[Restless28]

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.

[Fred Hansen]

Because of the nonsense idea of "re-strike" capability.

[Restless28]

After 100 years, they still believe in "nonsense"? I don't get it.

[faawrenchbndr]

What nonsense?

[Line Rider]

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.

[Kyle M.]

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.

[FLIPPER 348]

Originally Posted by Fred Hansen

Because of the nonsense idea of "re-strike" capability.

In a combat situation it is far from nonsense

[faawrenchbndr]

Military weapon speculation from a civilian,.........sounds like a Politician.

[Bob Hafler]

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.

[faawrenchbndr]

Originally Posted by Bob Hafler

?..... 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.

[Bruce M]

Originally Posted by Restless28

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.

[countrygun]

Originally Posted by Restless28

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?

[CAcop]

I had always thought hammer fired guns can pop hard primers more frequently.

[hsprincipal]

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.....

[TxGun]

Originally Posted by Line Rider

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 ).

[countrygun]

Originally Posted by Restless28

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.

[TSAX]

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

[TxGun]

Originally Posted by countrygun

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.

[SPIN2010]

Originally Posted by FLIPPER 348

In a combat situation it is far from nonsense

Fact, right there.

[fnfalman]

The HK P7M13 was made to compete in the XM9 trial (second trial). It was and is a striker fired handgun.

[FLIPPER 348]

It also has a 2nd/multiple strike capability.



Unless you have had to deal with muddy and/or frozen ammo your striker fired pistols will do you just fine at the pistol range.

[countrygun]

Originally Posted by fnfalman

The HK P7M13 was made to compete in the XM9 trial (second trial). It was and is a striker fired handgun.

Didn't win, did it?

[banger]

A question to the O.P..

In what way have hammer fired pistols failed?

1911, Beretta 92, TT30/33, Walther P-38, Browning Hi-Powers, and many more, are counted among the best and most reliable pistols ever used in military service in virtually every environment.

Environments from the Arctic to the Sahara, to the jungles of Southeast Asia, the woods and fields of Europe, even to the windswept islands of the Falklands.

If it ain't broke....Ahhhh....you know the rest.

I have always had a soft spot in my heart for hose guys that buy a pistol, (maybe 10), proceed to fire several thousand rounds, (maybe 20k) and think they know better than the "Big Green Machine".

The "machine" that buys 100's of thousands of pistols, and fires countless BILLIONS of rounds.

A "machine" that uses it's equipment for DECADES.

A "machine" that tests and USES it's equipment in every environment on Earth.

A "machine" that by the time it's done with it's pistols has placed them into the hands of MILLIONS of users.

[countrygun]

Originally Posted by banger

A question to the O.P..

In what way have hammer fired pistols failed?

1911, Beretta 92, TT30/33, Walther P-38, Browning Hi-Powers, and many more, are counted among the best and most reliable pistols ever used in military service in virtually every environment.

Environments from the Arctic to the Sahara, to the jungles of Southeast Asia, the woods and fields of Europe, even to the windswept islands of the Falklands.

If it ain't broke....Ahhhh....you know the rest.

But all the "cool" kids have striker fired pistols

[Glockdude1]

Originally Posted by fnfalman

The HK P7M13 was made to compete in the XM9 trial (second trial). It was and is a striker fired handgun.

The only down side the the HK P7's is heat. They heat up more than other pistols due to the gas system used. Other than that, they are very accurate, reliable, easy to carry handguns.