'Double Action Only' Pistols

SmithNut, when you fire a revo DA, you're firing it with the second action that the trigger can do...I don't have a problem with that term at all. When you limit a trigger to perform a single task only, it's a single action, regardless of the length of pull. And no, I'm not upset at all, just thinking out loud...sorry ;) FUD, I kinda like it...Long Single Action!
 
FUD,

Long Single Action? I think I've seen a manufacturer (Smith? Taurus?) call this Traditional Double Action. I'm not so sure that is the appropriate way to describe it, but the term was used to describe semi-automatic handguns that do this:

From hammer down on a round in the chamber, the shooter can indeed pull the trigger and the hammer will be brought back and dropped on the chambered round and all subsequent rounds fired use the single action mode because the slide cocks the hammer.

For the semi-automatics that do not allow the hammer to be manually cocked for the first shot nor do not allow the slide to cock the hammer when it cycles after a discharge, the manufacturer called Double Action Only.

Go figure...

Joe
 
Originally posted by Smithnut:
-----I don't know what's so hard about this. Have you ever shot a revolver? For all the time I have been shooting, you either shot it "double action", pulling the trigger through for each shot, or you cocked it first, and shot it "single action".------ Smithnut,
I agree with what you say above, but remember that a revolver will not cock after each shot. That's where the whole confusion arises; with autos, not revolvers. Some auttos will cock after the first shot and some will not. I also agreee with your scepticism of Ed Sanow's lumping Glock in with DAO. I don't think you can necessarily use the same terminology between revolvers and autos. Having too many terms will confuse people, but not enough is just as bad.
 
OK guys. Thanks for letting me play with this. It seems like I am satisfied with "the way things are", and am not hung up enough on "the way they should be". So, I am outta this discussion, and will remain blisfully happy with my DAO Smith & Wessons, pulling that trigger all the way back each and every time I want to make noise. I remain. ......SmithNut
 
The arguments over the meaning of "single action" and "double action" seem to go on forever. Unfortunately, we've created a situation in which logic conflicts with established usage, so the squabbling will likely continue for some time.

It's possible that the term "double action" arose to describe revolvers that could be cocked in two different ways, by thumbing back the hammer or by pulling the trigger. But if we were to apply this definition rigorously, wouldn't we have to classify a revolver with an internal hammer or a bobbed hammer as "single action", since it would present only one option for cocking the hammer?

Applying the definitions to autopistols gets even trickier. Look at all the permutations we'd run into if we were to classify them according to the options for cocking the firing mechanism (hammer or striker):

First, we'd have three basic cocking mechanisms: the trigger, the slide or bolt, and external levers such as a hammer or the frontstrap of a HK P7M8.

Then, for each of the three mechanisms, we'd have to decide if its operation was sufficient, or necessary, or both necessary and sufficient or irrelevant as a method to cock the pistol.

This would give us eleven possible permutations. (Three mechanisms multiplied by four possibilities yield twelve permutations, but we can safely discard the "irrelevant/irrelevant/irrelevant" combination since such a pistol could never be fired.)

Examples:

A Colt Government Model would be an "ISS", since it's impossible to cock by squeezing the trigger but manipulation of either the slide or the hammer itself is sufficient to cock it.

A Glock 17 would be an "NNI", since movement of both the slide and the trigger is necessary to fully cock the striker and there's no other way to do it.

A Beretta 92FS would be an "SSS", since either pulling the trigger, cycling the slide or thumbing the hammer will suffice to cock it. Or perhaps it would be an "SSS/III", since activation of the decocker/safety lever will make it impossible to cock by any means.

Hmmm...

Then again, there's little rhyme or reason to the way cartridges are named, so why should handgun designs be any different? :D
 
I always thought that "single-action" meant that the trigger controlled one action, dropping a cocked hammer. "Double-action" both drew the hammer into the cocked position and dropped the hammer. In this case, "Double-action only" is used properly.

Personally, this is one case in which Jeff Cooper and I think alike, "it is an ingenious solution to a non-existant problem."
 
A agree to disagree also. Let's all just give up now before we're all at the manufacturer's doors with torches shouting rediculous things about trigger terminology. I still feel the same way, but in the big picture, it really doesn't matter.
 
You're correct, FUD (isn't that how Gary Larsen animals spell "food" when they're smart enough to write at all?). Glocks, et. al are not true DAO or DA/SA of course. Since "safe action" is proprietary, perhaps we need to devise a good shorthand for the general class -

"Half-DAO"
"NSSDAO" (no second strike)
"SLTPA" (single length trigger pull action)
"CLTPA" (consistent length)
 
To borrow from a U.S. Supreme Court Justice (Potter Stuart?):

I may not be able to define DAO, but I know what it is if I see it.

Joe
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top