Double-action shotguns and carbines

[westernrover]

It seems obvious, especially for defense and other anti-personnel use. Single-actions require a compressed spring for the firing pin and a safety, or an empty chamber condition. I would have thought doing away with safeties for the kind of guns used for this purpose would have been a priority after the Kansas City Massacre. We've certainly seen a strong preference for not having mechanical disablers on handguns since at least Fairbairn and Sykes, and this accounts for a great deal of the argument in favor of DA/SA autos a generation ago, and striker-fired autos for the last couple decades or longer, and has always been one of the merits of the double-action revolver. The compressed spring issue is certainly a smaller one, but one that has come up perennially none-the-less with respect to the manner in which some people store home-defense guns.

A double-action trigger has long proven adequate for both safety and speed at handgun ranges. The range of the shotgun and demand for accuracy is not greater except perhaps in the case of the special-purpose shotgun with a rifled barrel for deer hunting. I would also argue the carbine, which has gained favor over the shotgun in recent decades for police and home-defense purposes, would also benefit from a double-action for this use. While the M4 may be used at ranges greater than 200 yards for military, hunting, recreational and other purposes, a carbine's practical use for police, personal and home defense is almost certainly benefited greater by a double-action trigger than by a single-action encumbered by a manual safety. This is especially true of the carbines chambered for pistol cartridges and larger caliber carbines for subsonic cartridges used with a suppressor.

There doesn't seem to be a good reason or explanation why the world of shotguns and carbines has remained in a state where the only options are cocked-and-locked, or an empty-chamber, while individual and institutional preferences for some form of double-action for handguns has prevailed.

Now I understand that Mossberg did offer a double-action shotgun about 20 years ago. I am not familiar with it but I understand it was not well received and it may not have deserved to be. Its action was derided as a safety feature for incompetently trained users. I cannot imagine the argument that M92, H&K, Sig and Glock users are employing a crutch for incompetently trained users being given any veracity today. The idea that a gun-disabling "safety" device is superior to skill with a double-action trigger lacks merit. The assertion that people should be trained to operate a gun-disabling lock before their firearm is ready to use has rightly been derided for over 100 years.

 

[Robert]

Or maybe I am ok with the way my safeties work now and don't see the need to add in needlessly heavy trigger to my AR or shotgun.

 

[4thPointOfContact]

Redacted as the OP has the same information I just posted. I need more coffee.

 

[.308 Norma]

There doesn't seem to be a good reason or explanation why the world of shotguns and carbines has remained in a state where the only options are cocked-and-locked, or an empty-chamber

On the contrary, there's a very good reason or explanation. Robert stated it in his reply (post #2). I also am ok with the way the safeties work on my carbines and shotguns, in fact I'm better than ok with it.

 

[westernrover]

It's absurd to think my proposition is about telling anyone personally how or how not to do anything. It was clearly stated to be about the options. I'm not advocating the M1911 be discontinued, but that there are other possibilities and they have advantages.

 

[Derek Zeanah]

If you'll let me get away with an appeal to authority:

The most important characteristic of any rifle is its trigger action. It is better to have an inaccurate rifle with a good trigger than the other way around. A good trigger has often been described as breaking like "a glass rod." By choice, there must be no apparent motion of the trigger as pressure is applied to it...The pressure required for the release of the firing mechanism is better light than heavy, though the actual poundage is not critical."

Good triggers by the definition of most aren't heavy triggers. Following the four rules and having a rifle/shotgun in good mechanical condition is sufficient for most of us, and has been since about forever.

 

[Jim Watson]

I cannot imagine the argument that M92, H&K, Sig and Glock users are employing a crutch for incompetently trained users being given any veracity today.

Let's don't use a pejorative term like "incompetently trained" let us more accurately say "minimally trained and rarely practiced" which is indeed the purpose for such guns' adoption. Jan Stevenson said the P5, P6, P7 German police pistols were made for "the convulsive response."

 

[westernrover]

So you're saying DA/SA and striker-fired autos were adopted for use by minimally trained and rarely practiced users? Would you also say Ed McGivern and Jerry Miculek adopted the double-action because of their minimal training and lack of practice? I'm sure there are various cases, more than one reason, for why someone has done one thing or another. But how does that justify the absence of double-actions for shotguns and carbines? How does it justify every available production shotgun and carbine being fettered by a disabling lock?

Also, I cannot buy the argument that a double-action trigger would render a shotgun or carbine inferior in practical performance. They have a longer sight radius than a handgun. They have more stabilizing weight on the front-end, and they have a shoulder stock on the rear. With those features, there would be no reason to find them inferior to double-action handguns which are widely accepted for the purposes I proposed. There is no proposal being made for a double-action long-range precision rifle.

With handguns, you have a choice. Why would you propose that for shotguns and carbines you should have no choice? Why would you propose that carrying an empty chamber or cocked-and-locked are the only good choices for shotguns and carbines and that there is no considerable demand for actions of other types?

 

[Jim Watson]

Can't say I have ever seen McGivern illustrated with any automatic, or Miculek with a DA/SA or DAO auto.
I do not confuse the double action revolver with the crunchenticker automatic, having shot both a bit.

You seem to be a market of one for the double action shoulder weapon. That doesn't work. Sorry.

 

[westernrover]

IGood triggers by the definition of most aren't heavy triggers.

I don't agree. Heavy is not problematic for someone who is trained in good trigger control. Trigger control is more fundamental to marksmanship than safety-lever-manipulation. A good trigger for police and self-defense purposes is heavy and smooth. You can either spend time training trigger control, or safety-lever-manipulation.

 

[Derek Zeanah]

Heavy is not problematic for someone who is trained in good trigger control.

Agree to disagree. Most of my rifles have aftermarket triggers, and the pistols I choose to carry and train with have triggers you would probably think are a bit light. Of course, interesting rifle shooting to me starts at 800 yards and I have a 1911 fetish, but there you go.

Edited to add: you are welcome to seek out a shotgun with a 15lb trigger if you like, but I will continue to maintain that competitive or defensive shotgun use is complex enough without having to work an artificially heavy trigger, especially under time pressure.

 

[westernrover]

You seem to be a market of one for the double action shoulder weapon. That doesn't work. Sorry.

I can't disagree with you there. I just don't see the explanation for why the market has overwhelmingly adopted double-actions (including striker-actions) for handguns, while all of the advantages of them are considered lost on long-guns. Maybe my appeal would be more effective if I posed it as, "why not striker-fired shotguns?" The striker-fired action is so well accepted in handguns, what is it about it that makes its use in shotguns and carbines non-existent? Does everyone think Glock trigger pulls are too heavy or too long for a shotgun?

 

[Robert]

What would be gained from making a rifle, carbine or shotgun double action? I've read your previous posts and have yet to get a clear purpose for a DA rifle or shotgun that would make it more desirable than what is currently available.

 

[Derek Zeanah]

What would be gained from making a rifle, carbine or shotgun double action?

My understanding is that the perceived advantage is safety.

 

[Jim Watson]

I can't disagree with you there. I just don't see the explanation for why the market has overwhelmingly adopted double-actions (including striker-actions) for handguns, while all of the advantages of them are considered lost on long-guns. Maybe my appeal would be more effective if I posed it as, "why not striker-fired shotguns?" The striker-fired action is so well accepted in handguns, what is it about it that makes its use in shotguns and carbines non-existent? Does everyone think Glock trigger pulls are too heavy or too long for a shotgun?

It's been tried before and nicer than that Mossberg. Charles Lancaster offered a four barreled shotgun. Early versions had double action triggers, but the late ones had conventional double triggers with a loop lever cocking the hammers and shifting the triggers for the other pair. Says something about the market interest in 1890, doesn't it?

There are some striker fired shotguns out there, mostly O/Us. It just doesn't show to the outside.

 

[westernrover]

The advantages allow it to be carried safely, stored without spring compression, and used without the need to manipulate a safety.

I never proposed an artificially heavy trigger, or 15 lbs. The weight of the trigger can be selected by the user based on their own assessment of what is necessary to avoid unintentional discharges in their use. Triggers on double-action guns are often as low as 3 or 4 lbs. Shotgun and rifle primers do not necessarily require any more striking force for ignition than handgun primers, and the primers that do require greater spring force do not necessarily require heavier trigger pulls. A longer pull with more leverage can be used to reduce the force on the trigger required to cock the spring, and springs can be partially pre-cocked as in many striker actions.

Again the goal is to be able to carry it without only the sear holding its discharge, and to be able to use it without the need to first manipulate a safety lock independent of the trigger.

 

[4thPointOfContact]

A heavier, longer trigger pull isn't something I want on a firearm that's normally used at much, much more than 'bad breath' distance. Unless forced to do so, everyone I've seen uses the single-action method for firing at longer distances where precision is required.

Yes, Miculek busted a balloon at 1,000 yards with a DA S&W 929 revolver, But:

• JM's not your average shooter
• You're not JM
• JM had Smith&Wesson build the revolver to his custom specifications
• Smith&Wesson isn't going to build a revolver to your custom specifications
• Exhibition shooting is in his job description.

