Has anyone (or 'why hasn't anyone') applied a Glock or DAO trigger to a long gun?

[Zoogster]

Internally most long guns are very different from handguns.

Long gun actions popular for sporting use tend to have actions that give very crisp clean trigger pulls without additional complexity.
Many people into rifles grade them on accuracy, and a light smooth and crisp trigger pull is easier to be accurate with.

They also don't have a firing pin block and most nor transfer bar disconnect etc
A long gun with a round in the chamber is a lot more likely to discharge the round if it is dropped on the muzzle or strikes something wrong or with a lot of force.
Most long guns are really not internally designed to be left with a round in the chamber all the time.
The are analogous to a revolver with the hammer fully cocked back, no transfer bar/firing pin block, and ready to drop the hammer.
Like an old single action revolver.
Most long guns with a round in the chamber are internally doing very much the same thing.


Modern handguns on the other hand have a lot of things built into them so they can be carried around all day. As well as tests and requirements. Like the FBI frisbee test where they chuck a gun and see if they can get it to go off.
Handguns that go off easily are unacceptable for people that will be falling on them, rolling on them, wrestling with people while wearing them, or even just living active lifestyles.

Putting that type of trigger on a long gun does not change things. It can still go off without the trigger even being pulled if it is handled wrong.





You can always get a MectTech and turn a Glock in some calibers into a carbine if you want.

 

[Skribs]

Thanks for the response Zoogster. So I guess my question is - why doesn't anyone design a rifle to work that way?

 

[Skribs]

Hmmm...in the autoloaders forum, the one about the Mechtech, I think someone brought up another answer against what I'm looking for - the handgun is carried in a holster covering the trigger guard, the long gun isn't.

 

[Captain Brown Beard]

The problem I'm trying to solve is that there is no need for a manual safety on a long gun, but for some reason every long gun seems to be designed with one. If it's not needed for a pistol, it's not needed for a rifle/shotgun. Why should the pistol be any different?

You obviously have never carried a long gun through anything more than a parking lot. It's never happened to me, (Probably because I use a safety) but I imagine a branch catching your trigger whilst you're hiking through brush/trees/whatever is likely to ruin your day. Or, your hunting buddy/ SOF SOG commando SAS NAVY SEAL friend.

Also, long guns are inherently different from a pistol because... pistols are kept in holsters with the trigger covered.

Perhaps you need one of these. It's long, it's Russian, the trigger pull probably sucks, and it even come in a "tactical version". This + slugs = cruiser rifle with no safety and sucky trigger.

 

[Driftertank]

A handgun is meant to be concealed, kept mostly out of sight, out of mind. It is designed to be taken from it's place of inaction and employed at a moment's notice at short range. By removing safety devices which must be manipulated from the time it's gripped to the time it's fired, you simplify the process, and reduce the risk of drawing a gun that doesn't fire when the trigger is pulled. THAT is the only reason for glock's safety trigger, to eliminate the need for manual safety.
A long gun is carried in the hands with intent to be used. If your finger enters the triggerguard, you do so with intent to shoot. The safety is meant to counter accidental trigger contact while handling. A glock trigger safety doesn't prevent firing in that situation (just ask the ATF guy). A DAO mechanism just adds weight and creep, both considered to be bad things for accuracy, which is typically a primary concern when employing a long gun.

Also, the "safety trigger," isn't. I've personally observed more ND's with DAO pistols.

 

[Deus Machina]

Also, the "safety trigger," isn't. I've personally observed more ND's with DAO pistols.

Probably from the feeling of complacency one can get with a DAO pistol, leading to forgetting about Rule #1.

But this is also because the DAO is, itself, a sort of safety feature. If you don't forget Rule #1, it makes it tougher to set off without serious intent.

Since you're not carrying a rifle in a holster or jostling it against things, the issue isn't as pressing.

Also, rifle rounds have primers built for rifle rounds, and thus made to take more pressure. They are therefore thicker and need more force to ignite, so unless you thoroughly redesign the system, the pull would pretty thoroughly suck.

 

[Caliper_Mi]

The difference is that absent a trigger pull, the Glock will not fire.

Neither will an AR15.

 

[holdencm9]

Hmmm...in the autoloaders forum, the one about the Mechtech, I think someone brought up another answer against what I'm looking for - the handgun is carried in a holster covering the trigger guard, the long gun isn't.

This. I was just going to type it before you brought it up yourself. But yeah, would anyone feel safe with a glock dangling across their chest all day while out and about, or slung over their shoulder walking through the woods? I don't think so. The point of the safety is to prevent a discharge for inadvertent trigger pull, and the logic of the glock trigger safety (or any DAO pistol really) is that it should be in a holster anyway, and the longer heavier pull should be enough safety by itself. Despite all the rhetoric about "the safety between your ears" I still don't think many people would feel comfortable with a glock-style trigger and no safety on an exposed weapon. Hence, you'll need a safety anyway, therefore, negating the benefit of the trigger.

 

[JohnBT]

"Why would they still put a real safety on the gun?"

As was pointed out, because if your shotgun only had a Glock-style trigger safety, and you were chasing the bad guy through your back yard (or hunting in the woods), a branch could cause the gun to fire. Even if you were careful, there's always the unexpected slip in the mud or sudden stumble over the yard gnome or child's toy in the dark to set things in motion.

A shotgun safety isn't much and I've never trusted one, but they're better than a live trigger waiting to be pulled.

 

[Sam Cade]

Mossberg used to manufacture a 590 with a double action trigger...

It was pretty horrible.

http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/product_info.php/products_id/47052

 

[Captain Brown Beard]

Mossberg used to manufacture a 590 with a double action trigger...

It was pretty horrible.

That pretty much sums up several of Mossberg's recent... offerings. Chainsaw anyone?

 

[-v-]

My take is 1. its not needed, since a manual safety on most rifles is both very easy to access and equally effective, and 2. its counter-productive to making a rifle accurate, since that is one of its main requirements. Basically point 2 is what makes them highly undesirable. Why would I get a rifle with a poor trigger that in relative terms offers nothing over a rifle with a really nice trigger? Answer: I wouldn't.

As for shotgun DA triggers, that beats me. If its a pump, keep the tube full, the chamber empty, and the safety off. When the need comes, cycle it and fire. This can be done faster then taking the safety off.

With an AR15, my thumb rests against the safety selector. It takes me in the realm of .2-.3 seconds to take off the safety and fire the rifle. Thus a trigger safety would offer me nothing.

 

[Drail]

A rifle with a "Glock" trigger is about the most obscene thing I can think of.

 

[danez71]

You obviously have never carried a long gun through anything more than a parking lot.

The OP is asking legitimate questions. No need to get snarky.

 

[Captain Brown Beard]

Maybe that was a tad snarky, I was simply baffled at somebody saying so matter of factly that a safety on a long gun serves no purpose. Those can only be the words of one not properly introduced to, and trained on firearms safety 101. They exist with good reason, and with practice, disengaging a safety mid draw becomes second nature, you shouldn't even have to think about it.

Regardless of whether or not the OP understands the concept is irrelevant, it should not be preached as gospel, else others unfamiliar with the subject become comfortable with poor firearms handling. This is how people get killed.

 

[Driftertank]

Remember, this is America, where manufacturers have to build their products under the assumption that proper training and discipline will not be used, and therefore said products must be designed to prevent people from being injured or killed due to their own incompetence. After all, nobody should be held accountable for their own actions, especially when there's money to be made through a liability lawsuit...

I'm sorry. My bitterness is showing. Rant wasn't directed at anyone. But i've been inconvenienced or injured through the actions of myself or others, and i get tired of people spouting "you shoul sue them!"

 

[danez71]

They exist with good reason,......

I agree whole heartedly.

.....and with practice, disengaging a safety mid draw becomes second nature, you shouldn't even have to think about it.

And I agree with that too.

Yet, so many will argue till pigs fly that a manual safety on a hand gun introduces a whole host of negatives, including adding time and complexity in a defense situation, and it should never exist.

There is always that other side of the coin.

 

[Driftertank]

I carry an "obsolete" 1911.

You can probably guess my postion on manual safeties and proper training...

 

[mnrivrat]

Originally introduced to meet the needs of the law enforcement
community. Mossberg has established yet another industry milestone
with the civilian introduction of the 500DA-the worlds first double
action style shotgun. The 500DA requires a long, deliberate stroke
of the trigger for each shot, replicating the trigger feel of
traditional "double action" pistols and revolvers. The hammer is
drawn back by the trigger pull, and is not cocked by the forend's
rearward motion. Operating the forend in the normal manner will
however, eject a spent casing, and position the next shell from the
magazine tube into the chamber.

From Bud's

 

[wwace]

My take is 1. its not needed, since a manual safety on most rifles is both very easy to access and equally effective, and 2. its counter-productive to making a rifle accurate, since that is one of its main requirements. Basically point 2 is what makes them highly undesirable. Why would I get a rifle with a poor trigger that in relative terms offers nothing over a rifle with a really nice trigger? Answer: I wouldn't.

As for shotgun DA triggers, that beats me. If its a pump, keep the tube full, the chamber empty, and the safety off. When the need comes, cycle it and fire. This can be done faster then taking the safety off.

With an AR15, my thumb rests against the safety selector. It takes me in the realm of .2-.3 seconds to take off the safety and fire the rifle. Thus a trigger safety would offer me nothing.

Sorry, but I can push a button style safety off far quicker than any human can rack a round in the chamber.

 

[JohnBT]

"The 500DA requires a long, deliberate stroke
of the trigger for each shot, replicating the trigger feel of
traditional "double action" pistols and revolvers."

No wonder the only DA shotgun ever made faded quickly. Who wants a 12 to 14 pound trigger on a shotgun. Even if they used the Colt factory spec for the DA pull on a Python it would be 10# to 12#.

 

[Skribs]

I carry an "obsolete" 1911.

I never said it was obsolete. However, my personal belief is that single action triggers are better for accuracy, SFA triggers are better for quick access. If you're trained better on the 1911, then it's better for quick access.

I don't think it adds hundreds of layers of complexity, but whether or not the safety is on is just one extra thing to remember. Just like whether or not there's one in the chamber. And the list can go on. While each thing is by itself only one thing, once you look at the whole system, you might add a few extra layers of complexity. Draw-Fire, vs. Draw-Safety-Fire, vs. Draw-Rack-Fire, vs. Draw-Safety-Rack-Fire. Yes, it becomes part of your draw stroke, but since I hadn't trained on that stroke when I first started, I opted for a setup that didn't require training for it.

Maybe that was a tad snarky, I was simply baffled at somebody saying so matter of factly that a safety on a long gun serves no purpose. Those can only be the words of one not properly introduced to, and trained on firearms safety 101.

You're right, I haven't carried a long gun outside of the range. However, I was thinking from the perspective of - if its safe on a pistol, why isn't safe on a rifle? It took someone reminding me that the holster acts as part of the safety mechanism, and wouldn't be there on a rifle. I *knew* these facts, just didn't put them together until after I asked the question.

 

[Fremmer]

The glock is a hi cap handgun for use at closer ranges. The striker fired trigger is fine for that application, but rc is right, you wouldn't want it on a shotgun or rifle. Too mushy for a flying bird or long distance target.

Another reason could be that a rifle or shotgun round might have a tougher primer that a striker fired action doesn't handle as reliably, but that's speculation on my part.

And marketing,too. Try convincing a kansas farmer to buy a striker fired deer rifle....

 

[Trebor]

Thanks for the response Zoogster. So I guess my question is - why doesn't anyone design a rifle to work that way?

Because there are no real advantages to that setup and several very real disadvantages. If it's not a "better way", why design it that way?

Also, there has been a Remington shotgun developed with a true double-action trigger. The consensus is the trigger sucks and it makes it harder to hit anything with the shotgun.

Personally, I think you should read and learn more about how the various types of firearms work and you'll develop a greater understanding of why things are the way they are. There is a huge difference in the operating mechanism of, say a Glock, and between a pump action shotgun or a semi-auto rifle. Once you understand how each works a bit better, you'll understand why some mechanisms work better for certain purposes then others.

 

[Cal-gun Fan]

You obviously have never carried a long gun through anything more than a parking lot. It's never happened to me, (Probably because I use a safety) but I imagine a branch catching your trigger whilst you're hiking through brush/trees/whatever is likely to ruin your day. Or, your hunting buddy/ SOF SOG commando SAS NAVY SEAL friend.

Also, long guns are inherently different from a pistol because... pistols are kept in holsters with the trigger covered.

Perhaps you need one of these. It's long, it's Russian, the trigger pull probably sucks, and it even come in a "tactical version". This + slugs = cruiser rifle with no safety and sucky trigger.

What shotgun is that, and is it available in the United States? Double action trigger or not, I really like the look of that one.