quote:

Originally posted by gc70:

quote:

Originally posted by sns3guppy:
It's a bandaid fix to a problem that didnt exist.

This is one of the most objectionable statements encountered in DA/SA discussions.

Everyone has their own views of the pros and cons of different types of guns. A lot of people clearly do find value in the DA/SA trigger system and it is simply rude to unilaterally declare their views as baseless and invalid.

I think you're mistaking his opinion for an invalidation of other's beliefs. I didn't read what he wrote that way at all. A lot of people get their feelings too involved in discussions like this. I like and shoot traditional double action pistols, in fact I prefer them, but when it comes down to it I don't really care what anyone says on a website about them.

Ford VS Chevy, which way to install the toilet paper.
Personal preference mostly and some are no doubt better with one than the other.
Look at another finely honed skill that is studied at a microscopic level, baseball pitching. One guy does it one way another a different technique. They end up at a similar result.
Endless discussions on why one is better than the other follow.
Then there is golf.

quote:

Originally posted by gc70:

quote:

Originally posted by sns3guppy:
It's a bandaid fix to a problem that didnt exist.

This is one of the most objectionable statements encountered in DA/SA discussions.

Everyone has their own views of the pros and cons of different types of guns. A lot of people clearly do find value in the DA/SA trigger system and it is simply rude to unilaterally declare their views as baseless and invalid.

I have repeatedly stated that value is found in DA/SA, and reasserted that it's not only not "dead," but never will be.

The assertion that the crunch-tick effect of double action/single action pistols is an answer in search of a question was provided by Colonel Jeff Cooper.

So long as the pistols sell, there is a market and prduction will continue. So long as millions of such pistols exist, the system is far from "dead."

A single action auto, ready to fire with a very short, light trigger pull and only proper handling to prevent negligent discharge, requires a certain degree of discipline. It may be simpler to shoot paper, but represents a greater opportunity to hurt one's self with poor handling. The same may be said of striker fired pistols that have no manually activated external safety.

Double action pistols add a measure of safety, to some degree dumbing down or idiot-proofing, by making it a bit more difficult to make that initial negligent discharge. Add to that a manual safet and there is the dual benefit of a long, heavy trigger pull coupled with the complexity of additional fine motor skills to deactivate the safety. These reduce negligent discharges, and have saved lives during gun grabs when the grabber was unable to get the stolen handgun into service.

Those same benefits are also drawbacks. Two sides to every coin.

There's an old saying to "beware the man with one gun." Any system can be learned. Proper training can make anyone better, with any given system. Basic principles apply across multiple systems. There is more than one approach, more than one way to do, and a cat may be skinned in multiple ways. In nearly all things, the greatest strengths are often the greatest weaknesses. This is no less true of DA/SA than anything else, like it or not.

quote:

Originally posted by BBMW:
Given how this thread is going, let me push it in the other direction. If DA/SA is good, why not just go DAO? I'm not being sarcastic about this. If a longer trigger pull is more controllable, eliminate the transition, and just have it be DA.
...

My opinion. Because the DA/SA transition isn't a problem, it is actually an advantage because you get a short reset into a superior SA action for all shots after #1. Yes, the trigger pull changes, but the reset is the same for every shot.

The DA pull is not a problem, but the reason DAO is not better is because it has a loooong reset back into DA mode again. If a short-reset DAO were possible (like SA style short), it would be great. Strikers just split the difference between the DAO and SAO, are simple to operate, and thus a very good compromise.

quote:

Originally posted by Strambo:

quote:

Originally posted by BBMW:
Given how this thread is going, let me push it in the other direction. If DA/SA is good, why not just go DAO? I'm not being sarcastic about this. If a longer trigger pull is more controllable, eliminate the transition, and just have it be DA.
...

My opinion. Because the DA/SA transition isn't a problem, it is actually an advantage because you get a short reset into a superior SA action for all shots after #1. Yes, the trigger pull changes, but the reset is the same for every shot.

The DA pull is not a problem, but the reason DAO is not better is because it has a loooong reset back into DA mode again. If a short-reset DAO were possible (like SA style short), it would be great. Strikers just split the difference between the DAO and SAO, are simple to operate, and thus a very good compromise.

