[BuckyP]

There are a lot of assumptions being made about Striker fired vs. Hammer fired guns.

Striker fired guns can have second strike capability (P99). Just because most of them don't, doesn't mean it's inherent in the striker fired system.

Not all DA guns with hammers have second strike capability. Some of the older DAO Smith autos, as well as the PX4 "C" (Constant action) models.

As far as the power of the strike capability, one system is not better than the other in my experience. I once assumed that the hammer was a stronger system. However, after having issues with Wolf primers, I found that my G17 was more successful in reliably igniting them than my HK 2000 (LEM) or my Les Baer 1911. BTW, during a steel match I used the double strike ability of the P2000 successfully on a couple occasions.

Back to the generalizations.

[tcruse]

There is no doubt that there are good and bad in both styles. The external hammer is something that is exposed and can snag on clothing and holsters. Also, as a general design rule the fewer the part count the more likely of a reliable design.
The person that wants a SD pistol is usually only interested in enough accuracy and not target shooting. A guy with a really light trigger can be great for target shooter and very bad for the SD application.
For SD user the striker design is simple and rugged. Requires less training and works.
I always find it interesting that so many on a Glock forum can find so many ways to not like the Glock success.

[grecco]

Originally Posted by WoodenPlank

HK has made striker fired guns before. Hell, they made one before Glock did.

Dont forget the VP70 also,
They also made the first polymer pistol.

[jp3975]

Originally Posted by BuckyP

As far as the power of the strike capability, one system is not better than the other in my experience. I once assumed that the hammer was a stronger system. However, after having issues with Wolf primers, I found that my G17 was more successful in reliably igniting them than my HK 2000 (LEM) or my Les Baer 1911. BTW, during a steel match I used the double strike ability of the P2000 successfully on a couple occasions.

How often did you use second strike?

Is second strike something you would value if someone where trying to kill you?

You may be some sort of operator or something. Everyone is different i guess. But I feel pretty confident that most people...if scared and full of adrenaline will waste valuable seconds using second strike more than they need to, rather than racking the slide. Without double strike capability, you will instinctively rack the slide because you cant pull the trigger...making you faster....save for that RARE occasion double strike will ignite a primer.

[gatorglockman]

Originally Posted by Hour13

I get what you're saying, but as an example... look at the writhing masses that are chomping at the bit for Glock to put out a true carbine, or a single stack 9mm.

If they built them, would they sell?

Absolutely.

But these are the pipe dreams of the Glock fans(me included), and not likely to ever happen. That isn't the market they cater to. Pistols? They make cop-guns, high capacity and mag interchange are a big deal. Carbines? Like that market needs anymore saturation.

HK/Sig are in a good place in the market, they don't have any need to jump into the fray of striker fired bricks.

Great counter point in the spirit of business and market share. No clue why Glock does not do a single stack pistol or a carbine. They would sell gobs and gobs of them for sure and I would buy one. I suspect Gaston is old, comfortable and has more money than he or his kids can spend. We shall see once he passes and if the company changes hands (sorry, that is morbid and a sad thought but reality)

This is indicative of where we are in our economy for certain. There are plenty of ways to innovate biz and financial growth, yet it seems all too often succesful businesses fail to adapt and take reasonable risk for reward.

That was the true heart of the post. If you are a Sig or HK fanboy/nut....and they offer a new design that works and is good.....are you likely to buy it? Sure you are. If it is revolutionary in design, are govt entities likely to entertain purchase of it? I believe so.

[Boats]

Originally Posted by jp3975

If you dont have a next round, why do you need a second pull?

Look, I don't care one way or the other about tap-rack-bang orthodoxy spats, but the second strike requirement came about directly from the experiences of past warriors and what they wanted to see in a sidearm.

You seem incapable of remembering that certain units in WW2, in both theaters, were cut off from resupply for extended periods. Other units in Korea and Vietnam were likewise using every damn round they had, perfect or not.

There you are, running low on ammo as a unit. You have some suspect boxes of ammo that are showing badly that they were fished out from the surf zone. Despite what the modern doctrine might say to do about ammo with iffy primers, the Army wanted the ability for the sidearm to take more than one whack at a primer if its operator wanted it to.

What are the odds that the last round doesnt go off and needs another pull?

That's immaterial, the Army wanted that chance to be present no matter how remote. I didn't write the RFP, I am just explaining that second strike capability wasn't in there randomly.

What are the odds the shooter keeps pulling the trigger when they should be racking the slide?

Again, that is irrelevant as to why the DoD added second strike capability to the XM9 RFP. IIRC, the ability to do so wasn't a JSSAP requirement for the aborted .45ACP trial.

[BuckyP]

Originally Posted by jp3975

How often did you use second strike?

Twice in one match, hence "a couple".

Originally Posted by jp3975

Is second strike something you would value if someone where trying to kill you?

My typical carry is a G30, so I wouldn't base my choice solely on that.

Originally Posted by jp3975

You may be some sort of operator or something.

Nothing of the sort. Just a competitive shooter that has put a lot of rounds downrange on the clock. It's the only experience I have to base my opinions on (and hope it stays that way).

Originally Posted by jp3975

I feel pretty confident that most people...if scared and full of adrenaline will waste valuable seconds using second strike more than they need to, rather than racking the slide. Without double strike capability, you will instinctively rack the slide because you cant pull the trigger...making you faster....save for that RARE occasion double strike will ignite a primer.

I agree.... assuming your free hand is available. Otherwise, you are trying rack one handed which is less than ideal. If you are on the ground fending off an attack, one may be inclined to pull the trigger again if the option existed.

As stated, it's not the end all, but to say it has no advantages is disingenuous.

[countrygun]

Why doesn't SIG/HK make a striker fired pistol?


They can't get one to go 'Ka-Boom"?

[Aceman]

I have been authorized to answer this question for HK:

STFU. Nobody asked you. When you need one, we will make one. As for the original that we made before Glock, you are obviously an unaware idiot. You may not buy our guns ever again. Even the pistols with hammers.

HK Customer Service
Because you suck and we hate you.

[gatorglockman]

Originally Posted by Aceman

I have been authorized to answer this question for HK:

STFU. Nobody asked you. When you need one, we will make one. As for the original that we made before Glock, you are obviously an unaware idiot. You may not buy our guns ever again. Even the pistols with hammers.

HK Customer Service
Because you suck and we hate you.

LMAO

Cold bro....ice cold. I am censoring my own response as to not be banned from GT.

Now....Dance Dieter....Da'nce...like a Sproke't!

[TSAX]

Originally Posted by NEOH212

At least with HK they already have a great DAO system. Sig's DAK leaves a lot to be desired though. Who knows what they will do in the future.

The Sig P290 DAO is worse than the DAK, the P290 was about 9 lbs and the DAK was about 6 ish

[Glockdude1]

Originally Posted by Aceman

I have been authorized to answer this question for HK:

STFU. Nobody asked you. When you need one, we will make one. As for the original that we made before Glock, you are obviously an unaware idiot. You may not buy our guns ever again. Even the pistols with hammers.

HK Customer Service
Because you suck and we hate you.

I didn't know you worked HK customer service!!!

[cowboy1964]

Originally Posted by phalanxr

Correct me if im wrong but a few years ago I thought HK said they were going to steer clear of Striker Fired Pistols.

Their reasoning was hammers were superior if you run into a situation where the first primer strike doesnt go through you can just fire again instead of racking it back to reset the pin in striker fired pistols.

-Phal

There's no technical reason a striker-fired gun can't have double strike capability. The Taurus PT709 does it, for example. It sure makes dry firing more fun.

[bamarammin87]

Just making a gun with the same trigger pull for every shot, and with a short, 4lb pull and reset, and no external safety. Sole reason I wish they did. It's lame that you have to have a DA revolver pull if you don't want 2 differen trigger pulls in a hk or sig.

[countrygun]

Holy Necromancy Batman!

[fnfalman]

Glock sucks because only HK can make a pistol that will feed cartridges loaded backward into the magazine. That's why HK is made in Germany by true Teutons and Glocks are made in Austria by a bunch of wannabe Teutons.

[Boats]

So, it's been about a year now. . .and guess what? Striker fired pistols still suck hard in 2013.

[WayneJessie]

Originally Posted by WoodenPlank

HK has made striker fired guns before. Hell, they made one before Glock did.

Blasphemy!!

[nathanours]

Originally Posted by Aceman

I have been authorized to answer this question for HK:

STFU. Nobody asked you. When you need one, we will make one. As for the original that we made before Glock, you are obviously an unaware idiot. You may not buy our guns ever again. Even the pistols with hammers.

HK Customer Service
Because you suck and we hate you.

Is this similar to the response given to those who ask when HK will start making guns with decent triggers?

[ca survivor]

Originally Posted by NEOH212

I don't care for the 250 and I wouldn't be caught dead with one of those fruity rainbow guns.

Now there are some folks in San Fransisco that probably like the Rainbow colors...

in San Fransisco

[barth]

I think the real question is why should HK make a striker fired pistol?

I really believe their primary focus (HK)
is the international military and police market.
Some of those contracts require a hammer fired gun.
Plus with the LEM trigger.
I see no advantage to a striker fired gun.
Plus, although rarely needed,
I like having second strike capability a hammer fired gun affords.

I love my Glock.
But would have no interest in a striker fired HK.
And I own five of them.

[bac1023]

Originally Posted by barth

I think the real question is why should HK make a striker fired pistol?

I really believe their primary focus (HK)
is the international military and police market.
Some of those contracts require a hammer fired gun.
Plus with the LEM trigger.
I see no advantage to a striker fired gun.
Plus, although rarely needed,
I like having second strike capability a hammer fired gun affords.

I love my Glock.
But would have no interest in a striker fired HK.
And I own five of them.

I actually like strikers, but I don't see a need for HK to build another.

[Kimura]

Originally Posted by barth

I think the real question is why should HK make a striker fired pistol?

I really believe their primary focus (HK)
is the international military and police market.
Some of those contracts require a hammer fired gun.
Plus with the LEM trigger.
I see no advantage to a striker fired gun.
Plus, although rarely needed,
I like having second strike capability a hammer fired gun affords.

I love my Glock.
But would have no interest in a striker fired HK.
And I own five of them.

Depends on how many military units and LEAs go that direction in the future and whether HK can be competitive in the market. That's what will drive HK's decision. DA/SA is harder to perfect than SF or SAO and LEM gets mixed reviews. If administrators for large LEAs and military start to see SF as a benefit because of price and decreased training time or if the right people start screaming for SF pistols, you might see a lot more agencies/units going that direction.

I believe the SF gun that was mentioned earlier in the thread was the SF P30 that the German police were talking to HK about. Rumor has it that they asked HK about the possibility of designing one. Then for whatever reason, probably money, decided against it. And it's been said that the only way HK will pursue it any further is if a large contract is involved. Because, as you said, govt contracts is their focus.

[s&wfan]

HK and Sig don't need to make striker fired pistols at this point. HK's striker fired pistol has been mentioned already, but really.... Asking why HK doesn't try to jump into competition with the other striker fired pistols out there is kind of asking why Ferrari doesn't put out a four door sedan to compete with the Ford Fusion.

[nathanours]

Originally Posted by s&wfan

HK and Sig don't need to make striker fired pistols at this point. HK's striker fired pistol has been mentioned already, but really.... Asking why HK doesn't try to jump into competition with the other striker fired pistols out there is kind of asking why Ferrari doesn't put out a four door sedan to compete with the Ford Fusion.

See, I don't agree with this analogy I've seen used a few times now in one fashion or another.

If you drive a Ferrari compared to a Fusion there is an incredible difference. They are not even close to being in the same category.

I've owned guns from HK, Glock, and Sig. If anything Sig is different from Glock and HK being metal framed, but in my mind HK and Glock are similar.

Yes the fit and finish is nicer on HK than Glock, but in reality they shoot very similarly. Their weight is similar, their dimensions are similar, and they are both just polymer framed combat style pistols carrying roughly the same capacity. In general the Glocks I've shot had better triggers than the HKs. Until the P30, Glocks for the most part also fit my hand better. In terms of accuracy, in a Ransom rest my Glock 19 shot slightly tighter groups than my USP compact. Does it matter? Not really because those groups were both better than I could shoot unsupported.

A more fair example would be paying Ferrari prices for a Fusion with a little bit nicer interior and paint job compared to paying Fusion prices for a normal Fusion.