The reason Glock caught on was because the partially precooked striker is not compressed enough to fire a round. The take-up on the trigger completes the compression of the striker spring then releases it after the "wall". Opposite to every design before it, the Glock trigger spring pulls the trigger back, not forward, lightening the trigger pull against the force of the striker spring.

Glock's unique action was determined to be DAO and thus "safe" and acceptable to police departments. As safe as a DA revolver or DAO hammer fired semi-auto (in theory), simple to operate (less training needed - cheaper), inexpensive, durable and easy to maintain (even less expensive), and 15-17 rounds just as the need for more firepower reached critical mass and the other options were a lot more expensive (P226, Beretta 92, S&W TDA, etc.)

15 years ago, Springfield's XD was not permitted in some competitions (IDPA I think) because it is actually a fully cocked SAO pistol. The M&P 1.0 compressed the striker a little bit during trigger pull, and the P320 is really SAO. The PPQ is a unique kind of SA, you have to take one apart to see how it works. The rules have been changed to allow Glock-action feeling pistols whether they are partially precooked or fully cocked.

So, over time, Glocks have become "normal", and similar feeling triggers have as well. Many thousands of LEO's carry them every day without incident. I'd like to see real statistical evidence about the incidence of ND's based on action type - we've all heard about Glock-leg and .40 Kabooms, but most of it is anecdotal. An ND with the "new plastic wonder pistol" would make news while one with an old DA revolver might not. I will say Glock's takedown requiring a trigger pull is not tolerant of errors or brain farts, and the way the VP9 and P320 require a locked back slide and removed magazine before rotating the lever is a big improvement.

I read an article (linked here I think) of someone with experience in LE advocating the H&K LEM as the best action for LE. Long pull DAO with visible hammer cocking, but a light SA break. Holster it with thumb on trigger.

And I do regret getting rid of my P99 and P99c - the DA/SA striker concept was great, and the anti-stress mode gave a DA-long SA-light first pull if wanted (I kept mine de-cocked) and the SA had a great reset. I tried to go Glock for a little while, but now I have P320's and P365's...

quote:

Originally posted by Lefty Sig:
The reason Glock caught on was because the partially precooked striker is not compressed enough to fire a round. The take-up on the trigger completes the compression of the striker spring then releases it after the "wall". Opposite to every design before it, the Glock trigger spring pulls the trigger back, not forward, lightening the trigger pull against the force of the striker spring.

Obviously you are correct about the way the Glock fires, but I recall several years ago reading a study, or article referring to a study, that tested the pre-trigger pull tension and there was enough force to fire the primer every time.

I don't have the information anymore, but that memory has always stuck in my brain (that aside, I frequently carry a G19).

Outstanding thread. An issue that should be discussed more often. Does anyone have a chart showing striker action pistols and the type of mechanism it uses to fire, e.g., pre-cocked, SAO, etc.

Appreciate the thoughts. None of this was meant to say strikers are wrong or inherently dangerous just that I have always found it a bit odd how fairly quickly folks (myself included) decided that they were just fine but yet if you saw a cocked and unlocked 1911 or single action hammer back on a DA/SA we would all poop egg rolls when there isn't a HUGE difference between the two.

Really more of sociological observation then anything else.

I wonder how many ND's for striker fired pistols take place during holster manipulations rather than just handling.

Trigger discipline is pounded into most of us, so when our fingers are NOT on the trigger, we feel somewhat immune to ND's. The act of holstering is generally performed without the shooter being able to see the process, especially once the gun enters the holster. If there is an obstruction in the holster, it is almost always out of sight. This is one reason I really like the tactile striker indicator on my PPS. It gives me tactile feedback on what is happening (or not happening) to my trigger when it is out of my sight.

quote:

Originally posted by cslinger:
I have always found it a bit odd how fairly quickly folks (myself included) decided that they were just fine but yet if you saw a cocked and unlocked 1911 or single action hammer back on a DA/SA we would all poop egg rolls when there isn't a HUGE difference between the two.

Really more of sociological observation then anything else.

My CZ P01 has a DA pull weight of 9# and a SA pull weight of just shy of 4#. All of my M&P's and Glocks come in between 5.5-6# so they are kind of in the middle there abouts. Not quite as scary as carrying a P22x with the hammer back but not as forgiving as a 10# DA pull either.

I'm sure the vast majority of ND's in competition (and probably real life) are reholstering. I know that 90% of the times I stop someone when I'm an RSO at pistol matches is a potential issue on a re-holster (normally a piece of clothing).

I am an old school revolver / 1911 type and must confess that a P320 makes me nervous. And agree that NDs with strikers seem to occur more often during holstering or in admin handling situations.
I am much more safety aware and cautious when I carry a striker gun, so I guess that makes me a better and safer gun handler. I also use a trigger guard cover when I take off my gun at night as an extra safety measure.
Bottom line: Never get complacent with any trigger system.

I've always had revolvers or DA/SA pistols and just got a 365.
Yeah.. I can see where being sloppy or complacent with it can go very bad.
It made me rethink everything I have been doing and what needs to change.
Not that I've been sloppy or careless with TDA guns but as has been noted there is no margin for error with something like a 365.
No hammer to ride home means look, look, and look again while holstering.
The first thing I did when holstering for the first time (empty) was look for the hammer with my thumb and not even look at what was going on with the holster.
My t-shirt was tucked in and while it wasn't in the trigger guard I could see where that could be bad and made me stop right there.
Shirt tails, cords and whatnot have always been something I'm aware of but now I seem to be even more cautious when handling it.
Not that I think it's any more dangerous or it will spontaneously go off but it is a lot smaller than my other guns and the trigger pull is fairly light and not very long compared to a DA/SA gun.
But a lot of garage practice has got me feeling more comfortable with it.
One of these days I might even stop trying to de-cock it. Which kinda cracks me up.
It's like looking for the clutch in a car with an auto after you have been driving a stick forever.

quote:

Originally posted by cslinger:
The vast number of striker fired pistols have short travel triggers with a pull weight around 4.5-5.5 pounds. The vast majority of them have no active safety. (I know plenty of passive safeties etc.). Some are only half tensioned but there are a fair number that are fully tensioned.

Now the vast number of gun owners have no problems carrying and using the above for carry / HD / competition etc.


Now let’s contrast this with a DA/SA in single action. The vast number of these pistols have a LONGER trigger pull with pull weight of 4.5-5.5 or so pounds. Now most gun owners would have kittens if they saw somebody carrying around a DA/SA in single action with no active safety.


Why the perception difference? How have we as the shooting public been conditioned to be ok with one but not the other?

Now this is not a condemnation of striker fired pistols. I have carried them and have no problem doing so as long as a proper holster is employed. Yet I would never think of carrying a DA/SA in single action.

So why the perception difference? A Walther PPQ has a marvelous trigger but it’s also damn light and easy.

I guess I am curious as to when / how we as the shooting public became so accustomed to such short travel/light triggers when in the past that would have been crazy talk?

As always take care and shoot safe.
Chris

Ernest Langdon would agree with you completely, and makes that very argument in a podcast I listened to recently. As everyone knows Langdon is a DA/SA proponent. He might disagree with some of the points several have made re: pre-tensioned strikers w/o active safeties, particularly ones with modified triggers which may, for example, deactivate the firing pin block. He argues that these are certainly not inherently safe, and uses the cocked SAO pistol without a manual safety as a direct comparison.

His take on this issue is the long, although not necessarily heavy, DA pull is what can keep a potential shooter out of trouble. I also recall his take on the P320 discharge when dropped on the rear of the slide was just as the OP has brought up. According to Langdon, the trigger safety on many striker fired pistols is a drop safety for this reason.

I own several striker fired pistols, several P320s & a couple H&Ks, three DA/SA Berettas including an LTT and two WC, all with trigger jobs and recently bought a CZ Shadow 2, and three SAO SIGs, and I don't carry, so I don't have a dog in this fight. I do respect the views of accomplished professionals though. Based on what I have learnes I would most likely carry only one of the Berettas or H&Ks.

quote:

Originally posted by YooperSigs:
I guess that makes me a better and safer gun handler.

And that’s the point I’m trying to make. It’s not that we should be careless with any gun, but I believe it’s foolish to contend that some aren’t less forgiving of mistakes than others. Then there’s the question of who makes mistakes? If we hardly ever shoot or handle a loaded gun except at the range with an RSO looking over our shoulder, perhaps it’s easy to never forget the rules, but that’s not true of everyone.

Law enforcement officers in particular may be handling their weapons when they’re excited and stressed, the situation is chaotic with people running everywhere, and everyone, including the officer, will be thinking about other things besides gun safety. In a situation like that, would I rather be around a relatively inexperienced shooter whom I might recognize bears an occasional glance to see what he’s doing, or the experienced, “I’ve never committed an unsafe act, and there’s no difference in how dangerous different guns are to handle” officer? I have known a couple “I never make mistakes” types, and they can warrant watching most closely of all. As the saying points out, familiarity breeds contempt, and being convinced of one's own infallibility because of that familiarity is the time to be concerned.

quote:

Originally posted by cslinger:
BTDT. Walther P99 and I wish that design had gained more traction.

The P99 has kind of a high bore axis, but I love everything else about that pistol. The first pistol I picked for myself (bought for me as a Christmas present by my father because I wasn't old enough yet) was a first-gen OD frame P99 (DA/SA, before they split into the QA and AS versions).

A reason that a DA/SA is SA is not equivalent to a striker, is when the shooter puts their finger on what they think is a 10 pound trigger pull and encounter four pounds. Now if the DA/SA was only carried in SA, had equivalent Pre travel and pull weight, and was drop safe, I don’t see a big difference.

Front Sight publishes ND statistics, and interestingly, ND’s are fairly evenly distributed between DA/SA, 1911 and striker pistols, despite striker pistols undoubtedly being the most common pistol through there.

ND’s are primarily technique lapses, secondarily holster related, and then action type. I would worry about technique, then holsters and then action type in that order.

I've read through this thread and found very well thought out positions on both sides of this question. I find that I fall on the side of the manual safety. Not because I can construct an invincible argument on it's behalf, but because I just feel uneasy without it.

I purchased a 320SC, had the upgrade and fired a bit. Accurate with a fair trigger, but couldn't overcome the unease. Yea, I bought the kydex.
Didn't help. Well, a forum member benefited from my gun sale and Sig made out a bit when I bought a M11A1, but I am a happier shooter with
a weapon I prize.

First I will say I almost NEVER carry a gun with a safety. Please do not bother with any arguments here. In competition I have seen Master Class shooters forget the safety, curse and waste a partial second. In a self defense situation this would be bad, Again a Master shooter who has trained more than most readers here.

I prefer a hammer product for many of the reasons mentioned here, I have purchased a P365 to see what all the fuss is about and it indeed is one hell of a gun and I do carry it in rare situations. However my main EDC's are H&K's with a LEM trigger. As one poster mentioned a nice smooth although longest pull with a light break.

Everyone will carry what works best for them. I wish I shot all my guns as well as I shot my 1911's but can not convince myself to carry them a lot. I love revolvers but besides the lack of capacity I shoot them poorly.

I do not like striker fired guns for all the reasons brought up in this thread, and because I just plain prefer a gun with a hammer on it. You may very well feel differently about it, that's fine and that's why there are different types of guns. Get what you like and shoot well, and be safe first and foremost.
Rod

Been using firearms of all sorts since the early 50s(that is the 1950s for all you who think the world began in 1995). ALL of them had manual safties.
"In the Army now, not behind a plow" became my mantra when I was 16 1/2. The Army, because the Army was the only service branch that would make you an Aviator w/o a college degree. I had the great good fortune to have some time between graduating from basic to the next flight school opening; ergo, advanced infantry training, and then really "good" luck, Ranger School. Probably because of my farm boy/all state football physique.
Therefore I learned a lot about the military weapons of the era(M14, M60, 1911, grease gun. shotgun(various), and many foreign weapons.
At that time the 1911 was always carried chamber empty-even the MPs were issued 5 rounds for duty and carried empty spare mags to fill the carriers! A cocked 1911 would cause lots of looks and a comment or reprimand from a superior. That was before I landed in Indian country, my first tactical instructor pilot immediately told me that I should befriend the guy in the arms room and get a .45 instead of a .38 and carry it fully loaded, cocked and locked. Gave one 8 shots (9 with todays' mags)and better power, did not take a lot to convince me.
Subsequent to my military career, I became a cop and packed lots of different weapons from then till today. Favorites were the 1911, BHP and Colt Commander, I later replaced the Commander(I just shot the snot out of that 1951 frame) with a Sig 220 SAO. Always carried with safety on over a loaded chamber.
When the striker fired handguns came into style, I just could not get used to the Glock style of pre cocked; no manual safety.
After a love affair with the SIG P series, I finally got a 320, the first ones available to the civilian market had no manual safety so I adapted, although I still have my BHP- really my daughter has it, she flys little jets off big boats and packs 3 9s, my BHP, a S&W 940 and a Bond derringer in 9mm. Even the Bond has a safety, the 940 is DAO and the BHP is still a traditional SA pistol. Of course that is how I taught her, and now she will be getting the M18 which is just a copy of my 320 Carry-but with a manual safety!
I probably won't buy one just for the safety, but as I still tell all my rookies and students,
"the real safety for any firearm is between your ears, anything else is just a piece of metal or plastic that depends on you to function". Still believe exactly that, even though I still prefer DAO or a SAO with a manual safety.

This is the first truly intelligent discussion of the safety/no safety/hammer/striker issue that I have read. I have most of the options: revolvers, 1911s, DA/SAs, classic sigs, etc. A 320 is the only gun that I currently own and I'm considering trading it for something new. It came to me used, with an Apex trigger, which is very good, if not up to 1911 standards, but I'm leery about carrying it. Great at the range, though. Anyway, thanks for the thoughtful education!

I almost hesitate to join this fray, because so many of the terms and concepts need, but lack, definition.

“Double action” and “single action,” for instance, were terms and concepts well understood as applied to double action revolvers. Double action meant capable of hammer down uncocked status, and was always paired with long, heavy pull to fire in this state. Single action meant cocked, main spring tensions contained only by sear engagement, and a short (and possibly lighter) trigger pull required to fire in this state. Single action could also be applied aptly and with the same meanings to such single action pistols as the M1911 types, and pretty much also the so-called “DA/SA” pistols like the SIG P220 series.

The Glock was not the first to confuse things. (Think the H&K P7.) The Glock is “partially cocked,” and, as someone else has observed, the amount of spring tension contained by the sear engagement (putting aside that the Glock does not have what I consider to be a sear) is sufficient to ignite most primers if somehow released from even the “partially cocked” state. What differentiates the Glock from primordal single action pistols is that the trigger pull is long, not short.

I am aware that some consider the Glock to be a DA (actually DAO) pistol, though I think that classification is debatable. I am also aware that the S&W M&P pistols are advertised by S&W as DAO for procurement purposes, and this is clearly wrong. The M&P has a real sear, and that sear rotates during the firing exercise and imposes zero additional firing spring compression. On the other hand, even though “cocked,” the M&P trigger pull required to intentionally fire is “long.”

Now, let’s take a stab at defining “safe.” Safe from what? A cocked S&W DA revolver presents a couple of risks of discharge not really intended by the operator. One is an errant trigger pull. Frankly, I consider this the lesser risk. Other risks are a “jar off,” caused by dropping the cocked revolver and having the sear engagement released by the sudden negative acceleration when the falling revolver contacts whatever it falls on. Another is “push off,” where sear engagement fails because someone has pushed the cocked hammer in the forward direction.

And, in my judgment based on some of the reports of unintended Glock discharges by sworn folks while holstering, we have the risk of a non-finger unintended trigger pull, i.e., a shirt or other object lying inside the trigger guard and in front of the trigger, which object is then “pulled” by contact with the portion of the holster that supposedly makes things “safer” by covering the trigger guard area.

So how do we address these risks? For the S&W revolver, the jar off and push off risks are largely (if not entirely) mitigated by the rebound slide, which prevents the firing pin from protruding in the primer unless the trigger is fully pulled and held for the entire time of hammer fall. In the Glock and M&P, the same risks are largely (if not entirely) mitigated by the striker block, which prevents striker movement unless the trigger is fully pressed for at least the initial portion of striker fall.
How about the stuck-object-holstering-discharge? Unfortunately,the striker block doesn’t address this risk at all, since if the trigger bar moves far enough aft to release the striker, the striker block has already been by-passed. How about the articulating trigger “safety?” It depends on the location of the stuck object, which may or may not articulate the trigger around its hinge pin. And this is the not risk that the trigger “safety” was intended to capture, which is an inertia fire caused by a drop landing on the backstrap area of the pistol.

OK, now what incremental risk is captured by a manual or “thumb” safety? As for jar off and push off: zero. Stuck object? Maybe some. Stupid operator trigger finger? Actually, in my opinion and experience, little or perhaps none, since a well trained operator of a pistol with a thumb safety will have instinctively thumbed the safety off before he puts his finger inside the trigger guard.

So how do we make a loaded firearm 100% absolutely perfectly safe? The only way I know of is to leave it in the safe. The moment the gun comes out of the safe and into the hands of a human, there will be some finite risk that cannot be pretermitted by mechanical means. And that means that someone is going to have to define how safe is safe enough, and that discussion will outlive all of us.

So, now that we have all of that on the table, what does it mean to at least one guy who has been handling, shooting, and carrying all of these firearm types for a very long time? Well, I sometimes carry a SIG P-series pistol and have no concerns. I sometimes carry an M&P pistol, sans thumb safety, and have no concerns. I never carry a Glock, but if you told me I had to, I’d have no more concerns than with the M&P.

And so my vote is that we move on to the next topic.

My family’s decision, once the kids turned into toddlers, was to switch to P7s, 1911s, DASA, or revolvers.

The thought of, somehow, a GLOCK coming out of a holster, and a toddler trying to give it back to someone, made all of our blood run cold...

Right or wrong, we all decided it wasn’t worth the risk.