And so many people miss out on this concept. They read on the internet that it is harder, and viola, they get themselves in a self for filling prophecy.

First run at the triple nickel this afternoon-



The DA shot is no harder to learn. You just have to want to. That's a 1.20 draw from concealment, a whole bunch of .16-.18 splits, .25 or so transitions, and about a 1.75 reload.

I ended the day with five bump drills. The gun is hardly the handicap that people 50-60 years ago would have you believe that it is.

My opinion may not count for much, but reading through this thread brought one thought to mind: Am I the only one who thinks the DA/SA critics are overthinking this?

My first gun was DA/SA, a Beretta 92FS, over 20 years ago. Between the 92 and my other guns (a couple of 1911s and a couple of S&W DA revolvers) I was probably averaging 1k rounds/month, plus whatever I shot during training classes. I took a few classes, none of them with big-name instructors, but I don't recall any of them saying anything bad about DA/SA, or that I had to do some special technique with them. Basically, align sights, pull trigger straight back without disturbing sights, gun fires, let trigger forward to reset, repeat as needed. I shot the 92 better (including the DA first shot) than my 1911s, both of which were custom builds.

Flash forward to early 2017. I'd been shooting mostly DA revolvers (I also had a Glock 23) over the past 6 years. I re-acquired my 92 and after a nearly 20-year hiatus from shooting DA/SA semi-autos, I was getting decent hits with DA-to-SA controlled pairs within a magazine's worth of ammo.

Maybe I'm missing something?

Well, I decided to try the 320 after all. A shop by me has a 10% off all things Sig. I traded my 40 229 (took a nice beating on that) and got a 320 TacOps. Won't be selling any of my 226s but maybe a 228 to fund this new endeavor. probably wind up regretting it.

Dude, I can see selling a .40 cal 229 (readily available and readily replaced) but for the love of all things Sig, don't part with a 228 (or the 226-es).

If you get good with a DA/SA, you'll get really good with other trigger systems. Even I have noticed this. I also think it important that the gun fit your hand. You won't do good work if you have to hold it sideways to get enough finger around the trigger. This is a problem for me with some of them.

And can we stop conflating the firing system (hammer or striker) of a gun with its trigger system? Hammers and strikers can be made with any style of trigger.

quote:

Originally posted by sns3guppy:
Tell me how you're one of two people on the face of the planet capable of teaching DA/SA. You made the statement. Out of curiosity, who is the other?

I think he is comparing himself to Ernest Langdon.
http://www.langdontactical.com
http://www.beretta.com/en-us/ernest-langdon/

Regarding the discussion......I actually prefer DA/SA over a striker, LEM/DAK, da or da/sa revolver, condition one......
The mechanical nature of the trigger, and when you master the prep or staging of DA, it's my preferred pres. As soon as the pistol is drawn, away from the body, that first moment or millisecond that pistol is pointed forward you can begin staging and as your arms raise, as soon as you look through the sights and you're on target, click. The shooter can turn the DA into a SA shot, from a point of view, with reps/learning. Additionally, the 10 or 10+# DA allows you to back off. I actually like the additional movement compared to say a striker, longer stroke on that first shot only. For me, allows greater control or precision over the trigger itself, and speaking for myself only, acts as a "safety". My long guns all have safeties, but in a pistol I loathe condition one.

I do not think one trigger is better than the other, really don't, it's merely a preference thing. I also don't think DA/SA is any kind of band-aid. I carried a 239 for 15 years and trained almost solely on P-Series Sigs for 20 years. Today I carry a Glock. Certainly not because of the trigger. The trigger is merely one single aspect of a pistol. And my opinion only, for me, a pistol is good for one thing only, concealed carry, not much else. So trigger is a factor, weight is also a massive factor, capacity, width, reliability, mag cost.....I mean it is a long list of factors. Glock just allows me to train on one single platform and have 5 sizes of the same thing. Subcompact single stack all the way up to a 1911 sized pistol, same controls, same everything. Open the safe, grab the size I need, holster, go. For me being able to shoot 5 different sized pistols, all reinforcing each other for training purposes, supersedes trigger preference. They're also light compared to what I used to carry, much lighter. My DA/SA's were always pant saggers unless you want to tighten the gun belt up so much you start restricting physical movement.
And for me only, focusing on one trigger only is of great help when I shoot or when I cannot get to the range, both.

So my preference and what I actually own and use daily are two different things. My perfect pistol or platform would be the capacity, reliability, weight and width of Glocks, but with sweet
mechanical DA/SA triggers and in all different sizes and calibers. Alas, a platform like that does not exist. Until it does, DA/SA is dead to me.

quote:

Originally posted by Tom Highway:

quote:

Originally posted by egregore:
If you get good with a DA/SA, you'll get really good with other trigger systems. Even I have noticed this. I also think it important that the gun fit your hand. You won't do good work if you have to hold it sideways to get enough finger around the trigger. This is a problem for me with some of them.

And can we stop conflating the firing system (hammer or striker) of a gun with its trigger system? Hammers and strikers can be made with any style of trigger.

Can you give an example where they're being improperly associated? I can't think of a DA/SA trigger that works without a hammer, or a striker with a DA/SA trigger.

I think it is just a matter of semantics in the firearms community.

Don't know if it is improper. Maybe more like personal preference on terminology.

Oh, I may like hammers too.

My experience with the DA/SA system Berretta, SIG and S&W The only DA/SA that I still have a S&W 4506 Gen3. Outside of the previously mentioned S&W4506 I have examples of the SA 1911 series pistols.

With that said in the age of the striker fire pistols Beretta has the new APX. Thus it would appear Beretta is prepared to move on past the DA/SA concept.Like it or not the striker fired pistol is cost effective and dominates the market place.

How many clips come with those DA triggers things?

quote:

Originally posted by henryarnaud:
Am I the only one who thinks the DA/SA critics are overthinking this?

No. In fact I suspect that many of the problems people have when they actually shoot a DA/SA trigger stem from overthinking the process of shooting the gun.

quote:

Dude, I can see selling a .40 cal 229 (readily available and readily replaced) but for the love of all things Sig, don't part with a 228 (or the 226-es).

Probably won't sell the 228. It's sweet. Might go back into the safe for a bit and do some polymer Sigs for a bit. Who knows? I'm liking this modularity stuff. Kind of what the Sig 250 was supposed to be.

quote:

Originally posted by Tom Highway:
I can't think of a DA/SA trigger that works without a hammer, or a striker with a DA/SA trigger. But where are they being conflated?

FWIW. http://www.waltherarms.com/handguns/p99/#

The systems do tend to be associated enough with the triggers that people have referred to them as though the terms were interchangeable - and this after DAO hammer-fired pistols were the "next big thing" some years back.

quote:

Originally posted by andronicus:
Has anyone else heard this stuff about the traditional DA/SA hammer fired pistols being done? I had and thought that it was horsesh*t until I talked to a buddy of mine who is an LEO and armorer for a fairly large city and he said the future was striker fired polymer pistols, 1911s and some niche stuff. Maybe I'll check out the 320. Have to sell some Sigs to do it.

Bet he heard that shit on CNN

quote:

Originally posted by imfrogman:

quote:

Originally posted by andronicus:
Has anyone else heard this stuff about the traditional DA/SA hammer fired pistols being done? I had and thought that it was horsesh*t until I talked to a buddy of mine who is an LEO and armorer for a fairly large city and he said the future was striker fired polymer pistols, 1911s and some niche stuff. Maybe I'll check out the 320. Have to sell some Sigs to do it.

Bet he heard that shit on CNN

#cnnblackmail

quote:

Originally posted by Tom Highway:


I can't think of a DA/SA trigger that works without a hammer, or a striker with a DA/SA trigger. But where are they being conflated?

Just one example is the Walther P99, a DA/SA with striker. There are hammer-fired guns with a partially cocked hammer, the trigger completing the cocking action and firing the cartridge. (examples: second generation Ruger LCP, S&W metal-frame DAO) IIRC, the Springfield XD is a pure single-action; the striker is fully cocked every time with the trigger providing no cocking action. The trigger system and firing system have nothing to do with one another.