External Hammer v/s Striker

[robinkevin]

I love the look of the Hi Power with a commander hammer, but I also like the look of the Glock line. The hammer vs striker question was not even in my mind when I decided to go with Glock over 1911 or Hi Power. It was more a choice of overall ergonomics, price, durability, and capacity. I shoot as well with the Glocks as I do with a 1911. The Hi Power, however, seems to make everyone a marksman. I doubt it's the hammer, however, since few praise the trigger pull of the Browning HP with mag safety still installed, even if it is SA. All down to personal preference in my book.

By the way, did anyone read about the police officer in NY this past summer/fall who stopped a criminal from shooting him by wedging his finger between the hammer and the frame on the criminal's revolver. It apparently broke his finger because the bad guy kept pulling the trigger trying to shoot the police officer, but he never managed to dislodge the officer's finger. If it had been a striker fired semi-auto the officer would probably be dead. Reverse the rolls, and perhaps a striker fired handgun has at least one advantage, as unlikely as the scenario may be. It does happen.

I did read about this, however at that range just simply pushing the slide back out of battery will also stop the pistol from firing.

 

[Fishbed77]

"The exposed hammer means the option of true single action operation in most cases. The Striker fired guns aer mostly DAO or at least feel that way. Generally striker fired are less precise triggers. You also get 2nd strike capabilithy if your gun is not SAO."

The exception to this rule is the Walther P99AS, which is striker-fired, but acts like a DA/SA. It's single-action trigger is as good as any I've fired on a combat handgun (including 1911s). A red cocking indicator on the back of the slide serves the purpose of an exposed hammer, by showing whether the striker is cocked or not. It's definitely an option you should look at.

As mentioned earlier, the PPQ is basically the same gun as the P99, but with a Glock-like pre-cocked striker. From all accounts, it has an excellent trigger feel as well.

 

[Plan2Live]

I have found I prefer a DA/SA external hammer semi for conceal carry over a striker. Like you, it's the idea of carrying a round chambered and the firing mechanism cocked and ready.

I'm finding the biggest disadvantage to that configuration is the limited number of choices in a compact size carry pistol chambering 9mm or larger. Basically it's an older S&W like a 3913 or CS9, CZ 75 RAMI, Sig 239, or ???? I haven't found too many other ors in that size range.

 

[CZ57]

The advantage of a striker fired system, one with a decent trigger pull anyway, is that the striker doesn't wait to be struck by a hammer. Meaning you have faster lock-times with a striker fired pistol. This is why many shooters do better with offhand shooting while firing a striker fired pistol.

 

[Casefull]

Meaning you have faster lock-times with a striker fired pistol. This is why many shooters do better with offhand shooting while firing a striker fired pistol.

I was wondering about the lock times. Are you sure that the striker fired have shorter lock times? Thanks.

 

[CZ57]

Well. I didn't originate the idea.Years ago there was an article in one of the major gun rags about top combat pistols. They were shot from a rest by multiple shooters and then shot handheld. The rested winners were hammer fired (SIG & H&K if IRC) but handheld it was a different story and the Glock was most accurate. That was the first time I had seen anyone put forth the idea and I for one believe it. The travel of a striker is shorter than that of a hammer and then the hammer makes contact with the firing pin that in turn has to travel almost as far as the striker did in the first place.

 

[robinkevin]

Never thought of this... but than again you are talking about a tenth of a second, I really dont see where it would make that much difference. But then again I guess in many ways when you compare two proven systems you are in fact picking fly crap out of pepper...

 

[NWcityguy2]

Anytime you hear the term "combat handgun", my advice is to skip past that part . Open and Limited USPSA and IPSC divisions are dominated by hammer fired guns for a reason. The organizations do have a place where service grade pistols such as Glock and others can compete as well, but the rules are most restrictive to keep things fair.

 

[Casefull]

I can see where the lock time could be less, although it probably depends on the design. The better sear breaks of the hammer SA pistols probably account for the accuracy advantage as the fraction of a second lock time is less of a factor.

 

[mgmorden]

Anytime you hear the term "combat handgun", my advice is to skip past that part . Open and Limited USPSA and IPSC divisions are dominated by hammer fired guns for a reason. The organizations do have a place where service grade pistols such as Glock and others can compete as well, but the rules are most restrictive to keep things fair.

Important note: Limited and Open aren't just dominated by hammer fired guns, they're dominated by SINGLE ACTION hammer fired guns. Production division allows hammer fired guns that are Double-Action or DAO, and Striker fired guns. Its pretty much dominated by the Striker fired guns.

Also of note is that USPSA has little to do with "combat" (and that's good as I wouldn't be that interested in it otherwise ). The guns dominated Limited have gigantic magwells hanging off them and in Open they have not only those but also sport red-dot sights that are grossly inefficient for "combat" purposes. The reality is the traits that make a gun work for competition are not the same as those that make it work for carry. Very few people shooting USPSA would ever carry the guns they actually compete with (and vice versa - my carry gun isn't even legal for USPSA).

Basing your general purpose firearms decisions on this would be like the military basing its next footwear purchase based on what basketball players wear.

 

[NWcityguy2]

Mgmorden I think you missed the context of my post, but oh well.

 

[Zerodefect]

I'd avoid DA/SA pistols if you're new. The options we have from striker fired, and 1911's have pretty much surpassed those in performance.

But no matter how the gun feels in your hands, or how the trigger feels, or whatever I recommend. You really have to pretty much buy one and try it for a few years. There is truely only one way to see if a pistol works well for you. Eventully you have to bite the bullet and just buy a few. It stinks to possibly end up with an obsolete weapon or two that doesn't work for you, but its a bit inevitable anyways.

I don't know any really good shooter, that only shoots one type of pistol, or has prefered only one type of pistol since they were a newb shooter.

 

[FIVETWOSEVEN]

A pistol without a hammer is like a hunting dog without ears.

The dog would be useless but the gun is just a different style.

 

[exavid]

I've got examples of both types of actions and like both. My LCP is a DAO hammer fired pistol, my P345 is DA/SA. On the striker side I have an SR9 and SR40c. I shoot them all regularly and like all of them. All four of them shoot well for me. I prefer the hammer guns because I feel more comfortable carrying with the hammer guns because they are safe with on in the chamber and no safety. I don't feel the need to put the safety on the .45 since it's safe with the hammer down and one in the chamber. The LCP's long DAO trigger pull makes is a safe carry with on in the chamber and no safety needed. In carrying the striker guns I prefer to keep them on safe with the chamber loaded.

 

[Pyro]

Both will work fine, but I prefer the "cocked and locked" of an external hammer gun.
I like the half-cock catch as well. Sorta the "just in case" if the primary sear was ever to fail.

 

[Dudemeister]

The Walther P99AS is DA/SA. First Shot is DA, the rest are SA. For safety you can decock it, then the your first shot would be DA, or pull back the slide about 1/4" to put it back in SA mode (much like recocking an external hammer).

The Luger P08 is also a striker fired gun with a lever safety. It's always in SA mode, no DA option.

@ Saturno V
Maybe it's me but striker fired pistols ring "cheap cheap" in my ears....
It's you,... really !!!

 

[Jim Watson]

This is why many shooters do better with offhand shooting while firing a striker fired pistol.

As I said in the other thread on the subject, this is hard to support when you look at what true precision target shooters use. I know of no striker fired target pistol. Surely if there were a real accuracy advantage somebody like S&W, Walther, Haemmerli, or Pardini would sieze the opportunity to take over the NRA and ISU market with one. But it is hammers all around. I speak of repeaters, not falling block or bolt action single shot free pistols.

 

[GLOOB]

Probably more to do with half a century head start in trigger tuning, methinks. There's nothing inherently more accurate about a hammer. This is a case of it it ain't broke, why fix it?

Besides, striker fired guns are still relatively new, and most of 'em are made to take advantage of the simplicity: to be lightweight and cheap. When you can do away with a frame mounted hammer, hammer strut, mainspring, decocker, and frame-mounted disconnector, you can make a simpler, lighter frame and mass produce a cheap handgun. I don't see many competitive bullseye shooters using polymer frames with loose slide/frame fit or combat triggers, either, and that has much more to do with the dominance of hammers, is my guess.

 

[Dudemeister]

I'm not familiar with high end specialized target pistols, but I'm thinking Browning Buckmark, Browning Medallist, Rugger .22 Mark II/III, S&W Model 41. All striker fired AFAIK

 

[GLOOB]

Ruger MkIII has a hammer and a firing pin. It's just internal. No clue about the others.

 

[Jim Watson]

Gloob, you are taking my position. Striker fired guns are built because they are cheaper.
But it has been claimed that they have shorter lock time and are therefore more accurate. It would then make sense for somebody to get on his horse and built a nice striker fired auto to take advantage of that, would it not? It's not like it is something new, Mr Browning sold FN a striker fired gun about the same time he sold Colt one with a hammer, in 1899. And the prototype for the BHP was striker fired.

Sorry, Dudemeister, ALL the pistols you list are hammer fired.

Smith & Wesson brought out the Straightline single shot target pistol and it certainly looked more modern than their single shot barrels on top break revolver frames. But they could not get the clean trigger pull of a hammer gun and it did not sell well.

 

[Hastings]

The longer lock time on a single action revolver often makes a difference in accuracy for new shooters used to double action revolvers who switch to a single action. The difference is very very small, but I definitely notice it.

If you analyze the physics of the hammer vs striker question, the hammer has to have some negative affect based on increased lock time, mass rotation, and impact on firing pin/frame. While I would agree that none of these things make a meaningful difference to someone who shoots regularly, longer lock time means more time for your sight picture to change slightly. Hammer rotation and impact absolutely have some, albeit small, affect on sight picture. Most of us overcome these things without even being aware they exist, but that doesn't mean they aren't there.

I think the only reason there are few, if any, striker-fired target pistols out there is due to tradition and the ease with which a sa hammered action can be tuned to perfection. If someone put the time and thought into refining the striker action, I'm sure you could produce a striker fired pistol that, when put in a pivot vice and fired beside a hammered gun, would be maintain aim at time of trigger pull better than the hammered gun.

There are two issues with the whole debate. The first is that striker fired pistols often have different barrel to slide locking mechanics. There is a lot of merit to the locking lug arrangement on the 1911, and Browning Hi Power. Glock's may work well, but their barrel locking arrangement is inferior to the 1911's, in my opinion. It would be interesting to see a striker fired 1911, or a hammered Glock. Unfortunately, we aren't comparing apples to apples because the striker doesn't act in isolation, it's interdependent on all the other mechanical design aspects of the gun it's in.

The other issue is the human component. As soon as you put a gun in a human's hands, you have introduced so many variables that judging the gun with any kind of objectivity is pretty difficult.

I know they aren't the greatest when it comes to firearms knowledge and techniques, but this would be a good topic for a Mythbusters episode. They get paid to take the time to try and eliminate the human factor, and be at least more objective than the typical 1911 fanatic, or Glock fanboy.

 

[Walkalong]

Mr Browning sold FN a striker fired gun

I love my FN Browning Model 1922. Despite the fairly heavy trigger pull, It is easy to hit a 10" steel plate at 25+ yards. It only misses when I get sloppy. Target gun? Well of course not, but, as posted, why couldn't a similar pistol be?

I'm sure you could produce a striker fired pistol that, when put in a pivot vice and fired beside a hammered gun, would be maintain aim at time of trigger pull better than the hammered gun.

I do not see why it couldn't be done, but change comes slow, and the maker would not be guaranteed the pistol would sell after putting a lot of money into it.

 

[robinkevin]

I have not yet mention this till today but I do have very little experience with 1911 and Glock but did shot both of them once together. Here is what I had to say about it on another thread.

I actually shot one (Glock) once along with a Kimber 1911 both in .45 (at the time I knew nothing of either to know what I had in my hand) but I recall shooting both good, but a lot better with the Kimber. But I was young and dumb at the time, actually was shooting with my girlfriends dad and I was just wanting to impress him with my shooting skills. I did so as I came close to matching him shot for shot but never gave any thought of how this trigger felt or how this one was... I just focus on the basics and shot. Kinda wish I had that to do over again LOL.

* That FN Model 1922 looks nice, its funny how certain pistol just never made it and others seem they will last forever.

 

[Hastings]

Walkalong,

I agree that even though it's doable, that doesn't mean it will be done, or even should be done. The 1911 action works great, and so does the Glock. I doubt the improvement in accuracy would be discernable given the human element, so why bother.