Let's have a candid conversation about GLOCKs.
- Thread starter TexasGunbie
- Start date
- Status
Mac's Precision
Member
Thank You Sir 
I try to be totally based firmly on facts and leave my emotions out of the discussion. Too much internet discussion is passion driven. While we all have an inclination to be passionate about our selected firearms it really has no place when making decisions about machinery.
I used to be pretty passionate and blindly a follower of specific brands. Working on guns daily for many years has been an education. Most people only get to experience one, two or a maybe few examples of certain brands. I get to see many examples of all brands so I can make comments and observations that other's can't due to lack of exposure to volume.
I see designs that are used in many guns and implementation of processes that are poor. Sadly some makers refuse to abandon certain processes and blindly march forward watching those processes fail. It is just accepted as a quirk of that design?!?! There are better ways but for what ever reason they go unresolved. Many of the makers have had a decline in quality over the years. I get to observe this decline happen and guns that once were regarded as fine quality have moved to mediocre or poor in my opinion due to factory disregard for precision.
Every firearm has drawbacks. Selecting a firearm for purchase is always a compromise on some level. You must evaluate how MUCH the drawbacks affect your satisfaction of ownership.
Cheers
Mac.
I try to be totally based firmly on facts and leave my emotions out of the discussion. Too much internet discussion is passion driven. While we all have an inclination to be passionate about our selected firearms it really has no place when making decisions about machinery.
I used to be pretty passionate and blindly a follower of specific brands. Working on guns daily for many years has been an education. Most people only get to experience one, two or a maybe few examples of certain brands. I get to see many examples of all brands so I can make comments and observations that other's can't due to lack of exposure to volume.
I see designs that are used in many guns and implementation of processes that are poor. Sadly some makers refuse to abandon certain processes and blindly march forward watching those processes fail. It is just accepted as a quirk of that design?!?! There are better ways but for what ever reason they go unresolved. Many of the makers have had a decline in quality over the years. I get to observe this decline happen and guns that once were regarded as fine quality have moved to mediocre or poor in my opinion due to factory disregard for precision.
Every firearm has drawbacks. Selecting a firearm for purchase is always a compromise on some level. You must evaluate how MUCH the drawbacks affect your satisfaction of ownership.
Cheers
Mac.
Your presentation is far more elegant that my brutal honesty. I am also a gunsmith but have lost my love for the customer requesting fully automatic Glock Pistols and AR 15 etc. Yes, I do know how to make them fully automatic but I won't do it for you and your question and then insistence is insulting to my intelligence and respect for the laws of our country that I and my son fought for.I am going to try to post a reply. This conversation has taken so many twists and turns it is like a police chase in East L.A..
I like Glocks. I will tell you why from a Gunsmith's opinionated perspective.
Glocks are built well. They are constructed from quality materials with a good attention to details. They fit the appropriate parts tight and the other parts loose. They rarely exhibit loose breech issues. They are headspaced correctly. They have well engineered extractors that fit properly and work well. The ejectors are very effective. The barrels and slides are appropriately hard to encourage long lasting durability. The trigger parts are engineered well with as few parts as possible. The metal parts are very rust resistant and require VERY little lubrication to work well. They are very consistently well built. Glock doesn't have much if any variance in quality. Unless they have been altered, Glocks all do the same thing, the same way and they do it very well.
Glock makes great magazines. They are simple to work on and easy to clean. They hold up much better than many competitors mags and tolerate a ridiculous amount of abuse.
Glocks are easy to work on. In the rare incident where one needs repair they can be fixed easily and very inexpensively. They respond well to the attention of an experienced gunsmith and can have superb triggers to satisfy the shooter with a critical trigger finger.
Glocks do have some shortcomings that I am not fond of....BUT the issues are MY dislikes and in no way make the gun any less of a weapon. They are things that I like to see changed because they make the gun nicer to shoot.
I am not fond of Glock's factory sights, guide rod, polygonal rifling or factory trigger action feel. The rifling issue is ONLY an issue if you want to shoot volumes of lead bullets. Otherwise it is a non issue. The factory barrel is accurate and LONG lasting.
Glocks designs and interchangeability of parts is pure genius. The ability for me to stock such a small supply of parts and yet service ALL the models is wonderful for the repair center.
Glock has very good customer service. My dealings with them regarding rare warranty issues has been VERY VERY good. I sent in a Glock 19 recently. It was one of the first 1000 of the model 19's (first Gen). After several thousands and thousands of rounds it finally developed a hairline crack in the polymer behind the locking block. It was sent in...and replaced. No questions asked. That gun was VERY used. And I do mean VERY used. It had more ammo through it than most people have ever seen in one place at one time. A wonderful testament to durability.
Glocks are good platforms to customize and can be made to fit every need in every way. The modular design lends itself to adding custom parts with a minimal degree of fuss. They are WELL supported by the aftermarket, equal to or exceeding the 10/22 rifle.
Glocks shoot well. They are accurate, reliable, long lived and dependable tools. It has been my experience that of all the guns I see at police ranges during training shoots and competitions, Glocks and Sigs fail the least. There are a number of OTHER brands that fail a LOT.
Regarding the firing mechanism: The in ability for a second striker hit is in no way a detractor to the Glock design. The striker hits with authority. Glocks reliability to fire is VERY good. Should you have a dud primer then a tap rack should be used. Shuck the dead round and load another. I cannot imagine that a person would ever sit there and repeatedly pull the trigger on a hammer fired gun trying to make a dead round pop. It didn't fire...get it out and move on. Use the same response to every fail to fire regardless if striker or hammer fired. Do you (during a gun fight) open your revolver and rotate the cylinder back to a dead round to hit it a dead primer again? No...of course not.
Do I own Glocks? Yes. I have owned many, customized them and sold many customs to drooling shooters that had to have them. I will own more in the future.
The local gun shop manager and I were having a discussion about manufacture quality. I posed the question to him: "IF you had to take any gun from your pistol case and step out in the street and get involved in a gun fight.....what would you choose?" Keep in mind you have never fired any of the guns in your case. You don't get to test fire it. You don't get to inspect it or clean / lube it. It just MUST run, feed perfectly and save your life. You don't know that they will or will not work. "What would you bet your butt on?" What gun would you bet that you can load from ammo on the shelf...and bet that it will run without fail? We talked about all the brands there...Which one's we have seen fail..based on what I have fixed in NEW guns...what NEW guns have issues right out of the box.... Which brands are consistently aces. After about an hour discussion it boiled down to Glock and SIG.
I will buy a new Glock in the future....and it will be .357 SIG caliber....a Model 32. It will be fit with a NY1 trigger, Ghost Rocket 3.5 connector, Stainless guide rod, Seattle slug, and Trijicon night sights.
Many purists have an issue with the poly frame, the wierd trigger that goes sproink, the NON 1911 frame angle, the NON hammer fired mechanism and the lack of "pretty" that the 1911 and other guns have. The cosmetic aspect of the Glock isn't an issue. The striker fired aspect isn't an issue. The trigger feel isn't an issue. The frame angle is less of an issue than most folks make it. If you are a skilled shooter and you shoot a LOT....you can make any pistol run and run well. The ergonomics of the Glock isn't a downfall of the design...it is often an excuse for someone to buy another gun they think they like better
In the end they are a good tool and are on a plain above much of it's competition. They are on a par with SIG. They are a far better design than the 1911 in MANY ways and fail far less often. That is a bitter pill for many to swallow....including me. I like the 1911 design and cosmetics but an equally priced 1911 just won't run as well or as long as a Glock from that same price point.
Cheers
Mac.
I own a Glock22 (gen3) and gave my G19 (gen3) to the daughter as a gift. Both are dependable and fit the requirements I have/had. I can't vocalize it but the Glock just 'feels right' in my hand. Ergonomics is my primary criteria followed very closely by reliability and then by caliber/capacity.
I shooting single-action revolvers at age 5 and carried a Dan Wesson for several years as a sidearm. Still like revolvers but they don't meet most of the requirements I have for a daily carry. I spent well over a decade in the military and got to shoot both the 1911 and M9. Didn't like the 1911 due to the grip/wornout/inaccuracy and only felt so-so about the first generation Berettas. The M9 had better accuracy than the service .45s but never really liked the 'feel'.
Then again I picked up a Ruger N.Vaquero in 45LC mostly based on nostagalia (and am growing to really like that pistol over the old Dan Wesson .357!)
Oh, and the 'unsupported chamber' should be submitted to MythBusters as neither of my .40 or 9mm factor barrels are any less supported than the typical equivelant.
I shooting single-action revolvers at age 5 and carried a Dan Wesson for several years as a sidearm. Still like revolvers but they don't meet most of the requirements I have for a daily carry. I spent well over a decade in the military and got to shoot both the 1911 and M9. Didn't like the 1911 due to the grip/wornout/inaccuracy and only felt so-so about the first generation Berettas. The M9 had better accuracy than the service .45s but never really liked the 'feel'.
Then again I picked up a Ruger N.Vaquero in 45LC mostly based on nostagalia (and am growing to really like that pistol over the old Dan Wesson .357!)
Oh, and the 'unsupported chamber' should be submitted to MythBusters as neither of my .40 or 9mm factor barrels are any less supported than the typical equivelant.
REAPER4206969
Member
[offtopic]Those laws are not respectable, and directly violate the Constitution that you were fighting for.[/offtopic]
DenaliPark
member
No, I'm debating whether you actually understand the mechanism, if you go and post at Glocktalk that it's striker fired they will laugh you off forum! The Glock is DAO, thats a simple fact! Unconventional, yes, but DAO nonetheless, unlike the Springfield XD's which BATFE didn't hesitate to label SAO.
Another matter of opinion sir. I sleep well at night knowing that I never willingly violated the law of the land
Mac's Precision
Member
The discussion of the matter of ignition mechanism design is a bit off topic but I'll address it since this thread has wandered way outside the lines several times already.
The Glock and Springfield XD are BOTH striker fired so that term is correct for both pistols. Now that being said the difference comes in HOW the striker is manipulated PRIOR to firing.
The Glock catches the striker lug when the slide closes while locking the barrel into battery. The striker is not cocked at this point only resting the lug on the cruciform sear plate with the striker spring in a relaxed condition. When the trigger is pressed to the rear the trigger bar moves the cruciform striker plate to the rear and raises the firing pin block to the disengaged position. This motion cocks the striker back. As the radius on the trigger bar encounters the tab on the trigger connector bar it forces the striker plate down. It is timed such that the striker is at it's rearward most travel when the sear plate disengages the striker lug. The striker then travels forward under spring tension and impacts the firing pin. This system does by design qualify as "double action only" as the striker is subjected to 2 actions by the trigger. Cocked and fired.
The surfaces on the sear plate and striker lug are engineered to be neutral or slightly positive. Not negative. That is to say that the lug is such that the striker will not be forced off the striker lug by spring tension but must be shoved off the striker lug by the angle on the connector bar. If the shooter partially pulls the trigger back and decides NOT to shoot the sear plate will positively fully re-engage the striker lug and resume a safe condition. The angle on the striker lug should NOT be altered to be greater than 90 degrees as it may become unsafe.
The XD is single action by definition. Again it IS striker fired but the striker is cocked to the rear as the slide is closed and the barrel locks. The Striker is held under tension by the sear at all times up to the point of firing. when the trigger is pressed the sear is lowered in a SLIGHTLY rotational manner. The positive angle on the sear combined with slightly positive angle on the striker lug induces a little bit of further rearward travel to the striker prior to firing.
The XD has a firing pin indicator and a person can observe the indicator protrude a bit farther prior to it disengaging the striker and being propelled forward to impact the primer. So since this striker is automatically cocked on closing of the slide it is only one action, dropping the sear, that induces firing. Therefore it is single action by design. The engineering in the sear angles, striker lug angle and depth of lug engagement must be such that it is safe to carry and not risk jarring off. The XD does incorporate a firing pin block in it's design so if it was to jar off it wouldn't fire as the pin would be blocked from impacting the primer.
Modifications to the sear / striker lug angles OR the striker lug / sear engagement depth should be addressed with extreme caution. The potential for creating a negative angle engagement or too shallow a depth of engagement can result in failure to maintain cocked or prematurely discharging due to unsafe light trigger pull.. It is my opinion that modifications to depth of engagement on the XD should not be done. Trigger pull improvements can be obtained without reducing the safe depth of engagement from the factory.
The term striker would be defined by a pin that is under spring tension and once released is allowed to travel forward to impact the primer.
Firing pin would be defined as a floating pin, or spring dampened pin that is impacted by a hammer (rotational or linear by design).
Double action would be defined as a mechanism that loads the mainspring or striker spring PRIOR to release and firing.
Single action would be defined as a mechanism that is cocked automatically or by the user and the only action required to initiate the firing sequence is simply releasing the sear with on action of pressing the trigger.
Hope that helps to clarify the differences. Hopefully the folks at GlockTalk aren't offended but the Glock IS striker fired....AND DAO.
Cheers
Mac.
The Glock and Springfield XD are BOTH striker fired so that term is correct for both pistols. Now that being said the difference comes in HOW the striker is manipulated PRIOR to firing.
The Glock catches the striker lug when the slide closes while locking the barrel into battery. The striker is not cocked at this point only resting the lug on the cruciform sear plate with the striker spring in a relaxed condition. When the trigger is pressed to the rear the trigger bar moves the cruciform striker plate to the rear and raises the firing pin block to the disengaged position. This motion cocks the striker back. As the radius on the trigger bar encounters the tab on the trigger connector bar it forces the striker plate down. It is timed such that the striker is at it's rearward most travel when the sear plate disengages the striker lug. The striker then travels forward under spring tension and impacts the firing pin. This system does by design qualify as "double action only" as the striker is subjected to 2 actions by the trigger. Cocked and fired.
The surfaces on the sear plate and striker lug are engineered to be neutral or slightly positive. Not negative. That is to say that the lug is such that the striker will not be forced off the striker lug by spring tension but must be shoved off the striker lug by the angle on the connector bar. If the shooter partially pulls the trigger back and decides NOT to shoot the sear plate will positively fully re-engage the striker lug and resume a safe condition. The angle on the striker lug should NOT be altered to be greater than 90 degrees as it may become unsafe.
The XD is single action by definition. Again it IS striker fired but the striker is cocked to the rear as the slide is closed and the barrel locks. The Striker is held under tension by the sear at all times up to the point of firing. when the trigger is pressed the sear is lowered in a SLIGHTLY rotational manner. The positive angle on the sear combined with slightly positive angle on the striker lug induces a little bit of further rearward travel to the striker prior to firing.
The XD has a firing pin indicator and a person can observe the indicator protrude a bit farther prior to it disengaging the striker and being propelled forward to impact the primer. So since this striker is automatically cocked on closing of the slide it is only one action, dropping the sear, that induces firing. Therefore it is single action by design. The engineering in the sear angles, striker lug angle and depth of lug engagement must be such that it is safe to carry and not risk jarring off. The XD does incorporate a firing pin block in it's design so if it was to jar off it wouldn't fire as the pin would be blocked from impacting the primer.
Modifications to the sear / striker lug angles OR the striker lug / sear engagement depth should be addressed with extreme caution. The potential for creating a negative angle engagement or too shallow a depth of engagement can result in failure to maintain cocked or prematurely discharging due to unsafe light trigger pull.. It is my opinion that modifications to depth of engagement on the XD should not be done. Trigger pull improvements can be obtained without reducing the safe depth of engagement from the factory.
The term striker would be defined by a pin that is under spring tension and once released is allowed to travel forward to impact the primer.
Firing pin would be defined as a floating pin, or spring dampened pin that is impacted by a hammer (rotational or linear by design).
Double action would be defined as a mechanism that loads the mainspring or striker spring PRIOR to release and firing.
Single action would be defined as a mechanism that is cocked automatically or by the user and the only action required to initiate the firing sequence is simply releasing the sear with on action of pressing the trigger.
Hope that helps to clarify the differences. Hopefully the folks at GlockTalk aren't offended but the Glock IS striker fired....AND DAO.
Cheers
Mac.
PR-NJ
Member
Mac -
An excellent post. I liked it so much I saved you website address in my Favorites.
An excellent post. I liked it so much I saved you website address in my Favorites.
I own two also - it took me awhile but I did get a G19 and a G22 - both Gen 3s. And I agree - the 19 is not comfortable to shoot. Finger grooves are just not right on the smaller Glock as they compress my middle finger too much and then there is the Grip angle....
Trigger IS better than I thought. It breaks clean.
So the G22 feels much better.
Both reliable and I will keep them but I prefer a couple other 9mms over the G19. I know others that feel the same way - the Gen 3 G19 is not one size fits all. I probably should have looked into getting a Gen 2 instead on the G19....
There is intelligent life on this forum....thank God!The discussion of the matter of ignition mechanism design is a bit off topic but I'll address it since this thread has wandered way outside the lines several times already.
The Glock and Springfield XD are BOTH striker fired so that term is correct for both pistols. Now that being said the difference comes in HOW the striker is manipulated PRIOR to firing.
The Glock catches the striker lug when the slide closes while locking the barrel into battery. The striker is not cocked at this point only resting the lug on the cruciform sear plate with the striker spring in a relaxed condition. When the trigger is pressed to the rear the trigger bar moves the cruciform striker plate to the rear and raises the firing pin block to the disengaged position. This motion cocks the striker back. As the radius on the trigger bar encounters the tab on the trigger connector bar it forces the striker plate down. It is timed such that the striker is at it's rearward most travel when the sear plate disengages the striker lug. The striker then travels forward under spring tension and impacts the firing pin. This system does by design qualify as "double action only" as the striker is subjected to 2 actions by the trigger. Cocked and fired.
The surfaces on the sear plate and striker lug are engineered to be neutral or slightly positive. Not negative. That is to say that the lug is such that the striker will not be forced off the striker lug by spring tension but must be shoved off the striker lug by the angle on the connector bar. If the shooter partially pulls the trigger back and decides NOT to shoot the sear plate will positively fully re-engage the striker lug and resume a safe condition. The angle on the striker lug should NOT be altered to be greater than 90 degrees as it may become unsafe.
The XD is single action by definition. Again it IS striker fired but the striker is cocked to the rear as the slide is closed and the barrel locks. The Striker is held under tension by the sear at all times up to the point of firing. when the trigger is pressed the sear is lowered in a SLIGHTLY rotational manner. The positive angle on the sear combined with slightly positive angle on the striker lug induces a little bit of further rearward travel to the striker prior to firing.
The XD has a firing pin indicator and a person can observe the indicator protrude a bit farther prior to it disengaging the striker and being propelled forward to impact the primer. So since this striker is automatically cocked on closing of the slide it is only one action, dropping the sear, that induces firing. Therefore it is single action by design. The engineering in the sear angles, striker lug angle and depth of lug engagement must be such that it is safe to carry and not risk jarring off. The XD does incorporate a firing pin block in it's design so if it was to jar off it wouldn't fire as the pin would be blocked from impacting the primer.
Modifications to the sear / striker lug angles OR the striker lug / sear engagement depth should be addressed with extreme caution. The potential for creating a negative angle engagement or too shallow a depth of engagement can result in failure to maintain cocked or prematurely discharging due to unsafe light trigger pull.. It is my opinion that modifications to depth of engagement on the XD should not be done. Trigger pull improvements can be obtained without reducing the safe depth of engagement from the factory.
The term striker would be defined by a pin that is under spring tension and once released is allowed to travel forward to impact the primer.
Firing pin would be defined as a floating pin, or spring dampened pin that is impacted by a hammer (rotational or linear by design).
Double action would be defined as a mechanism that loads the mainspring or striker spring PRIOR to release and firing.
Single action would be defined as a mechanism that is cocked automatically or by the user and the only action required to initiate the firing sequence is simply releasing the sear with on action of pressing the trigger.
Hope that helps to clarify the differences. Hopefully the folks at GlockTalk aren't offended but the Glock IS striker fired....AND DAO.
Cheers
Mac.
yeti
Member
There really is no need to quote entire posts in your replies, especially long posts, we are capable of reading the original. Thank you.
monet61
Member
Glocks
I own a G32 .357 Sig. I converted it to 40 and 9, but went back to what it was built for.
As far as grip angle, it just doesn't bother me. I mean, when I shoot my XD or my SAA or a cartridge converted 1858 Remington or an old Mod 39, all the grip angles are different. To me, thats the fun of shooting.
I like my Glock because I can shoot it and I trust it.
Same reason I like SAA's.
It's all personal.
Good shooting all.
I own a G32 .357 Sig. I converted it to 40 and 9, but went back to what it was built for.
As far as grip angle, it just doesn't bother me. I mean, when I shoot my XD or my SAA or a cartridge converted 1858 Remington or an old Mod 39, all the grip angles are different. To me, thats the fun of shooting.
I like my Glock because I can shoot it and I trust it.
Same reason I like SAA's.
It's all personal.
Good shooting all.
Marshall
Member
Mac, thank you for your in depth response and detail.
I still do not see how the gun can be a TRUE DAO gun without the trigger pull alone being able to accommodate the full cocking and firing of the striker and relying on the slide action to perform this, or half of this.
To me and many others, regardless of what goes on inside the pistol, if slide racking must take place to cock or partially cock the firearm and a trigger pull by itself cannot accomplish the full cocking and firing of the gun, then it's not a TRUE DAO handgun.
