PDA

View Full Version : Can an argument be made for DA/SA autoloaders?



xray 99
10-24-2011, 09:20 AM
The striker fired/LEM mechanisms appear to have supplanted the traditional DA/SA autoloader in the hands of LEOs and others. Can a case be made for selecting a DA/SA over the alternatives?

Dagga Boy
10-24-2011, 09:53 AM
I have always said that DA/SA auto's make great prisoner taking guns, and require a lot more work to shoot them effectively in a fight (or in general). I carried a DA/SA .45 ACP. auto for a majority of my L/E career. The reality was I took far more people into custody at gunpoint than I ever shot. When shooting was required, the folks I trained did exceptionally well in shootings, BUT we had spent a ton of time working on the DA/SA transition. I know that Todd and the many stellar shooters he has been around have been able to master the DA/SA, it just requires more work, and is less forgiving. For those who have not mastered trigger finger discipline, fear control, sympathetic squeeze, and other issues, DA/SA guns are slightly better at being more forgiving of mistakes than some other designs. You then have the issue of post shooting problems with forgetting to de-cock under stress. Basically, with training the DA/SA system can work and work well. Some of the best handguns ever made utilize this system. You just have to fit the plusses and minuses to your individual needs and training. Unlike many trainers, I have had enough exposure to these guns and been successful with them in both shooting people and matches to not totally discount them. I also understand that they take dedicated work to master. Unfortunately, these guns are often issued to actually avoid the work to shoot them well, and issued with the idea of not shooting. Hardware over software is always a disaster waiting to happen.

JAD
10-24-2011, 10:07 AM
So, no?

Dagga Boy
10-24-2011, 10:37 AM
So, no?

Depends on your individual needs. I am still regularly using an HK45C Variant 1. Do I "shoot" it better than my Glock or 1911's....no. Do I prefer it pointing at my family jewels than the other two-yes. Do I prefer it to any Glock for being in a bag or off-body in a home or location with kids-yes. Am I more comfortable with my options in a physical confrontation with it-yes (remember, pistol fights and fist fights are often inter related). Essentially, I prefer the handling characteristics of my V1 HK over most other guns, but prefer the shooting characteristics of a single trigger operation handgun. What is more important to you will dictate what is better.

ToddG
10-24-2011, 02:41 PM
I think the DA/SA is unfairly maligned, primarily by folks whose entire shooting career has revolved around the 1911 and Glock. They cannot shoot a DA/SA gun well and so they assume it's the gun's fault and not their own. A SIG with the short reset modification ("SRT") is one of the most shootable guns I've ever used.

nyeti is absolutely correct, it does take more effort to master a DA pistol. However, that "more" can be considerably minimized if you learn how to run the gun properly as opposed to having an instructor tell you to buy a Glock instead.

Working on the DA stroke of a DA/SA pistol forces you to develop great trigger control. This makes it much easier to transition to another gun, whereas many people who have lived their lives with 5# (or less) triggers often struggle to shoot a DA/SA well. I've even seen folks who've picked up a SIG or HK and thought the gun was broken because it didn't go off when they lightly brushed against the trigger.

Once you fire that first DA stroke, the SA on most DA/SA guns is lighter (and often shorter) than the consistent trigger pull on competing guns. So you have to learn to make that first shot, but afterwards the gun is in Easy Mode.

It's also extremely important to make decocking the pistol a purely subconscious act. There are different schools of thought on this, but I decock the pistol whenever it dismounts from the target (i.e., it moves into my ready position).

Dagga Boy
10-24-2011, 03:38 PM
Holy crap.....more Todd agreement:). Ditto on the de-cock. I trained my people to de-cock every time their gun came off target/suspect....even if they did not shoot. This tended to make it automatic when it happened for real. The only issue I am having now is that mastering the first DA shot with my arthritic hands is really tough. Luckily, I am at the point in life where I will hopefully not have to ever use a pistol again to save mine or someone elses life. I still train more than most active duty cops, but I have come to the point that how a gun handles and carries is more important than how it shoots. We are talking about marginal differences. Keep in mind that there are still a lot of very skilled front line gunfighters and elite units using DA/SA pistols to do God's work.

gtmtnbiker98
10-24-2011, 05:30 PM
The striker fired/LEM mechanisms appear to have supplanted the traditional DA/SA autoloader in the hands of LEOs and others. Can a case be made for selecting a DA/SA over the alternatives?
Why do we have to have an argument for a platform? I have been running DA/SA for the last two years, exclusively and have zero problems.

CCT125US
10-24-2011, 07:42 PM
In my experience I have found that running a DA/SA P30V3 has improved my fundamentals and overall ability. I started on a Glock 26, then an HK USP, then 3 different makes and calibers of the much maligned XD striker fired, back to a Glock and now I have moved onto the P30 V3. All my guns have had around 20K rounds through them and I will say that with the short time and low round count (relative terms, I know) I have had on the P30 V3, my (measured) overall ability has improved. It is different than striker fired guns, weather or not being different translates to "bad" is determined by the shooter. I feel it revealed some deficiencies in my overall technique that had remained masked and I was able to address and correct them. Did that correction time require commitment on my part? Yes. Did it take range time and rounds? Yes. Can I make the case for DA/SA over the alternatives? For me in my situation, hell yes. As previously stated, each shooter needs to carefully weigh what is important and look at all factors, whatever those may be.

jlw
10-24-2011, 08:31 PM
I carried a S&W 4006 for seven years. I don't feel that I was ever handicapped by the mechanism. Granted, when training new shooters not having to teach the transition and decocking is easier.

theblacknight
10-24-2011, 11:01 PM
I'm not a fan of beretta type guns for teaching extreme novices(marines). seems like they picked a gun with a 10lb first pull and a safety that's too far back and flips the wrong way so it would be harder to nd . Why where d/s guns even invented?

Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk

Dagga Boy
10-24-2011, 11:43 PM
I'm not a fan of beretta type guns for teaching extreme novices(marines). seems like they picked a gun with a 10lb first pull and a safety that's too far back and flips the wrong way so it would be harder to nd . Why where d/s guns even invented?

Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk

Equally, both the older Sig's and the HK's are exceptionally good guns. I won the Top Gun Shoot for the largest county in the United States and smoked every Glock there with a Sig Sauer DA/SA pistol. There is also a group of Navy people who seem to really like DA/SA guns and they can truly buy anything they want. I despise Beretta's, but I have seen a couple of L.A. County Sheriff's deputies who have spent a lot of time with LAV who will shoot most folks under the table no matter what they are carrying. It takes more dedication and practice, but is by no means impossible to run.

TCinVA
10-25-2011, 06:09 AM
I was always able to run a Beretta 92 quite well. They fit my hands better than a Sig and I can have a normal grip without neutering the slide lock. The G model "Brigadier" configuration is my favorite...and should have been the model Beretta sold the most, but alas...politics....especially if it can be had with the "Vertec" frame. I cut my teeth on a 92 and as such never really found the DA/SA transition to be the insurmountable obstacle that others have complained about.

TGS
10-25-2011, 09:41 AM
I'm not a fan of beretta type guns for teaching extreme novices(marines). seems like they picked a gun with a 10lb first pull and a safety that's too far back and flips the wrong way so it would be harder to nd . Why where d/s guns even invented?

Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk

"d/s" guns? Not sure what that means. Realize that once upon a time LEM and DAK triggers weren't around, Glocks and M&P's didn't exist, and 1911's were not carried cocked and locked with a round in the chamber. DA/SA was a pretty hot ticket against the other options, but I'm still pretty sure it was solely invented just to irk you.

How did the world EVER manage with DA/SA.........or those DA revolvers.....

Odin Bravo One
10-25-2011, 09:46 AM
The striker fired/LEM mechanisms appear to have supplanted the traditional DA/SA autoloader in the hands of LEOs and others. Can a case be made for selecting a DA/SA over the alternatives?

I think an argument can be made for just about any modern pistol action. For the LE and MIL folks, it is usually determined by someone other than the shooter what action will be made available to them. For the civilian, or LE/MIL who have a choice, it becomes personal preference.

As one of my mentors has always explained it..........."It's the wizard, not the wand".

Shoot what you want, what you are comfortable with, and can employ effectively.

If the rules suddenly changed, and I could only have a single pistol, I would choose a DA/SA. Not because it is somehow superior to other action types, but because it works for me.

ffhounddog
10-25-2011, 10:31 AM
I like the 3rd gen SW autos. My 3913 is the best shooting DA/SA I have.

Now I have always shot the M9 at expert and do not feel like the P229s I have are an issue. I do have a HK P2000 and USP combat comp that are LEMs and they are nice but the P229 SAS I have has a great DA/SA trigger.

Suvorov
10-25-2011, 02:36 PM
"d/s" guns? Not sure what that means. Realize that once upon a time LEM and DAK triggers weren't around, Glocks and M&P's didn't exist, and 1911's were not carried cocked and locked with a round in the chamber. DA/SA was a pretty hot ticket against the other options, but I'm still pretty sure it was solely invented just to irk you.

How did the world EVER manage with DA/SA.........or those DA revolvers.....

This is a good point sarcasm aside. People need to keep in mind a historical perspective on things. While the striker fired auto was around prior to the Glock, it wasn't widely accepted and many would argue that Glock's aggressive marketing to LEO agencies had as much to do with its widespread acceptance as did the system itself. For militaries and LEO agencies that are both cheap and hoplophobic by nature, any way you can package a new mechanism that will promise to be cheaper to train and "safer" to use will always sell. It worked for the DA/SA auto, it worked for the striker fired auto.

For what my opinion is worth, I like the DA/SA system. I have found that I greatly prefer a "rolling" double action pull to a heavy break. I cut my teeth with the Beretta, and it is still my favorite gun to shoot as well as my HD gun. I am issued a USPc LEM with the heavy trigger. It is far easier and requires far less concentration for me to fire an accurate DA shot from the Beretta than it is for me to do the same with my HK. I may loose a fraction of a second in the transition, but each successive SA shot is way easier to put on target than successive shots from the LEM. The smooth trigger of the DA/SA seems to work best with my "flinch tendency" while the heavy LEM just seems to aggravate it. This is especially true when I'm pushing my speed. I have been instructing/working with a friend who last year, purchased a DA/SA USPc. He has done remarkably well with it and while still a novice, can certainly hit the target (which is more than can be said for many noobs). He recently purchased a P2000 LEM (heavy) as a second gun, it will be interesting to see how he does with this system and which he likes better. I have suggested to him that whichever he likes, he has the other gun converted over.

My military experience with the Beretta was that the only real problem with it was the widespread resistance on the part of leadership to invest in quality training. Issue the gun, give a 10 minute POI and then have the troops shoot until they qualified. Rather than teach them how to shoot the DA side, they would just tell soldiers to cock the hammer and fire the first shot SA (even though that was against the qualification standards). I always though that was just akin to telling soldiers that they could do pushups on their knees if the standard pushups were too hard for them during the PFT. Also, none of the soldiers who bragged about how much better they could shoot their glock or 1911 ect could shoot the M9 well - odd....... The issue with the safety decock is also an example of a system being maligned as a result of CYA SOPs instead of a real desire to train soldiers/cops to use a system. As has been mentioned, a certain group of sailors seem quite content with the DA/SA system, but then again, they get good training instead of "check the box and move on" training. I wonder what kind of chaos will ensue if/when a striker fired auto becomes standard GI issue?