 

[Frank Ettin]

I can't disagree with you there. I just don't see the explanation for why the market has overwhelmingly adopted double-actions (including striker-actions) for handguns, while all of the advantages of them are considered lost on long-guns....

Nonetheless it apparently has. It would not be any great technological feat to produce one, but no manufacturer has perceived sufficient market acceptance to bother. A double action shotgun or rifle seems to be an answer to a question not enough people have asked to make the project commercially viable.

...Maybe my appeal would be more effective if I posed it as, "why not striker-fired shotguns?" ....

Striker fired rifles have been ubiquitous for over a hundred years. They're called bolt action rifles. There have been bolt action shotguns, which were also striker fired, but they haven't been all that popular.

Striker ignition doesn't have to be double action. It simply describes a type of action in which the energy to be transfer to a blow on the primer is stored in a spring directly bearing on the firing pin (or striker) rather than a spring propelling a hammer which then strikes the firing pin causing the firing pin to hit the primer of the cartridge.

In a typical bolt action, the striker spring is fully loaded up the cycling of the action and then merely needs to be released by the trigger (well actually by the sear which if acted upon by the trigger mechanism). On the other hand, in the typical striker fired handgun the striker spring is only partially loaded by the cycling of the action. Then when firing the gun the pressure on the trigger first fully loads the striker spring and then trips the sear releasing the striker to hit the primer and fire the gun.

A striker fired action or a hammer fired action can be designed and built to be either single action or double action.

 

[CoalTrain49]

I can't get my head around a DA/SA carbine.

Although I do love my Sigs. Those are the only SD firearms I keep handy. Everything else is locked up.

I lied. I have a revolver in my desk.

 

[WestKentucky]

My take is worth what you paid for it...

The DAO handgun has its merit in quick firing point and shoot scenarios. The main thing being considered is that this is a win/lose drag race where the winner lives and the loser doesn’t. It makes sense to shave every millisecond for that particular scenario. In no other scenario does a DAO pistol make any more sense than other options, but some defer to SAO should the point/shoot need arise.

Long guns are a different discussion because of their size and nature. You have a gun which is intended for further distance, and the point to make is to use it at distance far enough to not allow it to be grabbed and taken by the assailant to use against you. This means you are typically either going to have time to click off a safety or you are already losing the drag race of life or death. There is no standout reason to shave milliseconds. There is however the potential desire to click a safety ON to prevent an accidental discharge when a situation deescalates. If your so worried about a safety, the just leave a safety in the off position. If your worried about springs...don’t because they last a long stinkin time and even then they are usually cheap to replace.

 

[westernrover]

Is a police or home defense shotgun is considered for use at farther distances than a handgun? How far? Suppose it was a 9x19mm carbine instead. Now it can only be used at distances great enough that you have time to fool with unlocking it before an assailant can shoot you?

How does that reasoning transfer to double-action handguns? Are double-action handguns only for bad-breath distances? Do we need to lock our handguns in a disabled mode when the target is at any greater distance?

Would one argue that if someone wanted a shoulder stock, longer barrel and forestock on their Glock, making it a carbine like the Mechtech or Roni conversions, that they must also have a safety lever to lock it?

I won't descend into further foolishness. Any Joe Lackey can keep his safety if he wants to.

 

[Derek Zeanah]

I won't descend into further foolishness. Any Joe Lackey can keep his safety if he wants to.

Why the hostility? You asked, we answered.

 

[warnerwh]

I personally think a double action trigger is awful. A single action trigger is a necessity for precision. There's a very good reason why competitors often have very light single action triggers on all sorts of various guns. And I must argue that a double action trigger on a handgun has long proven adequate at handgun ranges. Maybe for you but not for me and many others. Just because you can't shoot doesn't mean the rest of us can't. Please don't make suggestions where you don't know what you are talking about. Guns are safe enough. It's people that need improvements.

 

[Kaybee]

I don't know about double action but I would like to see more modern shoguns "drop safe". Because some of the most common shotguns are not!

 

[Kano383]

Rifles have significantly stronger firing pin springs than pistols. The primers are thicker (to withstand higher pressures), and require higher striking forces.

Pistol primers have a cup thickness of around .017”, small rifle from .020” to .025”, large rifle usually .027”.

No sure about shotgun primers, but those I’ve handled seem to have a large rifle primer at the core.

So, to build one of those as a DA you’d need a much heavier trigger than for a pistol, which would exponentially increase the shooting disadvantages already pointed out in other posts...