Striker fired vs Hammer fired(?)

Gun, shooting and equipment discussions unrelated to CHL issues

Moderator: carlson1

Post Reply
Liko81
Senior Member
Posts: 388
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2007 2:37 pm

Re: Striker fired vs Hammer fired(?)

Post by Liko81 »

Hammer-fired weapons are no more or less safe than striker fired. It could be argued that they're less safe because the hammer can catch on something, and it can also be argued they're more safe because even though "safe-actions" have a trigger catch, a DA pull is harder and therefore even less likely to be negligently pulled. In the end though, any gun of any type currently in production is safe, even if in Condition Zero, as long as Rule 1 is followed. There is no excuse not to follow Rule 1. Safeties are exactly that; they're a safety net that helps protect you and those around you if you do something unsafe such as drop the weapon.

It is true that striker-fired weapons are more "streamlined", for lack of a better word. That makes them easier to draw from concealment. That does not mean hammer-fired weapons are significantly harder to draw. Despite all the striker-fired designs available, 1911s and .38 snubbys are still the most popular CCWs. Glocks are great duty weapons and the 26 is the "pocket rocket" for a reason, but other than the subcompacts they conceal kinda like my Ruger P95 does (as in there are better options). Ruger's new SR9 is slim, but it's still a full-size wonder-nine. Same with the M&Ps. All-in-all I don't think you'll have much trouble with either hammered or striker-fired in terms of carry safety, AS LONG AS YOU FOLLOW THE 4 RULES! :cool:
rm9792
Senior Member
Posts: 2177
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2007 9:07 pm

Re: Striker fired vs Hammer fired(?)

Post by rm9792 »

There are also hammer fired without an exposed hammer, such as the Para LDA.
User avatar
flintknapper
Banned
Posts: 4962
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2005 8:40 pm
Location: Deep East Texas

Re: Striker fired vs Hammer fired(?)

Post by flintknapper »

Some striker fired weapons offer "second strike" capability, a feature that could be an advantage in the (rare) case of a round not going off.

I suspect certain striker fired weapons have a faster "lock time" than some hammer fired ones, it never hurts to be faster. ;-)
Spartans ask not how many, but where!
User avatar
flintknapper
Banned
Posts: 4962
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2005 8:40 pm
Location: Deep East Texas

Re: Striker fired vs Hammer fired(?)

Post by flintknapper »

rm9792 wrote:There are also hammer fired without an exposed hammer, such as the Para LDA.

The LDA does have an "exposed" hammer, but it is always in the down position until the trigger is pulled. The newer models have what is basically a "bobbed" hammer...and it is hardly even noticeable when at rest.

I apologize if this sounds like a "correction", I knew what you meant, but the distinction is an important one.
Spartans ask not how many, but where!
rm9792
Senior Member
Posts: 2177
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2007 9:07 pm

Re: Striker fired vs Hammer fired(?)

Post by rm9792 »

My mistake, I meant the bobbed one. Kimber RCP is that way as well.
Post Reply

Return to “General Gun, Shooting & Equipment Discussion”