striker fired or hammer fired guns

tarosean said:

Been doing it for over 30yrs... Muscle memory. Brain farts do occur when I pick up a 92 style safety that I don't shoot much. Then again I dont carry them.
Dont matter much if I swipe off my Glocks.

Click to expand...

So in 30 years you've never forgot to disengage the safety?

I am not comfortable with a carry pistol with potential energy stored in the fire control system.

It pains me a bit as my favorite handgun is an M1911. It also includes striker fired pistols as well.

Hence, I am happy with a DA/SA semi-auto pistol. My current carry pistol is an H&K P30SK V3.

I worked for several years with a DA/SA pistol to be comfortable with the first shot DA trigger pull and quick transitioning to follow up SA trigger pull.

Also, I'm comfortable with carrying DA only revolvers as a result of my training. An S&W 442 or 642 are good alternatives for me.

But, if the risk/threat assessment changes, my choice of pistol may change as well.

My choice of carry gun is a Glock 19/26 but the fact that they're striker fired didn't have any real bearing on my decision. I like the consistent trigger pull but I could get that in a DAO or an SAO.

The size of the guns relative to their capacity and the fact that l could use a 19 magazine in both had much more to do with my decision than the fact that they were SFA.

Have them both and prefer a hammer fired gun.

Trunk Monkey said:

My choice of carry gun is a Glock 19/26 but the fact that they're striker fired didn't have any real bearing on my decision. I like the consistent trigger pull but I could get that in a DAO or an SAO.

The size of the guns relative to their capacity and the fact that l could use a 19 magazine in both had much more to do with my decision than the fact that they were SFA.

Click to expand...

I have no issue with your rational - all perfectly logical and as good a choice as any and better than most.

However regarding a thumb safety...

Trunk Monkey said:

Until you have a brain fart and forget to disengage the safety.

Click to expand...

Trunk Monkey said:

So in 30 years you've never forgot to disengage the safety?

Click to expand...

I'm always intrigued by these arguments from the no-safety/striker fired folks.

If you are prone to forgetting things, wouldn't it be just as likely for you to forget to keep your finger off the trigger as it were for someone to forget to take off the safety?

In your daily handling of a firearm, do you spend more time wanting the gun to not fire, or wanting the gun to fire?

In a split second "brain fart" which are you generally better off, the gun firing when you didn't want it to (you can't get that shot back) or it not firing when you want it to (you can correct that situation in another split second).

I'm OK with folks choosing a particular gun without a thumb safety because they believe they lack the ability to work a thumb safety, or for folks to avoid a striker fired gun because of the lack of thumb safety, and a short, light, essentially single action trigger, with no visible hammer makes them nervous, but why project our limitations on others?

JTQ said:

If you are prone to forgetting things, wouldn't it be just as likely for you to forget to keep your finger off the trigger as it were for someone to forget to take off the safety?

Click to expand...

I have never carried a pistol that required me to disengage a safety before firing it so I've never been in a position in which forgetting to disengage the safety in a real world encounter was even possible. I have however forgotten to disengage the safety on my 1911 just plinking at the range and I've seen others ,many others, do so as well.

I have had to draw my weapon in self-defense, more than once. I know exactly
how stressful that moment is. I also know that I only have to screw up that safety one time to get myself killed.

As I said every gun that I've ever carried at work or for self-defense was either a TDA or an SFA. Keeping your finger off the trigger is a critical skill that has to be practiced every time you handle the weapon. Not just when you fire it. I have been known to pick up cordless drills and index my finger along the frame. I have also had to point my weapon at a human being in the real world a couple of times. I remember in the moment my trigger finger glowed in the dark and I knew exactly where it was at. It was literally the only part of my body that I could feel and I remember in the middle of the situation being very surprised at how cognizant I was exactly where that finger was at.

Bottom line, I have forgotten to take the safety off of a gun. I have never yet forgotten to keep my finger off the trigger until I was ready to shoot.

JTQ said:

In your daily handling of a firearm, do you spend more time wanting the gun to not fire, or wanting the gun to fire?

Click to expand...

The firearms that I have in use stay loaded and holstered. I do not routinely administratively handle loaded firearms. When I do the first thing I do with them is clear them and verify that they are unloaded.

JTQ said:

In a split second "brain fart" which are you generally better off, the gun firing when you didn't want it to (you can't get that shot back) or it not firing when you want it to (you can correct that situation in another split second).

Click to expand...

It has been my experience that in the real world when something goes wrong your brain's tendency is to panic. It's also been my experience that panic compounds your problems and leads you to start making mistakes while you're trying to correct the original problem. Unless you're very lucky what usually happens is you run out of time before you solve the original problem.

I quit carrying TDA guns because I had a malfunction during a shoot and move exercise at a training class. I had a misfire or possibly somebody put a dummy round in my magazine. To make a long story short while I was clearing the malfunction I accidentally engaged the safety on the gun without realizing what I did. I tried to clear that malfunctioned three more times before I figured out why the gun wasn't firing. I really don't care why that happened because I'm absolutely positive that if that happened in a real-world gunfight I would very likely be enough to get me killed.

JTQ said:

I'm OK with folks choosing a particular gun without a thumb safety because they believe they lack the ability to work a thumb safety, or for folks to avoid a striker fired gun because of the lack of thumb safety, and a short, light, essentially single action trigger, with no visible hammer makes them nervous, but why project our limitations on others?

Click to expand...

I'm not projecting my limitations on others. I'm not telling anybody what kind of gun to carry. I very specifically asked the poster after he said that he's well-trained and has muscle memory of disengaging the safety over 30 years if at any time during that 30 years he'd ever forgotten to do so.

As I said earlier I've actually had to defend myself with a firearm in the real world and what I have found is everything that I can do to simplify the process is a good thing.

Every decision that I have to make an every step that I have to take between the time I perceive the threat and the time I'm defending myself is an opportunity for something to go wrong at literally the WORST possible moment.

I stated up thread and I meant it that if I ever have to defend myself with firearm again I want the dumbest (simplest) gun I can possibly have.

YMM (and very likely does) V considerably

Plan2Live said:

As a side thought, this post is about hammer fired vs striker fired. I'm curious why some people responding feel compelled to post photos or call out their brand rather than just replying in a generic hammer/striker manner.

Click to expand...

I posted the first pic in the topic. If you read what I wrote or what was posted about the trigger of a Striker Fire gun before my post, you would understand why the pic was posted.
The pics are of a Striker Fire gun with a better trigger installed and the trigger that was installed.

tarosean said:

Isn't that a product of your MIL/LEO training thou?

I was taught to disengage the safety during the draw. No fractions of a second lost or even a second thought given.

Click to expand...

I have carried many guns over the years to include the 1911, Beretta M9, S&W 4046, Glocks 22 G3 and G4, 19 G3 and 4, 17 Gen 4 and the G45. Those are just a few.
I was also thought to disengage the safety during the draw on the guns that have them.
I carry my duty gun in a level 4 holster. Many shooters have never drawn a gun from a level 4 holster and would have trouble doing so. A Striker Fire gun is a little easier to draw from a level 4 holster.
But I’m not saying that people should switch to a Striker Fire gun or a level 4 holster. Ones holster and firearm should match ones skill level and confidence level. Now I’m not saying that it takes more or less skill to operate one type of gun or the other. You just have to build the skills for the one you prefer.

Plan2Live said:

I prefer hammer fired, DA/SA for carry. In South Carolina there are a lot of places I can't legally carry, therefore I am forced to unholster then re-holster while seated in my truck. I carry at about 3:30 outside the wasitband so I am re-holstering blind. There is a lot that can go wrong in that scenario so I prefer to keep my thumb on the hammer as I ease my pistol into the holster. If the trigger snags on anything I can feel the hammer starting to rise and stop. I can't get that extra measure of confidence with a striker fired pistol. If I was able to holster the gun and leave it holstered all day I might consider striker fired..

With that being said, lets be honest. What striker fired pistols have actually done is dumded down the pistol to the lowest skill level. Yeah I said that and I stand by it. Flame on.

Click to expand...

I guess you drive a vehicle with a standard transmission, and would never ride in one with a dumbed down automatic transmission.
But then using your logic, wouldn’t an auto pistol be a dumbed down muzzle loader.
And spellcheck is a dumbed down version of typing. You misspelled dumbed in your text.

But come on, do we need to put down the guns we don’t like to make us feel better about the ones we like?
I love my 1911’s, I carry one on every hog hunt. I carry it in condition 1 and I’m no stranger to hammer fired guns.
One should carry the type of gun that they have trained with and have confidence in. It’s not about which is better. It’s about which your better with.

Striker fired DAO-Beretta Nano and Kahr. Best of both worlds.

I really don't care----my guns are all over the place

DAO revolver--642
Double/single revolvers---GP100, SP101
Single action revolver---Single Six
Single action autos---1911, MkIII
Striker fired autos---G19, G20, M&Ps
Double/single autos---P95s

Looking real hard at a Beretta 92 right now.

I'm a 1911 guy. Also love the 3rd gen S&W autos.

For striker fired I only have a couple. Canik TP9SFX and a Sig P365.

The Canik IMHO is a great pistol. Accurate as can be. Soft shooting, 20 round mag. It's my gaming gun.

I like the hammer fired ones (although I own a striker-fired gun, too). Mostly because the trigger can be gotten better on a frame-mounted hammer/sear interface system than can be done with a striker/release interface that bridges the fame-to-slide relationship.

JohnKSa said:

For my response, an internal hammer would provide the same benefits as a striker-fired gun. It's just that internal hammer semi-autos are not at all common. Offhand I can't think of any such semi-auto pistols currently on the market.

Bobbed hammers, at least for me, would not provide the same benefits.

Click to expand...

ruger lcp and lcp ii

murf

not quick enough, I see.

GunnyUSMC said:

But come on, do with need to put down the guns we don’t like to make us feel better about the ones we like?

Click to expand...

I'm sorry but you'll have to help me interpret that sentence. At your suggestion I tried Spellcheck but that didn't help, just sayin'.

Plan2Live said:

I'm sorry but you'll have to help me interpret that sentence. At your suggestion I tried Spellcheck but that didn't help, just sayin'.

Click to expand...

But come on, do we need to put down the guns we don't like to make us feel better about the ones we do like

I do like what an earlier poster wrote about "projecting our limitations on others" as a means of argumentative proof. Each of us has different skill sets and abilities and we learn to do repetitive skills differently because of those abilities or lack there of. I.e. some of us are more handicaped then others and need to allow for that in a given exercise.
Some folks have great mechanical skills and can fix almost anything. Others couldn't change a spark plug or fix common electrical problems.
Firearms and the operation thereof are just a proficient use of a tool.
Lots of times, beating our own drum, is more a sign of insecurity that it is of passing on the right way to do things.

I have 3 9mm guns. Two S&W guns, model 39-2 and model 915( basically the 39 with a high cap mag) and a S&W SD9VE. Two hammer fired and one striker fired. I have no preference one way or the other. The 39 and 915 both are double action/single action and both have hammer drop safeties. I have never left the safety on by accident because I have never once used the safety for anything but a hammer drop and then the safety is off.

I really like the SD9VE and was looking at it last night. It has never had a single failure of any kind. But neither have the other guns. All 100% reliable. One thing I do like about the 39 and 915 is the trigger reset. Both will reset in about a quarter inch of forward travel The SD needs about 1/2" to reset.

I was looking at the SD because I am kicking around the idea of getting a Glock 17. How short or long is the trigger reset on the Glock?

I feel safer carrying the 39 and 915 because of the long hammer stroke for the first shot. The SD9VE is my truck gun and its carried with a loaded mag and empty chamber. I feel better with it that way.

Zoogster said:

It would depend on the specific model, but in general a striker fired gun simply feels like a safer design to me.
I know many guns have hammer blocks, or transfer bars, but all the energy needed to fire the gun ready to go at all times on a cocked hammer merely waiting for the mechanism to let it fly seems less safe than a system that actually requires you build up some of the additional force in the trigger pull.
To me this is one of the big safety differences in many sidearms vs long guns. A long gun you pay attention to when using, so it is not as critical, but a sidearm should be capable of whatever abuse your life activities may throw at it without you having to baby it. Fall on it, maybe drop it, smack it into something on accident in its holster because it catches or bumps into something. All without ever firing. Yet still ready to be pulled and shot effectively if needed.

Striker just feels safer mechanically to me.
That said a hammer gun can be made to have a smoother mechanism every time. Precisely for the same reason. Less energy is needed for a cocked hammer with spring tension to be dropped and you can design the trigger to be as smooth or crisp or have exactly the amount of travel you like. You do not need to create any energy to fire the gun, just let energy already stored loose.
The biggest limitations being that you want the mechanism to still be safe enough to not fire too easily either negligently or with an actual failure of the internals from impact or anything else.
If performance while shooting is the only criteria a hammer gun can be tuned to be exactly what you want. Perhaps ideal for recreational use, or in situations where it is kept in a location like a quick access place for defensive use.
However I think as a sidearm to be carried a design that is inherently more drop or impact resistant, or where even if a part internally failed it shouldn't fire without some additional manipulation favors a striker fired gun. And some striker setups can feel almost as good.
The gun not firing if you don't want it to is more important most of the time than being slightly better while firing.
Yet most of the best works of art and craftsmanship are hammer guns.

Click to expand...

I much prefer my cocked and locked 1911 that has TWO safeties that need to be disengaged before you can fire it vs a Glock style firearm that has NO safety. I don't consider a flipper on the trigger to be a safety.

We moved away from exposed hammers on long guns over 100 years ago and striker fired rifles and shotguns have PROVEN they were the simplest, most reliable designed long guns. There isn't a single good reason to keep using them on handguns. That said, I own several 1911's that I like, but none of them are going to be the 1st gun I'd choose if I needed a handgun to defend myself. I own them for nostalgic reasons and I can see the same use for other classic pistols with exposed hammers. I can't recall the last new pistol design to come out with an exposed hammer.

If someone is close enough for a pistol slide to be out of battery, they are close enough for clothing, hair, etc., to get between the hammer and firing pin on an exposed hammer pistol or revolver. Close enough to prevent the cylinder from turning on a revolver. Pick your poison, either system can fail.

I am not comfortable with a carry pistol with potential energy stored in the fire control system.

Click to expand...

Glocks and virtually all striker fired guns are DOA systems. While the firing pin is partially cocked, does not have enough energy to fire a cartridge until the trigger is pulled and fully cocked. I can understand that some people are uncomfortable with that and no active safety. But they make several striker fired guns with thumb safeties. The new Sig M17, Rugers offerings are available with a safety as is the S&W M&P.

Maybe it is because of years of 1911 use, but I see these as a far, far better option than DA/SA. You get the safety of a heavier 1st trigger pull, but the confusion of 2 different pulls with DA/SA. After the 1st shot the odds of an AD go up due to the change to a much different pull for subsequent shots. With the striker fired guns every trigger pull is exactly the same. And with many of them you have the same option of engaging a thumb safety during a break in action.

Trunk Monkey said:

I have never carried a pistol that required me to disengage a safety before firing it so I've never been in a position in which forgetting to disengage the safety in a real world encounter was even possible. I have however forgotten to disengage the safety on my 1911 just plinking at the range and I've seen others ,many others, do so as well.

Click to expand...

As you note, your mileage does vary.

But I've carried and shot mainly 1911s for coming up on 10 years and disengaging the safety is so ingrained into my muscle memory it is nearly impossible to bring a gun up on target without disengaging it, both from repeated action and from my firing grip resting my grip on the safety.

This also works on a BHP and Sig SAO as the safeties are of similar function and location.

To your point, however, I am not nearly as practiced in safeties not in that location, such as the CZ 75 series or any slide mounted safeties. So I would not carry either of these cocked and locked without one heck of a lot of practice.

Favorite Trigger
1. Dan Wesson M15 in SA
2. Baer Premier (1911)
3. S&W M10 Revolver in SA

That said unless I'm shooting at small targets at long ranges it's a non-issue.

In a defensive pistol if I could get a long heavy trigger pull as slick and smooth as a 1960's S&W M10 Revolver I would be perfectly happy.

Wouldn't care if that was done with a hammer or striker action.

That said I don't really have a problem with a SA feel trigger like some or the latest DAO Hammer (95% Cocked) or Striker fired pistols have either.

jmr40 said:

Glocks and virtually all striker fired guns are DOA systems. While the firing pin is partially cocked, does not have enough energy to fire a cartridge until the trigger is pulled and fully cocked.

Click to expand...

I believe you are incorrect. They are much closer to a single action.

When the SIG P320 had issues with firing when dropped, a variety of guys on another forum (including some Glock armorers, who were able to bypass the firing pin block), took to banging on their striker fired guns, in a controlled manner of course. Nearly all of these striker fired guns had enough stored energy from cycling the action to ignite a round without a trigger pull. Admittedly most of these guns, if not user modified, had a firing pin block that would prevent an accidental firing, but the whole "partially cocked striker" isn't really a safety feature, but rather a marketing slogan.

JTQ said:

(including some Glock armorers, who were able to bypass the firing pin block), took to banging on their striker fired guns, in a controlled manner of course

Click to expand...

Not to nitpick but if you give any gun to an armorer (or any redneck with a dremel tool for that matter) they can disable enough of the gun to make it unsafe to drop. Hammer fired or striker. I've repaired more than one gun that went FA because of "trigger work" by some future gunsmiths lol. (And some from plain old wear and parts breakage) Including the beloved 1911. If you dropped them they would almost certainly go off (at least once even with hollow points)