Striker vs. Hammer

D

derukey

New member
EE Expired
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Location
Montreal, QC
Hi, I can't decide which is better: a new striker-fire / polymer pistol -OR- the classic hammer-fire / alloy models.

For example, I'm trying to compare the Sig P320 to the P226.

If the military and police are switching to the new models, then maybe so should I. But some people are telling the new technology is not so good for target shooting.

What factors should I consider in my decision?
 
Personally, I think you would find a CZ Shadow II superior to either of those choices. It's old school, but highly refined right out of the box.
 
Grizzlypeg said:
Personally, I think you would find a CZ Shadow II superior to either of those choices. It's old school, but highly refined right out of the box.
Click to expand...

Thanks, I familiar with this model and I find it to be very heavy. My interest is to discuss the details of technology rather than comparing makes and models. My reference to Sig P226 vs. P320 was only an example because I understood a military organization made a switch along those lines.
 
P320 is the definition of "military grade" I have seen more complexity on childrens toys than the new army pistol. Im not saying its bad, simple is always good but they didnt pick 320 b3cause its the best. P320 is literally just a bunch of stamped parts fitted into a very flimsy frame. Also I heard it can be hammer fired, when you smash it in the back with a hammer.
 
A striker fire handgun typically has a long trigger pull as part of the "safety" built into the design. A single action/ double action pistol like a P226 can have a much better single action trigger, lighter, crisper, less travel, shorter reset. I'm sure a striker fire gun can be modified to come closer to the feel of a single action trigger, but out of the box, they aren't made that way. All of these comments are generalities, and you can modify anything to be something else, but lacking an external safety, striker fire guns typically have a long, squishy trigger from the factory.

My favorite is a 1911 style gun with a reworked trigger. It has an external safety, so it can be holstered, cocked. It will have a single action trigger pull better than just about anything.

In the end, its not what we think, its what you think. I would suggest you try some of both, and see what you prefer.
 
Last edited:
Seems to me financial considerations are part of the military procurement process too.

Generally speaking, in my experience both military grade striker and hammer fired pistols are equally reliable. So aside from cost and reliability it comes down to personal preference. Do you want to carry a light pistol around all day and barely ever fire it or fire a heavy pistol a lot that you don’t have to carry around? Do you like an external safety or a heavy DA trigger? Do you like the same, consistent (mushy) trigger pull every time?

Which pistol fits your hand better? Which grip angle is better for rapid sight acquisition?
 
I'll take a SIG Sauer P226/7/8/9 over any actual plastic striker toys.....
Now if somebody will ask me if I have to choose ONLY one handgun to own, my answer is already written in stone for the last 25 years: SIG Sauer P226
 
Learn to shoot a DA/SA, then get a striker to see if you like it. You can't go wrong with P-226. If you can afford it, buy both and sell one you don't like while there is time before this fall.
 
Like a few others before me I am in the steel / hammer fired camp and also recommend a Shadow.

To be clear I have owned both styles of guns (hammer & striker).

The P320 in particular is a good gun. Its very "modular", light (which is can be desirable or not depending on the application) and very simple (which helps to keep the initial cost and maintenance costs low if buying in bulk like LE).

I personally feel that the metal guns (like the Shadow) are better built and feel better in the hand (others may feel differently). I definitely find I shoot metal hammer guns better.

One advantage a striker gun does have is that every shot will have the same trigger feel unlike hammer guns where the first shot will be DA (assuming the hammer is down like in IPSC).

Food for thought.
 
Half kiddingly, please ignore everyone else and just get the P320. Not because it's the best feeling gun, or the best looking nor is it the most accurate out there.

The main reason to get this gun is, you can trash the grip all you want and it's replaceable. This means you'll actually use it and not baby the grip portion like any other pistols after the gun ban.

Stock up grips and you have a "new" gun for a long time.

With that said, the best option is actually getting multiple P320 and you wont be out of the pistol shooting sports for a long time. The receiver part is protected and practically indestructible.
 
I have little experience with striker fired pistols but carried Hipowers and Sigs as duty guns for many years, putting 10’s of thousands of rounds thru them. I can unequivocally recommend the Sig 226. There is a reason many special operations teams in both law enforcement and the military carried this pistol. Accurate, combat proven, reliable and with decent sights and a trigger out of the box.
 
As other here have said - a hammer fired pistol will always give you a better let off than a striker fired pistol. One can learn to manage the let off on a striker fired pistol and do good shooting with it but it will never be as good as the crisp break that can be achieved with hammer fired.

OP indicated in his initial post that target work might be an issue so the hammer is the way to go in that case. Striker fired have gained prominence as a duty gun for the public service (military, police etc) largely because of safety/liability reasons for users that generally have a minimum of training with handguns. The weapon needs to be safe, ready to shoot at all times and above all simple to operate under stressful conditions. Striker fired delivers this very well but at the cost of a crisp surprise break which while nice to have is not necessary for the public service as the targets are big and the range short.

Target shooters (recreational or competitive) who are generally very skilled and competent demand more from a handgun.
 
If I had to chose out of the 2, it would be a P226. Nothing wrong with the P320, it’s quite enjoyable to shoot as well. The trigger on a 226 is fantastic compared to 320. Again, it’s not bad, it just comes down to personal preference. Don’t buy something because the army is buying it, buy whichever feels better in your hands.

But if I only had one pistol to buy, it would be a Glock 19 ;)
 
derukey said:
Thanks, I familiar with this model and I find it to be very heavy. My interest is to discuss the details of technology rather than comparing makes and models. My reference to Sig P226 vs. P320 was only an example because I understood a military organization made a switch along those lines.
Click to expand...

Not much advancement in terms of action technology and really depends on who you ask. I own both and gravitate towards hammer (Shadow 2) mainly due to the variability of available ammo. A striker would not always have enough energy to break the primer of some ammo. Whereas hammer always does.
 
I've owned almost every pistol design and if I were to buy one pistol I'd go P320 Legion for the money. If you want red dot capable P320 Max. CZ Shadow 2 would be my second choice.
 
Could you explain that a bit more in detail ? As I have a P320 coming is there some Ammunition it does not like ?
Thanks Leavenworth
SteelCap said:
Not much advancement in terms of action technology and really depends on who you ask. I own both and gravitate towards hammer (Shadow 2) mainly due to the variability of available ammo. A striker would not always have enough energy to break the primer of some ammo. Whereas hammer always does.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom