Pistol engineering and safeties

[Tirod]

Are there hammer fired guns, and striker fired guns, or, are there trigger fired guns? Taking the last as a working view, then it makes sense to use a separate thumb safety to control it being fired - however the primer activator works really has no bearing on it.

Trigger weight is more important. Hammer or striker, both can be as light as engineering can produce. 10 pounds, 6 pounds, 2.5 pounds, you can get the break as light as you desire. That being fact, then the question is, how safe do you want it to be?

Carry a SA with light trigger and no safety? Wait - I never said which primer activator was used.

Here's where tradition has intruded on practices we should be observing. In the past a SA gun was usually hammer fired - but now it can be striker fired. The pistol cycles recocking the primer activator and it's ready to release. No further trigger pulling needed to get it to full cock. Very little trigger creep and it breaks quickly, meaning, hammer or striker, it goes off.

It's not a hammer vs striker anymore. It's trigger fired, as there is no difference in activation, and in fact, it could be said it's much harder to tell now what mechanism actually releases the potential spring power. We don't have light crisp hammer guns vs long spongy striker guns now. It's been working toward that for 20 years.Blindfolded the average shooter may have a really tough time feeling any mechanical difference at all.

If how we pop the primer really has no bearing on how we control the trigger, then is it any wonder that now we have a lot of old and new shooters opting for striker fired guns with thumb safeties? Read up on all the P365 owners adding thumb safeties, and the discussion isn't about how hard it is - they are drop in parts - it's about finding the parts as they sell out quickly. P320 owners are installing them, too.

Are we doing that because we can? Sure. Are some buying that design because it does not have a trigger doohickey sticking out of it? I think so. That design has been out since the mid 1980's, the general shooting public has gone from divisive love or hate over it, more importantly, they have also kept up with the track record of safety it's demonstrating and it's no longer a mandatory option getting a striker fired gun. Striker does NOT equal toggle action safety trigger. While all the makers have copied it, almost slavishly for decades, it's notably becoming common that they are not. I feel a loss of confidence in the system spreading. And the result is to go back to what we know works and is tried and true, a separate thumb safety. Because, we get really conservative about things when it comes to life and death. Or, even shooting your leg.

That was too tempting.

Goes to maybe we should think of these sub components in their own right, not as a defining measure of how a pistol activates the primer. There is no real specific reason why a toggle safety trigger isn't offered on a hammer fired gun. It's just mechanical tomfoolery at the design stage, so to speak, same as making a revolver fire the bottom cylinder, or load the barrel behind the magazine stack. Or even gas delay it. All have been done, along with a roller locked action. The Webley - Fosbury was an auto rotating and cocking revolver. That would be a really interesting barbecue gun.

Well, striker fired guns with thumb safeties. I'm literally living in the future.

 

[Dibbs]

IMO, it's all personal preference. Many prefer to carry the SA, light trigger, striker fired, no safety type pistol.

OTOH, many of us prefer a firearm with a hammer, which gives the user more control over the firing status of the firearm, and more safety options. The way I see it, it's a buck dancer's choice.

 

[chicharrones]

I figured most of the current trend for safeties on striker fired pistols is due to people wanting target weight triggers on their self defense pistols.

Combined with less and less people coming from the DA revolver side of handgun shooting, and those folks are going straight into semi-auto pistols.

 

[Milt1]

There's a video on YouTube where a police chief in a gun store, after comparing the size of another pistol to his, decides to re-holster his pistol where upon doing so his weapon discharges putting a bullet in his leg. The culprit was a striker fired no thumb safety pistol that happen to have his jacket drawstring tab catch in the trigger guard releasing the trigger to fire the weapon. I'll always go for the hammer fired thumb safety because an accident like above won't happen with one. I know pushback's coming with all the Glock owners and how safe they are, so was the police chief's.

 

[JTQ]

Trigger weight is more important.

Ernest Langdon will argue it is trigger travel that is more important.

 

[JTQ]

- however the primer activator works really has no bearing on it.

There are also those that will argue the hammer is a visible and tactile safety not present in striker fired guns.