Failure2Stop
10-25-2011, 02:52 PM
I can shoot the M9 pretty well. For a DA/SA it actually has a pretty decent DA (most of the time), and if training time is devoted appropriately I have found that most can shoot shoot it pretty well. Manipulations due to the slide mounted safety/decocker are definately sub-optimal, but not unworkable. I prefer other DA/SA guns over the M9, but not because I shoot any of them any better.

One thing I have noticed (since I was away from any real pistol work for about 18 months) getting back into pistolcraft again is that I still shoot DA pretty well (P30 V3) until I push speed past my current skill level (which has dropped pretty noticably), at which point I do not perform to my expectation. I find that more consistent triggers (LEM, DA only, etc) tend to level out my performance, especially for that first shot.

FWIW- I think that DA guns make excellent trainers for the press-out, but I do not think that their cost is worth getting one just for that.

theblacknight
10-25-2011, 04:13 PM
"d/s" guns? Not sure what that means. Realize that once upon a time LEM and DAK triggers weren't around, Glocks and M&P's didn't exist, and 1911's were not carried cocked and locked with a round in the chamber. DA/SA was a pretty hot ticket against the other options, but I'm still pretty sure it was solely invented just to irk you.

How did the world EVER manage with DA/SA.........or those DA revolvers.....


Sorry Double/Single. Guys, notice I mentioned novices(me included). I just don't see what is wrong with 1911 style controls and functions.

jslaker
10-25-2011, 04:22 PM
Despite the fact that they're harder to learn to shoot, I still feel that DA/SA guns probably offer the best combination of safety and simplicity for people that don't eat and breathe guns. You pull the trigger, it goes bang, but the DA pull is heavy and -- more importantly IMO -- long enough that it's less prone to Glock Leg style NDs than a typical SFA. The system is just more forgiving of mistakes.

I really love HK's LEM set up since it gives you pull length with relatively consistent break weight, but not many casual gun people want to drop $800+ on a gun. DA/SA is a solid compromise, and I wouldn't be particularly adverse to carrying one if I needed to or recommending one as a house gun.

David Armstrong
10-25-2011, 05:37 PM
With autos I started with the 1911 and stayed with it when I could, but also had a lot of experience early on with the Walther P-38, and then was an early devotee of the S&W Mdl. 39 and later carried the HK P9S in .45 ACP. Of course then I discovered the Glock 17 and have never seen any reason to leave it. But if I were to only have a DA/SA again I would consider myself just as well armed as with any other platform. I've trained a lot of folks with them and haven't noticed any particular problems in learning the transition and have given away a number of Sig P6 SA/DA guns to family members for their personal use, so yes, I think an argument can still be made for the DA/SA auto, and it isn't a hard argument to make.

TGS
10-25-2011, 06:12 PM
Sorry Double/Single. Guys, notice I mentioned novices(me included). I just don't see what is wrong with 1911 style controls and functions.

No one is saying there's anything wrong with 1911 style controls and functions. Different strokes for different folks. Just cause some of us shoot DA/SA guns doesn't mean we're poo-pooing on your choices. It's just what we're shooting.

theblacknight
10-25-2011, 06:50 PM
Yeah but it seems like to be effective with you have to be of a certain skill, pretty high to me. So a dude cuts his teeth on a 1911 or glock,and then, besides innate preference, what does a Sig/FNP/HK offer a skilled guy to keep him shooting it? I'm not stirring shit at all, im genuinly curious. Law of primacy is strong, seems like switching would be short lived.

TGS
10-25-2011, 09:51 PM
So a dude cuts his teeth on a 1911 or glock,and then, besides innate preference, what does a Sig/FNP/HK offer a skilled guy to keep him shooting it?

Don't look at it as "why keep shooting it," as if it's inferior and needs a qualifier of some type to make it worthwhile next to a Glock or 1911. It doesn't.

But to play along, I'd say that some people would rather have the longer/heavier trigger pull of DA/SA for safety reasons, because they're gaining a safety margin and still able to shoot just fine. Me personally? I don't give a shit about how awesome a trigger is if it doesn't have my personal safety requisites for not only a carry weapon, but something I carry AIWB(long first pull and a hammer or tactile feedback device like the "Gadget" or Walthers cocking indicator).

So then you probably ask, "Well, why didn't you get your P2000 in LEM if that gives you your safety margin but is also more shootable, notably in one-handed manipulation?" Why? Because Va Arms Co only had the DA/SA in stock when I went. Why wait? I shoot the DA/SA just fine. Sure, LEM would allow better one-handed shooting, but I'm not terribly concerned being I can still put 7/10 rounds into a 2" circle at 5 yards either hand. That's acceptable to me. I don't shoot a whole lot either.....450 rounds per month at most. There's lots of guys that do more than that in a week on P-F.com, I wouldn't call myself "highly skilled" in this forums' company.

I learned my DA/SA manipulations in the Corps. Unless you get a special shoot package, they won't make you a AFHF graduate, but I certainly learned DA/SA manipulations just fine. First time I picked up a Beretta M9(first time I shot a handgun with any levity) I was missing a human silhouette 3/10 times at 7 yards, both DA and SA. Within 140 rounds I qualified at 363/400. Granted, I've been shooting since age 6 with longarms and had formal match rifle training in my teens, but from observing Marines learning the M9 for the first time I think what affects most new shooters is either 1) Lack of focus on front sight or 2) anticipation, NOT the DA/SA trigger. It's really not hard unless your physiologically challenged(small handed). Mundane daily tasks take WAY more brain power than the dreaded DA/SA transition.

HeadHunter
10-26-2011, 07:09 AM
Let's think about some often overlooked statistics of confrontations involving Armed Private Citizens.

According to the FBI's 2010 edition of Crime in The US (http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/tables/10shrtbl15.xls) there were 170 Justifiable Homicides by handgun and 28 by "firearms, type not stated" for a likely dataset not to exceed 198 JH by handgun in 2010. If we accept the 20-25% fatality rate often cited, then the likely universe of actual shootings is in the region of 1000.

Depending on which source we choose to accept, the number of confrontations between Armed Private Citizens and criminals annually ranges between 600,000 and 3 million. So our likely probability of a confrontation escalating into an actual shooting ranges from 1 in 600 to 1 in 3000. Suffice to say, the odds favor a non-shooting confrontation.

When teaching draw and hold, my observation has been that most people, even those with some training, will put their finger in the trigger guard during the initial stages of a confrontation. As they get more reps at draw and hold, that tendency goes down but never goes away.

I won't go into the human dynamics aspects here of proxemics and confrontations but it's worth researching for those who are interested.

For those reasons, I think a DA first shot gun is a much more appropriate for personal defense because the VAST majority of incidents are threat management situations not shooting situations.

TCinVA
10-26-2011, 08:07 AM
Longer, heavier triggers do indeed offer more of a margin for error than shorter, lighter ones. Now if everyone who handled firearms was extremely well trained with excellent handling habits that they never deviated from even under stress, it wouldn't matter. Unfortunately handguns are handled by humans, and frequently humans are poorly trained IF they are trained at all. Human beings also tend to get complacent with dangerous pieces of equipment and don't pay attention to proper safety protocols. Safety protocols also have a tendency to be less apparent when human beings are under extreme stress. Whether anyone likes to admit it or not, when police departments went to Glocks a good number of them experienced a noticeable spike in the number of unintentional discharges by their officers. A weapon with a relatively light, short-travel trigger that requires a trigger pull to disassemble does not leave much of a margin of error in handling. The Glock, of course, didn't cause the problem...it simply didn't forgive handling errors as well as some of the other weapons. (DA revolvers, DA/SA autos)

The phenomenon continues to this day:

222

Individual on AR15.com that recently shot himself in the hand with a Glock 17. He's not sure how, exactly, he managed to pull the trigger.

http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e78/trurolla_05/Mobile%20Uploads/IMG_3658.jpg

Another individual on AR15.com that reholstered with his finger on the trigger. It's likely that with a longer, heavier trigger pull neither of those incidents would have occurred. Not guaranteed...but likely.

The more I handle handguns the more aware I become of my vulnerability to making a mistake while holding one...which is why I carry a pistol with a long trigger pull and a hammer I can block when I reholster.

ToddG
10-26-2011, 08:11 AM
One of the first things ever written on pistol-training.com (http://pistol-training.com/archives/31):


Actions in action
25-Sep-07 – 09:33 by ToddG

One day a hundred or so years ago, a man built the first semiautomatic pistol. It was an ingenious thing, a gun that could load itself and fire many rounds from a single magazine. He made it so that one could have a short and light trigger which makes it easy to hit what one aims at.

Then someone said, whoa brother, something might touch the trigger when it’s not supposed to and fire the gun accidentally, for I cannot be bothered to learn the manual of arms. So the manual safety was created, so that there was a way to prevent one from using the short and light trigger except when absolutely intended.

Then someone said, whoa brother, sometimes I forget to take the safety off and I cannot fire my gun, for I cannot be bothered to learn the manual of arms. So the double action pistol was created, so that one could fire one’s pistol without dealing with a pesky safety while still having a reasonably hard time of making loud noises unintentionally.

Then someone said, whoa brother, it is hard to learn two different trigger pulls and often I forget to decock my pistol before holstering, for I cannot be bothered to learn the manual of arms. So the double action only was created, so that one could enjoy the safety of a long heavy trigger pull every time and thus avoid ventilating one’s own leg.

Then someone said, whoa brother, your trigger pull is too long and too heavy and I cannot hit anything I shoot at, for I cannot be bothered to learn the manual of arms. So the striker-fired pistol was created, so that one could have a short and light trigger which makes it easy to hit what one aims at.

Then someone said, whoa brother, something might touch the trigger when it’s not supposed to and fire the gun accidentally …

Train hard & stay safe! ToddG

Tamara
10-26-2011, 08:26 AM
This is why I am somewhat amused by all the recommendations I've received on how to shorten/lighten the trigger pull on my M&P, when the main reason I purchased it was specifically because it has a longer and heavier trigger pull than the, you know, 1911 I was carrying.

If I want a short and light pull, I don't need to order anything from Apex; I just need to open the safe... :p

Suvorov
10-26-2011, 09:08 AM
Yeah but it seems like to be effective with you have to be of a certain skill, pretty high to me. So a dude cuts his teeth on a 1911 or glock,and then, besides innate preference, what does a Sig/FNP/HK offer a skilled guy to keep him shooting it? I'm not stirring shit at all, im genuinly curious. Law of primacy is strong, seems like switching would be short lived.

So I offer the contrary statement: Guy guts his teeth on a Sig, Beretta or other DA/SA gun (or God forbid a DAO gun) and shoots it well. What does a 1911 or Glock offer the guy to make him switch?

