ligonierbill
New member
Check out the newfangled FN 1900. It's striker fired.
USNRet93 I am a relative novice but for carry, aren't all hammer fired auto loaders also with either a safety, a decocker or both?
USNRet93 said:I am a relative novice but for carry, aren't all hammer fired auto loaders also with either a safety, a decocker or both? I prefer the 'safety' of striker fired with one in the chamber, no need to 'decock or push safety off, plus same trigger pull everytime..Glock.
Yup, have a LCP, with the 'semi cocked' hammer gig, unlike LCP-2..Gonna use the LCP as trade for other son's G43 when he has his CCW..really dislike the LCP...Not quite. There's a number of DAO pistols on the market that lack both external safeties and deckockers. For example, the Sig DAK models and Ruger LCP.
ChasHam: said:Striker-Fired vs. Hammer-Fired
Reading various threads in this forum, folks have definite opinions and preferences on the desirability of striker-fired vs. hammer-fired pistols, especially with respect to how they’re carried. I haven’t done an actual count but my impression is there’s a lean toward hammer-fired.
You have more options and control with a hammer—but beside that, they both go bang when you squeeze the trigger. Wonder why folks bring up the two different mechanisms so often.
I am a relative novice but for carry, aren't all hammer fired auto loaders also with either a safety, a decocker or both?
Yeah the Law Enforcement Modification (LEM) is an interesting system. You can also change the weight of it with spring swaps. The light LEM version was very popular on HKPRO. I don't feel like LEM was ever as popular as HK had hoped.The HK USP series with the LEO triggers are hammer fired without an external safety. When the pistol is cocked, the hammer returns forward but the trigger spring is pre-loaded.
When you squeeze the trigger it is very light and the hammer comes back normally just at very reduced forces.
When the trigger hits the pre-load, the tension returns and the break is normal just much shorter than straight Double Action. At some point the bar preventing the firing pin from being struck moves to allow the hammer to strike. It feels more like a single action trigger. Follow on shots are normal single action trigger.
And many of those that do use a hammer option specify a DAO or similar (LEM, DAK, ETC) trigger over the DA/SA.Hardly. Sales numbers and what agencies use show a very strong preference to striker fired pistols. I own both and each has their advantages and disadvantages which are often a topic of discussion but as Winny said it boils down to personal preference.
I don't feel like LEM was ever as popular as HK had hoped.
Reading various threads in this forum, folks have definite opinions and preferences on the desirability of striker-fired vs. hammer-fired pistols, especially with respect to how they’re carried. I haven’t done an actual count but my impression is there’s a lean toward hammer-fired.
You have more options and control with a hammer—but beside that, they both go bang when you squeeze the trigger. Wonder why folks bring up the two different mechanisms so often.
Striker-fired with frame-mounted safeties: Several gunmakers offer striker-fired guns with frame-mounted safeties. My Ruger SR9c has a safety, which I usually ignore. FN makes several striker-fired guns with frame-mounted safeties (These guns are available either way, but not convertible once you've selected on version.). I think S&W offers models in the M&P line that work this way. In all of these models you CAN ignore the safety lever if you choose to. But if you feel the need, the safety is easily engaged and disengaged.
Things change and come around. Now days you buy a S&W M&P or a Glock and folks tell you that you need 4-500 dollars worth of after market parts to get the guns ready for self defense or competition. For the latter maybe $1,000. worth of parts and custom work.
tipoc