Striker vs Hammer Fired Polymer Frame Pistols

[faizi]

Which one will u prefer and why?
Please share ur reviews.

 

[wditto]

I like having a hammer so that I have that much more control in a situation where control is important

 

[The Lone Haranguer]

As long as it fires, how it fires is relatively unimportant.

 

[swinokur]

+1

As long as it goes bang.

 

[possum]

i am more of a striker fired fan. why is that? i don't know. all i know is glocks, xd's and the like are reliable, accurate and go bang everytime, and that is what i have been shooting/ training with since i started. if the glock or xd had an external hammer i would still like them and i would still own and shoot them. as a matter of fact the first semi auto handgun i shot was a sigma.

 

[Mike J]

My only polymer pistol is striker fired but I do own a hammer fired alloy framed pistol. I agree either should be fine. If the hammer fired is DA/SA it does require a little more commitment to learning the gun as it has 2 different trigger pulls. Either should be fine as long as it is reliable.

 

[zhyla]

I read some G&A article where they claimed striker fired designs are a really significant innovation... but I don't see how it matters how your primer gets nailed.

 

[Perseverance]

My glock buddy says that he gets thrown off shooting my hammer fired pistols by seeing the hammer...

I don't have a problem with either personally.

 

[usp9]

I've never had a light strike with a hammer, but I have with a striker fired pistol. In the long run it doesn't matter so long as your particular pistol works well, but if I had to choose one or the other, all else equal, I'd choose a hammer

 

[sarduy]

As long as it fires, how it fires is relatively unimportant.

i agree to that.

 

[Deus Machina]

+1

But I've said it before, and I stick to it: I'm a hammer guy.

Nothing against strikers, just never found one that feels right to me, and I do like my DA/SA pistols.

 

[tactikel]

I had a 1911 and now own an XD-45. I greatly favor the striker over the hammer- it is one less thing to deal with.
I gave my 1911 to a close friend when he became a LEO for his carry weapon, his chief would not let him carry it "cocked and locked" because it "looked " dangerous. The XD is always cocked-ready to go.

 

[pippin53]

Striker guns feel like toy guns when dry-firing.

 

[The Lone Haranguer]

I read some G&A article where they claimed striker fired designs are a really significant innovation...

Someone should have told him striker firing has been around for a century.

 

[jimpro]

I really don't care for the safety trigger on a lot of striker fired, I MUCH prefer hammer fired, then you have that single action trigger that a striker can't match... you can also see exactly the status of your hammer, you can have cocked and locked..... and you have an external safety, so that being said I prefer my PX4, I'm in the market for a Taurus pt845 or an FNP 45.... both hammer fired polymer pistols. I can't make up my mind between the two..... I'm a Taurus fan, but the FNP holds 15 plus 1 of .45 !!!! That's a dandy sidearm.

 

[modifiedbrowning]

I prefer a hammer (except for the Walther P99 AS) because most striker pistols have a craptacular trigger pull and a goofy trigger safety. I prefer DA/SA.

 

[FTSESQ]

gimme a hammer!

"his chief would not let him carry it "cocked and locked" because it "looked " dangerous"

It may "look" dangerous, but the 1911 is probably one of the safest pistols out there.

 

[Caliper_Mi]

Hammer fired, preferably with DA/SA.
I can visually tell the cocking state of the gun.
I like DA/SA for the ability to make a second strike on a dud round.
It also lets me carry +1 and uncocked because I like my pistol without a manual safety. Can either use DA or manually cock it.

 

[Rittmeister]

I prefer a manual safety, and I don't like the springy, tensioned trigger pull of the striker-fired guns. Therefore I guess I generally prefer a gun with a hammer. YMMV.

I have to say though that I fired a S&W M&P for the first time recently, and I was impressed with the trigger pull - and this gun can be had with a safety, also. Hmmmm...

 

[Quack]

Striker

Hammer

 

[GLOOB]

There's also a difference on the rear of the gun to consider.

With a striker you get up to an additional inch of sight radius.
With a hammer all you get is a funky beavertail.

 

[easyg]

The both work fine, so it really doesn't matter much to me.
But I do think that strikers are easier for the owner to disassemble and work on themselves (especially on a Glock).

 

[Haifisch]

On a polymer pistol I like Striker Fire.

 

[BRad704]

I dont really have any issues with shooting either way... I'm not looking directly at teh back of the gun when I shoot. I am looking past the gun at the target and making sure the sights are doing what they should be...

And I've never cleaned a hammer-gun (cept for my S&W M10 which doesnt count in this convo), but I did clean my dad's XD9 this weekend, and it doenst get any easier than that!!! From ready to shoot, to barrel, spring, rod, slide all laying on the table in about 12 seconds...

 

[NG VI]

I've got a couple of hammer fired polymer pistols, a USP and an FNP-9M, they are two of my favorite pistols.

However, my Glock 27 is also one of my favorites.


I don't know, I like both for different reasons, but I mostly like both for the same reasons. They work, and that's what matters most.