You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Do you prefer pistols that are hammer fired or striker fired?
- Thread starter GunLuvr01
- Start date
PatientWolf
New member
I really prefer hammer fired.
That being said, I have some striker fired which work well for what I got them for. There are also 2 striker fired I've handled lately, but don't own that seem really nice and would be welcome additions: the Ruger LC9s (as an alternative to my PM9) and the Sig Sauer P320 (I could use another .40).
That being said, I have some striker fired which work well for what I got them for. There are also 2 striker fired I've handled lately, but don't own that seem really nice and would be welcome additions: the Ruger LC9s (as an alternative to my PM9) and the Sig Sauer P320 (I could use another .40).
Wreck-n-Crew
New member
I know that what I am about to say will set some people off. Some people are hardcore fans and they will take it personally as an attack on their firearm when it is not:
There are light carry options (polymer, alloy) that are hammer fired, ultra reliable (even affordable) Semi-autos with great triggers. I prefer hammer fired because the best triggers available (out of the box) are hammer fired SA triggers. This is not a 1911 vs Glock theme or opinion by far, it's just the trigger.
Attention all HK and SIG fans of hammer fired pistols, please trade in your outdated gun for the new modern gun! Since there are so many of them they will not be a good item to collect. Also, since they are outdated they are not worth as much. I will however be buying a few of those outdated pistols at a higher than current value! I will pay $350 for a sig 226 in 9mm and %90 condition (that's $75 more than what it's worth now due to new technology). I also want an H&K in 9mm and 45. Please Pm me with what you have and I will pay above value as well. But hurry the offers won't last and prices of used outdated guns are dropping as we speak!Sarcasm ended.
Second strike is not that important to me and one can get around it. I prefer to have it on a gun with a good trigger that has a SA trigger though. It is to me like other features to me: adjustable sights, drop out magazines, easy to use magazine release, and light trigger pull. Not as do or die as reliability and ease of accuracy. YMMV
There are light carry options (polymer, alloy) that are hammer fired, ultra reliable (even affordable) Semi-autos with great triggers. I prefer hammer fired because the best triggers available (out of the box) are hammer fired SA triggers. This is not a 1911 vs Glock theme or opinion by far, it's just the trigger.
Warning, what follows is full of sarcasm. All emotionally sensitive people should not read anything in blue letters between the red letters! :Glock 19, carry and IDPA gun. Sixteen rounds, not too heavy, works all the time. The modern way!
Attention all HK and SIG fans of hammer fired pistols, please trade in your outdated gun for the new modern gun! Since there are so many of them they will not be a good item to collect. Also, since they are outdated they are not worth as much. I will however be buying a few of those outdated pistols at a higher than current value! I will pay $350 for a sig 226 in 9mm and %90 condition (that's $75 more than what it's worth now due to new technology). I also want an H&K in 9mm and 45. Please Pm me with what you have and I will pay above value as well. But hurry the offers won't last and prices of used outdated guns are dropping as we speak!Sarcasm ended.
Less moving parts yes. More reliable? Maybe, but not FME. I have had more light strike failures from striker than hammer fired (not the bullets fault). Weak firing pin spring (striker fired ) and weak hammer springs (hammer fired) the main cause of light strikes FME. If the design, QC, and parts quality are good there should not be a failure to begin with in either design. YMMVwhen the trigger is pulled striker fired guns are simpler and more reliable.
Keep in mind there are a few striker fired pistols with double strike capability. I agree that if in a FOF situation I would tap/rack/bang and forgo the second strike. Doesn't seem that useful in that situation but it has plenty of advantage if it doesn't go bang if you shoot a lot. If you get a light strike or a hang fire it will more than likely be at practice. With a second trigger pull most of the time the round will fire. Saves you from having to wait x-amount of seconds before ejecting the round and continuing on. Safer if it does go bang the second time. No open chamber if the round gos off.You do lose the 2nd strike capability, but the odds of the 2nd strike actually making a difference are slim to none.
Second strike is not that important to me and one can get around it. I prefer to have it on a gun with a good trigger that has a SA trigger though. It is to me like other features to me: adjustable sights, drop out magazines, easy to use magazine release, and light trigger pull. Not as do or die as reliability and ease of accuracy. YMMV
First, its always a good idea to include a "neither" or "none of the above" choice in a poll. A "both" or "all" might apply as well.
The OP asks for opinions, what we prefer, so all answers are "valid".
However, there are blanket statements and assumptions being made that are not valid, as stated. People tend to look at their personal experience, and express them as absolutes, when a look at everything shows the "absoluteness" of some statements to be incorrect.
This isn't a rant against any one, its about blanket statements, about either style.
Striker fired are simpler/ hammer fired have better trigger pulls/ etc.
Both groups include a WIDE variety of designs, and I guarantee you if you make a blanket statement about either I can find at least one exception.
As an example, when you think striker fired, you might think GLock. I might think Luger. Or Ruger Mark I .22.
Like wise hammer fired, you might think 1911, I might think Mauser Broomhandle. Or Walther PPK, etc.
If you could show me a pair of pistols, identical except for one hammer fired, and one striker fired, THEN it would come down to my personal preference. Otherwise, I look at the entire gun as a package, ALL features considered.
The OP asks for opinions, what we prefer, so all answers are "valid".
However, there are blanket statements and assumptions being made that are not valid, as stated. People tend to look at their personal experience, and express them as absolutes, when a look at everything shows the "absoluteness" of some statements to be incorrect.
This isn't a rant against any one, its about blanket statements, about either style.
Striker fired are simpler/ hammer fired have better trigger pulls/ etc.
Both groups include a WIDE variety of designs, and I guarantee you if you make a blanket statement about either I can find at least one exception.
As an example, when you think striker fired, you might think GLock. I might think Luger. Or Ruger Mark I .22.
Like wise hammer fired, you might think 1911, I might think Mauser Broomhandle. Or Walther PPK, etc.
If you could show me a pair of pistols, identical except for one hammer fired, and one striker fired, THEN it would come down to my personal preference. Otherwise, I look at the entire gun as a package, ALL features considered.
Got the sarcasm bit!
Must go back to a common wee speech my Dad was fond of, it suited a lot of situations "To each, his own" suits this post as well.
The main reason I carry a CCW, is for the defense of me, and mine.
The times in life (I am old you know) that I have protected me, and mine in the past, no gun was available were I resided. Yes I had guns, at home.
Feet/Fists/elbows/forehead/ various parts of the body, and what was around about.
Did good as well.
But since arriving in to the USA, and actually before moving here, I had a Florida CCW, when Canadians could have out of State CCWs. Like since the 80s.
Funny then, being more free away from home.
Since joining various blogs over the years, some long before moving to Florida, and before becoming a US Citizen.
My choice of handguns was based on what I knew, and what Pistols I instructed, professionally, for 25 years.
When the Glock 19 was first introduced, I changed from the G17, still kept the spare Mag. a G17 one. Two more rounds, and did not pinch my hand.
In the years since adopting the Glock 19, I have watched my peers change from this pistol, to that pistol, that calibre, and the other, and sometimes back again. I stayed with the G19, went from second Gen, to third gen now to 4th! Like the more aggressive pebble finish, much better in the rain, no sweat problems, my hands and feet don't sweat.
Trigger I played with, clean 5 lb release, sights? 5 years ago, Truglo, in all green, Glock factory extended slide release (slide lock lever?)the neat little butt plug, that makes for much smoother magazine changes.
No spring changes what's so ever.
The 9mm Ammo available just got better, and better. Once I drop my hand to my cut up cheap Glock Factory holster, it is now automatic, the handling and firing the pistol.
And that is why I stay with this Pistol, muscle memory is a trite phrase, we all understand it, even though muscles can not have a memory!
If I ever need to use this weapon for the reason it was developed, no past memory will infringe on the adrenalin fueled action, dictated by the action of an other.
Must go back to a common wee speech my Dad was fond of, it suited a lot of situations "To each, his own" suits this post as well.
The main reason I carry a CCW, is for the defense of me, and mine.
The times in life (I am old you know) that I have protected me, and mine in the past, no gun was available were I resided. Yes I had guns, at home.
Feet/Fists/elbows/forehead/ various parts of the body, and what was around about.
Did good as well.
But since arriving in to the USA, and actually before moving here, I had a Florida CCW, when Canadians could have out of State CCWs. Like since the 80s.
Funny then, being more free away from home.
Since joining various blogs over the years, some long before moving to Florida, and before becoming a US Citizen.
My choice of handguns was based on what I knew, and what Pistols I instructed, professionally, for 25 years.
When the Glock 19 was first introduced, I changed from the G17, still kept the spare Mag. a G17 one. Two more rounds, and did not pinch my hand.
In the years since adopting the Glock 19, I have watched my peers change from this pistol, to that pistol, that calibre, and the other, and sometimes back again. I stayed with the G19, went from second Gen, to third gen now to 4th! Like the more aggressive pebble finish, much better in the rain, no sweat problems, my hands and feet don't sweat.
Trigger I played with, clean 5 lb release, sights? 5 years ago, Truglo, in all green, Glock factory extended slide release (slide lock lever?)the neat little butt plug, that makes for much smoother magazine changes.
No spring changes what's so ever.
The 9mm Ammo available just got better, and better. Once I drop my hand to my cut up cheap Glock Factory holster, it is now automatic, the handling and firing the pistol.
And that is why I stay with this Pistol, muscle memory is a trite phrase, we all understand it, even though muscles can not have a memory!
If I ever need to use this weapon for the reason it was developed, no past memory will infringe on the adrenalin fueled action, dictated by the action of an other.
personal preference, sig 226 or cz75 for carry. I do have one striker, a springfield xd,that i bought to see what striker action was like, I guess it is not a bad gun just that I can not change my ways. I do not like the trigger but as far as I know , maybe that model does not have a good trigger. Doubt I will ever buy another.
Dirty_Harry
New member
Hammer fired for a defensive firearm, and striker fired for competition.
I don't necessarily prefer one or the other, but I would choose hammer fired if I could only have one.
I don't necessarily prefer one or the other, but I would choose hammer fired if I could only have one.
Gats Italian
New member
There's nothing "modern" about a striker fired pistol's ignition system. It debuted in the Steyr-Hahn M1911.
I favor hammer DA/SA with decockers. I will say that I have grown to like striker fired models much more than in the past. Undoubtable owning a very good model as my first one and then following it up with an equally good model has gone a long way in helping me change my mind.
It would have been interesting to have seen the poll to have the hammer fired divided into DA only and DA/SA.
It would have been interesting to have seen the poll to have the hammer fired divided into DA only and DA/SA.
Prefer hammer fired for the following reasons:
1) just don't like the trigger feel of striker fired;
2) as has been commented above, the state of a hammer fired is obvious;
3) to me, a DA pull w. loaded chamber is safer than a striker fired w, loaded chamber;
4) SA trigger pull on hammer-fired is much nicer (to me) than striker-fired trigger pull;
5) I like the option of a second strike on a misfire, rather than having to rack the slide.
1) just don't like the trigger feel of striker fired;
2) as has been commented above, the state of a hammer fired is obvious;
3) to me, a DA pull w. loaded chamber is safer than a striker fired w, loaded chamber;
4) SA trigger pull on hammer-fired is much nicer (to me) than striker-fired trigger pull;
5) I like the option of a second strike on a misfire, rather than having to rack the slide.