This very topic got a bit heated recently on another forum. One group was in the "I practice with every thing and have zero problems switching platforms". My feeling are that in a panic situation, I don't want any fumbling with "safety up for fire", "safety down for fire", "no safety", etc. I like having everything pretty much "pull the trigger and it goes bang".

quote:

Originally posted by SgtGold:The point I'm making is people tend to take this to extremes. The internet is full of people who assure you that you'll end up dead in a pool of blood if you don't carry an identical trigger to the one that's under the bed.

Extremes are never good. I can see devoting a disproportionate amount of practice to the pistol you carry the most, but I sure as heck am not about to limit myself by not shooting the others. There's too much enjoyment to be had in the shooting sports to take it that far. The chances of being in a gunfight are already small. The chances of being in a gunfight in which a fraction of a second on a safety/trigger will alter the outcome are infinitesimally small.

Thanks for all responses so far. I recently traded for a da/sa P239 and have a P320 also. Never have liked the feel of safety flicking off on the P220 SAO. I may keep it but likely only for competition.

I do pretty well switching from striker to/from DA/SA. The first shot may be a bit of a surprise, but is do-able. An external safety is a real problem. The higher the stress, such as in a match, the more likely I will forget that it is on.

However the German/Glock 22 degree grip angle completely throws me off after shooting Sigs for a while. Sigs have the common 18 degree grip angle.

A DA/SA is a safe gun for appendix carry, if that is your thing.

I answered your question this way: Several years back when conceal carrying first started being universally legal/accepted I decided I needed to get rid of my old 1911s that I had carried for over 30 years while on active duty and clandestinely as a civilian. Why, because family members who would often catch a glimpse of my gun would freak at the C&L gun. I went through several DA/SA before settling on a P220 in 38 Super. I spent many hours practicing and training with it to the point of a high degree of confidence with it but I still had to think when doing malfunction drills. One day I was at the range shooting my 1911 and as I was coming off the line a friend who was watching commented on how smoothly and quickly I had cleared the weapon and resumed shooting. I was barely aware that the gun had malfunctioned. Years of use had honed me to clearing the weapon as routinely as breathing. Those that have been in any type of stressful situation where you actually have to fire the weapon can tell you that thinking is the last thing you are able to do. I realized then that for me I needed to go with the gun I could work with best in a stressful situation. My trusty 1911 is back and I never considered another gun again for carrying. Go with what you can use the best and can keep running in adverse and stressful situations. All guns are mechanical and can fail you.

I normally carry a CZ75B or 1911. When I take my Glock or XD9 to the range, my thumb goes to release the safety.

It is best, under stress, to be trained.

People always talk about this myth that one action type is going to matter one way or another. If you are well trained, it is not going to matter. I can go back and forth at will between striker, and DA/SA with no issue. I am just as fast with either type, and just as accurate. (I have recently found one pistol that I am faster with than anything else. I may make a move soon to it exclusively when not at work. Right now I'm carrying a Glock at work, and a P226 Legion on my off time)

When I hear the "Stay only with one action type if your life depends on it" I always ask, do you use an AR or shotgun for any type of defensive work. The answer is almost universally yes. I ask them if the AR is the same action type as their defensive pistol. I usually get a blank look or some kind of "but, but it is different". No, it isn't different. You are just trained.

You will do as you are trained. If you are modestly trained, I would plan accordingly.

Something to keep in mind about responses to this type of question:

“I don’t have a problem,” is essentially meaningless. The question is not whether some people or even a large percentage of people don’t have problems, it’s whether the person asking the question might have a problem. If the problem-free guy is a member of the Triple Nine high-IQ group, has the skills and talents to be a Delta Ranger SAS ninja SEAL, and practices for two hours every day alternating between guns, what relevance do his experiences have for the rest of us? And has that person ever been in a situation in which he was attacked without warning, was injured early on, and then had to use a weapon that he wasn’t thinking about and hadn’t had a chance to warm up with?

On the other hand, if he’s a normal person but his “never had any problems” experiences were at the 15 yard line of an indoor range shooting at bull’s-eye targets, what does that mean?

If there’s one cartridge in a 1000-round box of ammunition that will blow up my rifle, that one round is far more important to me than the other 999. If I knew I had a box of ammunition like that and even if I were going to fire only a single cartridge, I’d chuck the entire lot, and not say, “Well, there’s a 99.9 percent chance I’ll be okay.”

What’s important about this question is whether some people have problems. If instructors say, “Yes, I’ve seen it,” competitors say, “Yes, I’ve seen it,” and experienced shooters are willing to admit, “Yes, it’s happened to me,” then it’s something the rest of us should consider very seriously. If we know we’re not going to experience any problems, great. But how do we know that? Every self-defense decision we make involves risks and compromises. Some cannot be avoided, but some can.

Excuse making is a funny thing. People discount what they want in conversations for a number of reasons. The SAS DELTA secret squirrel stuff always comes out, as some sort of gig. I'm not sure why it is used as some sort of insult, but it commonly does.

So, let's put it context. Do a large percentage of people switch between an AR and a Glock with no issues? Yes they do. Do these people practice hours on end? No they don't. Are they highly trained? No, they aren't. But, they seem to be able to do it with a small amount of money.

Then why is it such a big deal to people on the internet? It surely seems to be. You'd think the idea of having two different action types requires the skill of John Wick crossed with a Delta operator to hear some people talk. To hear some people talk, you should never pick up an AR. Or a shotgun. Because unless you are a SASDELTARANGERSEALTEAM 26, you aren't smart enough or capable enough to do it under stress. You actually are.

You will do as you train. If you don't train, plan accordingly.

My purpose in making the hyperbolic Super Operator comment is to emphasize the exact same point that others whose mantra is “train, train, train” usually bring up in these discussions. If someone says it’s necessary to train to avoid problems when switching among different operating systems, then they are introducing a critical caveat into their claims that it’s not such a big deal.

I certainly don’t have any objection to training-is-important advice because it is important. Two things, though:

One is that I’ve never seen anyone who says, “You won’t have a problem if you train properly,” describe what that proper training is. Some things may be a little obvious, but most isn’t. To return to my other example, is taking two guns to the range a couple times a year and firing 50 rounds from a static position at an operating platform enough? I suspect that descriptions of the “proper” training are so seldom forthcoming because they are either hopelessly unrealistic for most people to achieve or it would be obvious that they are ridiculously inadequate.

Are there established schools that offer such training and say, “Bring a 1911 and a Glock to our course, and we’ll teach you how to switch willy-nilly between them and never suffer an inadequate skills-caused malfunction”? Not that I’ve ever noticed.

And what’s more important, how do they know that whatever proficiency they believe they have will work in a real crisis? In a different discussion here I seem to remember someone’s using the example of trying to shoot accurately while having one’s testicles stepped on. Has anyone tried switching among various guns under those conditions? That question can of course be asked no matter whether the shooter sticks with one type of gun or switches back and forth, but one thing most shooting authorities advise is that simplicity is usually better when things become difficult.

Furthermore, and as a reminder, the original question in this thread asked what was best, not what was potentially achievable. If someone says he wants to see the top of Independence Pass and asks if it’s better to go in the summer or winter, I will say it’s possible at either time, but going in the summer is better because it’s possible to drive there. Going in the winter is possible, but would involve hiking for miles through deep snow. Want to train and equip yourself so you can do it in the winter? Good on you, but that’s not my recommendation.

But second, and most important, all shooters must ultimately answer questions like this for themselves. To reiterate, “I don’t have problems doing that,” comments are meaningless for answering that question for the individual. It’s like asking, “Is smoking bad for one’s health?” and being told, “My grandma lived to 92 and she smoked four packs of unfiltered Camels a day since she was eight.” Different people are different.

The fact that someone else doesn’t have any such problems because of his innate talents and/or even practice and training is immaterial to someone who doesn’t have those talents or lacks all the things that are required for an adequate training program: time, money, facilities, and especially knowledge of what specific activities must be practiced to learn not to have such problems. I personally have the first three, but the last? Not so much because I’ve never had them described in any of the formal training I’ve attended, or even explained by a knowledgeable person in a discussion like this.

As for the comparisons with operating a handgun in a high speed defensive situation and operating a long gun, anyone who is interested can join one of the departments I support, and I’ll take the time and effort to explain and demonstrate why they’re different.

Like I said, people have a wide range of excuses because it usually boils down to "I can't do it, so it can't be done". Ego is a great thing. Ego is a horrible thing. I usually see it come out of the striker fired crowd when they are making the excuses of why a DA/SA can't be shot well.

It boils down to this. If you are going to suck, you're going to suck less with a striker fired gun. Or in this case, with only one action type. If you are going to train, you're going to do you as you train. Excuses. They really do not impress me. I see people constantly complain about time, money, facilities, etc. Ok. Fine by me. You don't have it. Or you don't have the self disciple to make it. They make all kinds of comparisons about stuff that really isn't relevant. You should really stick with whatever. If you find yourself, in one fashion or the other, not able or willing to train. I got it. Completely cool with it. You just probably shouldn't be giving advice to everyone else about training.

YOU WILL DO AS YOU TRAIN. If you do not train, don't do it. There is no modicum of what is "best", despite those who anoint themselves to tell us otherwise. If you aren't going to train, don't do it. I really don't know how much plainer to say it without bringing someones smoking granny into it.

Cops are often poorly trained. They seem to be able to operate different weapons systems back and forth even at the lowly level of training some want to pay attention to. The more they pay attention the better they get. And they don't lose their minds under stress. Their fingers don't become sausages. They don't start drooling, close their eyes, become completely deaf. They also don't become super cops. They rise to the level of their training. But, again, as I have pointed out, they get the job done if they are trained. Another example (I know, its going to be touted as too different) is back up guns. The "I can't do it, so it can't be done" one trick ponies need to explain how cops magically go from their hip, to their ankle, successfully under stress. MY GOD. Agencies must spend millions of dollars teaching these monkeys to go to a different place on their body and retrieve a gun. And GASP. For many years, we had to operate a SIG Sauer classic P-Series for a primary, and had to shoot a J-Frame located on a different part of the body as a back up. How did we ever do it? After the academy, we took time in the few times a year to go to the range to train it. You will do as you train.

It is amusing that you mention the word "training" and it is automatically assumed that "training" means you have to be a Delta guy. Or it takes the level of training of a Delta guy to do this or that. And everyone else just isn't worthy of doing a complex skill, because they are just too fucking dumb. Or they have to spend eleventy billion dollars and 900,000 hours to do this or that skill. That is probably my favorite internet excuse. And generally I see it from people who refuse to train, so they can't do a skill, so it can't be done. In order to cushion the ego, there has to be a reason, so it is because it takes a P.hd in gun handling to do. Fact is, if you are going to mess with two weapons systems, and you are going to train with them, you can do it.

You will do as you train. Message ends.

The above post makes me smile.

I would like to be richer, thinner, and be better trained.

I'm working on all three.

But until I am, I will pinch pennies, buy long belts, and limit myself to primarily one platform. Which, if you're interested, is a Sig P226 DA/SA SRT.

Yes, it is important to achieve muscle memory with a single manual of arms. Not only when under duress, but when you are loading and unloading or otherwise handling a gun. All of my carry guns are Sig Sauer DA/SA pistols. I make one exception, when I am hunting and carry a 4' S&W Model 66. Since it is a DA that can be cocked for single action shooting, it is similar enough to my Sigs that I don't have to worry.

The point is, that I can always pick up a gun in my home, or from my holster, point it, pull the trigger and know that it is going to fire.

The only potential issue I can see is a momentary hesitation caused by the "Wait, which one do I have in my hands?" moment. Like jljones said, being proficient in two different types is easy enough, and you don't struggle going between a rifle and a pistol; but on the other hand there's no question which one you have in your hands between a rifle and a pistol.

I don't ride a motorcycle, but I imagine people have no problems switching between riding and driving a car. I don't expect people try to shift with their foot or rotate the steering wheel to accelerate. I suspect those same people may find their foot going to the clutch in an automatic though.

quote:

Originally posted by bobtheelf:
I suspect those same people may find their foot going to the clutch in an automatic though.

When driving automatic, my left foot is very twitchy.

Ima gunna side with Jones on this and I'll add to his analogies...

I drive a Kia Optima, a Ford F-150, and a Kawasaki Concours 14. No two vehicles have the transmission shift lever in the same place, have wiper controls in same place, have light switches and other controls in the same place. All have greatly different acceleration and braking performance yet somehow, I am able to seemlessly switch between all three and function in both routine and high stress situations.

I've yet to squeeze a steering wheel with my left hand thinking the vehicle will stop, I shift manually as needed on the motorcycle instead of assuming it is automatic, I don't thump the floorboard with my left foot to downshift the car or truck.

I am familiar with all three, I use all three regularly, and when driving I maintain a pretty high level of awareness and alertness.

My most carried gun is a P938 (SAO), carried cocked/locked and I instinctively snap the safety off as it comes out of the pocket. When I think it isn't "enough", I carry a P320. No worries there, no manual safety and striker simplicity. If I am on the bike, a Glock is in the tank bag.

Nightstand houses a P226 TacOps with TLR light/laser combo. If shit gets really serious I'll go for AR (5.56 or 7.62) and/or the Mossy 930SPX.

Oh, and later today I add an MPX to the stable...

I believe practice, training, familiarity, and awareness are important regardless of how many (or few) weapons you decide to work with. So long as you have practiced and are intimately familiar with it, it shouldn't matter which you have at the time. I know by the feel what is in my hand, at that point how to use it becomes reflexive.

It couldn't hurt to train with one action type only.

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:

YOU WILL DO AS YOU TRAIN.

You will do as you train. Message ends.

I have striker fired, DA/SA, DAK and SAO. Ill carry any of them. I am not a SPECOPSNINJADELTATEAMMEMBER.
What I will do when I decide to change to a different pistol is put a few hundred rounds through it, practicing drawing and reholstering and generally get a different mindset.
I then will go in my house, I have my own outdoor range, and practice drawing and dry firing. From there, I'm usually GTG.
Is there an advantage to just having one platform? Possibly. I like variety and I have various pistols.

quote:

Originally posted by RANGER20:
It couldn't hurt to train with one action type only.

Yep. And if you have a DA/SA pistol, you ought to share your training time between DA (that important first shot) and SA. With SAO, all one mode.