Help me understand the flavors of striker fired pistols

D

Doyle

New member
I didn't want to derail one of the other threads that gave rise to this question. It appears that there are at least 2 flavors of striker fired mechanisms. One flavor - i.e. Glocks, partially cocks the striker by the slide action. If I understand correctly, this type of action does not allow a "2nd strike" capability".

Another flavor relies soley on the trigger pull to fully cock and activate the striker. I would assume that this type does allow for a 2nd strike capability.

I've also seen possible reference to a third type of striker mechanism where the striker is fully cocked by slide action and the trigger simply releases the striker but I have not been able to confirm this.

Other than Glocks which I know fit the first type, what manufacturer's produce which type of striker fired pistol? Also, am I missing anything in my understanding of the various flavors?
 
I think the XD falls into the fully cocked type

Taurus uses a SA/DA de-cocker system that will revert to DA on a misfire.

S&W and Ruger (SR series) strikers are more or less Glock types.

The Kel-Tec clones that Ruger has are actually hammer fired that may be either at half cocked or pure DA depending on which design they are using.

I'm sure there many variations that I'm not aware of.
 
Last edited:
I can confirm for you, the existence of the "third type", where the trigger only releases the striker. But I'm afraid you have it a little backwards.

It's not the 3rd type, it was the 1st type!

The classic, iconic striker fired pistol is the Luger P.08. Also used by nearly all the old hammerless pistol designs. And still surviving in the wild in many .22LR semi autos (though not the Ruger Mk series, which only look striker fired, and use an internal hammer system).

While the evolution of combat/duty class semi autos has largely drifted away from the original concepts using a fully cocked striker and the trigger only releasing it, it still survives in many pocket and sport type pistols.

And, of course, the dinosaurs of the early days are still with us, though they no longer reproduce, and are only very rarely seen in the wild. One can more often find them on preserves and ranges, from time to time, most often when the weather is nice. ;)
 
Most striker action pistols do not offer second strike, as they require slide movement to cock or partially cock the striker.

In addition to the ones mentioned above.

The m&p is fully cocked... The cheaper SD line is a glock like partial cock.

Walther PPQ, The new Six 320 and HK VP9 are full cock type.

The Walther P99 is a DA/SA type striker. It offers second strike as it is a true DA/SA and even has a decocker.
 
marine6680 said:
...The m&p is fully cocked... The cheaper SD line is a glock like partial cock.
Click to expand...

According to the stuff I can find on the 'net -- and S&W doesn't talk about it -- the S&W M&P striker IS, as you state, fully cocked.

But, except for the fact that the trigger doesn't need to complete a "power" stroke to finish charging the striker spring, the M&P otherwise seems to functions just like a Glock. By that, I mean that slide movement is required before the trigger can be later used to release the striker. (In that sense, the S&W M&P is certainly NOT double-action.)

With a Glock, the striker spring is not fully charged by slide movement and the trigger is used to finish the power stroke and release the striker. In both the S&W and Glock cases, there is no re-strike capability.

It's strange, really -- as the Springfield XD seems to function like the S&W, but the ATF considers the XD to be a single-action weapon. There must be a technical difference between the M&P and XD actions that I haven't seen explained.
 
Walt Sherrill said:
According to the stuff I can find on the 'net -- and S&W doesn't talk about it -- the S&W M&P striker IS, as you state, fully cocked.
Click to expand...

S&W has more recently begun openly referring to M&P models as Double Action Only. Discussions I have seen on S&W/M&P forums claim the M&P striker is 97%-98% pre-tensioned.
 
Agree with gc70. 98% cocked sounds about right. The Plastic M&P's sear is shaped to slightly cam the striker back. The first thing a gunsmith does to refine the trigger pull is to flatten out that contour so it becomes almost a pure single action striker engagement.
I think acceptance of the PM&P as a DA equivalent by many government agencies is due to vigorous advertising by S&W on past familiarity, not the mechanical design.

I don't think the XD is any less safe, but they don't have the long history in US law enforcement and they did not push the gun to LE.
 
gc70 said:
S&W has more recently begun openly referring to M&P models as Double Action Only. Discussions I have seen on S&W/M&P forums claim the M&P striker is 97%-98% pre-tensioned.
Click to expand...

Yeah. I saw that. But, by definition, it's NOT double-action. I'm not arguing with YOU, by the way, but with the folks who chose to use that term to describe the S&W action. ;)

To wit: Double action (DA) refers to any gun which can be cocked and fired by a single pull of the trigger.​

You'll find that definition or others using almost the same words, on various gun sites and even on DICTIONARY.COM.

I've seen the term Modified Double Action more recently, trying to address the the Glock approach. Some of the earlier S&W Double-Action Only Gen. 3 gun -- like a 4043 I once owned -- were very similar: no restrike, and the slide had to be moved a bit to before the trigger could be function. It seems seem more like a "modified" single action, to me -- as the trigger primarily releases the striker (as is the case with the XD.
 
Walt Sherrill said:
Double action (DA) refers to any gun which can be cocked and fired by a single pull of the trigger.
Click to expand...

I do not disagree with that definition, but it is informative to look at the complimentary definition of Single Action (taken from the Glock website: Learn About Handguns - #4 What is the action of a gun?)

Single-Action: The trigger is used only to release the hammer/firing pin and does not cock the firing mechanism.
Click to expand...

The controversies and arguments surround what it means to cock a gun. Does cocking a gun involve bringing the firing mechanism from totally at rest to the point of release, or can it be any degree (say 1% or 2%) of additional preparation of the firing mechanism prior to release?

ADDED:
As I see it, the trigger action categories -single or double- are very old and have not been updated or expanded as technology developed. Instead, new developments have been shoehorned into one or the other of the existing definitions, with an increasingly uncomfortable fit.
(I see I added my additional comments as you were posting similar comments in your response.)
 
Last edited:
The controversies arose when new action types came into being that didn't fit the old categories. Nobody bothered to come up with new definitions -- they just tried to fit them the new designs into the existing cubbyholes.

It seems silly: the Glock is neither SA nor DA, but something slightly different. (Glock calls it "safe action" but I think they're really addressing the trigger safety and not the fire control mechanism's action type.)

The S&W Third Gen. DAO guns weren't really DAO, either, but did seem to take more finger action than a Glock does.

Until I see a technically correct cutaway (or an animation) of the S&W M&P action actually working, I'll remain unconvinced that the trigger plays any role in powering the striker spring.

Pulling the trigger on a S&W M&P, particularly if you've installed an APEX kit, sure feels like a SA gun, and the fact that the action doesn't have a re-strike ability argues against DA and for SA -- or something different.

I'd like to see how the Springfield XD trigger/striker function differs from the S&W trigger/striker function -- but just looking at diagrams isn't particularly helpful.

As I said, however, my argument isn't with YOUR comments.
 
Okay, my wife's DB9, which I assume is the Glock config, can re strike if you partially rack the slide. Is that Glock or one of the 3?
 
Walt Sherrill said:
It seems silly: the Glock is neither SA nor DA, but something slightly different. (Glock calls it "safe action" but I think they're really addressing the trigger safety and not the fire control mechanism's action type.)
Click to expand...

I agree that partially-cocked actions do not fall neatly into the two longstanding trigger action categories, but the industry does not seem anxious to change the definitions or expand the number of categories.

You are correct in your thoughts about Glock's "Safe Action" being a safety system rather than a trigger action type. Below is Glock's description of its “Safe Action”® System:

GLOCK’s revolutionary “Safe Action”® System provides a consistent trigger pull from the first to the last round. The three automatic independently operating mechanical safeties are built into the fire control system of the pistol. All three safeties disengage sequentially as the trigger is pulled and automatically reengage when the trigger is released. This safe, simple and fast system allows the user to concentrate fully on tactical tasks, particularly while under stress. It is safe if dropped and functional at temperatures from -40° to 122° Fahrenheit.
Click to expand...
 