I see exactly how the gun is being considered DA (technically) but do not understand how DAO can be a correct label when the gun cannot be fired by that action alone. The slide must be racked.
And from a user standpoint, it operates more like SAO firearms than it does DA or DAO. A slide must rack first, manually or by ignition and when you perform the "single action" of pulling the trigger, it fires, regardless of whether the gun does five things or one thing via that trigger pull. Which actually may be more realistic to a lot of folks.
Thanks again for your response. Hopefully you can help me to understand this?
I still do not see how the gun can be a TRUE DAO gun without the trigger pull alone being able to accommodate the full cocking and firing of the striker and relying on the slide action to perform this, or half of this.
To me and many others, regardless of what goes on inside the pistol, if slide racking must take place to cock or partially cock the firearm and a trigger pull by itself cannot accomplish the full cocking and firing of the gun, then it's not a TRUE DAO handgun.
I see exactly how the gun is being considered DA (technically) but do not understand how DAO can be a correct label when the gun cannot be fired by that action alone. The slide must be racked.
And from a user standpoint, it operates more like SAO firearms than it does DA or DAO. A slide must rack first, manually or by ignition and when you perform the "single action" of pulling the trigger, it fires, regardless of whether the gun does five things or one thing via that trigger pull. Which actually may be more realistic to a lot of folks.
Thanks again for your response. Hopefully you can help me to understand this?
Ragnar Danneskjold
Member
I'm with Marshall. A Glock cannot fire through the trigger pull alone, as a DAO revolver can. The trigger cannot perform the first action by itself. It requires the user to cock the firing pin manually, through working the slide, for the trigger to be capable of handling it the rest of the way. The trigger cannot pull the firing pin back on it's own. And for something to be a true Double Action, it has to be able to do that.
If I had a revolver where I had to thumb the hammer back half-way in order for the trigger pull to be able to pull it the rest of the way and release it, would we call that a Double Action revolver?
If I had a revolver where I had to thumb the hammer back half-way in order for the trigger pull to be able to pull it the rest of the way and release it, would we call that a Double Action revolver?
REAPER4206969
Member
I am not a hero Sir. I am but one man in the arduous, unending fight in the glorious defense of GLOCK Perfection. It's a strenuous fight; but it's a fight worthy of being fought.
Not analogous. What you're sorta saying in regards to a Glock is:
So if I had a gun I had to load in order for it to fire.... Yeah, so what?
The difference is that there's no way (that's not ill-advised) to get a bullet into the chamber of a Glock without cocking it. And once it's in there, there's no way to decock the striker from it's half-cock position. And once it's fired, it re-half-cocks, automatically. So for the aspect of not having enough internal energy to fire a round, it's a DA. For the aspect of second strike capability, it's a SA. So it's not a true DA, but it sure is close. And you'll never have to "thumb the hammer back" on a Glock, because that automatically happens when you load it.
Last edited:
TexasGunbie
Member
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2010
- Messages
- 270
Dear Sir Mac's Precision,
GLOCK has been waiting for a hero like you all along.
GLOCK has been waiting for a hero like you all along.
The glock is DAO. It only fires in a double action mannor. The striker is moved rearward to its fully cocked position and the the sear releases the striker, two actions, and it only works this way. DAO means just that, it can only operate by performing both actions. It isn't sa/da and it isn't sao. It performs two actions and always two, DAO. The fact it doesn't have multistrike capability has nothing to do with it being DAO. Sure, it isn't the same as many other DAO triggers, but that doesn't change the operations the trigger makes, being both cocking and releasing the striker.
Marshall
Member
Actually it has everything to do with it. Since the trigger cannot accomplish the task of fully cocking and firing the weapon and relies on a slide rack to do so, its not a TRUE DAO firearm. The end result to the USER being, the gun actually performs as a striker fired SAO firearm.
That said, I see both sides. IMO they need a new term for this class of operation. Maybe Assisted-DAO or some such thing.
REAPER4206969
Member
One more time.
Pre-set DAO
Marshall
Member
If that accurately described it I would go for it. But if the round doesn't fire after a trigger pull, it's not pre-set and not DAO. It must be assisted by a firing of the gun or by the user manually. Which brings us back to stricker fired SAO or maybe Assisted DAO. That's just reality.
DenaliPark
member
Perhaps a better analogy for you, would be to liken the action of racking the slide to closing the cylinder of a revolver! Neither can be fired until having done so....
- Status
