DA/SA semi autos ... difficult for me

[tarosean]

Darryl Bolke on "The LEM as a street trigger" where he covers the various trigger actions

good read even though I loath HK triggers.

 

[Walt Sherrill]

Well, no, the question was left "begging" because you seem to have implied that one of the reasons the military might have transitioned from the Beretta da/sa configuration to a striker-fired pistol had something (or nothing) to do the so-called "safety" factor (... "If keeping the shooter and those around him more safe is what drove the move to DA/SA guns in the US military, I wonder why the US Army and Air Force decided to go to the striker-fired route rather than sticking with the approach used in the Beretta M9 design?").

I wasn't making a claim that the SIG was somehow MORE safe but, rather, questioning whether the DA/SA guns was as really as SAFE as some here have claimed.

In terms of safety when not in combat, the Beretta probably was safer than the 1911 it replaced, if only because it required less training to get to a reasonable level of technical competence with the weapon. That said, I don't know WHY the Army and Air Force picked the SIG, and I don't know whether they consider the SIG more safe than the Beretta. In terms of handling safety, they might be both equally safe. In terms of where the first shots go when the shooting starts, that might be a different topic.

If the safety factor was/is the reason for changing a pistol selection based on its the firing sequence, the begged question continues to be, "Why did the military leave a proven sa design (the 1911 pistol) that had redundant safeties (frame-mounted safety lever and grip safety), in addition to the requirement for the pistol to be carried in "condition 3" (hammer down over an empty chamber with an inserted loaded magazine) state of readiness, to the Beretta format?"

If safety was a factor -- and we don't know that it was -- it would appear that the multiple redundant safeties of the 1911 simply didn't work all that well as intended, or simply didn't work in the environment where they were used. It may be that making the condition 3 carry the standard was the safest and wisest thing the military could do, given they were not going to SPEND THE MONEY NEEDED to train veryone who might use the 1911 to be proficient and safe with it as many would like. If caught by surprise, getting the 1911 into action was certainly not as quick as other weapons.

Finally, having less or more ammunition at your disposal in a self-defense situation becomes more of a question of practical survival than it does esoteric intellect if you really do need some extra rounds to end the fight on your terms The idea that more capacity leads to "pray and spray" or "spray and pray" is nonsense if the shooter has been trained effectively. If poor training or no training leads to errant and thoughtless shots being fired, don't blame having more cartridges on board than you otherwise might need in any given scenario for engaging in poor tactics.

If you do really need extra rounds, nothing works like extra rounds. That said, most civilian shootouts seldom seem to go much beyond 3-4 rounds fired by any one of the participants -- so I suspect that extra rounds are viewed as an insurance that may never be used. I know I'm not willing to carry a weapon with only 4-5 rounds in the magazine when I can easily carry two or three times more rounds and hardly notice the difference.

In military or police combat situations a higher capacity could make a big difference -- as those types of handgun confrontation often go FAR BEYOND 3-4 rounds. And I suspect there may even be times when "spray and pray" (or other forms of unaimed fire) might be a rational response in a given situation.

Many of the folks participating here have probably received a lot more handgun training than the typical soldier, sailor or marine. I know the training I got in the military, was (to borrow a phrase from John Nance Garner, describing his time as vice president under FDR) "not worth a bucket of warm piss." I know, too, that Special Ops troops get a lot more training than the typical G.I.. One acquaintance worked as an instructor with Special Ops troops at Ft Bragg for several years, told me about the type of training they do -- and those folks are constantly refining their skills with a lot of different weapons. Handguns are seldom their weapon of choice, but they were very proficient in their use.

Many members here may have had more handgun training than most military personnel, but that training seldom includes more than passing exposure to the tactics a civilian might use in a self-defense situation.

 

[mavracer]

Other than some extremely unlikely "battlefield" pick up scenario (and I've actually read goofier chit) what possible difference could it make??

You completely missed the point, if you can't shoot multiple trigger MOAs with fairly equal results then you probably really don't have all that good of trigger control with what you think you shoot well.

