:
Well, I guess not then:eek:

bds
March 5, 2010, 02:57 PM
Then why do you have to rack the slide after you dry fire to reset the striker?

You are not resetting the striker, you are resetting the trigger.

Unlike SA trigger like 1911, When you pull a Glock trigger, it stays pulled back - it does not return forward. Racking the slide resets the trigger ONLY, not the striker (hammer).

Only when you pull back on the trigger, will you pull back on the striker then release to ignite the primer.

DannyZRC
March 5, 2010, 03:11 PM
BDS, the striker is "half cocked" against the mechanism which connects it to the trigger. the trigger and striker are reset together.

the people who thought up the terms double action and single action clearly never thought of an intermediate solution, which is what the glock is.

I think, however, that most people care less about the mechanics of how the pistol works, but rather the the human interface factors. Trigger pull length/weight, tactile factors, wether or not certain functions are present like restrike or rechambering based on trigger pull.

double/single action only have real meaning in this area because of a broad set of assumptions about the aformentioned factors historically tied to those mechanical configurations.

Philo_Beddoe
March 5, 2010, 03:21 PM
The top view of the connector is what show how the slide "resets" the trigger.

It will answer any questions


That annimation also shows the striker not being reset until the slide has cycled too.

Philo_Beddoe
March 5, 2010, 03:26 PM
You are not resetting the striker, you are resetting the trigger.

Unlike SA trigger like 1911, When you pull a Glock trigger, it stays pulled back - it does not return forward. Racking the slide resets the trigger ONLY, not the striker (hammer).

That is not what the animation above shows

The striker does not "cock" until the slide has cycled.

Philo_Beddoe
March 5, 2010, 03:28 PM
After rethinking Glocks I think they are a modified action. Niether single or double action.

The trigger does move the striker rearward before if fires, however i does not completely do it like a true double action.

zhyla
March 5, 2010, 04:41 PM
I think what he was getting at, however akwardly, was that the trigger on a 1911 can be pulled without the weapon firing because of the grip saftey as well as the manual safety.

No, I was saying that if there is a round in the chamber a Glock can always be fired. A 1911 may need to be cocked depending on whether you lowered the hammer or not. This is the fundamental difference between SA and DA/SA guns from a user's perspective.

christcorp
March 5, 2010, 04:54 PM
They can word it any way they want to. But if you have a misfire due to a light strike on the primer, and you CAN'T simply pull the trigger AGAIN and strike the primer AGAIN, then it's NOT A DOUBLE ACTION PISTOL. It's that simple. Glocks are NOT double action pistols. You can argue that they're ALSO NOT SINGLE ACTION. That's fine. But that doesn't make them a Double Action pistol. Call it a hybrid. Call it a Semi-Double action pistol. Call it anything you want to. But you CAN'T call it a Double Action Pistol.

Philo_Beddoe
March 5, 2010, 05:10 PM
They can word it any way they want to. But if you have a misfire due to a light strike on the primer, and you CAN'T simply pull the trigger AGAIN and strike the primer AGAIN, then it's NOT A DOUBLE ACTION PISTOL. It's that simple. Glocks are NOT double action pistols. You can argue that they're ALSO NOT SINGLE ACTION. That's fine. But that doesn't make them a Double Action pistol. Call it a hybrid. Call it a Semi-Double action pistol. Call it anything you want to. But you CAN'T call it a Double Action Pistol.

/agreed

Also I think the Springfield Armory XD is a true SA pistol. There is no cocking of the striker period as far as I know on the trigger pull, just release.

saturno_v
March 5, 2010, 05:44 PM
I remember when the Beretta 92 was a big deal in the '80s one of the major selling point (including to the military and police forces around the world) was the extreme versatility of its DA/SA external hammer design and the great safety of it.

The 92 was my service pistol...and I think it still remains one of the greatest pistol ever designed.

Maybe I do not get it but I really do not understand why in the world anybody would accept a non DA/SA autoloader as defensive sidearm.....how in the world police forces accepted the Glock pistols....accidental firings with Glocks do happen...they are not that uncommon....

I only tolerate a non DA/SA pistol for my pocket piece (a Kel Tec P-11) because:

1) There are not many choices in pocket pistols chambered for service calibers

2) The very long and hard pull of the DAO trigger.

I think people give too much importance to the trigger pull and creep (okay, I admit that some triggers in few cases are really horrendous)

You learn to be accurate with the firearm you have (anybody that served in the military or police know that)..and, furthermore, we are talking about defence situations here not shooting matches...."center of mass" accuracy level at short distances.

There are really no reasons to accept anything else than the efficiency and versatility of a modern SA/DA for defense pistols, IMHO.

This is the reason why I consider a 1911 an old inferior design for carry use.

I would not touch a Glock with a proverbial 10 feet pole...just looking at its trigger scares the hell out of me.

