True SA striker-fire, can it be done, has it been done?

[Polar Express]

Hello all,

I've participated in several threads over the past couple years, discussing and opining on single action and striker action auto-loader pistols. I suspect I'll be displaying my ignorance here, but I'm here to lean as well, so I'll try to ask this respectfully.

The question that I have is this: Has any MFGR managed to design and produce a true single action striker fire pistol?

Why? Since I'm a big 'why' guy, I'll share what the motivation behind this question is. I personally like the feel of a single action trigger. (think 1911) I also appreciate the design where you don't have an exposed hammer to catch on things, or carve you up when you CC.

So, has anyone designed a firearm action, where either the hammer is internal, OR, it's a striker fire design, but the trigger pull ONLY releases the firing mechanism? From the mechanisms that I'm familiar with (I realize this list is short), part of the trigger pull, does pull the striker farther back, until the sear releases and the spring energy shoves the striker forward. To me, I define this as a 'double action' because the trigger does more than ONE thing. I realize the firearm industry may very well not agree with my definition, and I'm OK with that.

I realize that in my description, that the idea of internally safe may go out the window. (if a jolt causes the sear to release, there is enough energy to cause the round in the chamber to discharge)

From a pure engineering standpoint, this must be POSSIBLE to design, but... would it be practical?

Thanks in advance,
PE

 

[Sam1911]

The line gets fuzzy, but the Springfield xD series are considered a single-action striker fired trigger system. They aren't a whole lot different from Glocks or m&ps but enough different that IDPA wouldn't allow them in the same division as Glocks.

 

[Polar Express]

Thanks Sam, I read that detail in the sticky that ugaarguy did on the different firing types. In that thread, I saw that the XD striker is approx 95% pulled, prior to any trigger input. That's sure pretty close, but the trigger still moves that striker. (yes, I know I'm being pretty picky here, but that's why I asked the question) Thanks!
PE

 

[Chuck R.]

HK P7?
HK VP9?
Walther PPQ?

Chuck

 

[Polar Express]

HK P7?
HK VP9?
Walther PPQ?

Chuck

Chuck, I'm not sure I understand your post, would you be so kind as to clarify? Are you saying that those models do in fact have the striker fully 'cocked' and the trigger mechanism simply & only releases the striker?

Thank you,
PE

 

[Chuck R.]

Chuck, I'm not sure I understand your post, would you be so kind as to clarify? Are you saying that those models do in fact have the striker fully 'cocked' and the trigger mechanism simply & only releases the striker?

Thank you,
PE

Yup, my understanding is those at least are considered to be SA as far as strikers go.

Chuck

 

[Polar Express]

Yup, my understanding is those at least are considered to be SA as far as strikers go.

Chuck

Thanks for the clarification! I'm learning that while some (say, the XD) are CLOSE to what I'm describing, and close enough that they are treated differently by IDPA, even 95% isn't 100%. I'm wondering if any models have ZERO striker movement by the trigger pull, so the trigger ONLY releases. I'll look into those models and see if they are indeed 100%.
I to recall that PPQ had the nicest factory trigger pull when I was trying out various triggers last year.

Thanks again,
PE

 

[Monac]

I must be misunderstanding this question, for which I apologize. But aren't there countless classic pistols - Colt 1903, Ruger Standard Model, Luger, FN 1910, Raven 25, and on and on - that are single action by this definition? Or are you asking simply about modern combat pistols? In that case, I thought the Remington R51, of peculiar renown, was single action.

 

[Polar Express]

I must be misunderstanding this question, for which I apologize. But aren't there innumerable classic pistols - Colt 1903, Ruger Standard Model, Luger, FN 1910, Raven 25, and on and on - that are single action by this definition? Or are you asking simply about modern combat pistols? In that case, I thought the Remington R51, of peculiar renown, was single action.

