If uncomfortable with Strikers, which CCW?
- Thread starter chemcal
- Start date
corneileous
New member
I’m sure there’s probably a way to convert one to it but Beretta makes a type C and a type D. Both of which being double-action but the C is a constant-action which means it always fires every round from the half-cocked position every time but the D is the TDA that fires every time like the first decocked shot of a type F or G.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
corneileous
New member
They sure do. I’ve got one. The XDE. Got it in .45.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
It can't. You can switch between having a safety or having a decocker. Either way, it's a DA/SA action. It can't be DA only or SA only. (Maybe CZ Custom could do something with the action to make it DAO or SAO, but not OEM)
Action wise, it's basically a CZ-75 Omega in a polymer frame (though not compatible in any parts or mags with a CZ-75).
Last edited:
I often carry one of many concealed hammer pistols with a barrel less than 4".
Today it is my 1941 JP Sauer 38h. Internal hammer, DA/SA with a thumb cocking/decocking lever as well as a safety, 8+1 magazine, 32acp.
Another that gets carried often is my Beretta Model 70 with a cross bolt safety. It's a newer made gun from 1967 and also 8+1 32acp magazine. The Beretta 70 is SA with a smooth crisp trigger and carried Cocked & Locked.
Today it is my 1941 JP Sauer 38h. Internal hammer, DA/SA with a thumb cocking/decocking lever as well as a safety, 8+1 magazine, 32acp.
Another that gets carried often is my Beretta Model 70 with a cross bolt safety. It's a newer made gun from 1967 and also 8+1 32acp magazine. The Beretta 70 is SA with a smooth crisp trigger and carried Cocked & Locked.
Cyanide971
New member
My P-07 was converted to DAO a couple of years ago by CZ Custom and now sports a very nice 6.5# pull, and they also smoothed out and lightened my factory DAO P-09 MHS to 7#.
The Beretta PX4 Compact was recently converted to “D” configuration to match my factory PX4 D full size by a friend of mine (who’s a huge Beretta guru) , and it now has about a 7.5-8# pull. Says it was relatively easy to do, just swapping out the hammer assembly group w/spurless hammer and then replacing the mainspring with an LTT 11# spring. He also replaced the right side slide stop lever with a frame plug, and put slim stealth device levers on so as to give the slide as slim a profile as possible. I’m away from home with work for the next several weeks, but can snap a few pics of the actual pistol once I return if y’all would like? Only have this one of the parts before his handiwork (wasn’t able to get the Ameriglos installed, however), and here’s a link to the hammer assembly if interested.
https://www.midwestgunworks.com/page/mgwi/prod/C89160
Generally Geco, PPU, S&B or Fiocchi FMJ. I never understood the reasoning for hollow point from a short barrel. Even from my 1903 Type 1 with the full 4" barrel i still stick to FMJ.
I didn't mean to imply there was anything wrong with it, but it is not pleasing to me and does not compare favorably to a pistol twice or triple its price, which would be where most of the DA/SA pistols are priced. My experience is that stores will stock the CW9, but not the nicer, costlier Khar. I think it would be unfair if a person only handled a CW9 and decided to dismiss Kahr without seeing a T9 or K9 or another one of their finer pistols, particularly if they were willing to pay $800 or $900 on a Sig or 1911 Officers model. A CW9 would not be a fair comparison.
What aspect of strikers?
What is it about strikers that make you unwilling to carry them?
Is it the light first trigger pull in contrast to a Double Action first trigger pull?
Is it the lack of a safety on some models?
Identifying what you don't like about them can point to what you're looking for.
My EDC are a J frame revolver, and the Kahr CM9.
Technically, the CM9 is a striker fired pistol. But it relies partially on the trigger pull to give it enough energy to set off the primer. If the striker were to somehow slip off the sear, it would not have the same final energy as at the end of the trigger pull. So it's a striker fired pistol in name and for space saving considerations (don't need a big grip to house a pivoting hammer) but the long heavy (both smooth) trigger pull feels like a slicked up revolver trigger. It's one of the most accurate pistols I own and I feel comfortable pocket carrying with a softer pocket holster (Desantis Nemesis).
I don't really see anything wrong with the economy series of Kahr pistols, at least not my CM9. It has a tighter slide - to frame fit and barrel to slide fit than my M&P40c / 9c (original version, not 2.0). The trigger has less over travel and a cleaner break than my M&P too, despite being much longer. I have yet to try a PM9, maybe I'd be completely blown away by it.
What is it about strikers that make you unwilling to carry them?
Is it the light first trigger pull in contrast to a Double Action first trigger pull?
Is it the lack of a safety on some models?
Identifying what you don't like about them can point to what you're looking for.
My EDC are a J frame revolver, and the Kahr CM9.
Technically, the CM9 is a striker fired pistol. But it relies partially on the trigger pull to give it enough energy to set off the primer. If the striker were to somehow slip off the sear, it would not have the same final energy as at the end of the trigger pull. So it's a striker fired pistol in name and for space saving considerations (don't need a big grip to house a pivoting hammer) but the long heavy (both smooth) trigger pull feels like a slicked up revolver trigger. It's one of the most accurate pistols I own and I feel comfortable pocket carrying with a softer pocket holster (Desantis Nemesis).
I don't really see anything wrong with the economy series of Kahr pistols, at least not my CM9. It has a tighter slide - to frame fit and barrel to slide fit than my M&P40c / 9c (original version, not 2.0). The trigger has less over travel and a cleaner break than my M&P too, despite being much longer. I have yet to try a PM9, maybe I'd be completely blown away by it.
It would be very important to train trigger finger discipline -- that is, keeping the finger off the trigger when the sights are not on the target. As for the control needed to hold a target at gunpoint with the finger on the trigger, but not shoot it, I'm not sure that practice is advisable. I'm not saying one must shoot anything they muzzle with the finger on the trigger, but that it may not be advisable to muzzle something with your finger on the trigger unless it can be shot, or in other terms, until it's qualified as a target in a "good" shoot.
I do appreciate that it would seem striker-fired handgun manufacturers seemed to have engaged in a race to shorter, lighter trigger pulls. Some of them aren't far from an old GI single-action trigger, but without the safety. They are built that way for high-performance shooting and personally, I don't think they are best suited for concealed carry under or inside clothing. They are better suited to competition holsters, or possibly duty belt holsters that stand-off in conjunction with tight-fitting competition jerseys or tight-fit, tucked-in uniforms.
I do appreciate that it would seem striker-fired handgun manufacturers seemed to have engaged in a race to shorter, lighter trigger pulls. Some of them aren't far from an old GI single-action trigger, but without the safety. They are built that way for high-performance shooting and personally, I don't think they are best suited for concealed carry under or inside clothing. They are better suited to competition holsters, or possibly duty belt holsters that stand-off in conjunction with tight-fitting competition jerseys or tight-fit, tucked-in uniforms.