And yes the skill to have "combat" accuracy at "bullseye" speed is more than the average person will ever need for SD,but like I said I don't see being a better shot as a hindrance.

 

[KYMJoeP]

Well gee, I'm starting to feel like the outlier here. I have some of everything. I've got DA/SA from antique Walthers to Sigs, a couple 1911's, my everday guns are DOA autos (P290RS and Pico), and even though I elected not to carry them, I kept 2 of the striker fired guns I tried, the PPQ M2 and the Glock 19, because they are generally awesome. I'm probably the least proficient with the Glock, but that sucker will run on anything. I'm convinced that come the end of the world, all that will be left will be the cockroaches, and they'll be eatin' Twinkies and packin' Glocks.

 

[Walt Sherrill]

I'm probably the least proficient with the Glock, but that sucker will run on anything. I'm convinced that come the end of the world, all that will be left will be the cockroaches, and they'll be eatin' Twinkies and packin' Glocks.

Great post!! LOL!. I too have several versions of all of the above (except for DAO semi-autos, all of which had trigger pulls longer than I liked), but I'll probably keep my Glocks for a long time to come, too -- even though they aren't my favorites and they are NOT what I will carry. I do have a .45 GAP Glock 38 (with a TLR-4 light/LASER mounted) in an open drawer in the bedside nightstand each night, in case things ever go bump in the night. That gun goes into a small gun safe in the bedroom when I get up in the morning. I also keep a set of electronic muffs handy each night.

 

[ingliz]

That said...

"FBI statistics show distances as being around ten feet"

If you have your weapon in hand covering a target ten feet away...

A competent shot, DA/SA or DAO, should have no trouble dealing with the threat.

If you have a hand on a holstered weapon...

You will be point shooting. Dealing with a threat is more luck than judgement.

If you are caught cold...

Hand over your wallet!

 

[Walt Sherrill]

ingliz:

I agree with most of what you wrote above. But, there are cavaets:

• as I wrote before, I'm not sure that the FBI statistics are truly representative of many (or most) self-defense shootings. I am not convinced that the FBI's pool of data is truly representative of civilian self-defense shoootings. As I previously noted, a lot of documented shootings tell us that the distances between antagonists can vary greatly from one event to another, and many of the cases you can read about in the NRA magazines are quite varied.

• Even at ten feet a "competent" shooter must do more than just HIT the attacker to be safe: the shooter must stop the attacker. This is especially true if the attacker is armed with a knife (and knows how to use it) or a firearm. Quickly STOPPING (what may be an advancing) attacker may be harder than most of us want to believe. It arguably will take a Central Nervous System hit, as even a shot to the heart won't stop some attackers quickly enough.

• If you find yourself in an "up close and personal" altercation and have to use your weapon, the other things you write seem valid.

• In the last case, let us hope that you're allowed to hand over your wallet, as the attacker may be intent on more than just robbery.

 

[JTQ]

Tom Givens on civilian shooting incidents

American Handgunner https://americanhandgunner.com/when-citizens-fight-back/

 

[MoreIsLess]

Add me to the list of those that have trouble with a DA/SA trigger. I sold my Sig 226 for that reason and bought a Sig 320 with the proceeds, which I can shoot a lot better.

 

[hemiram]

I don't like the Glock type trigger at all. I prefer DA/SA, probably since I started shooting those kinds of guns 40 years ago. I never had any problems transitioning from the DA first shot to SA. If I was an inch or so off the POA on the first shot, whoopie. I really like my DAK P226 though, it must have been tuned up, as the trigger is very light and smooth. Much lighter and smoother than my brand new (frame) P229 DAK was. The closest DA trigger I have to the P220 is of all things, my well used Astra A-75, which shocks a lot of people when they shoot it. Quite a few people have bought A-75's after shooting mine.

