Why striker fired semiautos?

[tguil]

First I have to say that I am a "revolver guy", but I do have a Ruger Mark II bull barrel that I shoot a lot. I've been thinking about getting a 9mm for quite while. Don't really know why. My guns are not safe queens, but except for the Mark II, they are not shot all that much. From what I have read the advantage of the striker fired semiautos is the consistent trigger pull. In most cases consistently heavier that a DA/SA semiautomatic. Yes, I know that the first double action shot is pretty heavy on a DA/SA. For an average shooter like me, a person who shoots once in a while and doesn't carry on a regular basis, it seems that hammer fired semiautomatic would make more sense.

I almost always shoot my revolvers in single action mode. Every once in a while I shoot my S&W model 36 and Ruger Speed Six in double action mode but at close range.

Right now my choices for a 9mm are down to a FNP-9 or an SR9. I'm sort of leaning toward the FNP-9 even though it is about $100 more than the SR9.

Any comments?

Tom

 

[NG VI]

I've got a comment on your choices, I know nothing about the SR9 but I do own an FNP-9M (compact, barely smaller than the FNP-9 fullsize, one round shorter grip, 1/5th inch shorter barrel) and I love it. It feels great, it is perfectly reliable, and it has a short grip for a 15+1 round pistol. The trigger on the FNP is pretty normal DA pull weight, but it is very smooth, smoother and easier to keep steady than my other hammer fired handguns. The single action trigger is good too.

And as far as I know, the FNP has never been recalled.

Striker fired pistols can have a shorter slide and thus sit lower in the hand, but not all of them are shorter than all hammer fired guns. Some striker fired guns have triggers approximately equal to a decent DA/SA single action trigger, which is cool.

 

[usp9]

There are lots of different triggers available these days...even a sort of DA/SA striker fired trigger. The FN has a traditional DA/SA and is a very well made pistol. It would allow you to pre-cock the hammer if you want, so it may be more to your liking. Ruger is OK, but I'd drift towards the FN were it my choice.

 

[barneyrw]

<<"Yes, I know that the first double action shot is pretty heavy on a DA/SA.">>

Only if you need to make a fast draw, quick, up close shot. Otherwise you have the option of cocking the hammer for a SA first shot. I much prefer a DA/SA to a striker fired pistol but that's just my personal preference.

 

[MCgunner]

I'm quite fast up close with that DA. I like my revolvers and prefer DA or DAO guns with a long trigger on the first shot, simplifies things if I get in a revolver mood, which I do now and then. Even my DAO auto is hammer fired. It is a concealed hammer, though. I have a few striker fired rimfires, but they're not carries. They're true SA guns, too, not safe action.

But, the WHY is easy, different strokes for different folks. No two people are alike in needs or desires. I've got mine, you go get yours.

I like Ruger, my P90 being my favorite auto, but I know nothing of the SR9. My P90 has a much better trigger, very easy transition from the first shot, than either my P95 did or my current P85 does. It's sweet.

 

[chris in va]

In most cases consistently heavier that a DA/SA semiautomatic.

Actually you have it the other way around. My Kahr K9 has a pretty light trigger pull, moreso than my Sig 220. IIRC it's around 6-7#. The Glock has a 5.5# pull.

 

[mormandy1]

Great question.....

Why indeed?

My theory is that they are cheap to make, and offer a short consistent pull for rookie cops and those without a strong firearms background.

I prefer my guns with a REAL hammer, a heavy chunk of steel that beats the living daylights out of even the hardest primers. A gun like my P220 SIG. I don't want some "limp wristed" striker that won't set off hard primers, and won't allow a second trigger pull if needed.

Take any striker fired gun and do a search for "light primer strikes" and you will see what I mean.

Striker fired guns are part of the "dumbing down" of handguns to the lowest common denominator.

I have always owned and fired DA/SA guns for the most part, and with my P220 can pull my gun out in a flash and put a shot between the eyes of a target at 40-50 feet every single time with the first DA shot, and then follow that up with a hole right next to it with the SA shot. It's just a matter of training / practice. This rush to Glocks and other striker fired guns is not for me personally. Glocks are great for rookie cops with minimal firearms experience, and there are plenty of them out there.

But most seasoned handgunners either go SA cocked and locked or DA/SA in my experience.

 

[Steve C]

Advantages of striker fired piststols that are DA or Safe action only are:

1. More compact assembly.
2. Simple manual of arms.
3. Consistent trigger response.
4. No hammer to snag on clothing.
5. Generally a lighter trigger pull than typical DA revolvers or DA semi Auto's in DA mode and can be lighter than many SA modes.

Disadvantages are:

1. Some do not have a second strike capability (Glock) if a round fails to fire the slide must be cycled to take another shot.
2. Trigger pulls are long compared to SA mode.

My Glock 19 has a 5lb trigger and in simple weight is equal to or less than many SA pulls on most pistols and revolvers as they come from the factory. You can get a 3lb trigger for the Glock.

S&W M&P's have an easily improved trigger assembly that you can reduce the pull to 3lbs or less though for a self defense pistol you should probably stay at a 4lb or more pull to avoid a potential AD in a volatile situation.

 

[IndianaBoy]

I shoot a CZ 75B in USPSA and I carry a Sig 225... but I think the striker fired pistols like Glocks certainly have some merit.


If I have a round that fails to go off, I am not going to waste time pulling the trigger on it again.

Tap. Rack. Bang.

My fiance who has small hands and somewhat weak and skinny little wrists and fingers can shoot a Glock like a champ, but the heavier pulls of DA/SA guns gave her a lot of trouble.

Different strokes for different folks and it doesn't necessarily have a thing to do with 'dumbing down'. I hated the way glocks felt and I hated the mushy triggers. Now that there are 2 of them in the stable my opinion has completely changed.

 

[Butter]

Most of the respondents stated what I would have stated. I personally like striker fired guns since they have proven reliable to me. The other thing I like is the consistency of the trigger. As long as it's not gritty and stacky, I can learn to shoot it even with a long reset like my XDs. I also like 1911s for the same benefit of a consistent trigger press--and generally, a much better trigger than any other gun I have come across.

Oddly, I don't mind double action revolvers, but don't like the difference in transition from double action to single action in semi-autos. As far as shooting revolvers, I almost always shoot them double action and rarely, unless I am finessing a shot, will cock the hammer back for a single action bang.

 

[Just One Shot]

I went for an SR9 but I got an XD instead and it was only $20.00 more. It's a good shooter and well worth the $.

I suggest you take a look for yourself before settling on the two you listed, you might be pleasantly surprised on how good a value it is.

 

[lechiffre]

the advantage of the striker fired semiautos is the consistent trigger pull

i would say disadvantage.

the only striker fired constant pull gun i like is the hk p7.

the only other striker fired i like is the walther p99. it as da/sa with striker.


the only advantage of the striker that i can think of is that there is no need for a hammer spring in the grip. without that the grip can be smaller.

 

[JImbothefiveth]

Out of all guns that don't have a safety and can be safely carried, they have the best trigger.

 

[ArmedBear]

I own exactly one striker pistol. It's also the only autoloading pistol I keep loaded for home defense. Unlike most other guns I own, it's not a fun toy, and I generally don't shoot it for recreation. It's a superb TOOL, though.

The trigger is light enough for accurate shooting, but the pull is long enough that it doesn't go off when you first touch the trigger. If you've ever shot a match-grade pistol, you'll know why you don't want a match trigger on a defensive gun.

However, I also don't want a gun that makes me think about whether it's on or off safe, or whether it's cocked or not. I like a trigger pull that is consistent. This is a gun that might sit untouched for a month or more. I don't want to have to think about what state it's in, if I ever actually need to use it.

I like the XD's grip safety: it functions like a manual safety, without the extra step of thumbing it off to fire, and with the added benefit of allowing a "press check" without worrying about pulling the slide too far back. I also like the way I can feel the LCI quickly instead of the "press check", which I think is a bad practice anyway.

Under pressure, I want something simple and consistent.

I like my match pistol, but I don't want to use it as a defensive gun. I don't mind a complex manual-of-arms -- my first handguns were black powder single shots and black powder revolvers. I have accumulated a fair number of amusing firearms to play with, over the years. Some are complicated, some are hard to shoot.

But I don't want to deal with any of that crap in the unlikely but frightening event that my life depends on quick action with no room for errors.

DA revolver or striker pistol -- simple, consistent, nothing to distract my attention.

 

[zbock]

What about a DA/SA Striker fired pistol- The Walther P99/ sw99?

I purchased a sw99c for carry and I love the gun. It has a DA/SA trigger, which is why I opted for it over the other options (glock 26, m&pc, pps, etc).

 

[Butter]

Then of course, you can have it your way. That's the benefit, as others noted, of having lots to choose from. For me, and I guess a few others, having the same type of trigger press is important enough to make it a consideration of the choice of arms we buy.

 

[Zerodefect]

Most gunfight situations take place in feet and seconds, not yards and minutes. Less than 10', less than 5 seconds!

That stiff, long first trigger pull on da/sa guns is a serious disadvantage. I am way faster with a Glock, XD, M&P. The trigger is reasonable, every bit as fast as the single action trigger pull on most da/sa guns.

Reliability
Simplicity
Smaller size
Price
Weight

We are going to see more striker fired guns............who will be the first to offer a striker fired 1911? SA Glock?

 

[tactikel]

IMHO having the trigger pull differently ruins accuracy. I really like the simplicity of striker autos. I have a Spingfield XD-45, it is a terrific firearm. The XDm in 9mm or .40 is safer than a Glock, faster than a 1911, and is totally reliable.

 

[Ankeny]

Striker fired guns are part of the "dumbing down" of handguns to the lowest common denominator.

I know half a dozen USPSA Grandmaster shooters who have ties to law enforcement and also choose to carry striker fired pistols. I carry a Glock by choice and I am far from a newbie.

...faster than a 1911

How so? I am not following that one.

 

[tguil]

Oops. Guess I already have a "striker fired" 9mm. A P0-8 Luger manufactured in 1910. At one time I considered shooting it every once in a while, but because it has all matching numbers, a "Luger nut", told me that it would be best if I put it away and bought another 9mm to "mess" with. That was over 25 years ago and I still haven't bought the other 9 mm. Better get with it.

Tom

 

[Just One Shot]

Ankeny (...faster than a 1911

How so? I am not following that one. )

I'm guessing that he is talking about a 1911 that isn't locked and cocked. It's faster than a 1911 "IF" you have to take the time to pull back the hammer.

If that isn't it then he will have to explain it himself.

 

[gmh1013]

Im old and dont like them.
I like to look at the hammer to tell me if it cocked and loaded and have the option to de-cock with the hammer if I dont want to fire a round.
Plus on a DA/SA auto 99.9 percent of the time I always use the hammer
to cock the first round.
Looks like most are moving to this set up (striker fired) because its cheaper to produce and saves money

 

[ArmedBear]

I'm guessing that he is talking about a 1911 that isn't locked and cocked. It's faster than a 1911 "IF" you have to take the time to pull back the hammer.

Not sure about faster, but a 1911 that's cocked and locked requires two steps, with different fingers, to fire, whereas an XD with the safety automatically disengaged when you grip it, takes one step.

I know half a dozen USPSA Grandmaster shooters who have ties to law enforcement and also choose to carry striker fired pistols.

I'm not a grandmaster or a high master or any such thing. However, I do shoot matches and don't do too badly.

I don't shoot bullseye matches with the striker pistol, and I don't carry a bullseye pistol in the woods, or keep it in a quick-access pistol safe, etc. The specs of a gun do need to match the application -- "anything with a trigger and a barrel" is not sufficient.

 

[Walkalong]

The 1911 safety is swiped off before the trigger is ready to be pulled. Yes, it is two steps, but not slower.

 

[ArmedBear]

Two steps add a point of failure under stress.

You can argue all you want about how significant this is, but it is still a fact.

Also with a 1911 you have the choice between a heavy trigger that breaks suddenly and a light trigger that's easy to fire prematurely under stress. I prefer a somewhat longer, smooth pull, for this purpose. Like I said, I don't shoot matches with it, and I don't use a match pistol for self-defense.

I have nothing against the 1911, or carrying one.

The question at hand, though, is, "Why striker-fired semiautos?" And that's part of my answer.