Shawn Dodson
March 5, 2010, 05:55 PM
I remember the first time my father shot my Beretta 96FS. He engaged the manual safety and his face turned white! "Son I think there's a problem with your gun! When I put the safety on the hammer dropped!" He's a retired Marine, 100% combat disabled, and had never encountered a handgun equipped with a hammer drop safety.

I carried an SA 9mm Star M43 Firestar for a few years, cocked & locked.

After some research I chose the Glock 19 to replace it. It took awhile to become comfortable with it's "safe action" trigger, especially when holstering, so I can understand saturno_v's wariness. To this day I practice care when holstering it, but once it's properly holstered, I'm good. My finger is my safety.

saturno_v
March 5, 2010, 06:10 PM
Shawn...I understand that you can handle it with care..however if the market offer me an even more versatile and safe system at the same price/quality/weight level...why not??

Glock accidental discharge are a reality......yes you can have acidental discharge with any handguns...I just think that with the Glock it's easier....

bds
March 5, 2010, 06:15 PM
OP:
Why do people say Glocks and other striker fired pistols are not Single Action?

I think we are all answering the OP in many depth and detail levels. I tried to provide a simplified DA/SA/DAO and not get into partially cocked striker in Glocks.

For one thing, Glock trigger is NOT a single action trigger.

Shawn Dodson
March 5, 2010, 06:18 PM
I agree, a Glock is more vulnerable to negligent gun handling. Due care and caution mitigate the risk.

I also use ASP red guns as training aids. One of the advantages I saw with Glock was its manual of arms is identical to a red gun (i.e., no manual safety) which reinforces my training experience. When I present my Glock (or Glock red gun) from the holster, I put my finger on what I call the "Trigger Finger Rest" position. When I've made the decision to fire I move my finger to the trigger to work it. When I'm done shooting my finger goes back on the trigger finger rest.

REAPER4206969
March 5, 2010, 06:25 PM
Glock is a pre-set double action only. Just like a Para LDA/Kel-Tec P-32/P3AT/PF-9/Ruger LCP/ETC.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4AL3nXOxGw

REAPER4206969
March 5, 2010, 06:26 PM
But if you have a misfire due to a light strike on the primer, and you CAN'T simply pull the trigger AGAIN and strike the primer AGAIN, then it's NOT A DOUBLE ACTION PISTOL.
Second strike capability has nothing to do with determining if a pistol is double action.

Philo_Beddoe
March 5, 2010, 06:28 PM
BTW I was not hating on glocks, just trying to understand why a pistol that requires the slide be racked to reset the striker/trigger was being labeled as double action.

In my world double action meant the a simple pull of the trigger cocked and released the hammer. Like the orginal double action pistol, the revolver.

I now think the glock is either single or double action, but something of the hybrid of the two.

christcorp
March 5, 2010, 06:28 PM
That is why my SigSauer P220 SA/DA with decocker blows any of the glocks out of the water. It's safer, stronger, and overall just better. And it's one of the most accurate guns out of the box imaginable. Of course you do pay more for that.

Which goes to answer saturno's question, even though it's rhetorical. Police and others chose the glock for only one reason Price. Glock made it cheap enough for them to buy in bulk. I have an entire state of state troopers, and I don't know of one that "Loves" it. Many say it's ok, pretty good, etc... These are usually brand new young officers who don't have a lot of experience with firearms. But for police use, the glock is inferior to so many others. Especially the sig. But money does talk.

Do NOT get me wrong. I am not saying that the glock isn't a quality weapon. It is. But for police/military environments, to not have a true double action pistol, or a SA/DA, is totally retarded. Even the best quality ammo in the world can get a light primer strike where you need to get the next round off immediately. LIKE NOW!!! Like pull the trigger again. At least with an external single action, like a 1911A1, you can pull the hammer back. With Sig, just pull the trigger. With glock, rechamber the slide and forget that first round. If I HAD to carry a glock for police/military use, I would PURPOSELY carry condition 3 with an empty chamber. And I would practice quick chambering and fire until I was the best at it. "Like the Israelis do with their 1911A1". Self defense, you have time. Police officers are generally on the offensive in a situation where their gun is drawn. Speed is of the essence. I wouldn't want a "CLICK, OH SHIITE" mode and have my brain racing figuring out what to do. I'd rather simply practice chambering all the time so if there's a "Click", my muscle memory simply rechambers. Then again, it would take a LOT for me to own a glock. Like a law or condition of employment.

REAPER4206969
March 5, 2010, 06:32 PM
The 92 was my service pistol...and I think it still remains one of the greatest pistol ever designed.

Maybe I do not get it but I really do not understand why in the world anybody would accept a non DA/SA autoloader as defensive sidearm.....how in the world police forces accepted the Glock pistols....accidental firings with Glocks do happen...they are not that uncommon....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nDfNV9bJoSg

christcorp
March 5, 2010, 06:33 PM
Second strike capability has nothing to do with determining if a pistol is double action.

You are correct; however, that is the MAIN attribute of all double action pistols. Therefor, if it can't do that, then I don't consider it double action. We can play with words all day. But the accepted definition of a double action pistol is that by pulling the trigger, you are either raising the hammer to fall onto the firing pin, or you are pulling the firing pin back and allowing it to fly forward. If you can't hold a gun, without bullets in the magazine, and continually pull the trigger and have an internal hammer go back or a firing pin go back, and either release, then it's not a double action.

saturno_v
March 5, 2010, 06:34 PM
Christcorp

The fact is that you do not have to spend more than the price of a Glock to get a high quality SA/DA pistol....there is not only SIG around.

Beretta 92/96 are in the same price range.

CZ are even cheaper.

A Cougar is cheaper

Any Taurus is cheaper

Rugers are cheaper

Bersa Thunder 9, 40 and 45 are cheaper.

REAPER4206969
March 5, 2010, 06:35 PM
But the accepted definition of a double action pistol is that by pulling the trigger, you are either raising the hammer to fall onto the firing pin, or you are pulling the firing pin back and allowing it to fly forward.
Right.
If you can't hold a gun, without bullets in the magazine, and continually pull the trigger and have an internal hammer go back or a firing pin go back, and either release, then it's not a double action.
Wrong.

REAPER4206969
March 5, 2010, 06:36 PM
That is why my SigSauer P220 SA/DA with decocker blows any of the glocks out of the water. It's safer, stronger, and overall just better.
Cool story, bro.

saturno_v
March 5, 2010, 06:39 PM
Disclaimer: I respect Glocks for their accuracy and reliability..nothing wrong with that....I did shoot them at the range several times and I will again from time to time.....I just do not accept the limitation of their primitive firing system.

Shawn Dodson
March 5, 2010, 06:45 PM
...their primitive firing system. Uh-oh, you done did it now! ;)

Or is it, Oh no, you din't!

saturno_v
March 5, 2010, 06:49 PM
Shawn

For me not having second strike capabilities, no decocking mechanism and not external safety is "functionally primitive"...sorry...regardless of the sophistication of the materials used or the design...just IMHO...:evil::D:neener:

REAPER4206969
March 5, 2010, 06:50 PM
I just do not accept the limitation of their primitive firing system.
Now you're just being preposterous. Pre-set DAO striker fired pistols are the future of handgunning.

saturno_v
March 5, 2010, 06:52 PM
Now you're just being preposterous. Pre-set DAO striker fired pistols are the future of handgunning.


...according to who??? Glock??? and for me not having the second strike capabilities is not functionally a DAO design....you need to rake the slide to fire again...

Almost any other major hangun manufacturers stick with their DA/SA design....at least for their premium models...

For all the practical purposes, a Glock is functionally no different than one of the early cantury 25 ACP or 32 ACP semi auto pistol....single action no external hammer....can you decock it?? No....Double Strike?? No...the only difference is their little trigger safety...

REAPER4206969
March 5, 2010, 06:52 PM
For me not having second strike capabilities
Worthless.
no decocking mechanism
Unnecessary.
and not external safety
Unnecessary.

REAPER4206969
March 5, 2010, 06:55 PM
...according to who??? Glock???
You'll see.

Shawn Dodson
March 5, 2010, 06:57 PM
For me not having second strike capabilities... If the gun don't go bang when you press the trigger then you immediately, without thought, tap the base of the magazine with the heel of your support hand, roll the gun in the direction of the ejection port and simultaneously rack the slide. You should be able to accomplish all this in about a second.

There are other failures besides a faulty cartridge or light primer strike that can prevent the gun from going bang when you press the trigger.

It didn't go bang? Tap, Roll & Rack!!!

saturno_v
March 5, 2010, 07:00 PM
Reaper


The features are maybe worthless to you....

The SA/DA will be the premium design for decades to come...

Philo_Beddoe
March 5, 2010, 07:02 PM
Glock is a pre-set double action only. Just like a Para LDA/Kel-Tec P-32/P3AT/PF-9/Ruger LCP/ETC.

Pre-set strikers and hammers apply only to semi-automatic handguns. Upon firing a cartridge or loading the chamber, the hammer or striker will rest in a partially cocked position. The trigger serves the function of completing the cocking cycle and then releasing the striker or hammer. While technically two actions, it differs from a double-action trigger in that the trigger is not capable of fully cocking the striker or hammer.

Examples of pre-set strikers are the Glock, Ruger SR9 and Smith & Wesson M&P pistols.

Examples of pre-set hammers are the Kel-Tec P-32 and Ruger LCP pistols.


a double-action trigger performs two functions when pulling the trigger, first cocking the hammer or striker then releasing it to discharge the firearm

Since the glock trigger is not capable of fully cocking the striker or hammer, its not a true double action trigger

saturno_v
March 5, 2010, 07:03 PM
One of the early Glock....:evil: :D

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/__KONc6M3jls/Sr7k9OK9e-I/AAAAAAAAA1Q/XFm0_c6kzNg/s640/Colt25pocket+013a.JPG

saturno_v
March 5, 2010, 07:07 PM
Pre-set strikers and hammers apply only to semi-automatic handguns. Upon firing a cartridge or loading the chamber, the hammer or striker will rest in a partially cocked position. The trigger serves the function of completing the cocking cycle and then releasing the striker or hammer. While technically two actions, it differs from a double-action trigger in that the trigger is not capable of fully cocking the striker or hammer.

Examples of pre-set strikers are the Glock, Ruger SR9 and Smith & Wesson M&P pistols.

Examples of pre-set hammers are the Kel-Tec P-32 and Ruger LCP pistols.


a double-action trigger performs two functions when pulling the trigger, first cocking the hammer or striker then releasing it to discharge the firearm

Since a glock must have the slide work to accomplish this, its not a true double action trigger.

Amen to that...

REAPER4206969
March 5, 2010, 07:10 PM
While technically two actions, it differs from a double-action trigger in that the trigger is not capable of fully cocking the striker or hammer.
Did you get that from Wikipedia? Call the BATFE and ask what the Glock is classified as.

saturno_v
March 5, 2010, 07:12 PM
However for anyone interested, this is a Businessweek report about Glock secret path to profits..an investigation about some alleged questionable business practices of the company to get LE contracts....

Listen to it online or download the podcast.

http://www.businessweek.com/mediacenter/podcasts/cover_stories/covercast_09_10_09.htm

REAPER4206969
March 5, 2010, 07:13 PM
The features are maybe worthless to you....

The SA/DA will be the premium design for decades to come...
Ask any serious trainer what he thinks of those features.

saturno_v
March 5, 2010, 07:15 PM
Did you get that from Wikipedia? Call the BATFE and ask what the Glock is classified as.

I do not care what the BATFE says....if it can only be fully cocked by raking the slide, it is a functional single action pistol....period...end of the story...do not beat around the bush..

saturno_v
March 5, 2010, 07:16 PM
Ask any serious trainer what he thinks of those features.


I was trained int he military...and they were indeed good featurers to have....again one of the selling point for the Beretta 92.

For me (and others) Glocks are accurate and reliable cheap plastic pistols with primitive firing functionalities....

The Lone Haranguer
March 5, 2010, 07:18 PM
On a true single action mechanism, the striker would be fully cocked and the trigger would only release it. On the Glock, the striker is only partially cocked and requires the action of the trigger to complete cocking, therefore it is not a single action.

Steve C
March 5, 2010, 07:19 PM
The question revolves around the definition of a single action and double action. The simplest definition of each is:
In single action guns the trigger does ONE action and that is to release the firing mechanism.

In double action guns the trigger does 2 actions the first being to retract the hammer or striker and the second is to release the hammer or striker to fire the mechanism.

The position of the striker or hammer other than not being fully retracted or cocked is inconsequential to the definition.

Thus a Glock is a double action pistol by basic definition.

saturno_v
March 5, 2010, 07:21 PM
Thus a Glock is a double action pistol by basic definition.

Yes, but not by practical functionality....to the operator it is a SA pistol..period.

saturno_v
March 5, 2010, 07:23 PM
Ask any serious trainer what he thinks of those features.


Do not even mention ther name Glock to a couple of instructors at my range...LOL :evil::D:neener:

RobMoore
March 5, 2010, 07:26 PM
Second strike capability has nothing to do with determining if a pistol is double action.

You are correct; however, that is the MAIN attribute of all double action pistols.

If that useless feature is the best thing they have going for them, you can see why so many people are dumping them. Go here (http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=507365) if you want to debate that last comment, so we can avoid an off-topic repeat of an existing thread

Confederate
March 5, 2010, 07:30 PM
I'm not fond of Glocks and believe they're inherently dangerous pistols. I have a S&W 659/5906 that are true DA. One of the greatest, most important handgun safety rules is to never touch the trigger until you're ready to fire. This is exceptionally important for Glock and other striker-fired pistols, but admittedly less so for Berettas, Sigs and S&W second- and third-generation pistols, as well as most revolvers.

I would NEVER cock my 659 and carry it that way, so why would I carry a Glock that is, if I didn't have much smarter people than me to tell me better, cocked and ready to fire.

But wait, says one, it does have a safety! Oh, really...where?

Well, it's on the trigger!

Wow, that's a safe place for it! How does that make it safer than my cocked S&W? My Smith at least still has some travel in it even when cocked. It probably would have kept me from accidentally shooting the driver of a car, like the Glock-weilding police officer who forgot the cardinal rule of keeping his finger off the trigger until ready to shoot. With Glocks there can be no lapses in judement, no mistakes. The gun is always ready to shoot, the same as any single-action pistol or any cocked DA pistol, and there's no luxury of travel in the trigger. (I'm sitting here with my cocked, unloaded 659, and I still have enough travel in the trigger to make it safer than a Glock. I'd still never carry it cocked, but neither would I carry a "cocked" Glock auto.)

Accidental discharges have skyrocketed in police departments and agencies who have switched to Glocks and similar arms, and though I don't object to the rule about keeping one's finger off triggers until ready to fire, that rule is far less relevent to those of us with DA revolvers and autos.

Glocks, in my opinion, would be much better guns if they had safeties and some travel in their triggers. In situations where I may need my weapon in an instant, I probably would have my finger on the trigger if I were using a DA revolver or my Smith auto. I certainly wouldn't if it were a Glock.

REAPER4206969
March 5, 2010, 07:31 PM
Beautiful post Steve.

REAPER4206969
March 5, 2010, 07:34 PM
I'm not fond of Glocks and believe they're inherently dangerous pistols.
*facepalm*
In situations where I may need my weapon in an instant, I probably would have my finger on the trigger if I were using a DA revolver or my Smith auto.
Then you are poorly trained.

saturno_v
March 5, 2010, 07:34 PM
Well said Confederate....

I carry my Bersa Thunder 40 with one in the pipe without the slightest worry about the trigger....and without need for special hard shell holsters..

I still have to find someone that can really tell me what are the advantage of a Glock compared to a DA/SA pistol....I still cannot find no one...

Safety?? No...

Realibility?? Nope..

Weight...not even that....

What then??

REAPER4206969
March 5, 2010, 07:44 PM
Safety?? No...
The Glock is 100% safe.
Realibility?? Nope..
Glock is the world wide standard for auto pistol reliability and durability.
Weight...not even that....
Glock's are the lightest pistols in their class.
What then??
Size efficiency/capacity/weight/ease of use/ease of maintenance/reliability/durability/corrosion resistance/safety/accuracy/consistent short reset trigger/excellent customer service/readily available supply of factory and aftermarket parts and accessories/Etc.

ArmedBear
March 5, 2010, 07:48 PM
That's about the funniest Glocknut post by REAPER yet, and that's saying something. Not funny in a good way.:barf:

I hope I'm nowhere near any range where REAPER is. I like to make sure that anyone who EVER thinks of ANY firearm as 100% safe is at least 50% farther away from me than the maximum range of whatever round that gun fires.

REAPER4206969
March 5, 2010, 07:48 PM
I was trained int he military...and they were indeed good featurers to have....again one of the selling point for the Beretta 92.
The U.S. military gives little to no handgun training. I'm a huge fan of the Beretta 92 series BTW.

REAPER4206969
March 5, 2010, 07:50 PM
I hope I'm nowhere near any range where REAPER is. I like to make sure that anyone who EVER thinks of ANY firearm as 100% safe is at least 50% farther away from me than the maximum range of whatever round that gun fires.
It is mechanically impossible for the Glock to fire without its trigger being pressed from its center, fully to the rear.

saturno_v
March 5, 2010, 07:56 PM
The Glock is 100% safe.


As any other quality SA/DA pistol..as AmrmedBear said, no firearm is 100% safe...

Glock is the world wide standard for auto pistol reliability and durability.


Who establish that?? You can say the same thing about the Beretta 92 which has a way larger share of the market for military use

Glock's are the lightest pistols in their class.


Same weight as a FN 40 (on top of my head) or other plolymer frame SA/DA pistols......the weight has to do because of their polymer frame not because their firing mechanism...

Size efficiency/capacity/weight/ease of use/ease of maintenance/reliability/durability/corrosion resistance/safety/accuracy/consistent short reset trigger/excellent customer service/readily available supply of factory and aftermarket parts and accessories/Etc.

FN beats it in capacity and many others are equal

Size efficiency....in what regard?? A Bersa Thunder 9 is more compact with the same capacity and barrel length...

Ease of maintenance....again others are considered at the top as well (The Beretta 92 for example)

All other factors have nothing to do with the firing action..

So I'm still waiting....I understand driking the Kool Aid but I need concrete answers...:D

saturno_v
March 5, 2010, 07:58 PM
The U.S. military gives little to no handgun training. I'm a huge fan of the Beretta 92 series BTW.


Who told you that I did my service in the US forces??

And the US armed forces do offer training for handgun use to officers BTW.....

saturno_v
March 5, 2010, 08:00 PM
Ohh I forgot one Glock feature...the .40 cal kabooms....:evil::D

saturno_v
March 5, 2010, 08:04 PM
However I want to avoid dragging this for pages...

As I said before, I recognize Glock good accuracy and reliability...and I know about their excellent Customer Service

But please do not tell me that their firing mechanism is superior or on par in functionality and safety with a quality DA/SA because it isn't....period...no amount of kool aid and debate can change that.

christcorp
March 5, 2010, 08:06 PM
saturn; I agree with you on not needing to pay a lot for a good SA/DA type weapon. I too have a CZ-82, and think it's a great gun. I also have FEG, Walther, and a number of others. I was simply mentioning the Sig as a more modern weapon used widely. And as I mention in my previous post, I'm not bashing the Glock. I already said I think it's lot a lot of good attributes. But for law enforcement/military, I think it's very bad. I personally won't have one. I've shot quite a few. They are indeed nice. But if it doesn't have a true double action capability, which includes the capability of a second strike, without having to chamber another round, then I won't have one for practical use. It's a waste and dangerous. I rarely ever carry my Springfield 1911A1 any longer. But at least it has an external hammer if needed. Glocks are nice, but they definitely aren't the future of handguns. And the ONLY reason they are in the hands of law enforcement officers is because of economics. I know of 5 police departments; city, county, and state in 3 different states, that specifically chose the glock of the sig because of price. It was the only way they were going to be able to afford to upgrade. Of course, there's a lot of perception out there by a lot of ignorant people. "If it's good enough for police, it's good enough for me". Unfortunately, they don't realize that a lot of police officers aren't too fond of the glock.

saturno_v
March 5, 2010, 08:11 PM
Very well said Christcorp.

Serious firearm enthusiasts, recognize the good things about Glock...reliability, weight, accuracy...we admit that....what is wrong is when Glock fans convince themselves that a Glock is actually functionally superior to a SA/DA firearms which is not...from any angle you want to look at it...we are rational recognizing the good things, "they" are irrational not recognizing the shortcomings of their pet pistol...I do not have much experience with police but I know as fact that quite few of them absolutely hate it...they have to suck it up because is their standard issue.

REAPER4206969
March 5, 2010, 08:15 PM
what is wrong is when Glock fans convince themselves that a Glock is actually functionally superior to a SA/DA firearms which is not...from any angle you want to look at it
Serious shooters understand the superiority of a consistent trigger pull.

saturno_v
March 5, 2010, 08:18 PM
Serious shooters understand the superiority of a consistent trigger pull.


...................which is not an exclusive feature of Glocks.....

You see where the problem is?? We do not like Glock so we are not serious shooters?? Do you recognize your irrational argument???

Go and tell some of the 1911 fans at my range, winners of several matches (people that shoot EVERY FREAKING DAY) and visceral haters of Glocks that they are not serious shooters and wait for their response.....:uhoh::rolleyes:

REAPER4206969
March 5, 2010, 08:21 PM
...................which is not an exclusive feature of Glocks.....
Did I say it was?
Go and tell some of the 1911 fans
See my sig?

saturno_v
March 5, 2010, 08:23 PM
Good..so accept that some good shooters actually hate Glocks....I hold my own and I would never consider a Glock as defensive sidearm...target use it's fine

Hellbore
March 5, 2010, 08:39 PM
Hey, thanks to whoever posted that animation of how Glocks work! I appreciate that, I wondered how they work.

Now, I have a question. I'm still fairly green when it comes to guns so bear with me. If I understood the animations correctly, if you had a round in the chamber and you pulled the trigger, and for some reason the primer didn't fire off, pulling the trigger a SECOND time on the same round, would not result in another primer strike. Right?

Does this matter at all? Like say, if you had a dud or something, is there any advantage to giving it another stab with the firing pin? Or would the primer already be too badly dented for it to do any good, after the first strike?

Just curious... Also what is the accepted best course of action if you pull the trigger and there is no kaboom? Pull again, or wait a bit then clear the round by racking the slide?

Just wondering if there is any reason why the trigger needing to be reset by the slide being racked would ever be considered a problem, from a practical standpoint. I don't own any Glocks and have no stake in this argument, just curious.

RobMoore
March 5, 2010, 08:47 PM
Hellbore, Click here (http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=507365)

As to the question about firing a round with an already dented primer, it may fire, it may not. Usually if it has a significant hit, it won't fire. If it is just a dimple, such as what happens when a SIG's hammer falls on a slightly out-of-battery slide, the round will probably fire if it is ejected and rechambered, or if the slide is smacked into battery (harder to do on a hammered gun than it is on a strikered gun)

christcorp
March 5, 2010, 08:47 PM
Hell, I even own a 9mm Hi-Point. "Let's not start THAT debate". But it's a very good, reliable, and dependable gun. I will use it stored in my garage; spare room in the house; in my truck; in my camping/hunting gear; etc... I won't carry it. I won't keep a round chambered. (Because it is truly a single action striker fired with the firing pin held back under constant tension, even with a safety). So while it's a very good gun and has it's uses, I also recognize it's shortcomings. But my Springfield and Kimber 1911A1's also have shortcomings.

I would say that just about every gun I've ever owned, shot, saw, or researched has it's shortcomings. Even my beloved Sig P220 has it's shortcomings. 1) Low magazine capacity. "Not important to me, but to some". 2) Heavy. 3) Hard to conceal. I definitely can recognize it's shortcomings, even though I think it's one of the best weapons on the planet. What people really have to realize, ESPECIALLY glock fans, is that ALL pistols are a compromise. NONE of them are efficient. The only reason we have pistols is because carrying a rifle or shotgun all day long is difficult. And it's difficult to conceal. I would say the closest to perfect pistol I've ever seen, shot, or owned, is my CZ-82. Solid steel. Not too big, so you can conceal it. Not too small, so it doesn't snap your wrist. 9mm Makarov is hotter than a 380, equal to the low end of a 9mm luger. Double action, Single Action, Allows for decocking safely, Allows for carrying it cocked and locked for those who love that feature with the 1911A1. Ergonomically smooth. Ultra high quality steel and parts. 12 round magazine "For those who care". Ammo is very available and quite inexpensive. All in all, the CZ-82 is probably the closest to the PERFECT self defense pistol on the planet. But even it has some drawbacks.

Mike J
March 5, 2010, 08:50 PM
Yours is an oft debated question Hellbore. Some folks don't want a pistol without second strike capability. Others, myself included, think if you pull the trigger & it doesn't go bang you shouldn't pull the trigger again but got straight to tap. rack, bang as described in post #42. Makes more sense to clear that round & chamber a fresh one than stand there repeatedly pulling a trigger on a dud round.

REAPER4206969
March 5, 2010, 09:20 PM
so accept that some good shooters actually hate Glocks
I'm skeptical of anyone that "hates" Glock's. Dislike them? Fine. But there is no logical reason to hate the Glock. The Glock, like the Kalashnikov, or Mauser, or 1911 has earned its reputation as a reliable, durable and effective combat weapon. All serious shooters should respect it.

REAPER4206969
March 5, 2010, 09:23 PM
if you had a round in the chamber and you pulled the trigger, and for some reason the primer didn't fire off, pulling the trigger a SECOND time on the same round, would not result in another primer strike. Right?

Correct.
Does this matter at all?
No.
Just curious... Also what is the accepted best course of action if you pull the trigger and there is no kaboom?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfyULpEhmug

saturno_v
March 5, 2010, 09:51 PM
I'm skeptical of anyone that "hates" Glock's. Dislike them?...

Personally I do not "hate" them..I dislike them....actually I just would not use them as defensive sidearm, ok as target toys..

But there are people that, for any reasons irrational or not, "hate" them and, trust me, they are serious shooters.

Lv4snobrdg
March 5, 2010, 10:07 PM
I can say that I hate glocks as a matter of personal opinion. I wouldn't own one again and wouldn't suggest one to anyone who asked for my opinion.

1. I could never fire a reasonable group with them due to the long trigger pull.
2. Rappers, nuf said.

Steve C
March 5, 2010, 10:31 PM
deleted

REAPER4206969
March 5, 2010, 10:32 PM
actually I just would not use them as defensive sidearm, ok as target toys..
I have never heard anyone have this opinion. Go on...

RobMoore
March 5, 2010, 10:38 PM
Yeah, usually I hear "Glocks are good for self defense, but horrible as target toys".

Boats
March 5, 2010, 10:42 PM
I'm skeptical of anyone that "hates" Glock's. Dislike them? Fine. But there is no logical reason to hate the Glock. The Glock, like the Kalashnikov, or Mauser, or 1911 has earned its reputation as a reliable, durable and effective combat weapon. All serious shooters should respect it.

:scrutiny: :scrutiny: :scrutiny: :scrutiny: :scrutiny: :scrutiny:

REAPER4206969
March 5, 2010, 10:45 PM
Oh good, Boats is here...

sigsteve
March 5, 2010, 10:49 PM
If God did suggest a pistol to carry for self defense it would be a 1911 designed by the 13th apostle John Moses Browning! ;)

Boats
March 6, 2010, 12:24 AM
Oh good, Boats is here...

Someone has to clean up after you. You should regale us all with the "strategery and tacticality" of capturing and using enemy handguns and magazines during shoot outs so you can again pontificate on the superiority of overhand method.

You so curiously declined last time after popping off about the possibility. You must be a beyond serious shooter to not share.:uhoh:

Myles
March 6, 2010, 12:29 AM
I'm no fan of the trigger, but in a sense, Glocks have become like the old .38 revolver.