 

[Zerodefect]

I find the DA pull too stiff and cumbersome for a CCW. And then the SA pull breaks too far back, too much travel usually. CZ had a few good ones, but those seem quite rare. (comp hammer, custom tuned IIRC)

I prefer a Glock or 1911 for defense. The shot timer never lies.

 

[JTQ]

I find the DA pull too stiff and cumbersome for a CCW.

I prefer a Glock or 1911 for defense. The shot timer never lies.

Everybody has different requirements, but for "defense" the decision making point to shoot/not shoot is a big one. Not shooting something/someone fast is often more important than shooting something/someone fast.

Shooting fast at the range or in competition usually has no downside. You've walked the course and planned your shots before you actually run the course. On the street, there are no walk-thoughs, and shooting something you weren't supposed to shoot carries a little more consequence than a point/time deduction.

Though it's your call. Your own call, for your personal situation, is always right, as long as it works out for you in the end.

 

[Zerodefect]

My shoot, no-shoot, decision making process has nothing to do with the trigger type.

 

[Walt Sherrill]

I don't like the Glock type trigger at all. I prefer DA/SA, probably since I started shooting those kinds of guns 40 years ago.

I don't like the Glock triggers much, but I can use them -- and have less trouble with Glock triggers than I do with most DA/SA guns. l do like several other striker-fired guns I own. They are "Glock type" (i.e., a modified double action trigger pulls) but are less clunky than the Glock stock trigger.-- and like the Glock, the first and following trigger pull are all the same. I now just have two Glocks in my gun safe, one with a Ghost trigger kit installed, and the other with an after-market (ATI) trigger system. (The ATI system was not cheap, but I got a good-enough deal on that Glock that I could afford the trigger upgrade.) The Ghost-equipped one is better than stock, and the ATI trigger system is quite good and very un-Glock like.

I've had several DAO semi-autos, and all of them had longer trigger pulls than I cared for. Several S&W semi-autos called DAO (a 4043 I had was one of them, as were the 4043, 4044 and 4046), but these guns don't have second strike capability, so I question the DAO description. That trigger pull was longer than I like, but not as long as a true DAO gun. My 4043 couldn't be thumb cocked -- it had a flush hammer.

I've still got several DA/SA guns and a few of them, while still having different DA/SA trigger pulls, have lighter first pulls -- so the transition is less obvious or difficult. When I shoot these guns at the range, the hammer is cocked after chambering the first round and I leave it that way. If I have to decock, I'll thumb cock before I fire again. I have a gret Sphinx SDP which is DA/SA, and I can thumb-cock that decocked gun pretty easily after it's out of the holster.

I don't carry guns any DA/SA guns with different DA/SA trigger pulls, which includes my marvelous Sphinx SDP, unless the gun has a safety that allows C&L starts. Only my non-decocker CZ-pattern DA/SA guns (I've got three) meet that criteria. I do carry some striker-fired guns, and have been known to carry a BHP, as well. (I have a new SIG P320 and a new H&K VP9SK, but haven't shot them enough to consider carry with either one.

In the past I've owned and carried a Kel-Tec PF9, a Ruger LC9 (before they had a striker-fired model), and several small Kahrs, but moved on. I was comfortable with all of those trigger systems and shot them reasonably well -- but found them relatively unpleasant guns to shoot a lot.

 

[Hangingrock]

If the attributes of the DA/SA system were and are that superior to other systems then the DA/SA system design would dominate the current market place. Yes in decades past I extensively used the SIG 220 and S&W4506, kept the S&W4506 but moved on to the Glock G21.

 

[Walt Sherrill]

My shoot, no-shoot, decision making process has nothing to do with the trigger type.

Nobody has claimed otherwise. But what happens after you make that decision matters, too -- as does where the shots go.

As has been noted in prior parts of this discussion, when the attacker is ON you and you must shoot, the action type may not matter. Point-shooting may be the only option.

But, if the attacker is 15'-20' feet away, shot placement will be critical if you hope to STOP the attacker before the attacker STOPS you. After the shoot/no-shot decision is made, the distances to the target is a critical variable, and trigger system (and the amount of practice/training you've done with ANY trigger system) can make a big difference.

 

[Zerodefect]

That has nothing to do with anything I posted.

I see no point in using a pistol that's slower to draw and shoot than other types. If I want to shoot slower with the others, I can.

I don't want to leave 0.5+ seconds on the table and then call it some sort of bogus safety feature.

 

[Indawind]

There are a lot of viewpoints in this thread and I suppose this is one of things that today makes better than decades back, there are multiple solutions to the same problem.

I have SAO, DA/SA, striker styles of triggers and one thing that persists across all of them is that they are smooth. If they weren't they got fixed, and I am not talking a Billy style of trigger job with a dremel.

There is the theme of "safer" technology. I am not a follower of using technology to overcome bad practices. You either have your act together, or you need to work on it until you are proficient with your chosen trigger type.

The manual safety always comes up at some point and I suppose that coming from the era of 1911s and BHPs, sweeping a safety is just part of the draw stroke. I sweep the side of my Glock when I draw it. Old habits are hard to break.

Each trigger has its sweet spot I suppose for an intended use. Would I leave my Glock in the nightstand with the trigger naked knowing I might have to root around in the drawer and grab it coming out of a deep sleep to the sound of breaking glass, nope. a DA/SA or a cocked and locked SA? I have no issues with that in my nightstand.

The rapid adoption of the striker was talked about and there are a LOT of people seemingly following that technology being "newer" into the gun world. If that is what brings them into the fold, great. One thing that wasn't talked about in that respect is the price point. $500 dollar Glock, dead reliable, VS a $1000 Sig for the same job. This has to play into the buying process, I have people I know that it has. There are many reliable strikers easily available for a fraction of the cost of a high quality DA/DA. In the end for me if it is dead reliable it is GTG, with proficiency in the system.

The FBI stats showing close range for "most" encounters makes me wonder how a trigger, unless it is filled with pea gravel, can really play into a 10ft shot. Point shooting practice helps resolve that.

Something I did not see brought up about the DA/SA trigger that I suppose comes from so much time with SA triggers across the decades is cocking the hammer during the draw with your off hand. Up close and fast, DA for the first shot with no doubt yet if the circumstance allows a cocked hammer for a SA pull? Seems like a plus.

I guess with today's variety of quality pistols there has to be a good fit for anyone's personal preference whether it be classic com block, classic American or any of the current striker offerings. Find what you react with and shoot best and call it GTG.

Personal preference is a driving factor in almost EVERY purchase from cars to toothpaste. Too each their own and today there are lots to choose from.

 

[Walt Sherrill]

That has nothing to do with anything I posted.

I see no point in using a pistol that's slower to draw and shoot than other types. If I want to shoot slower with the others, I can.

I don't want to leave 0.5+ seconds on the table and then call it some sort of bogus safety feature.

You and I probably agree more than is apparent.

The speed of draw and the speed of shots fired haven't really been topics of this discussion, and I don't think anyone has been arguing that using a DA/SA design gun must be slower than other designs. All of the different action types can cycle faster than we can pull the trigger.

The time it takes for you to recognize a risk and act on it creates a far greater delay than anything that follows. The decision to get the gun out of the holster and onto the target will take far more time than it takes to be ready to press the trigger. And, once you're ready to do that, you may still not act right then. An extra half second in that last step of the process isn't likely to matter. If you take too long, it'll probably be due to something you didn't do quickly earlier in the process.

As another participant here has noted, the FBI analysis of shootouts seems to be based heavily on analysis of LEO gun battles. That participant's personal study of a number of (60+) civilian self-defense shootouts suggest that "less than 10 feet" is not as common in civilian shootings as the FBI statistics indicate, and that distance is probably not something our self-defense training should heavily focus on. It's important, but one of several important things. That doesn't mean we shouldn't practice point shooting, but it does suggest that quick and precise shots are important, too.

