Striker-fired,,,…safest?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Aguila Blanca said:
I wrote that Glock's description of their system as "safe action" is a term that conveys no useful information. As for the more detailed explanation of how their system works (from your link), in the context of whether it's single-action or double-action, IMHO it still conveys no useful information.
Click to expand...


Double-action or single-action convey no information until you have the experience with the respective firearms to know what those terms mean. The same is true here.

As for whether it’s single or double-action, I thought for your response earlier that your contention was it was neither, and I would agree. As systems are changed or developed we add terms as necessary. I don’t know that we need to force those terms onto a category of firearms that didn’t exist when the terms began to be widely used. I also don’t know whether we need to know the answer to that question in order to answer the OP’s original question.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
wild cat mccane said:
Still missing the 3 confused concepts as one though.

A trigger pull discharges any gun because the firing pin block correctly moved. If you finger pulled more weight is irrelevant. The VP9 at 100% cocked is about the same weight of pull as Glock.

A dropped gun is protected by the trigger dingus stopping the trigger from bouncing rearward, which would mechanically and correctly move the firing pin block. The dingus only exists for a drop safety. The Walther P99 has it as the back of the trigger shape doing the same. The P320 has a safety block as I put in my post above.

A gun won't fire, Glock cocked at 68% or 100% on the PPQ, unless the firing pin block moves by the trigger moving.


At no point is the Glock at 68% cocked safer in any of those cases because the Sear isn't different and the Trigger Dingus is drop safe for all of them, and the Firing Pin exists on all of them (safety block on the P320).


Based on his opinion, the lightest Single Action of all these guns is the P99AS. The pull when in Anti-Stress mode is a long travel with no weight--WAY longer than a Glock.

The only point where safety is actually a consideration in my mind is reset. A 68% cocked striker on the Glock is going to require a harder and/or longer reset than a striker single action gun like the PPQ, VP9, M&P. But that isn't always how it plays out by the manufacturer. Look at the VP9 which has a false reset point and overall longer reset than a PPQ or P-10
Click to expand...


Not all pistols have a firing pin block. The ones you mentioned do have one, but it’s worth keeping in mind that not all designs currently being produced do.

Not related to the amount the striker is cocked, but I’m not sure all designs have the equivalent of Glock’s drop safety that blocks the cruciform from dropping out of the way and releasing the striker. This is in addition to the firing pin safety and trigger safety. Other designs may use this as well, but they don’t advertise it like Glock does.


It would be nice if the OP comes back and chimes in on the comments made so far, and whether they touch upon what in the article drew his/her attention.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
The only safety on a Glock is between your ears. A 1911 or other gun with a manual safety is safer than a Glock. Even if the safety is a grip safety it's safer than a Glock. It's between your ears only with the Glock.
 
Cops and Glocks, an accident waiting to happen. Guns with double action first shot and a safety are 100% safer than a glock and a holster. A lot of the accidents with glocks are traced back to something sweeping the trigger by accident. A double action auto with the safety applied may be slightly less quick to get into action but is infinitely safer than a Glock. It comes down to training and someone thought the average cop couldn't train well enough to take the safety off under stress. I believe the Sig the Army adopted has a safety while it's striker fired to carry safely. How many accidental police shootings can be traced back to the shorter, lighter first pull of a Glock? Perfect handgun system? Not even close. I do like the double action autos with the hammer drop like CZ P01. No safety to worry about but a much safer system to carry than a Glock.
 
Part of it is reassuring government purchasing agents that your product is safe.

S&W broke into the striker fired duty pistol market by asserting that their striker was cammed back by trigger action, too. Right, about as much as the hammer of a CZ75 is cammed back, maybe 50 thou for 90% cocked instead of 68; and the first thing a gunsmith stones away for a trigger job.

I saw where LA was buying FN 509 for new hires. It surely has a firing pin block but I would bet it is fully cocked like most of the others on the market.
 
All striker fired guns have a fire pin block, safety block (P320), or an inertia firing pin (DB9). Here the DB9 is super weird because the pin leaves a mark on the primer, just a slight hit, every time a round is chambered.

USPSA mandates you don't drop your gun, they don't require a firing pin block. That's why the CZ Shadow compact and Shadow 2 are odd balls as "production" guns that don't have firing pin blocks. Almost all current guns have a mechanical barrier or restraint from the pin hitting hitting the primer that is removed when the trigger is pulled.

(Since we are talking modern guns and not 1911 70 or 80 series)


None of the current striker fired guns are going off on their own.
All have different weights and travels with Glock not always being the longest or heaviest.

So the idea that the 68% cocked striker is safer than the 100% cocked striker doesn't make mechanical sense. They both fire when pulled. They both don't fire when dropped.

So when is it more mechanically safe? There is no mechanical scenario.

If the others are unsafe, the Glock is in the same situation.

It's all about reset in my mind. But then what about a classic Sig with a SRT?
 
No partially cocked anything on my CZ 100, which has a true DAO action and an 8.5# trigger pull, albeit that feels like a staple gun. How many of y’all remember the old HK VP-70, with it’s 18# trigger pull? [emoji23][emoji1787][emoji23]
 
Jim Watson said:
Part of it is reassuring government purchasing agents that your product is safe.

S&W broke into the striker fired duty pistol market by asserting that their striker was cammed back by trigger action, too. Right, about as much as the hammer of a CZ75 is cammed back, maybe 50 thou for 90% cocked instead of 68; and the first thing a gunsmith stones away for a trigger job.

I saw where LA was buying FN 509 for new hires. It surely has a firing pin block but I would bet it is fully cocked like most of the others on the market.
Click to expand...


From what I can find the 509 is only partially cocked, like the FNS.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
TunnelRat said:
As for whether it’s single or double-action, I thought for your response earlier that your contention was it was neither, and I would agree.
Click to expand...
That was, and is, my contention.

I don't know what to call it. "Single-and-a-half" action, perhaps?
 
Since it doesn't take a single action to fully cock the striker and release the sear on a Glock, it is right to call it a double action.

What that means for the original complaint, nothing.
 
Aguila Blanca said:
That was, and is, my contention.

I don't know what to call it. "Single-and-a-half" action, perhaps?
Click to expand...


As I said in the rest of the post you quoted, for me personally I don’t feel the need to force those terms into situations that don’t necessarily apply. To me it’s not traditional single action as the trigger pull is finishing the cocking action, but it’s not traditional double action as the striker isn’t fully decocked at rest (and there are striker fired pistols that can be fully decocked and have a traditional double action mode, such as the Walther P99). As long as I understand how the action works, and I feel like I understand it to a reasonable degree, that’s the more important part to me than whether past terminology makes sense in this context.

This situation isn’t solely a Glock or even a striker fired phenomenon. Before they developed and released their current striker fired pistols, HK with the LEM and SIG with the DAK had trigger systems that didn’t start completely in double action or completely in SA. The LEM system specifically uses the initial running of the slide to partially cock the hammer spring.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Kahr is a perfect example of this too. Everyone calls it a double action trigger.

Just like the Glock, but even more so, the Kahr striker is cocked by the slide travel. Despite having a LONG travel, weight, and reset, the Kahr striker is more cocked than the Glock.
 
They still print magazines?

Sorry, being facetious.

All I know is that my daughter and I shoot USPSA with a G17 and (the original) XD respectively. Both have had trigger work. Her Glock trigger is lighter and "better" than my XD. It's close, but they've both been shot by a fellow competitor (who wears his sponsors' attire at matches) and he says her G17 is one of the best he's ever shot.

So whether it's SA, DA, "Safety action", whatever - when it comes to "feel", it makes no difference in my limited experience with our match pistols.

Now as far as safety goes, I've never given it a second thought. As stated above, the ultimate safety is between your ears.
 
OneFreeTexan said:
In the recent issue of American Rifleman,John Treakle, states the ‘glock’ system of striker is safer because the striker is only partially held, or loaded as he puts it.lHe claims that fully spring loaded strikers are inherently more dangerous, and liable for accidental discharge. He glosses over the fact that often a fully loaded striker has a lower trigger pull. He claims wil the partially loaded striker the trigger movement is comparable to that of a double action revolver.

Is a fully loaded striker that dangerous??
Click to expand...

It is certainly more prone to AD and the Glock IS a more robust safety system.

I do not make that statement as a shooter, but as a forensic engineer who has worked on cases professionally.

The Glock striker, in the event of two other failures, if it were to be released without pulling the trigger (AD) does not have sufficient energy to ignite the primer and fire the pistol. The designs which place the striker at 90+ percent of the striker spring compression do, again, in the event of two other failures, have enough energy to ignite the primers. I have now worked on 5 cases where those other two failures were present and the pistol fired in the holster. I am aware of numerous cases of those types of pistols AD while in the shooters hands, but the trigger was not pulled. Some are doubles. Another whole set in which only one failure occurred, and the shooter had a dead trigger. In some cases, riding the reset, the striker safety plunger is depressed and the striker can slip off the sear firing the gun with the finger "on" the trigger, but the trigger was not actually pressed to the firing point.

Caveats! Do understand that there usually has to be two failures. First is a worn sear where there is no longer a geometry to hold the hook and the striker slips off the of the sear. Second, the striker safety has to be malfunctioning (or removed) or that point where the shooter is riding the reset. Sears wear at different rates and in many cases, home gunsmithing is a contributor. One of my M&Ps, I am on my 3rd sear. The original and the factory replacement started to slip the striker at about 20K and then 16K. The first time, the pistol doubled during a match. I broke it down and figured out what was going on. The second time, I got a dead trigger.
 
You're hinting at two failures and I respect you MarkCO for all your work...

But safer in what regard? The firing pin block, right? AND dingus and/or sear trips AND the gun has to be dropped hard.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vGQQOPF14JQ

Cause how does the trigger move without a gun correctly going off?

It has to drop, have a broken dingus and/or sear, has to have a broken firing pin block.

What we saw in some cases of a SUPER hard wack to the 100% cocked PPQ was the sear tripped, but the firing pin was stopped by the firing pin block. No fire, dead trigger.
 
wild cat mccane said:
You're hinting at two failures and I respect you MarkCO for all your work...

But safer in what regard? The firing pin block, right? AND dingus must fail AND the gun has to be dropped hard.
Click to expand...

I am not hinting, I think the verbiage is pretty clear, there has to be two failures, the sear and the striker safety/block. And no, when the sear is worn, it does NOT have to be dropped hard. A slight shake will release the sear if the striker safety/block is compromised.

Only in that rare case when the shooter rides the trigger for reset...and if the 4 laws of gun safety are followed, no-one gets shot.

Note I did not say they were "dangerous" as the OP asked, but that the Glock is more robust in their design to prevent ADs.
 
No worries. From time to time, evaluation of the specifics of these cool little machines that have no regulatory controls other than the ATF saying who can and can not buy them, is a good thing.

Most gun designers are not formally educated in design, FMEA, etc. That is both a good thing, and a bad thing. The attorneys are highly risk adverse. All that plays in on what products hit the marketplace and the average consumer assumes that there is (in some cases) a lot more engineering in the process than there really may be. A lot is just common sense from a machinery and manufacturing perspective.
 
Right or wrong I chose an XD for my latest purchase with the idea it could become a carry pistol. I think a grip safety is better than no grip safety especially on the reholster which is a high percentage of AD’s I believe.
 
IMO, the safest striker fired pistol is the HK P7 - until you squeeze that front cocking device, the striker is under zero tension
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top