Monac,

No need for apology, I struggled with how to clearly articulate my query. I'll write it differently: I was hoping to see if there are any 'striker fired' pistols, or perhaps an 'internal hammer fired pistol' where the trigger pull simply released the sear, and had NO PART of creating the kinetic energy that actually fires the gun. The reason behind my question, was mostly for the purpose of CC, so one could have a 'single action' trigger, and not have an external hammer that could catch on clothing or such, (OR, gouging ones midsection if they carry appendix).

PE

 

[TarDevil]

The Ruger American fits your description.

From The American Rifleman:

The new pistols employ what Ruger is calling a pretensioned striker-ignition system. Some striker designs use the cycling of the slide to partially cock the striker, which is then fully cocked by depressing the trigger. When the slide of the American Pistol is cycled, the striker is set into a fully cocked position. This means the trigger only has to release the sear, resulting in a shorter, crisper trigger pull.

 

[Monac]

Wouldn't everything Hi-Point makes fit this description? I thought they were all SA striker fired guns.

Wow. It had never occurred to me that the Glock style firing mechanism had become so predominant that it was old-fashioned SA systems that now required careful explanation.

 

[Jim Watson]

IDPA now lumps all striker fired autos together.
Most of the followons to the Glock are fully cocked or nearly so.
The new Hudson is probably fully cocked and they are making a lot of advertising hay with its "linear" trigger.

But so are the FN/Browning 1900 and the Luger.
The Colt/FN/Browning 1903 has a fully cocked, fully enclosed swinging hammer.

It is difficult to get a light crisp safe trigger pull with a striker, it has to have some clearance in its tunnel that a hammer does not. Bolt action rifles have trigger linkages that there is no room for in a pistol.
But the striker system is cheap and light.

 

[Walt Sherrill]

I'm not sure that a "true SA Striker-fired" weapon is really functionally all that different than a modified Double Action weapon (like a Glock and most other striker-fired guns).

With a modified DA gun, slide movement is needed to partially charge the striker or hammer spring, but if the slide doesn't move (when chambering the first round) and after that round has fired, the trigger won't function again unless the slide moves again. That's true of a SA gun, too. And neither of these designs have "restrike" capability.

While you can thumb-cock SA hammer-fired guns, you can't always thumb-cock all DA/SA hammer-fired gun (like the S&W 4043 with a bobbed hammer) as such guns (like the Glock) also require slide movement for the trigger to function properly.

Re: "It is difficult to get a light crisp safe trigger pull with a striker, it has to have some clearance in its tunnel that a hammer does not." Perhaps, but my shooter Luger (a Soviet captured ex-E German police weapon) had a very light, very crisp, and (I think) safe trigger...

 

[Good Ol' Boy]

IMO a striker fired "SA" is more a feel than anything else. There's certainly no correlation in the mechanics to a SA revolver or 1911 style pistol.

That being said, shoot a Canik TP9SA and get back with me. Best trigger on a striker gun I've ever shot. If you're looking for a good SA feel on a striker fired gun that's certainly it.

 

[9mmepiphany]

As you may have surmised from the answer you've received so far, you question is based on a false premise...that striker fired pistol strikers need to be cocked by the trigger before being fired.

Quite the opposite is true. The long time norm for striker fired pistols was that the trigger only released the striker...my personal favorite is the H&K P7

Glocked added the feature that the striker not be held in the fully cocked position....requiring that the trigger press move the striker to the "full cock" position...as a workaround to a military specification requesting a DA trigger. This has been successfully marketed to American LE contracts that also required a DA first shot. They market it as a "safety feature"

 

[MAKster]

I think the OP is confusing a single action firing mechanism with his notion of a single action trigger (1911 or SA revolver). The long take-up in the trigger of modern single action striker fired pistols is done as a safety measure and is not needed mechanically.

 

[Ascot500]

Yes, there are modern single action, striker fired semi - autos
Hi-Point, Jiminez, Raven, Beretta NEOS, etc.
And many of the vintage Browning designs: Baby, 1900, 1910, 1922 as well as the many Spanish "Ruby" copies