on sale for 369.00

Bought one from them several months ago, have to say it was borderline excellent shape, have shot it multiple times trying to get to like DAK but after the last range trip firing a 226,239 in DA/SA i think i will be converting it over

I saw that and was tempted...is the DAK trigger similar enough to the DA pull of a DA/SA that it could become a dedicated double action training gun?

quote:

Originally posted by RobLew:
I saw that and was tempted...is the DAK trigger similar enough to the DA pull of a DA/SA that it could become a dedicated double action training gun?

IMO, No. None of the "light double action" systems (LDA, Smith's, LEM, DAK etc.) feel quite like the DA on a DA/SA gun. So much so I've never really liked any of them. There is nothing wrong with the concept, I just don't prefer them.

Also keep in mind that if you dryfire, you are dropping the hammer totally and the "system" isn't recocking into LDA mode and IMO most of the "double strike" modes are heavier then a DA pull.

quote:

Originally posted by RobLew:
I saw that and was tempted...is the DAK trigger similar enough to the DA pull of a DA/SA that it could become a dedicated double action training gun?

The pull characteristics are the same (IMO, of course) except that the full reset DAK pull weight is usually somewhat less than the DA pull of something like a DA/SA P226.

There can be a lot of variation in pull weights among different specimens, but based on my measurements of numerous different guns years ago, the double action pull weight of DA/SA Classic SIG pistols ran from about 8.5 to 10 pounds and very occasionally higher than 10 pounds.

When using the full reset pull of a DAK trigger, the weights usually ran 6 to 7 pounds. If firing the gun and using the (optional!!!) short reset pull, the weights commonly ran 8 to 9 pounds. As the term indicates, the pull stroke of the short reset is shorter than the full reset. The pull stroke distance of the DAK full reset is virtually the same as the double action stroke of a DA/SA pistol.

But of course all that is subject to individual variation, and especially based on the mainspring used in the pistol. Original DAK pistols evidently used the same mainspring as DA/SA models, and was apparently the cause of occasional light strike misfires. The standard DAK mainspring is marked with red paint. Using a red paint mainspring in a DA/SA or DAO model pistol increases the trigger pull weight significantly, in my experience to 13 pounds or more.

For a DA pull that’s exactly (more or less ) the same as a DA/SA’s pistol, use a gun with a double action only (DAO) hammer. The DAO mechanism is the same as a DA/SA’s except for having a DAO hammer that doesn’t remain cocked after a shot (and of course, no decocker).

Thanks for the inputs. I will wait for a deal on a DAO model.

If it is a DAO pistol you are thinking of buying, IMHO you are making a mistake in buying a DAO over a DAK. The DAK is IMHO much better than a DAO. All of my DAK pistols have a much lighter initial trigger pull than DAO which IMO is a very good thing to have. All this talk about two trigger pulls is irrelevant because if you ever actually need that gun for a self defense situation I very much doubt you will even notice that there are two different pulls. With practice the DAK system is competitive with any other system. A real plus is that with DAK you are not carrying a gun that has either a fully or partially cocked striker. I consider DAK much safer than a striker fired system.

It does have a partially cocked hammer which is the reason it has a lighter pull over a DAO Sig. It’s a long pull though and if you put your thumb on the hammer while holstering, then there’s really good chance you’ll feel the hammer moving before the gun fires should anything catch the trigger. It’s unlikely that trigger gets incidentally bumped and the gun fires.

It takes practice.

I don't have a DAK yet, and I'd like one. The only problem here is that it's a .40...if it was 9mm I'd already have one on the way.

To reiterate something I used to post over and over, the short reset trigger pull of the DAK system is totally optional, voluntary, shooter’s choice, to use and can be ignored if desired. All that’s necessary is to allow the trigger to reset fully rather than pulling it again at the first reset point. Don’t want to use it? Don’t. That’s all there is to it.

Criticizing the DAK system because of its “two” trigger pulls beggars belief, especially when the can’t-be-avoided two trigger pulls of a DA/SA SIG is considered to be perfectly fine.

And the reason the full reset pull weight is lower than the short reset pull weight or the double action pull weight of a traditional DA/SA or DAO trigger is because the DAK mechanism has better mechanical advantage over the others: the trigger bar contacts the hammer farther from the pivot point in the DAK than in the other mechanisms: Longer lever, less force required to move the rock; elementary school physics (or was at one time).

The DAK hammer at rest is “partially cocked” only in the same way that the hammer of a DA/SA SIG is partially cocked. The hammer is automatically pulled back out of contact with the firing pin very slightly to make the guns drop safe.

But if one wants a consistent double action pull that closely mimics the DA pull of a DA/SA SIG for practice purposes, a DAO model is the way to go. If one has an extra DA/SA model on hand, it’s also easier and less expensive to convert to DAO rather than to DAK: just remove the decocker and change the DA/SA hammer to a DAO hammer. Converting to DAK requires changing several parts.

And FWIW, I am aware of at least one unintentional discharge involving a DAK pistol. Someone managed to get part of a flimsy holster in the trigger guard while shoving it home: bang, just as the gun was designed.

I’d probably buy one if it was DA/SA. I could use another .40 gun to help use up some of the stash of .40 that I have, as well as having another option in a pinch. I just don’t like DAK and by the time I got the conversion parts I’m into it for too much, especially considering I’d likely send it to GrayGuns for an SRT and tuneup package. Maybe they’ll go on sale for more off lol.

Out of curiosity, has anyone purchased a pistol and just had it shipped directly to GrayGuns before? Then when GrayGuns was done with it, they could send it to your local FFL? I may see what Bruce and team could do for me to just replace all the DAK parts with their enhanced DA/SA stuff.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
The DAK hammer at rest is “partially cocked” only in the same way that the hammer of a DA/SA SIG is partially cocked. The hammer is automatically pulled back out of contact with the firing pin very slightly to make the guns drop safe.

Maybe my terminology or understanding is wrong, the hammer is partially cocked reducing the pull weight of the trigger. Try this dry firing: rack the slide which partially cocks the hammer, pull the trigger. Let the trigger fully reset, pull the trigger again without racking the slide and it’ll be at least two pounds heavier. Both pulls will be the same length unlike the short reset.

Also, with the hammer partially cocked, the DAK trigger has two walls. Slowly pulling the trigger a little over a third of its travel and you’ll find the first wall. The trigger weight increases. Continue slowly pulling the trigger past the first wall about 1/2 of the total trigger pull gets you to the second wall and the trigger gets heavier yet. Going past this wall releases the hammer. I don’t notice this stacking of weights if I pull the trigger a bit faster from start to finish nor don’t notice any notching; it seems like a long, smooth pull.

quote:

Originally posted by trapper189:
Try this dry firing: rack the slide which partially cocks the hammer, pull the trigger. Let the trigger fully reset, pull the trigger again without racking the slide and it’ll be at least two pounds heavier.

Yes, the second pull will be heavier because the trigger bar is then in contact with the hammer at the “short” reset point, just as if we were firing the gun and used the short reset rather than allowing the trigger to move fully forward to the long reset point. When dry firing and before racking the slide, the trigger bar contacts the hammer closer to the pivot point, and that’s why the pull weight is heavier. The pull weights when the trigger bar is in the two points of contact vary because of how far the contact is from the hammer pivot point.

I guess we can debate what “cocking” refers to, but the DAK mechanism does not cock the hammer in any traditional sense, that is, the mainspring is compressed and the hammer is held to the rear by the sear and will be released when the sear moves out of position. To rotate the DAK hammer to the rear to compress the mainspring prior to it (the hammer) being released to fire the cartridge requires pulling the trigger through a long stroke. I don’t consider that to be “cocked” in any sense. And although the position of the hammer is slightly different depending upon whether it’s in the normal rest position after the slide is cycled or is fully forward after dry firing, the main reason the pull weights differ is because of where the trigger bar contacts the hammer.

When the trigger is in the full forward reset position after firing a round or after cycling the slide following dry firing, the trigger bar contacts the hammer about where the black arrow is pointing in the picture. When firing the gun and just releasing the trigger to the short reset point, the trigger bar contacts the hammer at the stud that’s circled in white. The latter is also true when the gun has been dry fired and the hammer isn’t reset to its normal position by cycling the slide manually.





I am aware of the “argument from authority” logical fallacy and I try to avoid it, but I have owned numerous DAK handguns since shortly after their development, used and worked on them for many years, and still have more than I will ever need. I am therefore confident I know how they work.

quote:

Originally posted by Lt CHEG:

Out of curiosity, has anyone purchased a pistol and just had it shipped directly to GrayGuns before? Then when GrayGuns was done with it, they could send it to your local FFL?.

I did that many years ago, when I bought a used P228. Had the dealer send it directly to GrayGuns, it went back and forth between GragGuns and CCR, and when everything was finished GrayGuns sent it to my FFL.

I’m going to stare at my P239 SAS for the next hour to see if I can understand what sigfreund wrote. I only own two Sigs, both DAK. Those are the only guns I carry, but I readily admit I don’t havre a great understanding of their internal workings. Because of the P320 thread, I have a better understanding of how a P320 works even though I’ve never touched one than my DAK gums I’ve owned and shot for 18 years.

With any other firearm I own, if there is a point where the striker or hammer stops in a position between uncocked and fully cocked, I would call that position half cocked or partially cocked.

One quick question:

quote:

The hammer is automatically pulled back out of contact with the firing pin very slightly to make the guns drop safe.

Is this not what the firing pin block is for?

This message has been edited. Last edited by: trapper189,

The hammer on a P22X Sig rebounds, but doesn't half-cock. There's a spring inside that little plastic bushing or whatever it's called at the back of the frame below the hammer that engages the hammer and lifts it off the firing pin, but it doesn't compress the mainspring.

Guns like the CZ75 actually decock to a half cock position, where the mainspring is partially compressed and the hammer is held back by the sear in an intermediate notch. If you pull the trigger on a CZ75 on an empty chamber, the hammer will drop all the sway and stay forward, because it has no rebound like the Sig.

I'm with you on the drop safety function...I'm not sure what benefit the rebounding hammer provides, because if you drop the gun on the hammer that spring isn't strong enough to keep it from slamming into the firing pin. In fact, that spring gets defeated by the mainspring every time the gun fires. It seems to me that the firing pin block is the true drop-safety feature of the design, but I'm sure there's some engineering logic for the rebounding hammer that I'm not understanding.

quote:

Originally posted by trapper189:
Is this not what the firing pin block is for?

That’s a good question and you’re correct, the “safety lock” of Classic line SIG pistols does block the firing pin unless the trigger is pulled, just as the safety lock blocks the striker of a P320 unless the trigger is pulled.

I would say, though, that having the hammer reset spring pull the hammer back slightly so that the sear intercepts the hammer and prevents it from moving forward even if the hammer is struck is a secondary safety feature. There is a story that goes back to when P220 pistols did not have the hammer reset spring.

With those pistols if the hammer was decocked using the decocker as the gun was intended to be used, the hammer was blocked by the sear from moving forward far enough to contact the firing pin. That is true of all other Classic line pistols. If, however, someone “thumbed down” the hammer of an early P220, i.e., pulled the trigger and controlled the hammer with his thumb to prevent it from falling freely as if they were decocking a 1911, then the hammer would remain forward in contact with the firing pin that projects slightly from the rear of the slide.

The story was that a police officer who had an early P220 in a holster evidently did that, and while carrying his gun belt and weapon, the pistol fell onto the ground on its hammer and discharged, killing the officer.

Assuming the above story was true, why the safety lock in that slide didn’t block the firing pin, I cannot know, but the thumbing down process would have moved the safety lock out of the way of the firing pin, and perhaps it didn’t move back into the blocking position for some reason.

Whether that sad story is true, I’ve never attempted to determine, but because of that story or for some other reason SIG added the hammer reset spring to the mechanism to ensure that even if someone decocked a pistol by thumbing down rather than using the decocker, the spring would pull the hammer back to be intercepted and blocked by the sear.

Thanks for that explanation sigfreund!

Interesting. I can believe people thought the decocker was superfluous.

I only needed 15 minutes, not an hour, but I seems to me it’s more than this:

quote:

the main reason the pull weights differ is because of where the trigger bar contacts the hammer.

Looking at my P239 DAK, it seems the pull is lighter because of where the trigger bar contacts the hammer AND that the main spring is partially compressed thereby spreading the remaining compression of the main spring before the sear is released over the full travel of the trigger.

This is Sig’s hammer fired version of a Glock. In both, a portion of the spring tension necessary to fire the gun is locked in place before it is needed (I believe those in Glock circles would call this partially or pre cocked) and the remaining spring tension required to fire the gun is spread over the full travel of the trigger.

quote:

Originally posted by trapper189:
Is the rebound would be specific to DA/SA, correct?

Yes. DAK pistols do not have the hammer reset spring because the hammer does not remain in a cocked position after the slide is cycled and therefore it cannot be thumbed down to an uncocked position in contact with the firing pin. The hammer goes to the rest position automatically. The same is true of a DAO pistol. If I converted a DA/SA to DAO, the reset spring might still be there, but it would serve no purpose.

At this point I’ll admit that because it’s been so long since I’ve inspected a DAK mechanism, and I’m too lazy to dig out a pistol and do it now, I’m not certain what blocks the hammer from being pushed forward when it’s in its normal rest position. I believe it’s the sear just as the sear blocks a DA/SA or DAO hammer, and the sear contacts the little right angle ledge at the bottom front of the hammer pictured above. When the trigger is pulled, the sear is moved out of the way of the hammer, just as it is in any other Classic line pistol.

One thing to note is that when a DAK pistol is dry fired, the hammer ends up being completely shrouded by the “wings” at the back of the slide. It would be very difficult to get the hammer forward into the forward dry fire position with a round chambered, but not impossible, and because the hammer is then not exposed where it could be driven forward if the gun were dropped (hardly ever, anyway), it was probably not thought that any sort of reset method was necessary.

As for all the rest, we can agree to disagree if necessary.