GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

 
  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-25-2012, 08:30   #1
Restless28
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Solsbury Hill
Posts: 16,259
Why Does The U.S. Military Choose Hammer Fired Sidearms?

Why does the military choose hammer fired sidearms over striker fired ones? From the 1911 to the M9, and before that, revolvers, it seems that the hammer guns are preferred.

On the flip side, it seems that most LE agencies choose striker fire sidearms.
Restless28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2012, 08:36   #2
Fred Hansen
Liberal Bane
 
Fred Hansen's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 16,118
Because of the nonsense idea of "re-strike" capability.
__________________
When change is absolute there remains no being to improve and no direction is set for possible improvement: and when experience is not retained, as among savages, infancy is perpetual. - George Santayana
Fred Hansen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2012, 08:39   #3
Restless28
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Solsbury Hill
Posts: 16,259
After 100 years, they still believe in "nonsense"? I don't get it.
Restless28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2012, 08:44   #4
faawrenchbndr
CLM Number 281
NRA Life Member
 
faawrenchbndr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: east of East St. Louis
Posts: 33,107
What nonsense?
faawrenchbndr is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2012, 08:44   #5
Line Rider
Senior Member
 
Line Rider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Greenbow, Alabama
Posts: 2,588
The Glock did not meet the specification of the M9 trails back in the early 80's if I remember correctly.

Why do most Law Enforcement agencies use Glock? The Price. $357.00 each before trading in the departments old guns. After trade in of about $200.00 to $225.00 the department price is about $150.00 per gun.
__________________
Life's too short to carry an ugly gun.

Last edited by Line Rider; 05-25-2012 at 08:45..
Line Rider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2012, 08:48   #6
Kyle M.
Senior Member
 
Kyle M.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Bucyrus OH
Posts: 215
My local pd issues the S&W 4006 even though it is discontinued. They also have a list if approved sidearms you can carry. I personally have no idea what is on the list.
__________________
Glock 27 Gen 3

Pedersoli Rolling Block .45-70
Kyle M. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2012, 08:53   #7
FLIPPER 348
Happy Member
 
FLIPPER 348's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Lyle WA
Posts: 22,757
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred Hansen View Post
Because of the nonsense idea of "re-strike" capability.


In a combat situation it is far from nonsense
FLIPPER 348 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2012, 08:58   #8
faawrenchbndr
CLM Number 281
NRA Life Member
 
faawrenchbndr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: east of East St. Louis
Posts: 33,107
Military weapon speculation from a civilian,.........sounds like a Politician.

Last edited by faawrenchbndr; 05-25-2012 at 08:58..
faawrenchbndr is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2012, 09:07   #9
Bob Hafler
Senior Member
 
Bob Hafler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,205
I would say because it is a proven fact that there safe and it works, and has been doing so for a long time. We are not the only military that uses hammer fired pistols. Many Leo's and military in Europe use CZ's,Beretta's and other hammer fired pistols. I had no objection to the 1911 when I served. I'm not in the military anymore and I don't claim to think I know more than they do about what works best for them. So whatever they choose is fine with me. Just so long as it's not a piece of crap like the original M16.
Bob Hafler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2012, 09:38   #10
faawrenchbndr
CLM Number 281
NRA Life Member
 
faawrenchbndr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: east of East St. Louis
Posts: 33,107
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Hafler View Post
?..... Just so long as it's not a piece of crap like the original M16.
The original M16 design was solid. The Politicians & bean counters
are what screwed it up. Not to mention the Army not properly
training & equipping Soldiers with cleaning kits.
faawrenchbndr is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2012, 09:52   #11
Bruce M
Senior Member
 
Bruce M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: S FL
Posts: 21,991
Quote:
Originally Posted by Restless28 View Post
Why does the military choose hammer fired sidearms over striker fired ones? From the 1911 to the M9, and before that, revolvers, it seems that the hammer guns are preferred.

....
I do not know wy they pick what they choose now, but I am guessing when they picked revolvers with hammers it was because there was a relative scarcity of striker-fired revolvers.
__________________
Bruce
I never talked to anyone who had to fire their gun who said "I wished I had the smaller gun and fewer rounds with me" Just because you find a hundred people who agree with you on the internet does not mean you're right.
Bruce M is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2012, 09:59   #12
countrygun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 17,068
Quote:
Originally Posted by Restless28 View Post
Why does the military choose hammer fired sidearms over striker fired ones? From the 1911 to the M9, and before that, revolvers, it seems that the hammer guns are preferred.

On the flip side, it seems that most LE agencies choose striker fire sidearms.
This is a joke, right?

Do your research. There were no striker fired revolvers to compete against t he SAA and still none when they used the DAs

There were IIR 2 striker fired Autos in the trials that led to the adoption of the 1911. Both eeither failed, or were too expensive or both.

Look at the Small arms program that led to the M-9, How many striker-fired pistols were in the program and how any completed the trials? There was a lean "preference expressed" for a hammer fired but not just for second strike but also as a safety factor and the ability to see from across an arms room that someone had a cocked weapon for instance. But none the less the Bretta design finished best in the tests.

Striker fired guns weren't that common even when the M-9 was chosen and unlike LEA and civillians the military doesn't jump on every new and shiny bandwagon that comes along. That would the really gain of use to a large program by changing platforms to shoot the same round they are shooting now?

Last edited by countrygun; 05-25-2012 at 11:07..
countrygun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2012, 10:41   #13
CAcop
Senior Member
 
CAcop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: California
Posts: 21,678
I had always thought hammer fired guns can pop hard primers more frequently.
__________________
I wonder if your assessment of "The Wizard of Oz" would sound something like "A teenaged orphan runs away with three psychotic AD/HD patients and a little dog. She kills the first two women she meets." --Sinecure 07/03/2006
Freakin' awsome!! Kickin it old school. Hot sheet on the dash. The report was probably only two sentences. Long live Rencko and Bobbie Hill!--WhiskeyT
CAcop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2012, 11:13   #14
hsprincipal
Senior Member
 
hsprincipal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 821
Why does it matter? They test them and choose what they think is best. We are still undefeated, so our weapons must be working. Right? God Bless the USA.....
__________________
G23, G21, G22, G26, G17, G27, G20, G19, G34, G30s, G17L, S&W 1911sc, Ruger SR1911, S&W M&P .40, S&W New .38 Bodyguard, Beretta Neos, Beretta Nano, Walther PPQ, Sig 2022 9mm, Victory model .38 S&W, Colt LE6920, PPS, M9, 870, S&W 637, CW9, RO 9mm
hsprincipal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2012, 11:16   #15
TxGun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Family ranch in Texas
Posts: 2,178
Quote:
Originally Posted by Line Rider View Post
Why do most Law Enforcement agencies use Glock? The Price. $357.00 each before trading in the departments old guns. After trade in of about $200.00 to $225.00 the department price is about $150.00 per gun.
IME, and I participated in an RFI/RFP/Purchasing decision for a major PD as an outside consultant, competitors will come in within $25-$50 per pistol of each other and, at least in our case, training (both officers and armorers) and other after-buy support capabilities and commitment (spares, factory repair, parts, etc.) are the primary separators among the finalists who meet all the other criteria (reliability testing; man-weapon interface, i.e., ease-of-use; range tests, officer input, corrosion resistance, etc.).

Most departments are going to try to get at least 3-4 manufacturers into the competition initially to satisfy oversite committees (and paid consultants ).

Last edited by TxGun; 05-25-2012 at 11:25..
TxGun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2012, 11:20   #16
countrygun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 17,068
Quote:
Originally Posted by Restless28 View Post
After 100 years, they still believe in "nonsense"? I don't get it.

You are aware that our guns have to be able to use all NATO spec ammo from other countries and that other Countries tend to use harder primers because of their use of submachine gunes? AFAIK even the vaunted Glock has not received NATO approval yet while hammer fired CZs have.

Your standard of "nonesense" doesn't seem to apply to the rest of the world.
countrygun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2012, 11:48   #17
TSAX
USAF Vet
 
TSAX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 10,123
Blog Entries: 2
When I was in I never got into the whole debate/discussion, I watched many people argue this. I will say the M9 is a solid gun and the M11 (Sig P228) was great. They made a good choice, whatever the reason was and this is coming from a guy who is not a fan of the Beretta, that I carried for several years on duty and as an armorer. Would I have liked to see a Glock as the primary, sure but if I saw an M&P, HK, XD/XDM I would be happy as well.

And at least it wasn't a Taurus







__________________
IAVA (Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America) Member

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.

GSSF Member
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.

NRA Member
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
TSAX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2012, 12:05   #18
TxGun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Family ranch in Texas
Posts: 2,178
Quote:
Originally Posted by countrygun View Post
AFAIK even the vaunted Glock has not received NATO approval yet while hammer fired CZs have.
Glock G17s (1005/17/144/3969) and G19s (1005/66/132/7731) both have carried NATO stock numbers for quite some time and are standard issue for several NATO militaries.

Last edited by TxGun; 05-25-2012 at 12:42..
TxGun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2012, 12:16   #19
SPIN2010
Searching ...
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: On the move ... again!
Posts: 1,840
Quote:
Originally Posted by FLIPPER 348 View Post
In a combat situation it is far from nonsense

Fact, right there.
SPIN2010 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2012, 12:36   #20
fnfalman
Chicks Dig It
 
fnfalman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: California & New Mexico, US
Posts: 56,176


The HK P7M13 was made to compete in the XM9 trial (second trial). It was and is a striker fired handgun.
__________________
Can you dig it?
fnfalman is offline   Reply With Quote

 
  
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 19:42.




Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 1,505
405 Members
1,100 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,244
Nov 11, 2013 at 16:42