Lock Time, Glock vs 1911, Spring/Firing Pin effects, Gun type comparisons

[Nom de Forum]

The subject of lock time was discussed recently in this forum in a thread on Hammer versus Striker firing systems. Below are some links with information onlock time for anyone interested. Some highlights are:

Glock versus 1911 lock time - Glock is much faster.

Spring and firing pin changes - advantages and disadvantages.

Small sampling of rifle lock times - Savages are very fast.

Comparisons between muzzleloaders, and modern rifles and modern pistols

Equipment used to measure lock time and pressure changes during trigger pulls.

It might intuitively seem that if two strikers have the same energy, the heavier of the two will be more effective in detonating the primer. The opposite is true. Studies done by others (SAAMI, U.S. Army, Olin Corporation) show, that at a given energy level a high-velocity/low-inertia impact is more desirable for reliable detonation of the primer than a low-velocity/high-inertia impact.

http://www.brassfetcher.com/Weapon Function.htm

http://www.chuckhawks.com/locktime.htm

http://yarchive.net/gun/rifle/lock_time.html

http://www.dvorakinstruments.com/index.html

http://www.dvorakinstruments.com/case_3.htm

http://www.dvorakinstruments.com/case_2.htm

 

[9mmepiphany]

It might intuitively seem that if two strikers have the same energy, the heavier of the two will be more effective in detonating the primer.

I'm just curious, why would anyone think that was more intuitive?

Since energy is mass multiplied by velocity, a heavier striker would have to move slower. wouldn't it?

 

[Nom de Forum]

I'm just curious, why would anyone think that was more intuitive?

Since energy is mass multiplied by velocity, a heavier striker would have to move slower. wouldn't it?

The highlight statement you refer to is a quote from the link for the company that makes the measurement equipment. My opinion is intuitively humans see something large and heavy moving they intuitively think it is more effective than something unseen that is light and fast. The quote does not refer to the speed of the hammer effecting lock time only the differences in effect upon application of energy to a primer. Read the link as I am sure it better explains than I can.

 

[tarosean]

As mentioned in the other thread..

Can you fire 17rds a second from either? (Average from a full auto)

You cannot do it. I cannot do it, nor any person responding.. So really what's the point?
Dwell on imaginary scenarios or go run your gun in open against the big dogs to see who/what is faster..........

 

[Weevil]

The point is if you eliminate the human element and look at them from a purely mechanical standpoint one desgn is clearly faster.

 

[Nom de Forum]

As mentioned in the other thread..

Can you fire 17rds a second from either? (Average from a full auto)

You cannot do it. I cannot do it, nor any person responding.. So really what's the point?
Dwell on imaginary scenarios or go run your gun in open against the big dogs to see who/what is faster..........

The "point" is providing information for a better understanding of firearms technology. Neither in this thread or the other thread were shooting scenarios, competitive or otherwise, mentioned. Perhaps they were in a figment of your imagination. Lock time benefits inherent accuracy and is not very relevant to the cyclic rate of modern handguns. I debated placing this thread in the Semiauto forum or General Pistol or General Firearms forums. I choose the Semiauto forum because it was the last place lock time was discussed. I did a search of thread titles in THR about lock time. Very little discussion or explanation so I created one. It is fine and dandy if you find no value in discussing what the thread is about, but don't think because it doesn't have anything to do with cyclic rates it has no value. Many competition pistols do have modifications that reduce lock time. Are those modifications the most important modifications? No, but none the less they are there. I have run with some of the biggest dogs long enough to see them all occasionally trip and lose the race to average dogs.

 

[rcmodel]

The point has nothing to do with rate of fire, or full-auto.

The point is that faster lock time is an aid to accuracy.

The faster the lock time, they less time there is for the gun to move between the trigger break and the bullet getting out of the barrel.

While it still pointed in the same place it was when the trigger broke.

rc

 

[rskent]

Glock versus 1911 lock time - Glock is much faster.

The faster the lock time, they less time there is for the gun to move between the trigger break and the bullet getting out of the barrel.

And yet for me, the 1911 is so much easier than a Glock to shoot well.

 

[Nom de Forum]

And yet for me, the 1911 is so much easier than a Glock to shoot well.

I am sure you are right, and not just for you. A faster lock time is only a factor, one of several, in accuracy once the sear is released. I certainly find it easier to get away with trigger control errors using a 1911 than any Glock. This coupled with other inherent accuracy improving factors of the 1911 design make it easier to shoot faster and accurately than a Glock. Consider this:

Two 1911 style pistols identical in all things except one of them has a striker and one of them has a hammer and firing pin. If you were to shoot both with identical skill the one with a striker would be more accurate, but only a little more accurate. This is because the bullet would exit the barrel sooner and consequently would have less time being effected by movement of the pistol after the sear release.

 

[perpster]

A theory: The mass of an all metal 1911 will "absorb" the longer 1911 lock time movement. The lighter mass of the much plastic Glock will not absorb as much, but there isn't as much because it's shorter lock time. So wouldn't this factor sort of cancel out or be a wash? (whether or not it really makes any difference)

 

[Nom de Forum]

A theory: The mass of an all metal 1911 will "absorb" the longer 1911 lock time movement. The lighter mass of the much plastic Glock will not absorb as much, but there isn't as much because it's shorter lock time. So wouldn't this factor sort of cancel out or be a wash? (whether or not it really makes any difference)

The mass does not absorb time. Lock time is a measurement of time and has no mass to be accumulated or energy to be absorbed. What the mass of a 1911 will absorb is the energy of the hammer striking not just the firing pin but the firing pin retainer. That creates vibration that moves the pistol minutely from where the point of aim was immediately before impact. What does contribute to negating the advantage of the Glock's faster lock time are other accuracy enhancing 1911 attributes.

The example of the difference between Glock versus 1911 lock time is just a convenient way of explaining and demonstrating the concept of lock time. If I had a readily available link with a video and text demonstrating the difference between the superior lock time of a S&W K-frame in single action mode compared to a Colt SAA Peacemaker it would be just as good an example of the concept.

 

[hentown]

Having knowledge that a Glock has a faster lock time than a 1911, in the real world, is information largely of no value. I don't believe that a slightly faster lock time will make much difference @ the distances at which handguns are fired.

 

[Nom de Forum]

Having knowledge that a Glock has a faster lock time than a 1911, in the real world, is information largely of no value. I don't believe that a slightly faster lock time will make much difference @ the distances at which handguns are fired.

As stated in my previous post the example of Glock versus 1911 lock time was only used because it is a convenient example of the concept. It only has value for demonstrating a concept that does have real world value for improving the accuracy of pistols requiring accuracy greater than typical self-defense situations. If you are shooting at something where slight aiming errors lose you the match or miss the prey it is a benefit to have the fastest possible lock time. Maybe this will help explain the value of faster lock time: in pistols with the fastest lock times the bullet has left the barrel before the primer has detonated in pistols with the slowest lock time. This is not a thread asserting the superiority of the Glock as a pistol over the 1911.

 

[tuj]

You know its funny, lock time is a critical factor in accuracy, yet I have never seen any top shooter at Camp Perry shoot a Glock. They all shoot 1911's that are highly customized, or rarely, a Pardini. Therefore I am convinced that the accuracy potential of the Glock platform is not as high as the 1911, regardless of the shorter lock time.

Simply put, find me a Glock that can hold 1.5" for 10 shots at 50 yards.

 

[tarosean]

The faster the lock time, they less time there is for the gun to move between the trigger break and the bullet getting out of the barrel.

Yet in the example, in one of the links posted. We are talking 0.002 seconds (Glock 3.1ms vs. CZ 5.1ms)

In other words faster than that of a common Houseflys wing flap (3ms). Not sure what the average person would sway in that time frame?

 

[Nom de Forum]

You know its funny, lock time is a critical factor in accuracy, yet I have never seen any top shooter at Camp Perry shoot a Glock. They all shoot 1911's that are highly customized, or rarely, a Pardini. Therefore I am convinced that the accuracy potential of the Glock platform is not as high as the 1911, regardless of the shorter lock time.

Simply put, find me a Glock that can hold 1.5" for 10 shots at 50 yards.

I think you will be waiting a very long time for someone to find you the Glock you requested. There really is nothing "funny" about the fact that you don't see Glocks at Camp Perry. Glocks are a rather prosaic pistol compared to an accurized 1911. Many other factors other than lock time are more "critical" for the accuracy in modern pistols. More consistent action lock-up, and light, crisp triggers being two of them. However if all those other factors are equal in two firearms, the one with the faster lock time will be the most accurate. Nobody is asserting the Glock has better accuracy potential than a 1911. What is being asserted is that striker type firing systems are superior to hammer and firing pin systems in reducing lock time, and reduced lock time contributes to better accuracy.

 

[Nom de Forum]

Yet in the example, in one of the links posted. We are talking 0.002 seconds (Glock 3.1ms vs. CZ 5.1ms)

In other words faster than that of a common Houseflys wing flap (3ms). Not sure what the average person would sway in that time frame?

Certainly not perceptibly to the human eye, but that does not mean movement is not occurring. Humans are never not "swaying". Even when humans appear to be standing motionless the body is moving. The human brain is constantly doing what the computer in a Segway is doing to remain balanced.

Here is what the difference in the lock times you mentioned means: the bullet is out of the barrel of the Glock before the bullet in the CZ has moved. This does not mean the Glock is going to be a more accurate pistol than the CZ because as mentioned above in other posts other factors affect accuracy.

Something to consider is that the effect of these very short differences in duration of lock time are is magnified by size of target and distance to target. They don't have much effect when the targets are large and close.

 

[tuj]

What is being asserted is that striker type firing systems are superior to hammer and firing pin systems in reducing lock time, and reduced lock time contributes to better accuracy.

Ahh but a striker-fired gun inherently has a worse trigger pull than a SA gun, all but negating the difference in lock time.

 

[Nom de Forum]

Ahh but a striker-fired gun inherently has a worse trigger pull than a SA gun, all but negating the difference in lock time.

I almost out the door for the day, so this is the best reply I can give you for now. Striker fired guns do not require inherently worse trigger pulls. Nothing about a striker fire system prevents a semiautomatic pistol from being designed to have a single action trigger pull equal to any hammer fired single action semiautomatic pistol. A striker fired semiautomatic pistol that has the striker fully cocked can have just as light and crisp a pull as any other single action semiautomatic if it is designed to have it.

 

[Weevil]

Ahh but a striker-fired gun inherently has a worse trigger pull than a SA gun, all but negating the difference in lock time.

What about a striker fired SA pistol like the XD series of pistols?

Theoretically you should be able to have a good trigger and faster lock times.

Since the trigger isn't finishing the cocking action like a Glock it should be just as light and crisp as any other SA trigger.

 

[tarosean]

Many other factors other than lock time are more "critical" for the accuracy in modern pistols.

Seems you disprove your own assertions.

It's a handgun that has limited range, if it cannot capitalize on that strong point it's akin to putting a dragster on the Tail of the Dragon.

 

[9mmepiphany]

What about a striker fired SA pistol like the XD series of pistols?

Theoretically you should be able to have a good trigger and faster lock times.

Since the trigger isn't finishing the cocking action like a Glock it should be just as light and crisp as any other SA trigger.

It isn't just theory. I had a chance to shoot a XD a while back that Rob Leathem has used to win a major match...he sells them after a win...and it's trigger was exactly what you'd want for a Action Pistol match where you have to combine accuracy and speed.

 

[Weevil]

There's nothing about a striker fired pistol that would make it have an inherently bad trigger.

Yeah Glocks don't have a great trigger but that's because they're a DAO trigger not because they're striker fired.

 

[chuckpro]

Nom de Forum

Thanks for the links. Some good information on those pages.

Weevil

Glocks have a Pre-set Firing system not DAO. The striker is partially cocked when the slide cycles, main spring is under pressure. When you pull the trigger it you cock the striker the rest of the way.

 

[Weevil]

Is that not two actions???


No a Glock is not a "true" DAO that fully cocks the mainspring, but the trigger does indeed perform a double action.

It finishes the cocking action of the mainspring and then releases it.

Two actions.

Hence their classification as a DAO by the BATF.