Utterly reliable, no complex controls or mechanisms to master before being proficient with a basic utility sidearm. Easy to reccomend to a neophyte shooter, with basic safety training. However, I'd still recommend a model 10 for Grandma. My wife (she is a Grandma as well) prefers a model 66, with full-bore loads.

Although, I will admit, the idea behind the trigger safety always baffled me - if an obstruction gets inside the trigger guard, it's going to press the safety bar as well as the trigger.

NMGonzo
March 6, 2010, 12:30 AM
Call it what you will; i shot well with my glock 35.

I miss it.

Myles
March 6, 2010, 12:34 AM
Someone has to clean up after you. You should regale us all with the "strategery and tacticality" of capturing and using enemy handguns and magazines during shoot outs so you can again pontificate on the superiority of overhand method.

You so curiously declined last time after popping off about the possibility. You must be a beyond serious shooter to not share.

Way to cross-post, there.

It just so happens, that the the nice folks at Front Sight teach his method as well. No human being is ever in control of their environment and situation, and you may end up with an unfamiliar firearm in your hands.

Boats
March 6, 2010, 01:09 AM
Then please go back to the other thread and do what the fabulous reaper will not and expound upon how this unfamiliar handgun, a magazine, and a need for a reload are all going to happen in a "real environment."

I do so mind having to perpetually track down the internet ninjas for their sagacious advice when they will only publicly share a cryptic, "It could happen grasshopper, master told me so."

bds
March 6, 2010, 02:00 AM
However I want to avoid dragging this for pages...

And we are on page 4 ...


OP: Why do people say Glocks and other striker fired pistols are not Single Action?

Just reread the OP. It says "Glocks and other" striker fired pistols. So why are we so focused on Glock trigger only? I think the OP meant in general, striker fired pistols are not SA.

If the OP was stated, "Why do people say XD/M&P's striker fired pistols are not single action?" we would be having a different discussion?

NinjaFeint
March 6, 2010, 02:14 AM
Then please go back to the other thread and do what the fabulous reaper will not and expound upon how this unfamiliar handgun, a magazine, and a need for a reload are all going to happen in a "real environment."

I do so mind having to perpetually track down the internet ninjas for their sagacious advice when they will only publicly share a cryptic, "It could happen grasshopper, master told me so."
You make me laugh.

TG13
March 6, 2010, 09:39 AM
the XD is single action..

Top_Gunn
March 6, 2010, 05:32 PM
A lot of the disagreements here exist because we are trying to divide more than two kinds of pistols into only two categories: "double action" and "single action." Glocks differ from the ordinary single-action pistol because pulling their triggers does more than one thing--it finishes cocking the striker and then it fires it. They differ from the typical double-action pistol because the slide has to be racked in order to fire them. So they aren't exactly either double action or single action. I suppose this is why Glock calls them "safe action," but that's too much a marketing thing to catch on. "Striker-fired action" doesn't really get at the essence of it either, because the fact that it has a striker rather than a hammer is a minor detail. The Ruger LCP's action is pretty much the same as a Glock's, although it has an internal hammer rather than a striker; Ruger calls it "double action."

The terms "single action" and "double action" originated to describe revolvers; there are no ambiguities there. Applying those terms to autoloaders starts out with an oddity because no autoloader's action will do what a double-action revolver's action will do: go on to the next cartridge and shoot that.

I think of Glocks (and LCP's) as being a sort of "one and a fraction action" pistol. But I wouldn't say that to anyone else, because they wouldn't know what I meant. We really need a new term. As an earlier commenter put it, "[a]fter rethinking Glocks I think they are a modified action. Neither single or double action." Seems right to me. Too bad we don't have an accepted name for it.

christcorp
March 6, 2010, 05:53 PM
Yea, but when you break it down to it's basics, a Glock can do EVERYTHING that a Single Action pistol can do; but it CAN'T do EVERYTHING that a Double Action pistol can do. And for some people, some of the features of traditional Double Action pistols is important. So, a SA/DA pistol is the best of both for these people. Again, the Glock is a fine pistol. But it's NOT a Double Action pistol. Not compared to 90% of all other Double Action capable pistols and their features.

RobMoore
March 6, 2010, 10:24 PM
I would agree that to be fully accurate, we need to have more options than just "Single action" and "double action". "Strikered" or "Striker Fired" guns seems to be the most popular third term.

REAPER4206969
March 6, 2010, 10:44 PM
One more time. "Pre-set double action only."

REAPER4206969
March 6, 2010, 10:47 PM
"Strikered" or "Striker Fired" guns seems to be the most popular third term.
The firing mechanism has nothing to do with action type. There are many striker fired SAO/DAO/Pre-set DAO/DA/SA pistols.

If you enjoyed reading about "Why do people say Glocks and other striker fired pistols are not Single Action?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!