opinion on hammer fired or striker fired handguns for carry

opinion on hammer fired or striker fired handguns for carry

This is a discussion on opinion on hammer fired or striker fired handguns for carry within the Defensive Carry Guns forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; In your opinion which one and why would be more reliable for carry striker fired or Hammer fired?...

View Poll Results: which more reliable hammer or striker fired for carry?

Voters
128. You may not vote on this poll
  • Hammer fired

    59 46.09%
  • Striker fired

    69 53.91%
Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 58
Like Tree14Likes

Thread: opinion on hammer fired or striker fired handguns for carry

  1. #1
    Member Array eagleeye's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    141

    opinion on hammer fired or striker fired handguns for carry

    In your opinion which one and why would be more reliable for carry striker fired or Hammer fired?


  2. #2
    VIP Member Array Kilowatt3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    SW Louisiana
    Posts
    2,656
    I own both, but have lately been moving towards striker-fired guns for carry. I'm partial to M&P's and Kahrs.

    Regards,
    Jim

  3. #3
    VIP Member
    Array archer51's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    21,640
    Reliability wise I don't think there is that much of a difference. If you look at Ruger with the SR series guns and their P series guns, they both work fine. Same with Springfield Armory with their XD series and 1911's. The advantage of a hammer fired gun, is if it does not fire the first time, you can always thumb the hammer back and try it again. It all becomes a matter of personal preference. Myself, I like hammer fired guns, but I do have a striker fired gun that I carry on work days. Has nothing to do with reliability, but with size and ease of carry.
    tricolordad and stancehold like this.
    Freedom doesn't come free. It is bought and paid for by the lives and blood of our men and women in uniform.

    USAF Retired
    NRA Life Member

  4. #4
    Member Array Walden's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    171
    I like striker fired pistols, but I don't think any modern hammer fired system is unreliable
    "Though defensive violence will always be a 'sad necessity' in the eyes of men of principle, it would be still more unfortunate if wrongdoers should dominate just men." - St. Augustine

  5. #5
    VIP Member Array rammerjammer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Omaha, Nebraska
    Posts
    3,514
    either as long as the gun has proven to be reliable
    marcclarke likes this.
    "Was there no end to the conspiracy of irrational prejudice against Red Ryder and his peacemaker?"

    Revolvers, “more elegant weapons for a more civilized age.”

  6. #6
    VIP Member Array multistage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    NW Iowa
    Posts
    2,416
    Quote Originally Posted by rammerjammer View Post
    either as long as the gun has proven to be reliable
    Yessir. I like my Glocks and M&Ps, but I like my SIGs better. All have proven to be totally reliable.
    sensei2 and Talking_Monkey like this.

  7. #7
    VIP Member Array zacii's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    arizona
    Posts
    3,749
    Quote Originally Posted by eagleeye View Post
    In your opinion which one and why would be more reliable for carry striker fired or Hammer fired?
    Reliability isn't determined by the action type.

    Some pistols have a better reputation than others, for reliability. It has nothing to do with the action type, but rather the quality of engineering and manufacturing/assembly. And none are malfunction-proof.
    nedrgr21, sensei2 and Echo_Four like this.
    Trust in God and keep your powder dry

    "A heavily armed citizenry is not about overthrowing the government; it is about preventing the government from overthrowing liberty. A people stripped of their right of self defense is defenseless against their own government." -source

  8. #8
    Member Array rwponline's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    208
    Quote Originally Posted by zacii View Post
    Reliability isn't determined by the action type.

    Some pistols have a better reputation than others, for reliability. It has nothing to do with the action type, but rather the quality of engineering and manufacturing/assembly. And none are malfunction-proof.
    I agree completely.

    My guess is that all modern 'quality' handguns are going to be very reliable. Some may take more care/maintenance (1911), and others less (glock), but treat it right and it should perform well for you.

    I personally prefer DA/SA or DAO because I like putting my thumb over the hammer when holstering. It also weirds me out knowing the striker is fully cocked over a live round in a striker fired SA like an XD or M&P (half cocked strikers like glocks and rugers are fine). I guess I've spent too many years doing failure analysis...

  9. #9
    Member Array tricolordad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    New Richmond, Wisconsin
    Posts
    490
    Quote Originally Posted by archer51 View Post
    Reliability wise I don't think there is that much of a difference. If you look at Ruger with the SR series guns and their P series guns, they both work fine. Same with Springfield Armory with their XD series and 1911's. The advantage of a hammer fired gun, is if it does not fire the first time, you can always thumb the hammer back and try it again. It all becomes a matter of personal preference. Myself, I like hammer fired guns, but I do have a striker fired gun that I carry on work days. Has nothing to do with reliability, but with size and ease of carry.
    I agree with you, but i myself have moved more towards my hammer fired guns because i can just pull back the hammer and not lose money on ammo.

  10. #10
    Ex Member Array Ram Rod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Fayetteville, AR
    Posts
    13,687
    I didn't vote in the poll. I couldn't objectively. All mechanical things can fail. Add Murphy's law and you have what we all know to be the status quo.

  11. #11
    VIP Member Array nedrgr21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Midwest
    Posts
    3,676
    Quote Originally Posted by tricolordad View Post
    I agree with you, but i myself have moved more towards my hammer fired guns because i can just pull back the hammer and not lose money on ammo.
    Not following you on this - what are you getting at?

  12. #12
    Distinguished Member Array Rexster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    SE Texas
    Posts
    1,772
    I prefer a hammer, but reliability has nothing to do with it. Striker-fired autopistols tend to have slides that protrude comparatively farther to the rear, which complicates concealment. Hammer-fired pistols, especially with spurless hammers, can be more concealable, an example being my duty SIG P229 DAK. My prior duty pistol was a Glock, and served as an obvious point of reference for comparison.

    At re-holstering time, all else being equal, I would rather be able to put my thumb in a position to feel the hammer, to increase the certainty that firing cannot occur if something has possibly entered the trigger guard. This is not a deal-breaker for me, but
    a comfort factor, nonetheless.

    Lastly, I started handgunning with a 1911. A hammer just seems like it belongs. This is purely emotion-based preference. I have owned fully reliable pistols with hammers, and without.

  13. #13
    New Member Array Fabius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    4
    I've owned both and have settled on striker fired DAO (M&P, Glock, XD, Kahr).

    Most of the modern hammer fired pistols are DA/SA (Sig, FNP). I found that the transition from the first, long DA pull to the second, very short SA pull is difficult to master in realistic training scenarios. The only hammer fired pistol I own is a 1911, which is SAO.

    I don't thnk that relaibility is an issue with good quality, modern handguns.

  14. #14
    Distinguished Member Array grouse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    kansas
    Posts
    1,916
    I carry both. I don't really think one better than the other, Just like to see & feel that hammer.

  15. #15
    Member Array Coltman 77's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    406
    I like a hammer on my pistols. :)
    "Do your duty in all things. You cannot do more, you should never wish to do less".
    General Robert E. Lee

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

hammer fired handguns
,

hammer fired vs striker fired

,

hammer vs striker fired

,
hammer vs striker fired pistol for self defense
,
mechanical failure of a striker fired handgun
,
striker fire vs hammer fire for ccw
,

striker fired vs hammer

,

striker fired vs hammer fired

,

striker fired vs hammer fired pistols

,

striker fired vs hammer fired reliability

,
what is better hammer fired vs striker fired
,
which is better hammer or striker fired
Click on a term to search for related topics.