Pro's vs. Con's on Extenal Hammer Pistols

7.62mm

7.62mm

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
91   0   0
Location
Some BBQ Joint, far....far...away!!!
What are some of the Pro's and Con's to having a pistol with an external hammer, ala 1911 style, or internal striker fired, ala, Glock style.

Why choose one over the other? Is one style more reliable? Are external hammers one their way out, as far as new firearm design goes?

Thoughts please!
 
External hammers have the potential for a lot more "smack" thanks to their extra mass and leverage, which can improve the chances of setting off a tough primer or one where the firing pin channel is dirty or frozen. On the other hand an external hammer is one more moving part to fail or get snagged on something and provides somewhat of an access point for dirt and moisture to get inside.

My 2 cents anyway.
 
As a general comment, I have found that hammer-fired guns tend to have significantly better triggers than their striker-fired counterparts. Of course there are a million little variations on everything but, other things being equal, the hammer-fired SA/DA gun is going to be significantly more shootable (accurate for the average person) than the partially pre-compresed striker type of gun (GLOCK, Steyr, M&P, XD, etc.)

Then there are guns like the P7s that don't really fall into either category, and are very accurate.
 
How does the P7 work ghostie? Is it still available? I thought this model may have been replaced by the USP? Does the USP work the same way?
 
The P7 is a 'squeeze cocker'. You need to 'preload' the firing mechanism by gripping the gun in your hand. Hard to explain, but google is your friend!

The USP is NOTHING like the P7 series - it's an external hammer and conventional DA/SA trigger.
 
Glock for teh win!

J/K

I believe the increasing popularity of CCW has spurred more interest in internal strikers: less snagging and no chance of lint or whatnot getting into the hammer area. From a functional standpoint, millions of 1911's and millions of Glock's have functioned reliabily for years so I'd take that as evidence that neither design has a technical advantage.
 
SLANTO said:
The internal striker mechanism allows for a lower bore axis which allows for a higher grip on the pistol that helps control muzzle flip.
Click to expand...

And makes for more ergonomic pointability which will translate into very accurate shooting with practice...;)
 
Woodsman said:
How does the P7 work ghostie? Is it still available? I thought this model may have been replaced by the USP? Does the USP work the same way?
Click to expand...

Yah, the comment about Youtube is a good suggestion. I think there is something on there that shows how it works. It's pretty bizzare really, so much different than other guns. You, by squeezing the cocking mechanism (or the movement of the slide... when the cocking mechanism is sqeezed) are basically pushing back a striker... and the trigger is a single action type of thing that releases that striker forward by dropping a catch out of the way. Hard to explain. Best to play around with one and get a feel for how it works.

As the other poster was saying, USP is a lot more traditional. It's the same basic idea as SIG and other SA/DA guns. The market seems to have forced HK to give up on all their weird handgun concepts... which is a shame really.
 
Last edited:
I always liked an external hammer because I could see it - and I knew where I stood, for sure.

Also, I could reach up with my thumb and #### an external hammer at will (and decock it as well).

Never too comfy with a 'hammer' that I couldn't see.
 
Am I wrong in assuming that police (maybe not here) like a 1911 style because they can keep a round in the chamber and then quietly #### the hammer instead of pulling a slide back? Or is that a major no-no?
 
KaiBosh said:
Am I wrong in assuming that police (maybe not here) like a 1911 style because they can keep a round in the chamber and then quietly #### the hammer instead of pulling a slide back? Or is that a major no-no?
Click to expand...
The only time you'd see someone manually #### the hammer on a semi-auto pistol is when watching a movie. In real life, there's simply no reason to do it. If you wanted to have a round in the chamber, you would either carry cocked and locked, or fire the first round in double action (both methods are faster than manually cocking the hammer for the first shot).
 
870P said:
External hammers have the potential for a lot more "smack" thanks to their extra mass and leverage, which can improve the chances of setting off a tough primer or one where the firing pin channel is dirty or frozen...
Click to expand...

I agree 100%. I also experienced problem with hard primers in striker equipped guns. I had to pull trigger twice on 30% of surplus ammo. Also, decades ago, my friend had incident when Roth-Steyr (http://www.genitron.com/unique16.html), after closing bolt, left striker in cocked position. I rushed to pull the bolt for knob but just before touching the gun, it fired in the bank. We tried for half hour to repeat this but no luck. Since than, I do not trust striker guns any more. And after that event with surplus ammo I couldn't care less for any of them. Just my 0.2 cents...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom