DA/SA vs other

[ftd]

For semi-auto hand guns, I think that any preference for SA only over DA/SA is a moot point. Either can be cocked and stowed with the safety on, and therefore can act as a SA weapon from the first shot forward - no extra step to cock the DA/SA first. DA/SA can also be used as DA and carried/handled like a DA on the first shot, and SA subseqently - users choice.

I don't like semi-autos is SA only or DA/SA in a pistol that does not have a hammer for de-cocking (I'm not familiar with decocking levers, but that might be a solution to my concerns, except that mine don't have de-cocking levers).

I have, lately, been shooting a DA/SA revolver in double action. This has several advantages for me - gives me a little more exercise (mine has a pretty stout DA trigger pull, so my trigger finger gets a good workout), and the extra concentration required for accurate shooting in DA is building a more intimate relationship between me and this gun. If I ever get a revolver for defensive purposes I would definately consider a hammerless DA only model.

 

[Shadi Khalil]

I personally prefer D/A when it comes to autos and DAO with revolvers.

 

[Slugthrower]

"No matter how you feel about it, it's still an industry standard and you may interject your opinion in to it, but that doesn't make it correct."

"It's a standard. If you really want to simplify things, use the industry standard.", Sevens.

Agree with you 100%, yes it is my opinion and I should narrow it down and stick to the definiton. It does make me guilty of not researching the actual standard held by the industry and expressing said opinion as truth. Albeit my own truths and understanding of how my semi automatic pistols work,as flawed as they may be.

I'll admit I am far from objective, although I try. It would be beneficial to the thread to clarify the industry standard in regard to what a DA, SA, DA/SA, DAK, LEM, SAO, DAO, etc. really are. It would also greatly benefit the discussion and get to the matter of why one system has a decided advantage over another.

Always looking to learn more and gain further understanding. It is what makes this site such a great resource.

 

[Sevens]

...and get to the matter of why one system has a decided advantage over another.

It would further the discussion and share the knowledge, but I've always enjoyed variety in life. If one system has a decided advantage over another, that is most likely only for some folks, in certain situations. For others, it is no advantage, or no "decided" advantage.

There doesn't have to be an agenda when gun cranks get together to chat about different handguns and their operating systems... does there?

I have DA/SA, striker, and SA only pistols in my safe. I have DA and SA revolvers, too. None of them arrived in my safe against my will or good judgment, and none of them are likely to get kicked to the curb, either!

 

[aarondhgraham]

Aarond's Law #2,,,

Every thing is a two-edged sword.

It would also greatly benefit the discussion and get to the matter of why one system has a decided advantage over another.

I'm really not all that sure that any of the firing systems have a decided advantage over another.

I do believe it's all a matter of personal preference.

I know people who are very established competition shooters,,,
They have as many variations in their preferences as any group of shooters.

That alone tells me that there is not going to be a clear winner in this debate.

I prefer a DA/SA pistol with an exposed hammer,,,
I train with it so the first heavy trigger pull is no big deal to me,,,
I can easily depend on that trigger pull to act as an "automatic safety" for me.

I'm not a lover of the 1911 platform,,,
But I could easily train myself to thumb off a safety if I so desired,,,
What I can't train my mind to accept is walking around with a cocked hammer on my hip.

I'm not saying it's unsafe,,,
Or that the many thousands of people who do so are being unsafe,,,
I'm saying I would rather deal with a heavy trigger pull than fret about carrying a cocked handgun.

I carry my DA/SA pistol with the hammer down and the safety off,,,
I use the de-cocker after I have chambered a round.

I practice drawing my pistol and shooting quickly,,,
I'm a firm believer that getting the first shot off quickly is a good thing,,,
And I don't worry about the safety being off because the hammer is always down.

But I can easily conceive of a situation where I would have time to draw and take careful aim,,,
For that I want the capability to thumb back that hammer and wait for the moment to shoot the bad guy in the forehead.

It's not about which system is inherently best,,,
It's about which system best fits your individual choice in manual of arms.

Call me old school but I always want a hammer on my revolver or pistol,,,
I'm simply more confident in my training with that manual of arms.

More importantly I am convinced it is the best mechanism,,,
For the way I want to and have trained to react in self defense scenarios.

Your mileage will certainly vary.

Aarond

 

[Sevens]

What I can't train my mind to accept is walking around with a cocked hammer on my hip.

...and this is the likely reason that the DA/SA pistols got so unbelievably popular in North American law enforcement as duty pistols. It was very much a "perception" thing.

For a lot of people, it comes down to potential energy. A cocked handgun (and one that can easily be seen as such) has all the potential, stored energy it needs to discharge RIGHT there and doesn't even need human interaction, it merely needs some kind of failure for that potential energy to become kinetic energy.

Of course, we gun folks know that there are other safety devices in place to intercept such a happening, and we also know the probability of that happening at all is horribly slim.

But there were folks at the top who were in charge of choosing duty pistols for large groups of officers who carried them visibly and they chose the DA/SA platform as the best compromise of what they needed and how the public was going to see it.

 

[loose_holster_dan]

+1 to the p7

 

[yustinus1973]

My first pistol was a TDA(DA/SA), so i have just kind of always liked them, most of the pistols i have owned have been TDA. Never been a big fan of SAO pistols even though iv owned a number of them, same thing goes for DAO, as for striker fired safe action pistols i am just not a fan at all, i like hammers thats just me. I also like decockers, and my first shot being DA then all my other shots being SA.

 

[jimbob86]

Gun fights involve trigger slapping and point shooting

Because no truly determined agressor was ever stopped by a loud noise, I'll use the sights and squeeze the trigger, thankyouverymuch. YMMV.

 

[ltc444]

DA/SA controversy has allways in my mind a way for so called gun experts who make their living writing something to fill space in magazines.

I have both styles and do not have problems transitioning for DA to SA.

Its is merely Practice, Practice, and more Practice.

 

[iMagUdspEllr]

@Slugtrhower:

Until they make a striker fired pisol that holds the striker in a completely compressed and ready state, which only has to trip a sear it can in no way be considered an single action. At best it is a light double action, with a shorter stroke and a need to be reset like a SA, should it misfire.

A striker fire pistol is single action. When you pull the trigger it does one thing... causes the striker to hit the firing pin. I know. On a Glock it is "half-cocked" when you rack the slide or after the previous round is fired. However, even though the striker does move back slightly before it slips off the trigger bar... that whole process could be described as one action (causing the striker to hit the primer). I understand that is splitting hairs. But, I do not call it a double-action because double-action guns are capable of repeatedly hitting the same round if it fails to fire without manually resetting the hammer/striker.

All of the caveats near the end of your quote are the very reasons why striker fire pistols are not and should not be called double action. They are closer to SA guns in operation. There is no repeat strike. And, you have to set the striker via racking the slide in order for it to be cocked and able to fire. I know... the striker moves back a little... then it releases and fires... "2 actions". But, none of that is possible unless it is already "cocked" to begin with by cycling the slide... just like a SA. Its splitting hairs. It is irrelevant to the topic in this thread. But, I can build a better case for striker pistols being SA than DA.

A double action doesn't load kinetic energy. It loads potential energy. When the hammer is finally released the potential energy is converted to kinetic energy. But, I am splitting hairs.

It is a compromise in that you have a trigger stroke, no matter how light, requiring you to concentrate on keeping your sight picture till you can reach the point of discharge.

Yes, you must do that for any gun. However, heavier trigger pulls (esp. 10 lbs) require much stronger finger, hand, and arm muscles in order to keep the pistol on target throughout the trigger pull without pulling the trigger with your hand and just your trigger finger like you are supposed to. I know it is the same process, but it is an easily verifiable fact that you have to put a much larger amount of effort and build much stronger hand muscles just to do the same thing a SA pistol can do with less effort (work smarter not harder anyone?) I know, if you do your part and fire the gun correctly it doesn't matter if the trigger pull is 20 lbs. However, your gun should not test you. Your gun should allow you to be able to put accurate shots on target with the least amount of effort and skill. I hope I didn't just offend everyone. But, yes, you shouldn't have to put forth more effort and skill to do the same thing a SA does (puts a bullet on target). I like DAOs too but only as long as they have lighter trigger pulls than 10 lbs. Like I explained earlier that just makes the shooter's job much more difficult than it has to be. You should be concentrating on what you are doing (shooting accurately and quickly) not fighting your weapon.

I fully understand the concept of trigger discipline. The key to my statment is that you thought you were ready to destroy what was on the other end of the pistol and in the very last instant realize you do not. You can train yourself to keep that finger outside the trigger guard till you are on the target. Your instincts are going to drive you to put your finger on that trigger when you percieve an imminent danger approaching. Yes it is unsafe, people will do this anyway, especially the ones that are not going to train as they should. It is that possiblty that causes compromise actions to be devised. Otherwise a SA trigger would be the answer and nothing else would need to be considered.

I respect that. I agree that even with training you might accidentally put your finger on the trigger when you shouldn't especially in a life or death situation. I think I get it now. However, I don't want to fight with my weapon when I do really need to use it quickly and accurately right now. I would really hate it if my gun caused me to miss when I wanted to use it. But, now I see both sides of it.

The DAO pistols that are coming into use now are a much better option for self defense as accuracy isn't so important at short ranges and the differences aren't that great up close. The problem is that if you decide to use it outside that role it does begin to show it's flaws. That option to have a very nice trigger break of a true SA is why the DA/SA still survives.

DAOs can have really nice trigger breaks, lighter triggers (although I haven't seen any "short" DAO triggers other than the Sig DAK... but that is an option between long and light or short and heavy... and its only short and heavy if you cock the hammer back first).

There are striker actions, such as the PM9, that are near perfect immitations of a very good DA trigger pull in a revolver and have a pull that seems lighter.[/QUOTE=Slugthrower]

I think Kahr PM9s are sweet pistols. There is no doubt about that.

The fact that the Safe Action in a Glock seems to behave as if it was a SA , even thought it isn't, is why it is nearly as dangerous in lesser trained hands as an 1911 without a manual safety in those same hands. Hence the notion of an idiot proofed pistol and a continuing search for the perfect trigger action.

Well... I think a 1911 has a great system. It has a quick, positive, easy-to-use safety that you can deactivate during the draw step and therefore doesn't hinder your speed. It doesn't have repeat strike but I say, "Boo hoo" to that because most people agree you should just get rid of the round that probably already has a primer that has been depressed too far to be worth striking again anyway (assuming there isn't another reason why the round didn't go off).

I also think that striker pistols are just as good as 1911s. You shouldn't put your finger on the trigger of a 1911 even with the safety on... because that one time you thought it was on will be that one time you shoot yourself. So... I figure that a Glock is just as safe as a 1911. You shouldn't be touching the trigger regardless... and that is what fires the gun on both pistols.

DAOs have the benefit of repeatedly striking a round...but that is a moot point for the most part because the primer already has an indent in it anyway and a light primer strike isn't the only reason why a round fails to fire.

So... I lump all of those guys in the same category. But, I place them all above DA/SA. I see what you are saying about the gun giving you the opportunity to stop and pull back before you destroy something you don't want to. But, that is really your responsibility. Identify what you choose to point your gun at before you even think about going through the motions of sending rounds at it. I see both sides... but it is still you who pulls the trigger and with adrenaline in you... 10lb trigger pull is a drop in the bucket as far as preventing you from shooting something you don't want to shoot.

I see your side now, though. It does give you that little buffer to prevent you from sending a bullet you wish you could have taken back. Oh and lmao to your last paragraph.

@PawPaw: A DA/SA revolver... isn't really what is being discussed. Because on a revolver every shot will be a DA shot unless you stop to manually make it single action. So... the shot will be the same DA shot every time unless you make the conscious choice to "change modes". I don't have a problem with that because you aren't forced to transition from DA to SA like on a DA/SA semi-auto.

@ftd:

Either can be cocked and stowed with the safety on, and therefore can act as a SA weapon from the first shot forward - no extra step to cock the DA/SA first.

No. A Beretta M9 decocks the hammer when you put the safety on. A Sig Sauer P226 doesn't have a safety. The only gun that comes to mind that functions the way you describe is the newer FNX series of pistols. I like those guys... because you can carry condition I just like a 1911... but I got rid of mine because the safety dug into my hand while I held it and it didn't feel very positive when you deactivated it... partially because you could completely decock the pistol on accident if you applied too much force flicking the safety off.

If I ever get a revolver for defensive purposes I would definately consider a hammerless DA only model.

I agree

@aarondhgraham:

I practice drawing my pistol and shooting quickly,,,
I'm a firm believer that getting the first shot off quickly is a good thing,,,
And I don't worry about the safety being off because the hammer is always down.

I agree that the first shot must be fast... and accurate. You can't miss fast enough to stop them. And, you can miss fast enough to hurt an innocent person. I don't understand... if the safety is on the gun will not fire. If the grip safety isn't depressed the gun will not fire. If the trigger is not pulled then the gun will not fire. What will do some or all of these things especially if the gun is in a holster (pocket gun guys... I can't help you)?

But I can easily conceive of a situation where I would have time to draw and take careful aim,,,
For that I want the capability to thumb back that hammer and wait for the moment to shoot the bad guy in the forehead.

...Or you could have just shot them with a SA, striker, DAO. No hammer thumbing required. If something needs to be shot it is worth shooting quickly. Even if precision is required... the time spent thumbing the hammer back is time lost aligning your sights. This situation is the very reason why I dislike the DA/SA. I understand, though. I will not tell someone to shoot a gun they are not comfortable with. To each his own.

@jimbob86:

Because no truly determined agressor was ever stopped by a loud noise, I'll use the sights and squeeze the trigger, thankyouverymuch. YMMV.

I agree. When I heard that argument I thought, "That is a pretty stupid line of thinking. I will pull my trigger properly."

@ltc444:

DA/SA controversy has allways in my mind a way for so called gun experts who make their living writing something to fill space in magazines.

I have both styles and do not have problems transitioning for DA to SA.

Its is merely Practice, Practice, and more Practice.

Practice is what it is all about. But, wouldn't you agree that with the same amount of practice you would be more proficient with those other systems because you only had one trigger pull to master instead of two different ones and a mandatory transition? When I shoot DA/SA I feel like I am fighting my gun and those first two shots inspire no confidence to me whatsoever. That is just my mileage. I am not very good at DA/SA though... so that is probably why. But, I just think, "Why bother?" There are no advantages to DA/SA... and it is harder to master. It feels like wasted effort. That is just my opinion though.

 

[Jamas]

The comment by aarond about cocking the hammer on a DA/SA pistol is dead on for me. My nightstand gun is DA/SA and I could see cocking the hammer as soon as I pick it up. Not every self defense situation will present its self in the way you have it played out in your head.

 

[iMagUdspEllr]

@Jamas:

The comment by aarond about cocking the hammer on a DA/SA pistol is dead on for me. My nightstand gun is DA/SA and I could see cocking the hammer as soon as I pick it up. Not every self defense situation will present its self in the way you have it played out in your head.

Exactly... so what makes you think you will always have time to thumb the hammer back? Some situations allow you that luxury, not all of them. That is an extra step that you never have to worry about with the other action types.

And, flicking a safety off is easier, faster, better than thumbing the hammer back. You have to break your shooting grip, resist the hammer spring, and then regain your shooting grip. That is much more complicated and time consuming than flicking off a safety (or not having a safety at all). I don't understand how this line of thinking isn't instantly banished after a moment of introspection.

 

[Lost Sheep]

Some notes

(edited for brevity Striker fired guns aren't really DAO (they don't have repeat strike capability).

I know of at least one, the Colt 2000. Actually is more of a double action than any gun I have ever seen. Most DAO have the hammer cocked until the bolt/slide closes, then drops the hammer or striker. The Colt 2000's striker travelled with the slide/bolt both back and forward and thus was never cocked until the trigger acted on it, and that occurred only from the "at rest" position. Remarkable design. How many other pistols had a rotating bolt locking mechanism?

The HK P7 solved all these problems...

And introduced others. You REALLY have to get used to loading the mainspring with the frontstrap. But it is an innovative design that has a LOT of merit. You just have to retrain your muscle memory.

For semi-auto hand guns, I think that any preference for SA only over DA/SA is a moot point. Either can be cocked and stowed with the safety on... (edited for brevity)

Except for the "hammer drop safety" or decocker. Sure, the Taurus 99/92 and CZ clones safeties lock the hammer back, but most others (Rugers and, I think, Smiths and others) drop the hammer.

That hammer fall, though is just about as scary as walking around with a hammer at full cock all the time.

DA/SA controversy has allways in my mind a way for so called gun experts who make their living writing something to fill space in magazines.

Too true, too true. And here we are doing as good a job (or maybe even better) FOR FREE!

iMagUdspEllr's post (#31) points out some of the same details I have noticed in this thread.

Interesting thread. Sorting out who is using what meanings for their terms makes it difficult, but educational nonetheless.

Lost Sheep

 

[iMagUdspEllr]

@Lost Sheep: I believe the Desert Eagle has a rotating bolt if I'm not mistaken.

I feel like I learned a lot.

 

[Jamas]

It's hard to believe that you can dismiss something as easily as you do... Anything that can go wrong probably will but to say that I wouldn't be able to thumb back a hammer because it would take to long is just nonsensical. As I said before the situation where you need the gun is probably not going to present its self in the manner you imagine.
I dont like external safeties, therefore I don't buy guns with them. I also don't like dao semi-autos so... I guess they still make the da/sa with a decocker just for me...

 

[SPUSCG]

I like the safety of a first da shot but don't want to be hindered by a poor trigger pull after, and a good da/sa in sa mode will have a much better trigger than the plastic guns with strikers or a dao.

Also, I like the ability to pull and shoot, no safeties or such, and if grappling around on the ground or such fighting someone my guns ready to roll even in less than ideal positions like that. And the type of distance you'd shoot da at i doubt anyone would miss, and if i need to make a long shot, well i cock the hammer.

 

[Sparks1957]

I think DA/SA is exactly the best thing for me... no external safeties to fumble around on, I've got the safety of a heavy DA pull on the first round, and a smooth light SA after that.

It's a perfect balance for me, give me my decockers any day of the week.

 

[iMagUdspEllr]

Anything that can go wrong probably will but to say that I wouldn't be able to thumb back a hammer because it would take to long is just nonsensical.

How is it nonsensical? You could not have enough time to draw the gun (doesn't matter what gun you have... you're screwed) or you could have enough time to draw the gun but not enough time to get a good shot off. In the latter situation you are better off not thumbing the hammer back because it takes less time to just pull the trigger. And, in that situation the other action types have the advantage.

I understand that things will not go down exactly how I plan them. But all situations happen throughout time. That is a constant and that is what I am using to compare DA/SA to other action types.

I like the safety of a first da shot but don't want to be hindered by a poor trigger pull after, and a good da/sa in sa mode will have a much better trigger than the plastic guns with strikers or a dao.

DAO guns have just as nice triggers as DA/SA guns. Even though they are DAO they have a much lighter trigger pull than the DA mode on a DA/SA gun. I can't really defend striker pistols. The only thing I can say about them is... they aren't as bad as you make them sound. I can shoot my 1911 just as well as my Glock. Gun fit seems to dictate my accuracy more than the trigger does... unless the trigger is god-awful. And, no one is trying to defend terrible guns.

In contrast, the DA pull on my PX4s is so heavy that I am forced up and left (I'm left handed). Like I said, I probably don't like them because I'm not good with them. Also, like I said before, why am I expending this extra effort? I am accomplishing the same task with more work and effort than with all these other designs.

When grappling around any gun is good to go in that situation.

Why bother having a gun where you have to cock the hammer to make a long shot? Why not just have a gun that has the single action trigger all the time?

I see that you guys have made up your minds and that is what works for you. I will not tell someone that they shouldn't use what you are comfortable with. But, it is obvious to me that its extra work and effort for no reason.

DA/SA
1)Better trigger pull than a striker pistol
What's wrong with SA triggers? Oh yeah they're fine but you can't stand flicking a safety off... yet you think thumbing the hammer back on a DA/SA is a viable option.
2)No safety like a SA
Yes, and in return you have a heavy trigger pull or you are forced to cock the hammer if you don't want the DA pull (which leads right back to the first point).

I am about to make a generalized statement this does not necessarily apply to anyone who has posted in this thread: It seems people who advocate DA/SA actions do not understand proper trigger discipline or fail to realize it is easier to use a safety than it is to thumb back a hammer.

But, I see where the center of the argument is now.

On SA designs people instinctively flick the safety off and that doesn't prevent you from accidentally pulling the trigger when you don't want to (aside from failing to acknowledge you have removed the gun from the holster, flicked the safety off, and pointed it at the target.). The 10 lb pull will hopefully "wake someone up" before they fire the round. Also, you don't have a chance of forgetting to disengage the safety. But, DAO and striker fire pistols don't have that issue. And, even SA users don't seem to have issues with disengaging the safety (not that I have done a study... but I acknowledge that it is possible to forget). Striker fire and DAO pistols don't have bad trigger pulls.

I definitely think striker fire pistols have better pulls than the first DA pull on a DA/SA pistol. If you believe that you have the chance of forgetting to take the safety off, then what makes you think you are going to remember to thumb the hammer back? If its possible for you to forget about the safety... isn't it possible for you to forget if you are in DA or SA? How are you going to pull the trigger instinctively? Are you going to do a DA pull by instinct or an SA pull? Do you train mostly with DA or SA? Both equally? What will your finger do in that life or death situation? Will it try to pull the DA trigger like it is in SA mode? Will you thumb the hammer back but still instinctively pull the trigger like a DA pull like the first shot normally is?

I didn't think of that argument until now. But, I am slow like that sometimes

SA, DAO, striker fire... if you train with it there is only one right way to shoot it... that is the only muscle memory you have... so even under duress you are likely to shoot well... or at least better than you would with a DA/SA action. At least it seems that way to me. All of this depends on stress level and level of training. But, I think most people will agree that you are really making it hard on yourself when it doesn't need to be.

I don't know. Counter-arguments anyone? Did my logic fail somewhere?

 

[Jamas]

Bringing up the fact that there could be a situation that will prevent you from drawing/grabbing your firearm is a moot point when the topic of conversation is action types on your chosen gun. Everything is situational, and in a dire situation i would rather not have to worry about disengaging a safety... about thumbing back the hammer... Situational I'm not going to try to thumb back a hammer if there is an immediate threat, i would just pull the trigger.
If you are uncomfortable with your ability to transition from a long double action pull to a short single action pull then please use whatever you wish.