When this discussion started, a number of those who advocated the DA/SA trigger design felt that if they were on the verge of doing something unsafe or unnecessary, a DA/SA trigger could act as a safety buffer that could let them make better decisions by giving them some extra time (if they needed it.) That was extra time, but it was time THEY CHOSE to take, not time required by the action type. While I disagreed with that reasoning, it made sense to them.

Those who are DA/SA advocates feel that any seeming disadvantages associated with DA/SA guns can be overcome with proper training and practice. They may be right -- but that doesn't make me want to go that route.

 

[TomJ]

I primarily carry striker fired guns, but I do have a P229 with which I couldn't shoot well in DA. The E2 grip helped, but what helped more was getting a trigger job done by a local gun smith. Sig can do them as well. It went from a heavy, somewhat gritty pull to being buttery smooth. It'll always be more accurate in SA, but I shoot it well in DA now. f you're going to carry a DA/SA having a trigger job done is money well spent, if you're not happy with your trigger.

 

[Kaybee]

Some guys just don't want to admit to themselves that they can ever make a mistake, even under stress or scared. Did you ever accidentally cut yourself with a pocket knife.. ever?

You must practice using the DA trigger, but you have to practice anyway, you can't escape that.

They say glocks are less complex, but a light trigger with no safety is in itself a form of complexity. Have you trained enough not to reflexively cook one off when you are scared/under stress? You won't know until you are there.

 

[Kaybee]

Does anyone think different trigger weights/ types of safties / etc are appropriate depending on whether you are carrying CCW under clothing and open carrying in a holster?

 

[Kaybee]

Sometimes I wonder if the popularity of striker fired guns were influenced by how much less expensive they were for a very long time. Were Glocks are the first big mainstream plastic guns? Were they less expensive then their competitors?

 

[sakata8242]

I love Sig pistols and took my Sig 229 to range. I have never had this gun in my carry rotation, and it is for all intents and purposes a range gun. It is highly accurate and very pleasant to shoot. Generally I shoot it single action at the range, ie, I cock the hammer for the first shot, and had never really tried shooting it DA the first shot. But I got to thinking, if I wanted to carry the Sig I should probably try to get used to the DA first shot, rather than cocking the first shot.

I really have trouble with making the transition from the DA first pull to the SA subsequent pulls. I find I almost need to regrip the pistol in between the first two shots. It just seems unnatural to me. Another thing I discovered was that after making the heavy DA first shot, I tended to fire it too fast in SA mode on the subsequent next shot, mainly because the first DA trigger pull is so heavy compared to the 2nd shot.

I realize this is a practice problem 100%. I just don’t practice that way. But I don’t think I want to put in the time and effort to learn this when my Glock, 1911s, and S&W M&P don’t require this to be learned. I think I am just going to stick with them because of the consistent trigger pull.

What thoughts do others here have on this?

I personally prefer hammer fired pistols and don't mind the DA pull or the transition to SA. Most of my pistols are DA/SA or DAO. Not only do you have the potential for a far superior single action trigger pull compared to striker pistols with DA/SA, both systems affords a larger margin of safety when it comes to reholstering or "managing people at gunpoint" (a rarity for civilians, but perhaps more important since unlike LE, this is something most CCW'ers aren't used to or have trained much, if at all, for).

The biggest advantage to me with the DA/SA or even DAO is that once you master the trigger, I truly believe that the trigger control you develop makes you a better shooter in general.

 

[Hangingrock]

I happened upon trigger press notations made with my examples. S&W4506 DA10Lbs/SA 5Lbs and SW99-45ACP DA 8Lbs/SA 5Lbs. Speaking of Glock G21-6.25Lbs All three semiautomatic pistols are factory stock trigger press weights OEM without aftermarket modification. Each one of the semiautomatic pistols differs in manual of arms. So what we have is a typical S&W-4506 DA/SA, SW99-Smith&Wesson/Walther collaboration with a trigger system that has three different modes of function and the Glock G21 striker fired. Which of the systems is safer in usage is up to the operator’s competency.