Marty8613 said:
Okay, my wife's DB9, which I assume is the Glock config, can re strike if you partially rack the slide. Is that Glock or one of the 3?
Click to expand...

Glock?

More likely Kel-Tec (which DB copied, as did Ruger...) Isn't the DB hammer fired? The Kel-Tec design uses much more trigger action to make things happen -- it's part of their current design philosophy, and considered a safety function, by making a heavier, longer trigger pull.

The original definitions said, in effect, if the trigger can do the entire job, it's Double Action. If all the trigger does is release the hammer or striker, its Single Acton. That's apparently why the ATF called the Springfield XD a single-action gun.

Then they brought out guns that, after the first shot, reverted to SA mode (with the hammer or striker charged by slide movement). They called those guns DA/SA. Note: some folks say that DA/SA guns that can be started from cocked and locked could also properly be called SA/DA, as they're different from the typical DA/SA gun. (We're splitting hairs...)

And then there were DAO guns (double-action ONLY), which means that ONLY pulling the trigger makes things happen -- the hammer or striker is NOT cocked by the slide as is the case with many DA/SA guns. A lot of revolvers are like that, and some SIG and CZ semi-autos are are like that. Maybe others, too.

Then along came Glock, with another action type in which the slide must be moved (by loading or firing) to partially charge the striker or hammer spring before the trigger can function. With a Glock and similar actions, the trigger stroke completes the cycle, charging the spring and releasing the hammer or striker.
 
Last edited:
Glock calls their system "safe action". It is a blend of DAO and SAO that doesn't quite fit into any previous system. At least as far as I know. The ATF figures it is close enough to be classified DAO. As near as I can tell the M&P is almost identical to Glock and XD is true SAO.

The odd thing to me is that the Glock, after trigger take up, feels more like SAO. The XD and M&P both feel closer to DAO
 
We can focus on technical definitions. Glock and other similar action guns would technically be double action, since the trigger pull does move the striker in two ways - finishing the cocking and releasing the striker.

Or we can focus on practical definitions. Glock and other similar action guns behave like single action, since the motion of the slide is required to prep the gun for the next shot.

Either way, "safe action" is really much more of a marketing thing than a description of the trigger mechanism.

My preference is to focus on the practical, since that is really what matters on a day to day basis. If it has second strike, think double action. If it doesn't, think single action. All of the variations are important to know about when it comes time to work on the gun, but when your shooting, it only really matters how the gun behaves.
 
If you can call the positive sear engagement of the M&P double action... then you can claim the positive sear engagement and hammer camming of a CZ 75B with a cocked hammer DA as well...

Its functionally the same, but one is a hammer the other a striker.


The XD functions in a very similar way as the M&P... the design is different, how parts move is different, but practically speaking, they work the same. Less positive engagement, but there is a lot of surface area to the xd sear and striker engagement.


I would say you could call the Glock trigger and those similar to it... Assisted Double Action... or Slide ADA... if you want to really get technical.

Or even Partially Tensioned DA... Or you could call them half cocked... :rolleyes:

But I think Assisted works best.
 
Great discussion so far. I'm learning something. For the practical application, which of the striker fired pistols offer true 2nd strike capability (i.e. a 2nd chance to pull the trigger and hit the same primer without having to rack the slide)?

For this discussion, let's limit it to striker fired models and not DAO models with an internal hammer (i.e. older Ruger LC9, etc.).
 
The only ones I know of are in Posts #2 and 4.
One particular model of Taurus and the Walther P99AS.
The Taurus had some flaws reported, I would not consider anything but the Walther.
 
Doyle said:
... For the practical application, which of the striker fired pistols offer true 2nd strike capability (i.e. a 2nd chance to pull the trigger and hit the same primer without having to rack the slide)?
Click to expand...

The ones that immediately come to mind are the Walther P99AS, S&W SW99 (basically the same gun), Walther PPX, Canik TP9, Magnum Research MR9, SIG 250, Taurus 24/7 (which may depend on the model), and (ugh) the CZ-100. There may be others...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top