If this person works for someone who is supplying the gun and mandating its use, then we know that answer...




http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e78/trurolla_05/Mobile%20Uploads/IMG_3658.jpg

Another individual on AR15.com that reholstered with his finger on the trigger. It's likely that with a longer, heavier trigger pull neither of those incidents would have occurred. Not guaranteed...but likely.

The more I handle handguns the more aware I become of my vulnerability to making a mistake while holding one...which is why I carry a pistol with a long trigger pull and a hammer I can block when I reholster.

I am curious, does anyone have any reliable data on the number of holster related NDs committed by Marines and Soldiers using the SERPA holster? These guys would be by and large far less trained than many of the guys who have been having issues civilian side with the SERPA? Would this number go up if Marines/Soldiers were issued striker fired autos? Pure speculation of course....

rsa-otc
10-26-2011, 09:21 AM
As TC said we're HUMAN BEINGS, we do have brain farts from time to time. More so when we are under pressure and/or under trained. Anything that can give us a little room for error and the opportunity to catch our brain fart is probably a good thing. As Headhunter pointed out more often under stress we may have the gun out and never shoot it than the other way around. I started my career with a DAO revolver, then moved to a DA/SA auto and only recently moved to an M&P. None of these systems have been problematic for me to shoot well. But I was aware of the pitfalls of the DA/SA auto (remembering to decock under pressure) and the striker fired shorter lighter trigger pull.

You just need to understand the benefits and short comings of each and make your educated choice as to which battle you wish to fight. Just keep in mind there probably have been more AD/ND's even among the dedicated well trained folks with striker fired or SA only weapons than with DOA, LEM or SA/DA weapons systems.

TGS
10-26-2011, 10:03 AM
Todd, that was truly an awesome passage of biblical proportions. :D

TC, very well put.

Failure2Stop
10-26-2011, 10:55 AM
http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e78/trurolla_05/Mobile%20Uploads/IMG_3658.jpg


Best
Picture
Ever



I am curious, does anyone have any reliable data on the number of holster related NDs committed by Marines and Soldiers using the SERPA holster? These guys would be by and large far less trained than many of the guys who have been having issues civilian side with the SERPA? Would this number go up if Marines/Soldiers were issued striker fired autos? Pure speculation of course....

Thank all thigs holy, those that actually use the Serpa are also generally those that the Corps keeps separated from live ammunition when at all possible. I actually don't think that the USMC will see that many NDs simply due to the fact that the weapon/holster combination is not used with any degree of immediacy in training except for specialized units that generally use more proven holsters and provide better training opportunity.

mongooseman
10-26-2011, 12:14 PM
Perfectly happy with DA/SA handguns. I cut my teeth on a Beretta 92 a little over twenty years ago and was fortunate to have good instructors. In my division I can pretty much carry what I want in 9mm, ..40, or .45. A few years of experimentation and I keep coming back to DA/SA. I've pointed a handgun at a lot of people because of the number of high risk warrants we've served. I've only discharged a firearm once (SIG 220) and the gun performed as advertised. I don't recall thinking about the trigger; training and practice kicked in. After that incident any slight reservations about DA/SA vanished.

JAD
10-26-2011, 01:45 PM
I'm a little unconvinced, I guess. The main argument advanced for the DA / SA is that it's easier to shoot successively than a DAO. I struggle with that, but ok. The reason that the DA/SA and DAO are superior to the single action / safe action is that they're better for holding people at gunpoint with your finger on the trigger.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4HcvIH6GpW8

I (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4HcvIH6GpW8) struggle /mightily/ with that.

TCinVA
10-26-2011, 01:48 PM
I'm a little unconvinced, I guess. The main argument advanced for the DA / SA is that it's easier to shoot successively than a DAO. I struggle with that, but ok. The reason that the DA/SA and DAO are superior to the single action / safe action is that they're better for holding people at gunpoint with your finger on the trigger.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4HcvIH6GpW8

I (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4HcvIH6GpW8) struggle /mightily/ with that.

I wondered how long it would take for that video to show up.

Nobody is saying that longer trigger pulls make it impossible for a particularly dim bulb to screw it up and launch a round...just that it offers a greater margin for error.

TGS
10-26-2011, 02:00 PM
I'm a little unconvinced, I guess. The main argument advanced for the DA / SA is that it's easier to shoot successively than a DAO. I struggle with that, but ok. The reason that the DA/SA and DAO are superior to the single action / safe action is that they're better for holding people at gunpoint with your finger on the trigger.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4HcvIH6GpW8

I (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4HcvIH6GpW8) struggle /mightily/ with that.

If you struggle with that, then that's okay. We're not saying you're wrong for disagreeing and making an informed decision to use a different platform.

rsa-otc
10-26-2011, 02:01 PM
I'm a little unconvinced, I guess. The main argument advanced for the DA / SA is that it's easier to shoot successively than a DAO. I struggle with that, but ok.

Not a believer that DA/SA is Easier than DOA.


The reason that the DA/SA and DAO are superior to the single action / safe action is that they're better for holding people at gunpoint with your finger on the trigger.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4HcvIH6GpW8

I (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4HcvIH6GpW8) struggle /mightily/ with that.

You should never intentionally hold anyone at gunpoint with your finger on the trigger. But anyone who has watched COPS or another reality TV show knows that trigger fingers migrate to the trigger. Will DA/SA totally prevent an ND/AD in that case? No, BUT a long DA trigger reduces the likely hood of it happening. A study was done in Germany that concluded no matter what the policy or level of training, fingers find their way onto triggers more often than not.

BTW I couldn't tell from the clip whether it was a Beretta 92 or a glock. Does anyone know?

TGS
10-26-2011, 02:04 PM
A study was done in Germany that concluded no matter what the policy or level of training, fingers find their way onto triggers more often than not.

BTW I couldn't tell from the clip whether it was a Beretta 92 or a glock. Does anyone know?

Looked like a Beretta 92 to me.

Do you have a link to that test? I'd like to read it and keep it around as a reference.

JAD
10-26-2011, 02:06 PM
I wondered how long it would take for that video to show up.
Sorry to be predictable.


...just that it offers a greater margin for error.
...Which lets people get through training and daily handling with poor trigger discipline, but which under stress doesn't seem to provide any serious impediment to a negligent discharge.

Or I'm wrong; whatev.

TGS
10-26-2011, 02:11 PM
...Which lets people get through training and daily handling with poor trigger discipline, but which under stress doesn't seem to provide any serious impediment to a negligent discharge.

Or I'm wrong; whatev.

Does it bother you that some people don't mind DA/SA? Do people who carry and shoot a DA/SA pistol with acceptable proficiency bother you in some way?

JAD
10-26-2011, 02:45 PM
Does it bother you that some people don't mind DA/SA? Do people who carry and shoot a DA/SA pistol with acceptable proficiency bother you in some way?Not at all; and if the argument for DA/SAs (to the OP) is, "cause I think they're cool" (which is why I've bought several DA/SAs), or "because I was issued one," then that seems pretty righteous to me. However, if SMEs (I think it was an SME) are going to say that the argument for the DA part of DA/SAs is that they're more forgiving in high stress situations, then I'm going to struggle with that. It's contrary to my training (not my experience -- I'm not an SME -- but my training).

With that said, I don't mean to troll, and I certainly don't mean to contest the views of SMEs. I'm actively participating in the thread because I have a personal stake in the DA part of the question. I rely on a DA trigger (a Kahr PM9) when I run, because I carry in a pistolwear PT2 (http://www.pistolwear.com/pt2.htm). Fairly often, I have the notion that I should probably discontinue that practice, and run a different pistol in condition 3. I struggle with it; the topic's germane; and I'm interested in what the SMEs have to say.

rsa-otc
10-26-2011, 02:45 PM
Looked like a Beretta 92 to me.

Do you have a link to that test? I'd like to read it and keep it around as a reference.

This link sent me looking for the study:

http://www.forcescience.org/fsinews/2004/10/can-you-really-prevent-unintentional-discharges/

Then:
http://www.policeone.com/police-products/firearms/articles/94371-Can-you-really-prevent-unintentional-discharges/

&

http://www.policeone.com/news/1208969-Involuntary-Firearms-Discharge-Does-the-finger-obey-the-brain/

If you want to purchase the actual published study "I Think" this link will get you there:

http://hfs.sagepub.com/content/48/3/413.abstract

ToddG
10-26-2011, 02:46 PM
I'm on the Android and can't see the video, but if it's the female cop who AD's right next to the grounded suspect's face, it's a Beretta and she had manually cocked the hammer upon drawing. My recollection is that she'd been taught that to help her qualify.

rsa-otc
10-26-2011, 02:48 PM
I'm on the Android and can't see the video, but if it's the female cop who AD's right next to the grounded suspect's face, it's a Beretta and she had manually cocked the hammer upon drawing. My recollection is that she'd been taught that to help her qualify.

Training Failure?

Suvorov
10-26-2011, 04:07 PM
I'm on the Android and can't see the video, but if it's the female cop who AD's right next to the grounded suspect's face, it's a Beretta and she had manually cocked the hammer upon drawing. My recollection is that she'd been taught that to help her qualify.

I commonly observed this training "scar" in the military. Frustrating to say the least, especially when the Battalion Commander was one of the ones doing it and still missing at 7 yards.

jslaker
10-26-2011, 07:04 PM
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but, to the best of my knowledge, another consideration is that HK's LEM is really the only game in town in terms of a hammer-fired duty weapon with a consistent, light pull combined with short reset. Otherwise your options are SAO, traditional DAO, or DA/SA. I think DA/SA has clear advantages there. I've been working with an SFA gun for nearly 6 months now, and it still makes me noticeably more uncomfortable during administrative handling than my DA/SA guns or -- most recently -- my LEM did.

External hammers are a serious plus for many people outside of trigger pull considerations; unless CDA systems like the LEM become more prevalent, a DA/SA is the best choice for the many people that decide a SFA firearm is not for them.

TGS
10-26-2011, 08:28 PM
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but, to the best of my knowledge, another consideration is that HK's LEM is really the only game in town in terms of a hammer-fired duty weapon with a consistent, light pull combined with short reset. Otherwise your options are SAO, traditional DAO, or DA/SA. I think DA/SA has clear advantages there. I've been working with an SFA gun for nearly 6 months now, and it still makes me noticeably more uncomfortable during administrative handling than my DA/SA guns or -- most recently -- my LEM did.

External hammers are a serious plus for many people outside of trigger pull considerations; unless CDA systems like the LEM become more prevalent, a DA/SA is the best choice for the many people that decide a SFA firearm is not for them.

DAK as well, right? Not to sure about the reset part with the DAK though.....

jslaker
10-26-2011, 08:34 PM
DAK is rather notorious for having a reset that is either long or very heavy, one, depending on where the shooter resets, which is why I didn't include it. It's lighter than traditional DAO, but isn't comparable to an SFA pull in the way LEM is.

DannyZRC
10-26-2011, 10:56 PM
I think it's interesting that the short/light paradigm holds water for about 10-15 years before things start creeping back towards DA and safeties etc, which then prevale for much longer.

Almost like the market is trying to tell us something.... ;p

fuse
10-27-2011, 01:37 AM
I'm on the Android and can't see the video, but if it's the female cop who AD's right next to the grounded suspect's face, it's a Beretta and she had manually cocked the hammer upon drawing. My recollection is that she'd been taught that to help her qualify.

Face, meet palm

Odin Bravo One
10-27-2011, 01:38 AM
Training Failure?

when combined with pure stupidity, training failure is the underlying cause for 99.9% of ND's.

No action or type or brand or caliber or color of pistol will prevent someone from being an idiot, or suddenly make them safer, or better prepared to handle firearms. A Glock cannot fire by itself. A Beretta cannot fire by itself. Neither can a Sig. Or a 1911. Or a Colt SAA, or a S&W 625, or an M&P, or an XD, etc., etc., etc.

I also don't buy that one action type is superior to, faster than, or safer than another. I just finished reading Gun Digest's Guide to the 1911. I was dumbfounded by the arguments that the 1911 is better than any other sidearm ever developed in the history of mankind. I like the 1911, and for those who know me, that is not a secret. I even went so far as to replace my "go to" DA/SA pistol with a Full Custom 1911 for a period where what I had was a pistol, what I wanted was a Howitzer. I had my reasons. Subjective reasons for sure, but they were my reasons, my gun, my life. (I digress, apologies)

Back to the book (and the point),I was utterly amazed that the author could write that stuff and keep a straight face. Maybe he didn't. Sadly enough though, I am starting to think that he actually believed the crap he was writing. Sadder still is that I spent the $7.99 and waited three hours for it to download to my kindle, then pissed away another 3 hours of my life force feeding myself this awful book.

Even so, the idea that the method of operation of a mechanical device is objectively superior to another is absurd. How would we begin to measure this? The the reality is that measuring a method of operation is so subjective that there is no way to establish a baseline, gauge, track, or assess one type against another. Certainly you could identify certain parameters, but there would be subjectivity in selection of the criteria and even then, the criteria would be subjective at best, extremely biased at worst, and subject to such wide interpretation to make them essentially useless.

Todd's post on the evolution of pistol actions, while humorous, is also spot on.

Le Français
10-27-2011, 08:55 PM
(First post here. This site is proving to be an excellent resource; my thanks to all of you.)

Regarding the DA/SA question, it seems to me that two standards are being used to evaluate the different action types:

Category A: Easier to shoot

Category B: Harder to shoot

In my experience (common sense does play into this as well), a striker fired action or a single action only wins category A -- it is demonstrably easier to learn to shoot, and easier to shoot in general. This is by virtue of its simplicity and consistency, as well as a lighter and shorter trigger pull (as compared to the double action first pull). This is not to say that some people cannot reach extremely high levels of skill with a DA/SA gun. As you all know, many people have. However, if they had dedicated all of their training time to training with a handgun having a simpler and easier action, they most likely would have had even better results. I believe the DA/SA is clearly inferior when it comes to shooting and manipulating the gun.

On the other hand, DA/SA clearly wins category B. It is harder to shoot, and therein lies its advantage for many people (and many agencies). If you are pointing your gun at things you would rather not put a bullet in, and you have your finger on the trigger, that DA pull is a good thing, precisely because it makes the gun harder to shoot.

The gun that is easier to shoot intentionally (advantage) will also be easier to shoot unintentionally (disadvantage), and the gun that's harder to shoot unintentionally (advantage) will also be harder to shoot intentionally (disadvantage).

In a world where everyone observed Rule 3, the DA/SA would be a solution in search of a problem.

My apologies if this post is redundant; I haven't read the whole thread.

joshs
10-27-2011, 10:12 PM
Welcome to p-f.com Templar.

I think the biggest problem with TDA is the lack of instructors that actually know how to shoot a TDA gun well. Many instructors just tell their students to get a different gun, rather than learning how to teach TDA. If there is any difference in ease of shooting for new shooters, then this difference disappears rather quickly as shooting skill increases. And, whatever greater amount of practice is needed in order to learn the TDA is insignificant compared to the amount of practice it takes to become a "good" shooter anyways.

TDA is still very popular at the highest level of practical competitive shooting. The following is the top 10 from this years USPSA Production Nationals listed with action type (SAO not allowed).

1. Ben Stoeger TDA
2. Rob Leatham SFA
3. Dave Sevigny SFA
4. Matt Mink TDA
5. Phil Strader TDA
6. Rodney May TDA
7. Kale Garretson TDA
8. Brad Engmann SFA
9. Angus Hobdell TDA
10. Lee Demaculangan SFA

TDA is even more popular in IPSC due to a minimum trigger pull weight on the first shot, which likely makes it more representative of guns that people would actually carry.

mnealtx
10-27-2011, 10:16 PM
I'm guessing that SFA is striker fired action... TDA is...? Traditional double action?

fuse
10-27-2011, 10:20 PM
I'm guessing that SFA is striker fired action... TDA is...? Traditional double action?

Yes. Another name for DA/SA

joshs
10-27-2011, 10:21 PM
Yes. I like using TDA instead of DA/SA because it requires less typing and it makes all of the action types fit into three letter acronyms. TDA, SFA, SAO, LEM, DAK, DAO.

mnealtx
10-27-2011, 10:23 PM
That's cool, so long as you know what the acronym means...thanks for the info.

Le Français
10-27-2011, 11:23 PM
Welcome to p-f.com Templar.

I think the biggest problem with TDA is the lack of instructors that actually know how to shoot a TDA gun well. Many instructors just tell their students to get a different gun, rather than learning how to teach TDA. If there is any difference in ease of shooting for new shooters, then this difference disappears rather quickly as shooting skill increases. And, whatever greater amount of practice is needed in order to learn the TDA is insignificant compared to the amount of practice it takes to become a "good" shooter anyways.

You raise a good point, which I recall Todd mentioned earlier as well.

Certainly the difference in difficulty is not monumental (we aren't comparing a Colt SAA vs. a Glock 34). However, the difference is there. That long and heavy first pull and the need to decock don't go away with practice.

If someone is looking for a defensive type pistol and the added safety of the DA/SA is a non-issue for them, then from a shooting and manipulation point of view I don't see a good reason to go with DA/SA. Liking a particular DA/SA gun could be a reason, though (those Berettas sure do look nice).

peterb
10-28-2011, 09:56 AM
Any thoughts on the merits of decock-only vs. a combined decock/safety? Decock-only always seemed more logical, but I don't have enough experience with either to be a good judge.

Suvorov
10-28-2011, 10:36 AM
Any thoughts on the merits of decock-only vs. a combined decock/safety? Decock-only always seemed more logical, but I don't have enough experience with either to be a good judge.

About the only advantage I can see for the decock/safety system is that in a gun takeaway with the weapon on safe, it might just buy you enough time to react before the bad guy figures out how to use it. I have also heard argued that they may be safer if left loaded around children - but that is silly for obvious reasons.

Other than that, it is pretty much widely assumed that the decock/safety is a liability. Assuming you are using a DA/SA (or TDA from now on) system because your upper management doesn't want to take the time to give you quality training, then how can you be expected to disengage the safety under stress? Of course that doesn't stop the CYA officers in the Army and Marines from requiring troops to carry the M9 with the safety engaged. That was one of the few advantages of the old M12 holster where the flap covered the safety and no one could tell if your safety was on or off. From what I understand, the Air Force is the only service tuned in enough to have their troops carry with the safety in the off position. Most LEO agencies I know of that still issue/or authorize Berettas and 3rd Gen S&Ws also run with the safety off. Still, even when carrying with the safety off, the safety might accidentally move to on preventing you from firing when you need it most. Which is why I still train to flip my thumb even when shooting a "G" model Beretta.

As I recall, the decock/safety was one of the faults that the Army listed with the Beretta during the M9 trials but at the time Beretta didn't want to change it and it was adopted with this feature. The French on the other hand required a decock only for their service pistol and the "G" model was born. Having shot the Beretta as my primary gun for over 15 years, I can say I definitely prefer the decock only "G" models.

EVP
10-28-2011, 11:23 AM
In my experience (common sense does play into this as well), a striker fired action or a single action only wins category A -- it is demonstrably easier to learn to shoot, and easier to shoot in general. This is by virtue of its simplicity and consistency, as well as a lighter and shorter trigger pull (as compared to the double action first pull). This is not to say that some people cannot reach extremely high levels of skill with a DA/SA gun. As you all know, many people have. However, if they had dedicated all of their training time to training with a handgun having a simpler and easier action, they most likely would have had even better results. I believe the DA/SA is clearly inferior when it comes to shooting and manipulating the gun.



I agree with the above. My thoughts are along these same lines. With that being said, I do believe there are people out there that probably shoot a DA/SA gun equal to or better then a striker fired gun with the same time invested in both platforms. For the majority of shooters( me included) it seems striker fired pistols are easier to shoot and improve overall marksmen ship with. I came to the conclusion that it would be more efficient for me to learn and train on a striker fired platform given a certain amount of time and money that I am willing to invest.

ToddG
10-28-2011, 03:54 PM
SFA/LEM/DAK: Learn to manage a 5-8# trigger and press a 5-8# trigger every time.

DA/SA: Learn to manage a 10-12# trigger and press a 10-12# trigger once followed by a lot of ~3# triggers until you decock the gun.

Le Français
10-28-2011, 04:34 PM
SFA/LEM/DAK: Learn to manage a 5-8# trigger and press a 5-8# trigger every time.

DA/SA: Learn to manage a 10-12# trigger and press a 10-12# trigger once followed by a lot of ~3# triggers until you decock the gun.

The difference in length between these two lines of text itself speaks volumes. :)

CCT125US
10-28-2011, 09:24 PM
[QUOTE=CCT125US;32000 I feel it revealed some deficiencies in my overall technique that had remained masked and I was able to address and correct them. Did that correction time require commitment on my part? Yes. Did it take range time and rounds? Yes. Can I make the case for DA/SA over the alternatives? For me in my situation, hell yes. As previously stated, each shooter needs to carefully weigh what is important and look at all factors, whatever those may be.[/QUOTE]

Can I quote myself?

In my case, since making the transition from SFA to DA/SA again I am able to realize a level of performance that I thought impossible years ago. Just because something is "easier" does not make it "better". There are many things that are "easy" but not "better". Easy does not always translate to measured results. IMO a SFA is easier to shoot, yes. It is easier to train the lowest common denominator and easier to train with limited time, money, expenditure of training resources and dedication. But after taking the time to measure my performance in the areas I feel important, I have decided the TDA is best for me. This is not to be misunderstood that those who chose a SFA are under trained by any means. In my particular case the TDA needed more training and dedication which translated to better measured performance...... and the debate continues..

Le Français
10-28-2011, 09:44 PM
CCT125US: "IMO a SFA is easier to shoot, yes. It is easier to train the lowest common denominator and easier to train with limited time, money, expenditure of training resources and dedication."

In that case, why did you come to the conclusion that "after taking the time to measure my performance in the areas I feel important, I have decided the TDA is best for me"? I'm genuinely curious.

CCT125US: "In my particular case the TDA needed more training and dedication which translated to better measured performance."

If you have X amount of training time to devote to pistol shooting, and you devote it to training with the more complicated of two possible platforms, it seems clear to me that the results will not be as good as if you had elected to allocate that time to training with the simpler system. Nonetheless, I understand that, given enough training, the differences all but disappear and perhaps even cease to really matter.

CCT125US: "..... and the debate continues.."

I do appreciate the thought and reason that go into discussions like this. Ultimately, though, I think what's most important here is that good guys be skilled with their weapons of choice, regardless of action type. On that I'm sure we all agree.

Suvorov
10-28-2011, 10:06 PM
I do appreciate the thought and reason that go into discussions like this. Ultimately, though, I think what's most important here is that good guys be skilled with their weapons of choice, regardless of action type. On that I'm sure we all agree.

And that brings us back to the OPs original question - can an argument be made for the DA/SA system? Ultimately the answer is yes. It may not be the best solution for all applications, but it is certainly still a viable system. In the end, training and skill (not to mention mindset) will trump the nuances of each system and as many of the great shooters out there have demonstrated, while the military and LEO trends are towards the SAF and LEM type systems, those soldiers and LEOs who are issued DA/SA pistols are not being dealt an unwinnable hand.

Le Français
10-28-2011, 10:42 PM
And that brings us back to the OPs original question - can an argument be made for the DA/SA system? Ultimately the answer is yes.

Agreed. The answer is clearly yes. Here, then, is the argument in favor of DA/SA autoloaders:

The DA/SA system is harder to shoot, and thus it is safer.

For experienced shooters with good training, it's not an argument that should carry much weight.

ToddG
10-29-2011, 08:19 AM
If you have X amount of training time to devote to pistol shooting, and you devote it to training with the more complicated of two possible platforms, it seems clear to me that the results will not be as good as if you had elected to allocate that time to training with the simpler system. Nonetheless, I understand that, given enough training, the differences all but disappear and perhaps even cease to really matter.

That's more or less exactly the opposite of what CCT125US said. You keep assuming that easier will somehow equate to better.

Let's take a Honda Civic and a F1 car.

For two relatively poorly trained guys, the Civic driver will beat the pants off the F1 driver. The F1 driver with little or no training may not even be able to get the car moving.

For two reasonably competent drivers, the Civic doesn't stand a chance against the F1. The F1 is simply capable of doing things the Civic cannot do.

Now, the Civic driver can spend money putting a giant engine, giant brakes, better suspension, etc. into his Civic so that it will do things no Civic was ever intended to do (i.e., tricking out the trigger on an SFA) but at the cost of reliability and/or safety.

Now obviously, that difference between a Civic and an F1 is many times greater than the difference between a good SFA and a good DA/SA pistol. The point is that while some things may be harder to master, there can be advantages to mastering them that cannot be achieved otherwise.

Here's a great discussion by pistol-forum.com SME Julie Golob about why tricked out DA/SA guns are dominant in IPSC Production Division: IPSC World Shoot - The Match at juliegolob.com (http://www.juliegolob.com/ipsc-world-shoot-the-match)



The DA/SA system is harder to shoot, and thus it is safer.
For experienced shooters with good training, it's not an argument that should carry much weight.

Why? Experienced shooters with good training make mistakes, too. Commercial airline pilots -- who get orders of magnitude more training than most CCWers and cops, are tested regularly in realistic stressful simulations, and who have daily experience being responsible for the lives of hundreds of people -- make fatal mistakes every single year. If someone who made it through that selection and training process can have a brain fart and kill a fly busload of people, who among us wants to claim he's infallible?

EVP
10-29-2011, 03:05 PM
Let's take a Honda Civic and a F1 car.

For two relatively poorly trained guys, the Civic driver will beat the pants off the F1 driver. The F1 driver with little or no training may not even be able to get the car moving.

For two reasonably competent drivers, the Civic doesn't stand a chance against the F1. The F1 is simply capable of doing things the Civic cannot do.

Now, the Civic driver can spend money putting a giant engine, giant brakes, better suspension, etc. into his Civic so that it will do things no Civic was ever intended to do (i.e., tricking out the trigger on an SFA) but at the cost of reliability and/or safety.

Now obviously, that difference between a Civic and an F1 is many times greater than the difference between a good SFA and a good DA/SA pistol. The point is that while some things may be harder to master, there can be advantages to mastering them that cannot be achieved otherwise.


I understand what you are trying to convey with the analogy. I think it would be more relatable to firearms if you compare two cars of the same relative class. Lets say you take two Porsche 911 carreras (which you had some experience driving at the track). One is a manual one is a auto/tiptronic.

To the beginner and even average drivers the auto is going to be able to best the manual around the track. The person in the auto can focus more on the other aspects of taking a car around a racer track(racing lines, looking for the apex, braking zones, etc). The person in the manual may not be able to focus as much on those other aspects of racing(shooting).

Now take someone who has experience and has been racing for a while and they will be able to take advantage of the capabilities of a manual and use them to their advantage. What if you only were able to train for a race for a day? A week? A month? What would be the best choice for those different situations?

Of course it depends on what the person wants to drive and what they drive better( two different things that could be the same or separate) Do they want to drive the car on the track or the street? What car do they want to have to drive in rush hour traffic, or perhaps in bad weather?

Hope it kinda makes sense.




This leads me to my question:

What have you observed concerning new shooters and how they perform with the two different platforms? Do you see that newer shooters tend to perform better with one over the other?

DannyZRC
10-29-2011, 03:28 PM
Except, in this case the benefit is enhanced safety without degraded performance at a cost of additional training.

Perhaps though an argument could be made that at a potentially very high skill cap, the drawback of the DA pull is more than overcome by the lighter follow on SA pulls. The IPSC article linked seems to show that the 5lb/2lb TDA guns were fairly evenly matched with the 5lb DAO guns, and those people practice a whole lot, don't know how much higher a skill cap you can find.

I wonder what Todd and others would think the training intensity crossover is, where the safety advantages no longer come with a serious proficiency penalty. Could it be expressed in total round count, ongoing round count, etc?

Le Français
10-29-2011, 09:27 PM
That's more or less exactly the opposite of what CCT125US said.

I'm not sure what you mean by this. I was not trying to repeat what CCT125US wrote.


You keep assuming that easier will somehow equate to better.

Let's take a Honda Civic and a F1 car.

For two relatively poorly trained guys, the Civic driver will beat the pants off the F1 driver. The F1 driver with little or no training may not even be able to get the car moving.

For two reasonably competent drivers, the Civic doesn't stand a chance against the F1. The F1 is simply capable of doing things the Civic cannot do.

Now, the Civic driver can spend money putting a giant engine, giant brakes, better suspension, etc. into his Civic so that it will do things no Civic was ever intended to do (i.e., tricking out the trigger on an SFA) but at the cost of reliability and/or safety.

Now obviously, that difference between a Civic and an F1 is many times greater than the difference between a good SFA and a good DA/SA pistol. The point is that while some things may be harder to master, there can be advantages to mastering them that cannot be achieved otherwise.

Here's a great discussion by pistol-forum.com SME Julie Golob about why tricked out DA/SA guns are dominant in IPSC Production Division: IPSC World Shoot - The Match at juliegolob.com (http://www.juliegolob.com/ipsc-world-shoot-the-match)

Understood. So, is it accurate to say that your argument for the DA/SA is that a) it is safer, b) the SA trigger provides a considerable advantage over stock SFA triggers, c) the DA pull and the need to decock are not really serious barriers to performance, and d) learning to master the DA pull is actually beneficial to overall shooting, as it instills a focus on proper trigger control?

If this is, in fact, your position, I think it certainly has some merit (for what my opinion is worth). I know that shooting a DA/SA handgun has caused me to pay even more attention to trigger control, and this has resulted in better performance across several platforms.

Although it is my opinion that in shooting and manipulation the more complex DA/SA does not provide enough advantages to outweigh its disadvantages, I recognize that some people demanding additional layers of safety can make good use of the platform. Also, as I mentioned earlier, given enough training, the differences in performance between the two systems all but disappear and perhaps even cease to really matter.



Why? Experienced shooters with good training make mistakes, too. Commercial airline pilots -- who get orders of magnitude more training than most CCWers and cops, are tested regularly in realistic stressful simulations, and who have daily experience being responsible for the lives of hundreds of people -- make fatal mistakes every single year. If someone who made it through that selection and training process can have a brain fart and kill a fly busload of people, who among us wants to claim he's infallible?

Certainly, skilled people make mistakes. My statement was based on the advantages I see in the SFA system, coupled with the fact that many skilled shooters employ SFA pistols without safety issues.

Le Français
10-29-2011, 09:32 PM
...in this case the benefit is enhanced safety without degraded performance at a cost of additional training.

Well and concisely put.

I think that for many people, the enhanced safety is not worth the additional training necessary to negate the performance gap.

jslaker
10-29-2011, 09:43 PM
Well and concisely put.

I think that for many people, the enhanced safety is not worth the additional training necessary to negate the performance gap.

I think for many people, the "answer" is actually at the extremes. There are very real advantages for those who train little, and there are likewise advantages to those who are willing and able to put the needed work in to make it work very well.

Somewhere in the middle, you have people who can afford the safety tradeoff, but can't afford the increased training necessary to truly benefit from the platform.

It's my suspicion that the middle group is the smallest of the overall population. Personal prefence may dictate other choices, but I really don't think DA/SA will trip up someone that's truly proficient as much as it's often made out to be.

ToddG
10-30-2011, 07:09 AM
Understood. So, is it accurate to say that your argument for the DA/SA is that a) it is safer, b) the SA trigger provides a considerable advantage over stock SFA triggers, c) the DA pull and the need to decock are not really serious barriers to performance, and d) learning to master the DA pull is actually beneficial to overall shooting, as it instills a focus on proper trigger control?

Yes, exactly. As you pointed out, DannyZRC's one-liner was much better at explaining it.

I also think we're falling into a bit of a mire about the "training effort" thing. I see people in class all the time who shoot a lot and aren't very good. I see people who practice one tenth as much and are outstanding. There's a huge difference between "shooting" and "practice." But I'd be willing to be that most of the folks who read this forum shoot often enough, and dry fire often enough, that they could practice the DA trigger stroke more than adequately.

As mentioned earlier, the other major issue with DA/SA in my experience is that it is substantially more difficult to find an instructor who is actually qualified to teach it. I've witnessed accomplished, nationally recognizable instructors tell students that DA/SA guns were bad and that the first DA shot was unmanageable.

rsa-otc
10-30-2011, 09:47 AM
I've witnessed accomplished, nationally recognizable instructors tell students that DA/SA guns were bad and that the first DA shot was unmanageable.

Every time I hear this kind of attitude it drives me nuts. :mad:

I've been the only revolver shooter in more than one class, turning in the best times and scores, against 1911's, glocks etc. And that revolver by the way was DAO. At one class I had a couple of folks come up and say "I could shoot like that if I had a revolver". At one instructors class every day we would do an exersize they called rolling thunder, where we would shoot all the ammo in the mags/speedloaders we had on our person as fast as we could get hits. I had 8 speed loaders, thats 8 reloads to most of the lines 2 or 3; I wasn't the last person shooting and I posted the best score. At the time if I put 1000 rounds down range a year for the last 5 or 6 years I'd be suprised.

Has anyone given thought to the fact that the Federal Air Marshals issue the Sig TDA gun in .357 sig. Their Q course is has some tight times and accuracy standards (I know not as tight as before IIRC). They don't seem to have an issues with the TDA weapon.

Point is as Wheeler and others can attest DA is quite managable and you really don't need to spend a lot of time aquiring the skill set. You have to be open to it.

Le Français
10-30-2011, 07:55 PM
As mentioned earlier, the other major issue with DA/SA in my experience is that it is substantially more difficult to find an instructor who is actually qualified to teach it. I've witnessed accomplished, nationally recognizable instructors tell students that DA/SA guns were bad and that the first DA shot was unmanageable.

I have heard Travis Haley and Chris Costa say that in their experience as instructors, the DA/SA system has proven more complicated and problematic than other, simpler platforms. I don't doubt it. Perhaps they are biased against DA/SA and blind to its virtues, but when such people talk, I tend to listen.

YVK
10-31-2011, 01:22 AM
I have heard Travis Haley and Chris Costa say that in their experience as instructors, the DA/SA system has proven more complicated and problematic than other, simpler platforms. I don't doubt it. Perhaps they are biased against DA/SA and blind to its virtues, but when such people talk, I tend to listen.

If you ever get to train with anybody who served on SEAL Teams, you'll hear exactly opposite.

Le Français
10-31-2011, 10:10 AM
If you ever get to train with anybody who served on SEAL Teams, you'll hear exactly opposite.

Exactly the opposite would be saying that SFA and SAO pistols are more complex and problematic than DA/SA. I doubt very much that anyone would make the case that DA/SA is simpler.

Also, Kyle Defoor, who I believe was a SEAL, clearly favors the SFA system.

I really don't mean to be dragging this topic on unnecessarily. A lot of good points were made; my thanks to those who participated.

YVK
10-31-2011, 10:45 AM
Exactly the opposite would be saying that SFA and SAO pistols are more complex and problematic than DA/SA. I doubt very much that anyone would make the case that DA/SA is simpler.

Also, Kyle Defoor, who I believe was a SEAL, clearly favors the SFA system.

I really don't mean to be dragging this topic on unnecessarily. A lot of good points were made; my thanks to those who participated.

The "opposite" mainly referred to "problematic". Those dudes are getting excellent reliability and service out of their TDAs under harshest conditions. As far as complexity, yep, hard to beat Glock; the SAO I am not so sure, given requirements for pretty much hand-fitting the parts for a serious use pistols.
You're right, I think we exhausted this thread.

Le Français
10-31-2011, 11:08 AM
The "opposite" mainly referred to "problematic". Those dudes are getting excellent reliability and service out of their TDAs under harshest conditions. As far as complexity, yep, hard to beat Glock; the SAO I am not so sure, given requirements for pretty much hand-fitting the parts for a serious use pistols.
You're right, I think we exhausted this thread.

Just one clarification: By "problematic" I did not mean "unreliable" in the least. Chris and Travis clearly said that some DA/SA guns are very reliable, and there is little doubt that the M9 and P226 are among the most reliable pistols out there. What I meant was that Travis and Chris were saying that they found DA/SA to cause problems in training due to their complexity--students forgetting to decock, for example.

Good discussion, guys.

JAD
10-31-2011, 11:24 AM
If you ever get to train with anybody who served on SEAL Teams, you'll hear exactly opposite.
Really? Every single former SEAL prefers DA/SA? Like, say, Herschel Walker?

will_1400
10-31-2011, 01:17 PM
Personal preference for me, but I don't see anything really wrong with TDA. If anything, I seem to shoot TDA pistols better (or to be more precise, less like a bag of smashed ass) than SFA or SAO. The DA/SA transition does take some getting used to, but I don't see it as being too much different (conceptually) than remembering to disengage the thumb safety on a 1911.

Just my $.02 worth.

Odin Bravo One
10-31-2011, 06:15 PM
Really? Every single former SEAL prefers DA/SA? Like, say, Herschel Walker?

I am going to go out on a limb and say that YVK was likely referring to the fact that SEALs are still using several types of DA/SA guns. Personal preference is always going to be personal preference........no matter what profession a person has.

JohnN
10-31-2011, 07:28 PM
Really? Every single former SEAL prefers DA/SA? Like, say, Herschel Walker?

Are you referring to Herschel Davis?

YVK
10-31-2011, 07:49 PM
Really? Every single former SEAL prefers DA/SA?

As Sean alluded to, I can't speak about personal preference of each individual Team member, active or retired. I've heard a very logical explanation why they wanted TDA and didn't want Glocks; whether it was an opinion of one or general consensus, I don't know. Granted that my personal number of acquaintances in that circle is small, I've not heard them speak negatively about their issued pistols, or present TDA as some sort of hindrance. You have any info to contrary?

JAD
11-01-2011, 10:43 AM
Are you referring to Herschel Davis?
No, I'm talking about the 1982 Heisman Trophy winner, a known 1911 fan... or I'm an idiot. I am indeed talking about H.D. -- Hershel, actually.

JAD
11-01-2011, 10:51 AM
You have any info to contrary?
Absolutely.

David Armstrong
11-01-2011, 11:00 AM
I'm not sure where all this harder/safer/faster/etc. comes into play, because if there has ever been a serious valid testing of that I've never seen it. What I have seen is thousands of people learning to shoot over a 40 year time period that includes pretty much all action types, and if there is any difference for the average shooter I haven't seen it. I've run ranges and trained folks on 1911s, revolvers, DA/SA, DAO and stiker-fired and assorted variations on a theme and there just hasn't been any noticeable difference in accuracy, speed, safety, and so on. My $.02.

s0nspark
11-10-2011, 04:11 PM
I think that for many people, the enhanced safety is not worth the additional training necessary to negate the performance gap.


Many buy a gun and rarely train - the enhanced "safety" of a TDA system might present obstacles to the unskilled shooter's effective use...

BUT

that is not really a failing of the system, but of the user! ;-)

A hammer is not a better or more preferable tool just because an untrained somebody could nail their feet to the floor easier with a nail gun! (And that could been seen as an argument both for and against TDA or SFA systems!)

The choice of platform should really be based on personal needs, ergonomics, and of course plain old preference instead of some communal sense of "better". The reality is that, with a responsible shooter, *every* platform carries with it an (endless) need to train... and that is IMO what we should communicate to new shooters in place of Glock vs HK vs whatever.

.
.
.
.

That said I learned to shoot on SFA systems of one sort or another and have personally found SAO (ala 1911's) to feel somewhat awkward in comparison. As I am about to change out my carry gun I am looking really hard at TDA systems ... partly for the ergonomics of the pistols under consideration (HKs and Sigs fit my hands much better than anything else I've handled) and partly because I like the conceptual flow of DA/SA/decock... it is more aligned to how I personally think about shooting.

In any case I do not see my choice of platform hinging on a perception of needing less practice to become proficient ... as a serious student of the craft I will forever be setting new goals and seeking new levels with whatever tools I use :-)

s0nspark
11-10-2011, 04:14 PM
I seem to shoot TDA pistols better (or to be more precise, less like a bag of smashed ass) than SFA or SAO.


LOL! That needs to be some company's new ad copy!

Le Français
11-11-2011, 02:01 AM
As I am about to change out my carry gun I am looking really hard at TDA systems ... partly for the ergonomics of the pistols under consideration (HKs and Sigs fit my hands much better than anything else I've handled) and partly because I like the conceptual flow of DA/SA/decock... it is more aligned to how I personally think about shooting.

Frankly, I don't think either of these is a good reason to change platforms. Which platform do you perform with the best? That is more important than how it fits in your hand, or how it aligns with the way you think.

DannyZRC
11-11-2011, 03:22 AM
I might argue that the philosophical questions are important, and that "performance" is a fairly broad word.

You can measure what you shoot more accurately, rapidly, and precisely, but can you measure how safely you operate the system?

Is safety not one of the ways in which you expect the shooter+gun system to perform? Does the difficulty in measuring it invalidate it as a pertinent criteria?

s0nspark
11-11-2011, 08:18 AM
Frankly, I don't think either of these is a good reason to change platforms. Which platform do you perform with the best? That is more important than how it fits in your hand, or how it aligns with the way you think.

Well, I didn't mean to imply that those are my sole reasons for considering a switch :-)

My overall point was that choosing the right gun is a very personal decision and no matter what one chooses, training (and lots of it) will always be needed. I see nothing inherently better or worse about any of the platforms - pros and cons just need to be weighed along with all of the other issues involved in the decision at that particular stage in one's development as a shooter.

Le Français
11-11-2011, 12:22 PM
Below I address the four parts of Todd's argument for DA/SA by providing pertinent quotes from two other prominent firearms instructors. I think this thread can benefit from their insight.


a) It is safer

Larry Vickers:

"Another disturbing trend is for Law Enforcement agencies to put very heavy trigger on their issue service pistol for liability reasons. The most famous example is the Glock New York trigger that weighs approx 8 lbs and even worse is the New York plus that has a trigger pull weight of 12 lbs. Remember if your pistol weighs 2 lbs loaded and you have an 8 pound trigger pull it will take 4 times the loaded weight of the the handgun to make it fire. This means for the typical shooter it is virtually impossible to shoot the weapon accurately under stress. This leads to misses and an unintentional spray and pray approach when in a gunfight. The danger to innocent bystanders is increased dramatically and the very thing that was meant to make the pistol safer ( heavy trigger pull ) actually increases the danger to the public that LE officers are sworn to protect. This sad state of affairs started as a byproduct of LE agencies that issued revolvers and relied on the long heavy double action trigger pull as a safety device. This lead to the unsafe habit of allowing officers to have their finger on the trigger when they should not. Enter a stock Glock 17 with a 5 lb trigger and no manual safeties of any kind and you have a recipe for disaster. A much better approach is to train and if need be re-train officers to keep their finger off the trigger at all times except when presenting the weapon toward the target. Always keep in mind that a mechanical device is a poor substitute for safe gun handling."


b) the SA trigger provides a considerable advantage over stock SFA triggers

Ken Hackathorn:

"DA/SA pistols like the Beretta M92, Sig 226/229, S&W M5906, plus CZ 75 family of pistols all are favorites of IDPA SSP shooters because, with practice, the first heavy DA shot can be learned and follow up shots are the short sear movement SA shots that rarely weigh more than twice the weight of the pistol."


c) the DA pull and the need to decock are not really serious barriers to performance

Ken Hackathorn:

"In this concept it has been understood for decades that if the weight of the trigger pull is more than double the weight of the handgun, it will be hard to shoot well. Note, I am not saying it is impossible, but it will definitely take more training and practice.

"Any heavy pull triggers will only increase the movement of the gun while pulling the trigger."

"Glock pistols with a 5.0 pound sear release represent one of the best all around choices for most new shooters."

Larry Vickers:

"As a general rule a serious use pistol should have a trigger no lighter than 4 pounds and ideally no more than 6 pounds."

"Average shooters will generally shoot a pistol with the same trigger pull weight from shot to shot better than a double action/single action pistol that has a long and relatively heavy first trigger pull followed by lighter and shorter trigger pull for each following shot. A perfect example would be a Glock 17 with a factory stock trigger that weighs approx 5 pounds and is the same for each shot vs a Beretta M9 with a double action first trigger pull of approx 13 lbs and a 5 lb single action trigger for each shot after. Although DA/SA guns can be mastered the average shooter will definitely shoot a pistol like a Glock better than a Beretta."

Note: Add to this Chris Costa and Travis Haley's experience and recommendations against DA/SA based on complexity, specifically the need to decock.

ETA: Rob Pincus:

"Once we get past stoppages and breakages, the guns that give most shooters the most trouble on the line are the double action/single action guns. These generally come in two flavors: 1980s or earlier designs from the age where these guns dominated law enforcement agencies and the military, with slide mounted safety/de-cockers, and slightly more modern designs with frame mounted levers. The long heavy trigger pull and the extra manipulation step of de-cocking make these guns harder to learn and to shoot well than single action or striker fired pistols."


d) learning to master the DA pull is actually beneficial to overall shooting, as it instills a focus on proper trigger control

This is an argument for the DA as a training tool, nothing more.

Le Français
11-11-2011, 12:51 PM
Some good info here.

Are You Safer with a More Complicated Duty Weapon?
Easy-to-use pistols are best for law enforcement duty guns.

August 28, 2007,
Author: Rob Pincus

Director of operations at the Valhalla Training Center in Montrose, Colo., Rob Pincus has been a trainer and consultant in various combative fields for many years and is the developer of the Combat Focus Shooting Program.

There are probably two or three camps when it comes to what type of duty pistol is the safest for the average patrol officer. I am going to lump together the nuances of the manually operated safety and the de-cocker camps together for the purposes of this article. I am also going to lump the double-action only (DOA) and “safe action” camps together as well.

There are those that would have you believe that you are safer if your firearm is more complicated and there are those, I am one of them, who argue steadfastly against that assertion because the primary purpose of your firearm is self-defense or the defense of others. If your duty sidearm was designed or purchased with any other thought in mind, you were done a disservice. Regardless of what some may have you believe, you are in a lot more danger from the bad guys on the street who can and will do serious harm to you if you can’t defend yourself efficiently than you are from your own sidearm, especially if you are well trained in its use.
There are those who will argue that it doesn’t take any extra time for a proficient officer to engage a lethal threat with a firearm that has a manual safety (such as a 1911 design or a Beretta 92 carried with the safety engaged). While this may be true, it is certainly not true that most trained officers can return those firearms to their safe mode as quickly as they could return a firearm without such a device to its safe mode.

The reason should be obvious: Double-action/single-action and single-action-only pistols are designed to be in their double action or on safe mode, respectively, when they are not actively being shot. To engage in any other activity with these guns in single action is potentially more dangerous because the firearm is in a condition where the trigger travel is short and the pressure needed to engage it is light.

So even if we take away the “from the holster” delay/distraction that these guns can and do suffer from, we run pretty squarely into a more complicated situation if after a shooting, or deciding not to take a shot, the officer needs to do anything else, including re-holstering quickly and safely to deal with the aftermath of a shooting incident.

The “safe-action” type striker-fired and double-action-only pistols do not suffer from either the extra physical action at deployment or the added cognitive and physical necessities after a shooting to be used effectively. All other things being equal, less effort and time to conduct any given activity equals higher efficiency. When you are dealing with a critical incident that may involve the use of lethal force, you should strive to be as efficient as possible. Having tools that are fundamentally more efficient can help you achieve that goal.

Personally, I prefer any of the less complicated modern pistol designs such as the Glock, Smith & Wesson M&P, or Springfield XD over any other design for patrol officer and special reaction team use. Even the DAO firearms, which are just as simple to use, fall behind in the category of efficiency because of their heavy and unnecessarily long trigger pulls. While these may not make a difference during typical close quarters defensive shooting, they do have an adverse affect on the officer’s ability to shoot at the extreme end of defensive precision and deter frequent realistic practice.

Safe handling of a firearm is a training issue, not an equipment one. A more complicated firearm is harder to train with and less efficient to use. So ultimately, it could end up putting you in much greater danger than a simpler design under the same circumstances.

DannyZRC
11-12-2011, 01:03 AM
It's all a bunch of hot air and confirmation bias, especially the garbage about the weight of the gun. It's in your hand, you're pressing on your own palm with your trigger finger with the gun's grip as an intermediary. Where on earth do they come up with this stuff?

Jeff Cooper said some nasty things about crunchentickers, he has a big fan club composed of human beings, and human beings are susceptible to confirmation bias.
Confirmation bias, illustrated here:
http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/how_it_works.png

The walther P-38 came on scene in WWII and the Double Action auto pistol has been pretty popular ever since. The market has spoken and all that.

YVK
11-12-2011, 01:39 AM
Well, you are not going to get yourself a randomized trial on this. Sights are attached to a gun, you don't want to take them out of alignment while pushing on the gun, you can't really push perfectly especially at speed...Doesn't matter what trigger system you use, seems rather logical that it is easier to push sights out of alignment when exerting heavy pressure on light gun vs light pressure on heavy gun.

Other than that, in my experience, TDA/LEM is safer and there is more to shooting it than just being a training tool. Now, this could be a confirmation bias...

DannyZRC
11-12-2011, 03:22 AM
you're squeezing the trigger against your hand via the grip, a 5lb trigger on a 2 lb gun feels like a 5lb trigger on a 4lb gun feels like a 5lb trigger on a 10lb gun.

ToddG
11-12-2011, 07:17 AM
Le F -- I'm not going to engage in a debate with cherry-picked quotes from people I actually know. I've seen both Larry and Ken shoot DA/SA guns on numerous occasions, Ken especially. No one is trying to convince [i]you[/] to shoot a DA/SA gun.

YVK
11-12-2011, 09:44 AM
you're squeezing the trigger against your hand via the grip, a 5lb trigger on a 2 lb gun feels like a 5lb trigger on a 4lb gun feels like a 5lb trigger on a 10lb gun.

This implies two possibilities:

- none of these guns moves at all when I press the trigger. We know this is not true, otherwise we would've had zero discussions about trigger control, it wouldn't have existed as a concept

or

- 2 lb gun moves equal distance as 10 lb gun under same pressure. In my experience it is not true as well. I once tried to dry fire laser-enabled LCR one handed and I could not keep laser dot at one spot. I mean, I couldn't do it even once. I don't have this problem with my 1911 with CT grips...

GOP
11-12-2011, 11:11 AM
Lame, over simplified data point: I just bought a stock CZ SP01 Phantom (DA/SA) and I already shoot it better on day 1 than my Glock with stock trigger and even better than my M&P. Was getting most of my shots touching out to 17m yesterday. I have never fired a DA/SA until yesterday. I just think that each shooter has individual preferences that make one better with a DA/SA over a SFA platform. Just my noob opinion.

s0nspark
11-12-2011, 11:17 AM
When someone asks "can an argument be made" the answer is, apparently, always yes. :-)

Tamara
11-12-2011, 11:35 AM
Ah, now I know I'm on an internet gun forum. :p

Suvorov
11-12-2011, 12:16 PM
When someone asks "can an argument be made" the answer is, apparently, always yes. :-)


Tamara

Ah, now I know I'm on an internet gun forum.



Well now that we settled the whole SFA vs TDA debate does anyone want to voice their opinion on which has a better for a ONE SHOT STOP, the 9mm or the 45 ACP :p

Le Français
11-12-2011, 12:29 PM
Le F -- I'm not going to engage in a debate with cherry-picked quotes from people I actually know. I've seen both Larry and Ken shoot DA/SA guns on numerous occasions, Ken especially. No one is trying to convince [i]you[/] to shoot a DA/SA gun.

My last two posts were not meant to start a debate, nor were they meant to demonstrate that Ken, Larry, or Rob abhor DA/SA guns. I was simply trying to include the opinions of some other well-respected professionals. Surely a discussion such as this one cannot be harmed by the inclusion of such people's thoughts on the matter. That's all I have to say.

jetfire
11-12-2011, 12:31 PM
This really isn't a discussion so much as it is one side saying that DA/SA guns are bad and the other side pointing out (correctly) that DA/SA works just fine.

TGS
11-12-2011, 01:12 PM
The walther P-38 came on scene in WWII and the Double Action auto pistol has been pretty popular ever since. The market has spoken and all that.

Even before Walther produced the P38, they were producing the DA/SA PPK. It competed quite well against striker fired pistols of the early 20th century. So much so that the Walther PPK is often thought of as the pocket pistol of the 20th century, totally eclipsing SFA guns of the day.

David Armstrong
11-12-2011, 01:37 PM
Below I address the four parts of Todd's argument for DA/SA by providing pertinent quotes from two other prominent firearms instructors. I think this thread can benefit from their insight.
With all due respect for the noted instructors, there are equally noted instructors who take a totally differentpositionn. Iwould point out that anyone who argues you have to have a light trigger based on the weight of the firearm and so on they first have to explain how it was possible to develop excellent accuracy with revolvers which frequently had 12 pound DA pulls. For that matter there are a lot of folks, instructors included, who prefer the NY trigger for their Glocks because they find it helps them shoot better.

DannyZRC
11-12-2011, 04:17 PM
This implies two possibilities:

- none of these guns moves at all when I press the trigger. We know this is not true, otherwise we would've had zero discussions about trigger control, it wouldn't have existed as a concept

or

- 2 lb gun moves equal distance as 10 lb gun under same pressure. In my experience it is not true as well. I once tried to dry fire laser-enabled LCR one handed and I could not keep laser dot at one spot. I mean, I couldn't do it even once. I don't have this problem with my 1911 with CT grips...

http://www.emoclear.com/handgrip.jpg

A trigger is like one of those, but short on one side so you only squeeze it with your index finger.

explain why the weight of the handle matters in relation to how hard it needs to be squeezed, and how the ratio of squeezing force to total mass will effect the motion of the whole system.

Tamara
11-12-2011, 04:35 PM
This really isn't a discussion so much as it is one side saying that DA/SA guns are bad and the other side pointing out (correctly) that DA/SA works just fine.
You stop making sense, right this instant! :D

Tamara
11-12-2011, 04:44 PM
explain why the weight of the handle matters in relation to how hard it needs to be squeezed, and how the ratio of squeezing force to total mass will effect the motion of the whole system.

