Striker vs Hammer - LCP II

Is a striker fired pistol inherently safer than hammer fired?

I recently regained interest in firearms after 30 years or so, before Glock. I was immediately confused by striker vs hammer fired pistols, and still not clear about the internal differences. I saw that striker fired pistols had a trigger "blade" safety, and frequently have no thumb safety. Then I learn this is not universally true, with the LCP II being an example of a hammer fired pistol with a trigger blade safety and no thumb safety.

When reading about this new pistol, questions were asked about firing pin safety, with the point being "is there anything to keep it from firing if the sear should (unintentionally) release the hammer without the trigger being pulled". Are these questions being asked because the LCP II is hammer fired, rather than striker fired? So I ask the question ...

Is a striker fired pistol inherently safer than hammer fired?


Merus

Merus said:

Is a striker fired pistol inherently safer than hammer fired?

I recently regained interest in firearms after 30 years or so, before Glock. I was immediately confused by striker vs hammer fired pistols, and still not clear about the internal differences. I saw that striker fired pistols had a trigger "blade" safety, and frequently have no thumb safety. Then I learn this is not universally true, with the LCP II being an example of a hammer fired pistol with a trigger blade safety and no thumb safety.

When reading about this new pistol, questions were asked about firing pin safety, with the point being "is there anything to keep it from firing if the sear should (unintentionally) release the hammer without the trigger being pulled". Are these questions being asked because the LCP II is hammer fired, rather than striker fired? So I ask the question ...

Is a striker fired pistol inherently safer than hammer fired?


Merus

Click to expand...

I wouldn't say that one is more safe than the other, but folks do argue this endlessly. The major advantages of striker fired are the low bore axis (compared to hammer fired) and that there is no hammer to snag on clothing, etc. And you can't "de-cock" a striker fired pistol without pulling the trigger (which makes some folks really nervous), although de-cocking a hammer fired pistol can be just as nervous making, assuming both have a round in the chamber.

On the other hand, a hammer fired SA/DA pistol will normally have a better trigger feel, and strike the primer with more energy, thereby minimizing the chance of a light strike and non-firing. There are other pluses and minuses with both designs also.

The bottom line is that there is no such thing as a "safe" firearm despite all the hype to the contrary. Just as there is no such thing as a dangerous gun. Guns are designed to go bang, period. All other things merely interrupt that basic purpose. People are safe or dangerous.

So, a striker is like a spring loaded firing pin that strikes the primer when the spring tension is released by pulling the trigger?

If so, that sounds like a much simpler design. This would mean that any safety would necessarily be much different, since the focus is on a trigger and a spring loaded striker, rather than a trigger and a hammer and a firing pin. That would explain the trigger safety commonly used on striker fired pistols.


Merus

[Merus
And you can't "de-cock" a striker fired pistol without pulling the trigger (which makes some folks really nervous), although de-cocking a hammer fired pistol can be just as nervous making, assuming both have a round in the chamber.
[/quote]

You can not de-cock a Glock or a need to de-cock a Glock because it is NEVER cocked . When you pull the trigger you are cocking the gun like a DA revolver . The firing pin is moved back a little bit to get it out of the loading port and get back to the firing pin block and lock in position so if you drop the gun the firing pin can move forward to hit primer . There is no safer way to carry a gun with round in the chamber then Glock type system . If you drop a old original 1911 45 gun with all it safety . The firing pin could move forward and make the gun go bang . So much for grip and manual thumb safety .

They are in fact "spring loaded" firing pins, but that doesn't mean it's a simpler design. There are other bits and pieces that go into it. Just different. If you download the instruction manuals for the models you're asking about (which include a parts breakdown), you'll get a better idea of the differences. The following page contains manuals for all of Ruger products.

http://www.ruger-firearms.com/service/productHistory.html#pistol

I have owned 2 Glock 45ACPs, 5 Taurus PT145s, and 3 S&W M&P45s. Taurus has the right idea of being able to pull the trigger again when you have a ight strike for any reason. I have had many more light strikes with striker fired handguns than with hammer fired guns. Striker fired is OK if you have a backup shooter to save you while you clear the light strike problem, however, hammer fired is far more reliable if you are alone.

lashlaruhe said:

I have owned 2 Glock 45ACPs, 5 Taurus PT145s, and 3 S&W M&P45s. Taurus has the right idea of being able to pull the trigger again when you have a ight strike for any reason. I have had many more light strikes with striker fired handguns than with hammer fired guns. Striker fired is OK if you have a backup shooter to save you while you clear the light strike problem, however, hammer fired is far more reliable if you are alone.

Click to expand...

After shooting Glock's since 2003 and shot over 50,000 rds in my Glock's I've never had a light primer strike . But if you do you can slide the slide rearward about 1/4 to 3/8 of a inch the trigger will reset for a second strike at the primer . 99% of all light strike in a Glock is someone oiling the gun in the wrong spots and got oil in the firing pin channel and need to be clean and dry and free any oil in that channel . The other 1% is bad spring . Glock's are dry guns and only 2 drops of oil is need for the whole gun for 1000 rds . .