Double action vs. single action

Boomer said:
The striker fired pistol makes you concentrate more on the reset of the trigger than on the press which fires the shot. If you've trained yourself to add 3 or 4 pounds of pressure to the trigger without moving the rest of your hand, you've mastered most of the problems related to the mechanics of good shooting, all that's left is position, sight picture and breathing. With a SA trigger, on reset all you have to pay attention to is that you don't loose contact with the trigger as it resets, and this takes little concentration.

There is no more concentration on reset with a striker fired gun than a hammer fired gun. The benefit of the Glock trigger is the very positive feel of the reset and absolutely no slack to take up once the reset has been achieved, much like an SA gun.

Some folks are so heavily invested in technology that they become upset that some designs are timeless and cannot be improved upon. The striker fired pistol is a different way of doing things, not a better way. The SA's exposed hammer is a case in point. After having been the issue pistol for the WW-I, WW-II, the Korean and Vietnamese wars, the frequent preference of special forces personnel in modern conflicts, and for swat team personnel who have a choice, the any suggestion that the pistol can be made unfunctional from dirt entering the recess for the hammer is pretty much imaginary, although anyone who stakes his life on a pistol, even a striker fired pistol, should protect it to the extent possible.

A 1911 doesn't need the thumb safety, so if its removed, the striker fired gun has no advantage.

The striker fired system is in fact a better way of doing things. Fewer parts in a slimmer lighter package is progress, improvement. Add in the much increased capacity and the near flawless record for reliability and it's a far better design. The fact something was ISSUED has little merit as the guys on the front didn't get any say in what was adopted (that has changed a lot for the folks today but they still don't make the final decision). It would be foolish to consider undocumented accounts of the mighty 1911/45ACP as fact without proper verification. It is a known fact that no more than 10% of soldiers during the second actively engaged the enemy(from either side), so that leaves a possible BS story rate of 90%, just saying. The number of SF units and LE units using the 1911 is very small. Glock has the lions share by a large margin. Have a look at a Glock annual magazine, it's right full of articles about agencies and SF units adopting the Glock the globe over, and no there are no repeats from year to year. If it weren't for the Americans and their blind love of the 1911 it would have faded into history long ago..

As for the thumb safety, if it isn't needed then why is it still there?? That isn't progress, that's stubbornness. The advantages of the striker fired guns is still the same as it was in the beginning. Less weight, fewer parts, slimmer profile, simpler manual of arms, higher capacity and far better reliability. Just to add to the fire, you have compact and sub compact guns that can cross share magazines, the manual of arms are all the same, and the sub compacts still pack 10 rounds.

The greater your magazine capacity, the longer you're in the fight, I buy into that. Magazine capacity is one point from which the 1911 suffers, even when chambered for 9mm or .38 Super, the Browning P-35 is better, but still doesn't match the Glock's 17 round capacity. Under our current laws however, the Glock and the 1911 are both restricted to 10 rounds, so there is no advantage to the Glock. Scrap the magazine restrictions, and I'll go shopping.

Concealing a 10 round Glock be it a full size, compact or sub compact is far easier than any 10 round 1911. From an IDPA or defensive side that is huge. Even a sub compact 1911 in 9mm still only carries 9 rounds in the mag and comes in at 26 oz empty weight, the same weight as a Glock 26 loaded with 10 rounds. The 1911 is still a 1/4" longer and a full 3/4" taller. The grip is the hard part to conceal and that's where the difference is the greatest between the two. If you go to the "mighty" 45 you add 1.25" in length, same height(5") and reduce your capacity to a whopping 6 rounds. Oh, and you ad 2 more oz to the EMPTY weight a hefty 28 oz.Our laws are relevant to us, but they are not relevant to the discussion where pure merit is involved.

I'll give the striker fired guns kudos in one area, if you want an affordable, reliable out of the box fighting pistol, the striker fired guns have it all over the 1911s, which are a gunsmith's cottage industry.

And that is my point. For what they are designed for(handguns that is) the Glock is the answer.
Click to expand...

More bold.

TW25B
 
I make no apology for preferring a 1911 over any other fighting pistol, but then I still carry a SA revolver for serious work. Why? Because it performs it's role better than anything else. My 2 experiences with Glock were less than inspiring, (both issued from the same lot) and in both cases I approached the guns with an open mind, wanting to appreciate any advantages they might provide, but in the first case, I was unable to feel the reset, and invariably had a long trigger pull for each shot. On the second occasion, again I couldn't feel the reset, but this time the trigger was so heavy as to make the gun almost unuseable, I shot a nice tight groups despite this, so they will shoot. The agency which issued these turkeys replaced them with SIG 226s a short time later. Now SIG makes a nice pistol, for a DA. That said, if all of Glock's products were like those, there is no way they would have achieved the market share they have. But the experiences I had with the poor ones has jaded me, and while I'm not blind to the advantages of a striker fired pistol, I'd more likely purchase a Springfield XD than a Glock. You can even get them with a thumb safety!:p
 
TW25B said:
What no one has mentioned about DA/SA(commonly referred to as traditional double action) is that the trigger reset is often not very positive and/or has slack in it which you should be taking up prior to breaking the shot. The new SIG short reset triggers are fantastic, the old SIG triggers are pure crap. Very long and heavy first shot followed by no defined reset and a bunch of slack on the SA pull.

My adivce is to play with each and every make and model that interests you. Dry fire(or live fire) each one and pay attention to the finer details of the trigger pull and the reset. Observe the slack, the length of pull, the weight, the break, any over travel after the shot, and the reset.

TW25B
Click to expand...

I agree that that the Short Reset Trigger on the Sig is an improvement but the double action pull is still very heavy. There is a big difference between the DA and SA pulls. So it will tend to slow you down or make it harder to shoot accurately. Not a big fan of DA/SA Triggers. The variation is just too great. DA only I find to be better because at least you can get used to it. I shoot a variety of guns which vary from high grade single action with a 1.5lb pull to the Sig SRT DA/SA triggers. I find the DA/SA adjustment the most difficult. With training you can get used to anything but it is still harder especially when stressed.

Interestingly the gun I shoot best is a high grade target pistol with a fully adjustable trigger Single Action Only hammer system. The hardest to shoot accurately is my Sig 226 SRT transition from DA to SA, external hammer. I don't have any striker fired guns as they are usually plastic body and I prefer heavier guns. Not saying there is anything wrong with strikers so please don't go "Glock is Best" just saying what works best for me. In my opinion it is harder to shoot a light striker fired weapon when under stress as the gun shakes more due to its light weight. If you can do it great. I find it more difficult.
 
Last edited:
grinder08 said:
I agree that that the Short Reset Trigger on the Sig is an improvement but the double action pull is still very heavy. There is a big difference between the DA and SA pulls. So it will tend to slow you down or make it harder to shoot accurately. Not a big fan of DA/SA Triggers. The variation is just too great. DA only I find to be better because at least you can get used to it. I shoot a variety of guns which vary from high grade single action with a 1.5lb pull to the Sig SRT DA/SA triggers. I find the DA/SA adjustment the most difficult. With training you can get used to anything but it is still harder especially when stressed.
Click to expand...

100% agree! DA to SA transition is the hardest to get used to in pistol work. Especially under timed pressure. That's why my DA/SA guns are safe queens and only used to show newbies the variety of actions available.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom