Striker mechanism, the ultimate in reliability???

[JJ45]

For those of you more mechanically adept than I am. We know of the so called torture tests of Glocks maybe firing 100K without problems and the XDS firing 25K rounds without a malfunction. These are striker-fire pistols.

Not comparing build quality such as comparing Glocks with S&Ws, Colts, etc. but comparing the mechanical operation of the auto-loading pistol. Would you say that all else being equal, the striker mechanism is more durable and reliable than a hammer fired, thumb safety, SA, DA/SA, or DAO type of pistol action and less likely to fail?

In trying to analyze it, does the addition of a hammer, safety and the required pins, springs (more moving parts) and maybe other factors required to operate non-striker auto pistols make them inherently less reliable than a striker...again, all quality factors being equal.

 

[sigarms228]

Nope. Hammer fire pistols have also been known for long reliability. Reports from reputable sources of SIGs such as P226 lasting more than 100,000 rounds fired. Supposedly Federal was using an HK USP 45 for ammo testing that was going strong well past 200,000 rounds fired.

Here is a well documented 50,000 round hard use test of the HK45 by Todd Green that went for than 31,000 rounds without any issue of any type.

http://pistol-training.com/archives/4027

He also did endurance test of HK P30 that went over 91,000 rounds fired.

http://pistol-training.com/archives/2668

 

[TunnelRat]

^That doesn't really say whether one is more reliable than the other, it simply states that there are examples of hammer fired pistols going to long round counts.

The problem is all else isn't equal. There are almost always differences beyond the way in which the primer is ignited and you can't assume those differences aren't important. Another problem is these tests of individual pistols are hard to use to draw conclusions about one mechanism as a whole.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

 

[jmr40]

We stopped using exposed hammers on long guns over 100 years ago. Bolt action rifles and break action shotguns are striker fired and have proven by far to be the most reliable designs.

50,000 rounds at the range isn't the same as 1000 rounds in combat or field conditions. Kept clean and fired under those conditions any gun should function for a long time.

Exposed hammers are far more prone to being damaged when dropped or used as a club, which happens in the real world. They offer another opening for dust, dirt and other debris to get into the firearm and in close quarters fights clothing, hair, or fingers can get between the hammer and firing pin preventing the gun from firing.

 

[Jim Watson]

...and break action shotguns are striker fired and have proven by far to be the most reliable designs.

Nope.
The hammers are under there, right along. I know of a few striker fired shotguns but most are concealed hammer.

 

[Chui]

We stopped using exposed hammers on long guns over 100 years ago. Bolt action rifles and break action shotguns are striker fired and have proven by far to be the most reliable designs.



50,000 rounds at the range isn't the same as 1000 rounds in combat or field conditions. Kept clean and fired under those conditions any gun should function for a long time.



Exposed hammers are far more prone to being damaged when dropped or used as a club, which happens in the real world. They offer another opening for dust, dirt and other debris to get into the firearm and in close quarters fights clothing, hair, or fingers can get between the hammer and firing pin preventing the gun from firing.

You’re mixing bananas and sushi.

We aren’t speaking of bolt guns.

HK, SIG, CZ are all stellar hammer fired pistols and they’ll more reliably ignite primers under all conditions - especially foul conditions.

The advantage the striker fired pistol has is shootability for your average and below average shooter.

I prefer a highly tuned DA but who can formulate a cogent argument against Glocks and other striker fired pistols?

They work, they are simple, they are reliable and they are maintenance friendly.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[RickB]

I see Glocks unable to get through 100 rounds without a misfeed, but don't think the striker has anything to do with it?

 

[TunnelRat]

I see Glocks unable to get through 100 rounds without a misfeed, but don't think the striker has anything to do with it?

Any pistol that can't get through 100 rounds without a misfeed needs maintenance or repair.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

 

[JJ45]

Let me try a different approach.

Two nearly identical pistols except for the firing mechanisms (the only ones I could think of but there are certainly others)

XDs 3.3" 9mm (striker)
XDe 3.3" 9mm (hammer)

Which, do you think, would prove to be the most durable/reliable and outlast the other?

 

[ligonierbill]

If you ran such a test, the likely outcome is that the first failure would be in a wear part unrelated to the method of driving the firing pin.

John Moses Browning favored...both. I have a FN 1900 (striker) and a Colt 1903 (hammer). The FN was made between 1907 and 1910, the Colt in 1923. I have no idea how many rounds each has fired, but they both work flawlessly. Choosing one mechanism over the other has more to do with whether one favors a visible hammer that can be decocked or a smooth profile (the "hammerless" Colt hides the hammer for this reason).

 

[USNRet93]

I see Glocks unable to get through 100 rounds without a misfeed, but don't think the striker has anything to do with it?

I guess an anti glock fanboy as adamant as a glock fan boy

Sons(2) and I have 7 Glocks between us..2 -17(gen4 and gen5), 3 Glock 43s, Glock 45 and Glock 42...and we shoot up in the mountains all the time..and I can count on 1/2 of 1 hand how many 'failures' we have had..probably 2-3 and those stove pipes..probably a total of only 7000-8000 or so rounds..so...

 

[BBarn]

Hammer fired tend to do a better job with the hard primers on some mil surplus ammo, but there isn't much of that ammo around anymore. With today's ammo strikers seem to be quite reliable, except for those many shooters who change to lighter springs and have frequent primer strikes with no bang. But the same thing happens with their revolvers that have been swapped to lighter springs.

I don't think the striker firing mechanism of a modern pistols is very comparable to that of bolt action rifles. The pistol mechanisms use fairly light strikers and springs while bolt actions use somewhat heavy strikers with very stout springs.

 

[Tallest]

HK, SIG, CZ are all stellar hammer fired pistols and they’ll more reliably ignite primers under all conditions - especially foul conditions.

More reliably than what? And based on what?

The advantage the striker fired pistol has is shootability for your average and below average shooter.

In what way are striker fired pistols more "shootable" than, say, a 1911 or P226 or CZ75? I am probably in your classification of average shooter, and I find all of the above to be every bit as "shootable" as a Glock or S&W M&P.

 

[jar]

If you ran such a test, the likely outcome is that the first failure would be in a wear part unrelated to the method of driving the firing pin.

John Moses Browning favored...both. I have a FN 1900 (striker) and a Colt 1903 (hammer). The FN was made between 1907 and 1910, the Colt in 1923. I have no idea how many rounds each has fired, but they both work flawlessly. Choosing one mechanism over the other has more to do with whether one favors a visible hammer that can be decocked or a smooth profile (the "hammerless" Colt hides the hammer for this reason).

And the beat goes on.

My Savage 1907 made in 1913 and Ortgies 32acp made in 1924 are striker fired and still going strong. My Walther Model 4 and Colt 1903 Pocket Hammerless that were both made in 1923 are hammer fired and still going strong.

They are all mechanical devices and fortunately fairly simple mechanical devices and so it's possible to service and inspect almost all critical parts.

 

[pete2]

Folks, striker fired guns are usually cheaper, especially plastic 20 shooters. I can't see anything better about them as for reliability. Think about it, the 1911 pistol for example, and for rifles, M1, M 16 etc have hammers as do O/U shotguns, pumps and semis. Heck, look how long a S&W revolver lasts.
Don't be brainwashed by the folks who sell cheap plastic guns.

 

[Chui]

(1)More reliably than what? And based on what?



(2) In what way are striker fired pistols more "shootable" than, say, a 1911 or P226 or CZ75? I am probably in your classification of average shooter, and I find all of the above to be every bit as "shootable" as a Glock or S&W M&P.

(1) Hard primers, for example.

Ever get mud and debris in a pistol? That’s another example.

(2) The 1911 is the most shootable due to the trigger mechanism - short, light, single action, short reset, heavy pistol, great ethos, long sight radius.

All of the polymer pistols are about the same weight. Ergos are similar enough that I find it does not matter with shootability.

In what world is the DA trigger a faster & more accurate (simultaneously) under stress than a striker-fires Glock, CZ P-10C, VP-9 or P320?

If you “think” they are the same then obtain a shot timer and run some drills.

Shooters at the highest levels will perform very similarly (highly) with either. “Average” shooters will not. They will usually suffer - especially on smaller targets.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Chui]

Folks, striker fired guns are usually cheaper, especially plastic 20 shooters. I can't see anything better about them as for reliability. Think about it, the 1911 pistol for example, and for rifles, M1, M 16 etc have hammers as do O/U shotguns, pumps and semis. Heck, look how long a S&W revolver lasts.
Don't be brainwashed by the folks who sell cheap plastic guns.

Glocks are CERTAINLY more reliable than 1911s.

And it’s not just Glocks.

The 1911 wins in shootability. It’s second to none there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Jim Watson]

If you had a couple of dozen outfits making "Glocks" and all of them thought they were smarter than Gaston and Willy, you might see a falloff in reliability, there, too.

 

[Tallest]

(1) Hard primers, for example.

Ever get mud and debris in a pistol? That’s another example.

(2) The 1911 is the most shootable due to the trigger mechanism - short, light, single action, short reset, heavy pistol, great ethos, long sight radius.

All of the polymer pistols are about the same weight. Ergos are similar enough that I find it does not matter with shootability.

In what world is the DA trigger a faster & more accurate (simultaneously) under stress than a striker-fires Glock, CZ P-10C, VP-9 or P320?

If you “think” they are the same then obtain a shot timer and run some drills.

Shooters at the highest levels will perform very similarly (highly) with either. “Average” shooters will not. They will usually suffer - especially on smaller targets.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You're losing me. I don't think they're the same!

In my experience, everything about a DA trigger is more concise than a striker fired triggers. Unless you're talking about taking your first shot hammer down, a DA trigger on 1911 or a CZ75 (I reference these two because they comprise the majority of my experience) has less travel and a much cleaner break than a Glock trigger. Indeed, I think the trigger is probably the biggest compromise of choosing a Glock. But I choose it anyway.

 

[TunnelRat]

You're losing me. I don't think they're the same!



In my experience, everything about a DA trigger is more concise than a striker fired triggers. Unless you're talking about taking your first shot hammer down, a DA trigger on 1911 or a CZ75 (I reference these two because they comprise the majority of my experience) has less travel and a much cleaner break than a Glock trigger. Indeed, I think the trigger is probably the biggest compromise of choosing a Glock. But I choose it anyway.

A 1911 doesn't have a DA trigger. DA means double action, a 1911 is single action. He is exactly talking about hammer down for pistols designed to be used with a DA first pull, such as a SIG P22X series or Beretta 92 series.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk