Gun designers moved away from exposed hammers on rifles and shotguns over 100 years ago for a lot of reasons. Striker fired long guns have long ago proven to be more reliable. The better question is why did manufacturers keep using them on pistols for so long. I understand revolvers, and have no issue with them on classic pistols like the 1911. I'm not interested in selling my classic pistols with hammers, but there is no reason to have them on a modern pistol.
That hammer actually makes the gun more dangerous. There are more AD's with exposed hammer lever actions than all other types combined. Mostly when being unloaded or trying to un-cock them. Exposed hammers can catch on brush or clothing and allow the gun to be unintentionally cocked without the person carrying it knowing.
In true life or death struggles at face to face distances clothing or hair can get between the hammer and firing pin and prevent the gun from firing. If a gun is dropped in a struggle, or used as a club an exposed hammer can be damaged making the gun inoperable. An exposed hammer is another opening for dirt and debris to get into the guns internals and cause problems. Modern striker fired guns keep all of the moving parts protected inside of the gun with fewer openings for dirt to get inside.
All of my pistols are "ready to rock" all the time. No reason to look at a hammer, but I can look at either the trigger or loaded chamber indicator on my pistols if I want to.
Glad to hear your guns can rock. So can my hammer fired, and I have rocked quite a few of those, implied "worthless" hammer fired handguns in my life and not talking about shooting pieces of paper at a nice cozy range while BS about how tough life is.
Therefore, could you kindly post all the actual facts you have stated about reliability and safety. I would like actual facts, not internet gossip or info from some internet shooting expert.
Actual figures or even experience from those who have actually carried in real life situations where guns are actually used for what they are intended and not shooting mean looking people on paper.
I'm 73, have carried a hammer fired handgun all my life, and never had a problem with reliability nor safety and I carried in places you would only have nightmares about including but not inclusive to Thailand / Burma border (when I was there is was still Burma), and possibly some of the surrounding countries; (never to be confirmed nor denied)
, have also carried hammer fired handguns in the deserts of some countries that are only friendly to scorpions, and other lizards (four and two legged varieties). And most of those working with me at the same time were also carrying hammer fired weapons; not all, but the majority. Only common factor we had was the ammo.
And now that I have been retired for many years, only hammer fired are the handguns of choice. Why? Cause I have proven to myself in many situations they work, and always have worked, regardless of how dirty they have been they have gone "bang," when I aimed and pulled the trigger. And at times, some were seriously filthy. And going bang when airmed at a target that can actually aim something at you and go bang back, is what it is all about.
However, I will not say striker fired are not any good. They are; just really looking for info as requested. (And to be honest, it will not change my mind about my hammer fired handguns and I have a few.
)
