Why do people not like striker fired pistols?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm with Possum on this one, I like striker fired guns as much as any other as long as the one I am holding is reliable and I can shoot it well. And for me, that's despite owning a 1911 (and picking up another soon) and a couple of revolvers.

The XD 5" 9mm I own has SA's Custom Carry package on it and the trigger is better, the fiber optic sights are quick to pick up and its an accurate gun...at least for me. I am not a great shot, but these newer plastic guns seem to be more accurate than I can get them to be. So I own several of the XDs, sold the Storm due to too long a trigger reach despite the small backstrap, and own an M&P 9mm.

While the trigger on the M&P is not as good as a Glock or an XD in my opinion, it offers one of the most comfortable grips out there for smaller hands regardless of metal or plastic frames that I have encountered. And if the pistol is comfortable and you can accomodate the trigger, you're getting something pretty good.
 
The only striker fired pistol I own is an XD45acp. Good gun, and I carry it alot, but recently I've been into wheelguns and single action (hammer fired) autos.
 
Oh, they haven't told you yet? If it's not a 1911, it's complete garbage. In fact, only a 1911 can kill a man. The Phillipines proved it.
 
I'm not very fond of most striker fired guns, but that's not because they are striker fired guns.

The trigger gets stiff resistance at the end, and the stiff / snappy sear release affects my aim in a bad way. Glock being the worst offender.

I don't get that with my SIG DAK.
 
Oh, they haven't told you yet? If it's not a 1911, it's complete garbage. In fact, only a 1911 can kill a man. The Phillipines proved it.
Certainly a man with his testicles wrapped in wet leather.

Fortunately, outside of the Philippines, guys who do that are more likely to just stay home and watch "Will & Grace" instead of trying to cut your head off with a bolo...
 
I've noticed that not having a external manual safety scares the crap out of folks. Especially the older generation.
 
In a striker fired pistol, the action of the trigger pull in some way has to cross from the frame to the slide, which aren't exactly in a fixed relationship. In a gun with a hammer, all the fire control stuff except the firing pin is in the frame, in rigid alignment. It may well be possible to make a striker fired pistol with a crisp, light, and yet safe trigger. It just hasn't been done yet.
 
I've noticed that not having a external manual safety scares the crap out of folks. Especially the older generation.

And the part I find funny is they have no problem with a revolver but anything else without a dumb dumb safety is junk. I have no problem with striker fired pistols all my autos are striker fired. I have owned 1911's and such but wasn't impressed with them.
 
I'm trying to figure out the difference between the two... can someone explain it? I believe my Ruger P95 is striker fire, but I'm not sure, and don't quite understand how to tell.
 
It's all personal opinion - I like shooting a wide variety of guns/actions, but for a carry gun I prefer a gun with no manual safety, but DA/SA action.

The DA first pull, and the ability to hold the external hammer down during reholster makes me feel safer from AD/ND than a Glock/M&P/XD. Not bagging on them, just where I came out after experimenting with Glock & XD. I currently carry a Beretta PX4SC DA/SA when I carry an auto. 75% of the time I carry a DAO j-frame instead, though.
 
It's all about the trigger for me. Well, that, and I like being able to cock a DA/SA for a SA first shot.

But mostly it's about the trigger.
 
Sepia striker fired guns don't have external hammers. Your Ruger isn't striker fired. Glock's, XD's , the Ruger SR-9 are striker fired. There is a sticky in the handguns-autoloaders subforum here that explains the different acrion types better than I can.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top