Virginia Gun Owners Forum - VGOF

I have tended to prefer striker fire handguns in the past, however I have started to develop an appreciation for 1911s in the past few months. I was wondering what opinion I might be able to solicit from the general public. What I would like to know is which do you prefer, Striker or Hammer, and why. Thank you for your discussion!

For looks I like a hammer but for practical purposes I don't even think about it.

hammer-fired, with a decocker.
lots of reasons, mostly though because it's what i learned on and am most comfortable with.

I think you can pay someone to make a really nice trigger/pull on your hammer fired gun but I'm not so sure you could get as smooth a trigger on a striker fired gun.

For reliability I don't think there's much difference. This statement is based on the claims made for Glocks and their reliability. I know from experience the 1911's just keep on working. I've got Colt 1911 style pistols made in 1917 (1st one I ever bought) through the newer series 80's and none of them have ever broken.

I'll be personally testing a Glock M31 over the next few years so the report will be awhile getting posted.

Luv my strikers...

I asked Greg at the Crossroad Gunshop when I could expect my Springfield XDs to wear out... he said he didn't know, nobody had ever gotten them to that point yet!
He said keep on

I have a Ruger P95 and Glock 19, like them both. I seem to be more accurate with the Ruger, but that may be due to having owned and practiced with it longer; have only taken the Glock to the range once or twice so far.

I have seen comments about the long DA pull being an impediment to accurate shots with a hammer-fired SA/DA, but if you are focusing on 1911s that is not an issue anyway.

The hammer would seem to be a potential problem for concealed carry if that is one of your goals, just because the hammer moght snag on something if it had to be drawn quickly.

Personally, I prefer strikers. All internals, and little to no holster interuptions. Not to mention the "ease" of use. I have both strikers and hammers, I love all of them. With the hammers you account before each shot for the forward/down movement. With strikers you account for the side to side movement. Either way you go you'll win because you have one option with you.

Having shot and carried both....striker. Nothing to snag on your clothes when you draw.

Aesthetically (unimportant for a gun IMO) the hammer looks nicer, as it gives a nice break in the form of the weapon.

I'm with Kreutz on this one... I OWN hammer fired weapons, but I DEPEND on my striker-fired for defense.

One exception is my Colt Mustang, but only because I customized it to the point I have NO concerns about it's function, and I carry in "Condition 2" (Loaded, Hammer down).

But if I OC, or CC in the winter? I carry a striker fired weapon.

There are a couple of companies who've had to make their primers softer so striker fired pistols can shoot them. Personally, I got rid of the Glock I had and am just going with hammer guns (see list >>). The Para I have is what I bought to replace the Glock 35 I had for competition use. Goes BOOM every time, even with slightly higher primers on my reloads.

Jim

"Glock Perfection" is a misnomer. The Springfield XD line has a set/release trigger, not a release trigger for their striker fired. It hasn't failed me in .9mm, .40, or .45 ACP... YET!

There are exceptions to every rule.

Glock started it, but others are IMPROVING on it... Still, love my Glock 19, It's the only one I kept, all the others have been sold, or replaced with XD's.

Carl, I disagree with the statement of Glock perfection as a misnomer. Where can you find another gun that has the same following that glock has? I'm not talking about fan fare but rather, schematics. Notice how many companies have gone to "Glock like" slide releases, trigger safeties, composite grips, sites, spring guides, trigger lb reducers, water analysis', fouling over riding, barrel connections, weight, and not to mention full auto ablities? I loves me some glocks! I have had one since the military in the late 80's and still shoot it regularly. The Glock is a industry leader and in my opinion has achieved the "perfection" status.

There is something about an exposed hammer that I apprectiate. Thumbing down the hammer isn't a problem for me as it seems to be for others. Cocked and locked may be "old school" but, makes sense to me.