 

[mcb]

I won't carry a handgun with a manual safety. When I grab the gun to shoot that should disengage any and all safety. From that point forward the safety rests strictly between my ears.

 

[sgt127]

I grew up on DA revolvers. When at rest, there is not enough stored energy to fire the gun.

Then I carried a 1911. On duty. For 20 years. It has a light crisp trigger. A grip safety. And, a thumb safety. I carried it in a holster with a thumb snap that went under the hammer. A 1911 has enough stored energy to fire if everything goes wrong. In the holster, it could not be made to fire.

The current striker fired guns are cocked pistols. There is enough stored energy for them to fire if everything lets go. Some, now, are fully cocked. The sear is just a trap door to allow the striker to go forward.

Glock people will disagree but, a Glock, in carry mode, has enough stored energy to fire if everything lets go. I’ve tested it. It is, a cocked pistol.

The race is on for short trigger travel, light easy to shoot guns with no off switch.

Then there’s this.



This, is actually a pretty stupid meme. A short action, light trigger doesn’t care what pulls it. It can’t differentiate between a finger. Stick. Drawstring, shirt tail.

in a hip holster, I had to carry a Glock for 15 years. It was an acceptable risk. Appendix. No. Nor a beloved 1911.

I did not point a gun, with enough stored energy to fire, at my body.

Many do. It bothers me not one bit that they do. If the gun fires, I doubt the bullet will hit me.

 

[Monac]

Are there hammer fired guns, and striker fired guns, or, are there trigger fired guns? Taking the last as a working view, then it makes sense to use a separate thumb safety to control it being fired - however the primer activator works really has no bearing on it.

This question makes no sense to me, even as applied to pistols. It sure doesn't make sense as applied to rifles and shotguns, since those guns pretty much all have what would be called a single action trigger mechanism if it was in a pistol.

Look, guns have manual safeties if people are going to walk around with them cocked. And if the gun has what is called a double action trigger mechanism, the safety often incorporates a de-cocking mechanism so that the gun can be uncocked in a mechanically safe way. (Yes, I know that many people have decocked pistols their whole lives by pulling the trigger on a live round and lowering the hammer with their thumb, without ever having an accident. It is still the kind of thing where if enough people do it enough times, there are going to be accidents. It's a question of when, not it.) But you can have a decocker without a safety, and in a conventional DA/SA gun - the concepts are different, they just happend to be couple fairly often.

Furthermore, for any gun, no matter what kind of trigger mechanism it has, a manual safety can act like an on/off switch. A trained user does not even need to think about disengaging it in a time of need, but it may keep an "unauthorized" user (child, thief, assailant, babysitter's stupid boyfriend, etc.) from firing it, at least for long enough for the authoriized user to step in. (Nothing on this earth can stop a stupid person with enough time on their hands.)

I have no idea why this kind of thing is an issue. The division between revolvers and automatic pistols made sense to me, because those seemed like basically different kind of guns. The division between striker-fired and hammer-fired pistols does not, because that part of the gun is irrelevant to the firing mechanism and thereby to any manual safety mechanism. A better distinction would be "pistols that have Glock-type trigger mechanisms" and "those that do not". On either type, a manual safety may or may not be considered desirable by the user depending on their individual situation.

The vast majority of Glock-type pistol users simply do not want a manual safety, and the Glock-type trigger gives them a gun that comparable in safety to carrying a revolver, with the high-capacity, fast-reload advantages of an automatic, and a lighter trigger than a DA revolver pull.

To go off on a tangent, what made no sense to me was the Remington R51, which was a single action pistol with only a grip safety. The US Army decided that was not a good idea around about 1910, and neither Colt nor John Browning ever had a problem with that. As far as I could tell, the thinking behing the R51 was "It's a striker fired pistol, therefore it does not need a manual safety!" Otherwise, I could not explain it.

 

[sgt127]

The vast majority of Glock-type pistol users simply do not want a manual safety, and the Glock-type trigger gives them a gun that comparable in safety to carrying a revolver,

Respectfully, I completely disagree.

A Glock trigger travel is much shorter than a DA revolver. 1/4” vs maybe a full inch.

It is much lighter than a DA revolver. 5.5 pounds versus 12-15 pounds.

There is no tactile feedback, other than the trigger, to let you know a Glock is about to fire. A DA revolvers hammer must come back to fire. Both visual and tactile indicators that it’s about to fire.

A DA revolver is at rest when holstered. A Glock, at rest, has enough energy to fire (about 75% of the time from my experimenting) It’s not fully cocked, but, very close.

 

[WheelGunMan]

My striker fired pistols have safeties. I use the safety for administrative handling and holstering...once they are securely in the holster the safety is switched off. My DA/SA pistols do not have safeties, well one does but is seldom used. They are decocked prior to holstering and are then holstered with my thumb on the hammer.

 

[JohnKSa]

...a Glock, in carry mode, has enough stored energy to fire if everything lets go. I’ve tested it. It is, a cocked pistol.

It's difficult to actually test that. The design of the gun will not allow the trigger bar to be forced down from the carry position under normal circumstances. It may seem that it is going straight down, but that can't happen without smashing the safety ramp or bending the trigger bar. I suppose it's also possible that perhaps the safety ramp is being compressed somewhat, the trigger bar is being flexed somewhat and the slide is being forced upwards and flexing the slide rails somewhat and everything together is giving enough to allow the trigger bar to be jammed directly downward.

A good test to see what's really happening is to leave the firing pin safety installed for the test. If it it's being deactivated in the process of forcing the trigger bar down--the bar is being cammed backwards inadvertently and the test isn't really valid. If the firing pin safety prevents the primed case from firing then the trigger bar is being forced downward without being cammed backwards.

Once it can be established that the bar is being driven straight down, then the technique can be used to see if it will fire a primed case with the firing pin safety removed.

It’s not fully cocked, but, very close.

Energywise there's about 25% of the energy stored when the gun is in carry mode vs. when the gun is fully cocked by the trigger just before the striker is released. In terms of striker spring compression by length about 50% of the compression is present in carry mode with the other 50% being applied by the trigger movement.

 

[Jim Watson]

Well, striker fired guns with thumb safeties. I'm literally living in the future.

Well, the future of about 1893.

 

[Tirod]

Ernest Langdon will argue it is trigger travel that is more important.

You make a good point. These days travel is being cut down a lot, too. In my case, travel isn't a good thing as carpal tunnel has set in and long travel triggers actually are much more difficult to shoot. It also goes to those looking for a target trigger on a carry gun, of which I am no fan, however, a short light trigger with no creep or travel is now much more common on striker guns. The 365 was noted for that early on.

As for the officer shooting himself, let me suggest that if it were a hammer fired gun with toggle trigger safety, the result would have been the same. An article of clothing manipulated the trigger causing it to go off. Striker or hammer would have no difference.

To add: I bought a Canik TP9SF and behold, there is a striker indicator in the back of the slide to show it's cocked. Hammers don't have a distinct advantage in this. The LCP I owned had such a short hammer it wasn't readily obvious up or down. Others mark the extractor to show it's loaded, or port the barrel on top to see the casing, which doesn't actually indicate it's cocked, but does deliver it could be.

Goes to treat it as if it were loaded ready to fire at all times, you don't need to absolutely verify it is. Murphy states it will be loaded when we forget or abuse it.

 

[JTQ]

To add: I bought a Canik TP9SF and behold, there is a striker indicator in the back of the slide to show it's cocked. Hammers don't have a distinct advantage in this. The LCP I owned had such a short hammer it wasn't readily obvious up or down.

The advantage you'd have with your LCP over the Canik is when holstering, you could put your thumb on the hammer. If anything should happen to foul the trigger during holster insertion, you'd know it because you could feel the hammer pushing against your thumb. With the Canik, the first indication of trigger fouling would be the sound of the gun discharging.

Hammer fired guns aren't for everybody. Manual safety guns aren't for everybody. You have to decide what features you value and choose your guns accordingly. Choose what you like, you just have to realize there are no perfect firearms. Everything compromises something.

 

[.455_Hunter]

The problem is that Glock is far from the worst offender in terms of unsafe factory triggers- some Sig and Walther products are essentially the same as carrying a loaded chamber Series 80 1911 with the grip safety pinned and manual safety disengaged.

 

[RETG]

I always carried safely

Have always preferred hammer fired, that is all I own at this time, have never used a safety, and have Always carried with one in the chamber.

 

[dogtown tom]

Well, striker fired guns with thumb safeties. I'm literally living in the future.

No, you're ignoring the past.
John Browning designed several striker fired pistols with a manual, thumb operated safety.

But forget that for a second and understand the only safety that matters is between your ears.

 

[dogtown tom]

There's a video on YouTube where a police chief in a gun store, after comparing the size of another pistol to his, decides to re-holster his pistol where upon doing so his weapon discharges putting a bullet in his leg. The culprit was a striker fired no thumb safety pistol that happen to have his jacket drawstring tab catch in the trigger guard releasing the trigger to fire the weapon. I'll always go for the hammer fired thumb safety because an accident like above won't happen with one. I know pushback's coming with all the Glock owners and how safe they are, so was the police chief's.

Horsehockey.
Whether you call it inept, untrained, unaware or unsafe gun handling can cause any pistol to fire unintentionally.

 

[dogtown tom]

.....The current striker fired guns are cocked pistols. There is enough stored energy for them to fire if everything lets go.

And a cocked and locked 1911 isn't?

Some, now, are fully cocked. The sear is just a trap door to allow the striker to go forward.

Glock people will disagree but, a Glock, in carry mode, has enough stored energy to fire if everything lets go. I’ve tested it. It is, a cocked pistol.

Define "if everthing lets go".

 

[dogtown tom]

Respectfully, I completely disagree.

I don't disagree because I understand his point. You missed it.

A Glock, at rest, has enough energy to fire (about 75% of the time from my experimenting) It’s not fully cocked, but, very close.

Thats like saying a parked car has enough energy to drive off on its own because it has gas in the tank.
A Glock will not fire until the trigger is pulled.
Whether there is stored "energy" in springs is irrelevant.

 

[dogtown tom]

The problem is that Glock is far from the worst offender in terms of unsafe factory triggers- some Sig and Walther products are essentially the same as carrying a loaded chamber Series 80 1911 with the grip safety pinned and manual safety disengaged.

There is nothing unsafe about the Glock trigger. A Glock will not fire until the trigger is pulled.
If you think Glocks, Sigs, Walthers are the equivalent of carrying a 1911 with safeties deactivated you either don't know anything about Glocks, Sigs, Walthers or 1911's.

 

[.455_Hunter]

There is nothing unsafe about the Glock trigger. A Glock will not fire until the trigger is pulled.
If you think Glocks, Sigs, Walthers are the equivalent of carrying a 1911 with safeties deactivated you either don't know anything about Glocks, Sigs, Walthers or 1911's.

If you actually read what was stated, the comparison is most direct with the Series 80 1911 and the fully-energized at rest striker platforms, not Glock. Trigger weight and stroke distance are very comparable when not viewing through a biased lens.
I challenge you to come-up with the de facto practical difference, not the design difference.

But what does a degreed mechanical engineer, former Active Duty Army O3, with a 20 year career in energetics, weapons, safety and risk mitigation know...

 

[sgt127]

I don't disagree because I understand his point. You missed it.


Thats like saying a parked car has enough energy to drive off on its own because it has gas in the tank.
A Glock will not fire until the trigger is pulled.
Whether there is stored "energy" in springs is irrelevant.

Not at all. It’s a parked car, engine running, in gear. And two wheel chocks keep it from driving off.

If the wheel chocks slip. The car drives off.

If the firing pin safety gets stuck in the up position and the sear breaks, the gun fires.

 

[sgt127]

Covered trigger.
Gun cannot fire unless trigger is pulled.
Drop safe.