Assumptions about striker fired rifles and shotguns
- Thread starter brutus51
- Start date
- Status
That's a perfectly valid presupposition that's probably not uncommon among people that don't disassemble lots of different firearms.
I know a Mossberg pump shotgun uses a hammer. The sear releases a hammer that pivots about an axis and hits the firing pin. I believe some over-unders use strikers. Bolt action rifles like the Mauser or Remingtong 700 typically use what we'd call a striker. Lever action rifles almost always have an exposed hammer. As for semi-autos, the Browning BAR rifle uses a hammer. The BAR machine gun also uses a hammer. The AR-15 uses a hammer. The Garand, M1A and Mini-14 use a hammer. The AK-47 uses a hammer.
AK-47 hammer
AR-15 hammer
I know a Mossberg pump shotgun uses a hammer. The sear releases a hammer that pivots about an axis and hits the firing pin. I believe some over-unders use strikers. Bolt action rifles like the Mauser or Remingtong 700 typically use what we'd call a striker. Lever action rifles almost always have an exposed hammer. As for semi-autos, the Browning BAR rifle uses a hammer. The BAR machine gun also uses a hammer. The AR-15 uses a hammer. The Garand, M1A and Mini-14 use a hammer. The AK-47 uses a hammer.
AK-47 hammer
AR-15 hammer
Last edited:
generally centerfire pump, semi, and lever rifles and shotguns are hammer fired. Most modern designs simply minimize the hammer and conceal it within the receiver.
Hipoint carbines are striker fired, but off hand those are the only semi-auto long guns I can think of.
Hipoint carbines are striker fired, but off hand those are the only semi-auto long guns I can think of.
Deanimator
Member
Look inside of an AR15, a Kalashnikov... or a Garand.I've always assumed ( you know " make an ass out of u and me") that any rifle or shotgun without an exposed hammer was automatically striker fired.
Can anyone tell me if this is true or not?
Think I'm about to get a Duh! of the year award.
Jim Watson
Member
Wrong-oh, JMR.
There are a couple of European O/U shotguns that are striker fired but they are a tiny minority.
Double guns have internal hammers.
And the Remington-Keene was a bolt action with hammer.
There are a couple of European O/U shotguns that are striker fired but they are a tiny minority.
Double guns have internal hammers.
And the Remington-Keene was a bolt action with hammer.
jmorris
Member
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2005
- Messages
- 24,099
I've always assumed ( you know " make an ass out of u and me") that any rifle or shotgun without an exposed hammer was automatically striker fired.
Can anyone tell me if this is true or not?
Think I'm about to get a Duh! of the year award.
Not, lots of firearms have internal hammers. Not the Duh of the year award though, a “duh” guy or gal wouldn’t have asked the question and just kept the assumption. Making an ass out of him/her and umption..,
MacAR
Member
The Winchester model 24 was a striker fired sxs also, the only one I'm aware of. The M37 single shot was also striker fired, but has an exposed "cocking piece" that looks like a hammer. If I'm not mistaken, there are a couple of Mossberg semi auto .22's that are striker fired as well. The 351 comes to mind but I may be mistaken as I said. Otherwise, most all pump, double, and auto shotguns have internal hammers, along with most rifles with the exception of many bolt actions.
Mac
Mowgli Terry
Member
Maybe, we are speaking of a firing pin and calling it a striker. The Model 24 Winchester had a bad rep at the time because of striker problems.
entropy
Member
I only know of two shotguns that are striker-fired: The Browning Recoilless Trap gun, and some of Al Ljutic's designs. (some are free-floating firing pin models. I believe the Dyno-Kick and Space Gun are striker-fired.)
so, just to share some more - of the not knowing about stuff type of thinking. What actually makes it a striker? a firing pin has to hit the primer, is a striker just defined as there is no hammer? the striker is the firing pin? it is just pulled back against some spring tension and released by the trigger pull? kind of funny cause you could call the ones with a hammer striker fired because the hammer strikes the firing pin.
Deus Machina
Member
A striker slides in a linear fashion. Think of a slide hammer, or a straight punch. They're usually at least mostly cylindrical (manufacturing otherwise is an unnecessary complication) and the firing pin is usually part of the striker assembly. In handguns, the firing pin and striker are often a single piece; in rifles, the firing pin is often threaded through it to make adjustment and replacement easier.
Versus a hammer, which is separate from a firing pin (universally in anything self-loading, and I don't know of any modern design that has it attached, or even many old ones), and swings in an arc along a separate axis--think of the action of a carpenter hitting a nail--to strike the firing pin or primer.
Two ways of doing the same job, the name just references the design.
It's not always easy to tell the difference without disassembling a rifle; they usually have more space to work with so don't have to compromise elsewhere, hide everything inside to keep crud out, and discrete trigger groups mean that it's not easy to tell through the trigger. Unlike handguns, which you can usually just look at and tell, and pulling the trigger often feels creepier and 'squishier' with strikers.
Last edited:
OP
OP
brutus51
Member
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2013
- Messages
- 1,367
So is it then safe to say that striker fired weapons move in a straight linear fashion and the firing pin is generally integral, while hammer fired weapons swing on an arc and strike a separately contained firing pin?
Also, if this is true, why do bolt action rifles ( striker fired) have a nice crisp single action type trigger pull as opposed to the mushy, awful pull found on handguns?
Also, if this is true, why do bolt action rifles ( striker fired) have a nice crisp single action type trigger pull as opposed to the mushy, awful pull found on handguns?
Deus Machina
Member
Generally, yes. Technically speaking, affixing the firing pin to the hammer like older revolvers makes it a 'striker assembly' (even then, the hammer and firing pin are actually different pieces, just pinned together) but that's so uncommon now it's easier to describe the method: striker=linear, hammer=swinging.
As for the trigger, a few reasons. They've just been refined since bolt-action rifles became a thing. Handguns often have a 'semi-cocked' design, so you're actually pushing the striker further back as you pull the trigger, but a rifle has plenty of room for a heavier spring and some lever advantage, and they don't expect you to be carrying it cocked without a safety on like handguns. That squishy trigger is a sort of safety for a handgun like a Glock, in that it takes more to move the trigger. You generally don't want the crisp 'glass rod' break of a good 1911 without an external safety, for safety reasons. And with the space afforded on a rifle, they don't have to pack it in and minimize it like a handgun, so they can just make the trigger really nice.
Then again, there have been quite a few striker-fired rifles with crappy triggers. There's just no reason they shouldn't improve it, and what consumers or marksmen want is nice and crisp. So they tend to be made nicer.
As for the trigger, a few reasons. They've just been refined since bolt-action rifles became a thing. Handguns often have a 'semi-cocked' design, so you're actually pushing the striker further back as you pull the trigger, but a rifle has plenty of room for a heavier spring and some lever advantage, and they don't expect you to be carrying it cocked without a safety on like handguns. That squishy trigger is a sort of safety for a handgun like a Glock, in that it takes more to move the trigger. You generally don't want the crisp 'glass rod' break of a good 1911 without an external safety, for safety reasons. And with the space afforded on a rifle, they don't have to pack it in and minimize it like a handgun, so they can just make the trigger really nice.
Then again, there have been quite a few striker-fired rifles with crappy triggers. There's just no reason they shouldn't improve it, and what consumers or marksmen want is nice and crisp. So they tend to be made nicer.
because the sear is a separate piece on rifle actions like the Winchester model 70 and holds the firing pin back, not the trigger. so the trigger has virtually no weight to overcome when releasing the sear and the trigger pull, therefore, can be light and crisp.
on the other hand, older military action designs, like the mosin nagant, do not have a separate sear and use the trigger for this job of holding back the firing pin. the weight on this type of trigger is much greater resulting in a much heavier, mushier, longer pull (kinda like a glock).
murf
mcb
Member
The Nagant has a seperate sear and trigger. It's just a really bad design but there is a trigger that acts on a sear that is retaining the striker.
Nagant Trigger Top, Sear Bottom.
thanks for the correction, mcb. the rest of the explanation should be good.
murf
p.s. now that I think about it, the glock and all other striker-fired pistols have sears. I believe mcb has the key to your question: bad design, or poor geometry in the trigger/sear/striker relationship makes for a long, heavy, mushy pull.
murf
p.s. now that I think about it, the glock and all other striker-fired pistols have sears. I believe mcb has the key to your question: bad design, or poor geometry in the trigger/sear/striker relationship makes for a long, heavy, mushy pull.
Last edited:
lysanderxiii
Member
No, actually most "hammerless" shotguns have internal hammers.I've always assumed ( you know " make an ass out of u and me") that any rifle or shotgun without an exposed hammer was automatically striker fired.
Can anyone tell me if this is true or not?
Think I'm about to get a Duh! of the year award.
George P
member
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2018
- Messages
- 7,772
Blaser is striker fired; the only one I know of
entropy
Member
mcb
Member
Murf and I where talking about the Mosin Nagant, I had just shortened it to Nagant since I was on my phone at that time.
entropy
Member
I know. I collect them, and try to make sure those viewing such posts know the difference. You wouldn't call a Massey-Ferguson a Ferguson, would you?
- Status
Similar threads