DannyZRC,

Dude, seriously? It would seem that this would be self-evident.

GOP
11-12-2011, 05:20 PM
Objectively: a lot of the best shooters in the world shoot DA/SA's, one of the most successful pistol in Production division is a CZ in DA/SA. A lot of SOF units use DA/SA's (the SEAL Teams for example). A lot of the best shooters in the world love SFA's. A lot of SOF units like SFA's. So, apparently a case can be made for both. It depends on the individual preferences involved. I come from an MMA background, some guys excelled at grappling and some at striking, the winner was the better fighter, despite their personal style/preference.

jlw
11-12-2011, 06:10 PM
This thread and a DA/SA thread elsewhere are going to force me to break out the 4006 to shoot in an IDPA match.

YVK
11-12-2011, 06:18 PM
Why? If I'm following the argument, he's not saying that the trigger pull weight doesn't matter but that how heavy the gun is in relation to the trigger pull weight doesn't matter. That is a 5 pound trigger pull in a 1 pound gun is the same as a 5 pound trigger in a 3 pound gun. That makes sense to me.

To move a gun [in general or, in context out of this discussion, out of sight alignment] means to impart a momentum to it. Momentum=velocity x mass. Given that velocity is negligible here, the momentum is only determined by mass. If I am applying 5 lbs of force to a 1 pound gun, this is five times more than I need to impart a momentum. Same force applied to 6 lbs gun is insufficient to impart any momentum. This is a oversimplification, but it is accurate enough for illustrative purposes.

Tamara
11-12-2011, 06:31 PM
Why? If I'm following the argument, he's not saying that the trigger pull weight doesn't matter but that how heavy the gun is in relation to the trigger pull weight doesn't matter. That is a 5 pound trigger pull in a 1 pound gun is the same as a 5 pound trigger in a 3 pound gun. That makes sense to me.

You can complicate this by adding all kinds of other factors, like total area of the grip in contact with your mitt, or coefficient of friction of the grip material versus human skin (further modified by whether that skin is dry or wet), but it should be self-evident that a five-pound force acting against a one-and-a-half pound object will displace it less than an eight-pound force acting against that same object, all else being equal. This is not rocket surgery.

This is how lighter triggers serve to enhance accuracy in the first damn' place, else trigger weight would not matter at all.

YVK
11-12-2011, 06:46 PM
Well, yeah, if the gun was lying on the table and I pushed against the trigger face without holding onto it, how much it weighed would matter. But if I'm holding the gun then I still don't see how the weight of the gun (not the weight of the trigger pull) makes any significant difference (other than I may get tired holding it out there).

That is true, and that's why I said my example was oversimplification. The strength of your grip adds to a total amount of force needed to move the gun. That's why some instructors will say that one can get away with subpar trigger control if grip is good; yet, if guns didn't move out of alignment, we wouldn't be talking about trigger control at all, would we?

Without any further exploits into physics etc., I think most people find that it is a lot easier to break a 2 lbs trigger cleanly rather than 8 lbs trigger, irrespective of trigger system or travel length.

Sometimes cigar is just a cigar, no?

Tamara
11-12-2011, 07:17 PM
Well, yeah, if the gun was lying on the table and I pushed against the trigger face without holding onto it, how much it weighed would matter. But if I'm holding the gun then I still don't see how the weight of the gun (not the weight of the trigger pull) makes any significant difference (other than I may get tired holding it out there).

The reason this is important is because the weapon (whether pistol or longarm) is not plugged into your musculo-skeletal system like they were both made out of Lego blocks. Hence the "all other things being equal" disclaimer.

If all coefficients of friction, grip areas, & etc. are equal, the 2lb. trigger pull on the 2lb. gun will disrupt your sight picture less than the 10lb. trigger pull on the 2lb. gun.

The overall effect, however, can be mitigated through training and practice and, through these factors, can be reduced to a point such that it makes no nevermind in most any foreseeable defensive confrontation.

DannyZRC
11-12-2011, 07:26 PM
you're not pushing the gun, you're squeezing it.

I'm not saying the weight of the trigger, and the weight of the gun, are irrelevant. I'm saying their ratio is irrelevant.

correlation, causation, etc.

Tamara
11-12-2011, 08:20 PM
you're not pushing the gun, you're squeezing it.

Yes. While trying to keep the sights aligned.

Look, dude, if you have some new gun-fu technique that eliminates all the rules of marksmanship and physics I've learned over the years, I'm all ears. If you can prove, really prove, to me that hanging pink fuzzy dice off my front sight will improve my chances of hitting, I'll be heading to Dollar General for a pair of them tomorrow.

I mean, fuck that Larry Vickers guy, what've you got here? :eek:

DannyZRC
11-12-2011, 08:21 PM
to clarify the question:

Are a 4lb gun with a 6lb trigger and a 2lb gun with a 3lb trigger both the same as a 6lb gun with a 9lb trigger?

The ratio is a red herring, IMO.

see sig for disclaimer, etc.

DannyZRC
11-12-2011, 08:22 PM
was posting while you posted, <3.

peterb
11-13-2011, 08:35 AM
IF the trigger pull was a linear motion perfectly in line with the center of mass of the gun, AND the mass of the gun was perfectly aligned with the grip, the weight of the gun would matter a lot less.

But it isn't, so we have moments, and torques, and other factors that tend to pull the sights out of alignment when we squeeze the trigger. More mass generally adds inertia that resists those movements.

Wheeler
11-13-2011, 09:47 AM
Is this all hypothetical or are you guys operating from some sort of personal experience? You can do the math all day long, it's what happens on the range or street that matters. Or in other words, real results based on experience.

I excell at shooting guns with what most people feel are heavy triggers. Some of the advantages I have are hand strength, forearm strength and an ability to appy heavy pressure precisly. Most of that comes from a lifetime of working with my hands, which makes it easy, (for me) to shoot a double action revolver or a DAO semi-auto.

It's still easier to shoot a 1911 with a 3 1/2# trigger accuratly and rapidly than a comparably weighted revolver with a 7# trigger. While I don't think that trigger pull weight vs. gun weight applies to all shooters, I do think it's a good baseline to start with.

Wheeler
11-13-2011, 10:45 AM
For me, the relatively small point that I'm focusing on is hypothetical. I'm just trying to understand what is being said in a way that makes sense for me; which may be my first mistake...

Without intending to be a smartass, learning by doing always works for me. There is a reason that many instructors prefer to teach Glocks or 1911's. They are (typically) easier to shoot and therefore (typically) easier to teach.

Do a little research on your own, borrow a revolver or a heavy first pull DA/SA auto and run a few drills and compare to your preferred blaster as a reference point.

jlw
11-13-2011, 12:10 PM
I went to firearms instructor school back when we (previous agency) issued the 4006. We then switched to Glock.

I can tell you first hand that teaching the single trigger pull of a Glock with no decocking was much easier than teaching the transitional trigger of a TDA system and all that goes with it.

That being said, I personally see the merits of the TDA system.

s0nspark
11-16-2011, 09:43 AM
The overall effect, however, can be mitigated through training and practice and, through these factors, can be reduced to a point such that it makes no nevermind in most any foreseeable defensive confrontation.


That statement could sum up my position on this whole thread... regardless of platform it really boils down to this: train to be proficient. :-)

s0nspark
11-16-2011, 09:46 AM
If you can prove, really prove, to me that hanging pink fuzzy dice off my front sight will improve my chances of hitting, I'll be heading to Dollar General for a pair of them tomorrow.


No dice on the fuzzy pink dice for me - a guy has to look cool, ya know!

Le Français
01-13-2012, 10:43 PM
To add another SME opinion to this highly opinionated thread, I thought I'd throw in this link. Kyle Defoor (someone who used DA/SA pistols while serving as a SEAL) shares his position on this issue: http://m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=95079

mnealtx
01-13-2012, 10:55 PM
To add another SME opinion to this highly opinionated thread, I thought I'd throw in this link. Kyle Defoor (someone who used DA/SA pistols while serving as a SEAL) shares his position on this issue: http://m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=95079

I noticed he skipped discussing the 1911 *trigger* and went off on a tangent about capacity and caliber instead.

Cosmo M3
01-14-2012, 09:01 AM
I noticed he skipped discussing the 1911 *trigger* and went off on a tangent about capacity and caliber instead.

I don't think SEALs cared about trigger or anything like that as long as it worked.

TCinVA
01-14-2012, 10:54 AM
To add another SME opinion to this highly opinionated thread, I thought I'd throw in this link. Kyle Defoor (someone who used DA/SA pistols while serving as a SEAL) shares his position on this issue: http://m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=95079

Kyle's opinion is informed, but still an opinion.

I deliberately shelved my striker-fired pistol and bought one with a hammer because I was carrying AIWB...and that's plenty of justification for the existence of guns with a hammer for me.

Also note that he said pretty much the same thing lots of other folks in this thread said about DA/SA.

Jac
01-14-2012, 12:45 PM
I find it interesting that Defoor defends his dislike of hammer-fired guns by saying "To me, there is just no good reason to shoot a pistol with a hammer anymore. We don't have different trigger pulls on carbines, so why have them on a pistol?".

The M4 is hammer fired, with a thumb-operated safety. So if he wants a consistent trigger pull that's similar to his carbine, he needs... a 1911?

LHS
01-14-2012, 01:11 PM
I think the DA/SA is unfairly maligned, primarily by folks whose entire shooting career has revolved around the 1911 and Glock. They cannot shoot a DA/SA gun well and so they assume it's the gun's fault and not their own. A SIG with the short reset modification ("SRT") is one of the most shootable guns I've ever used.

nyeti is absolutely correct, it does take more effort to master a DA pistol. However, that "more" can be considerably minimized if you learn how to run the gun properly as opposed to having an instructor tell you to buy a Glock instead.

Working on the DA stroke of a DA/SA pistol forces you to develop great trigger control. This makes it much easier to transition to another gun, whereas many people who have lived their lives with 5# (or less) triggers often struggle to shoot a DA/SA well. I've even seen folks who've picked up a SIG or HK and thought the gun was broken because it didn't go off when they lightly brushed against the trigger.

Once you fire that first DA stroke, the SA on most DA/SA guns is lighter (and often shorter) than the consistent trigger pull on competing guns. So you have to learn to make that first shot, but afterwards the gun is in Easy Mode.

It's also extremely important to make decocking the pistol a purely subconscious act. There are different schools of thought on this, but I decock the pistol whenever it dismounts from the target (i.e., it moves into my ready position).

Well said. I grew up shooting 1911s, so when I first fired a Beretta I was not fond of the heavy first-round DA pull, and would manually thumb-cock it before shooting. Then I got my head out of my ass and learned how to shoot that first DA shot properly. It does take more time and effort than a striker-fired pistol, but for my applications, I prefer the DA/SA. Specifically, when reholstering in an IWB rig, where clothing can and will snag your trigger eventually. I had this happen to me once when reholstering after a string of fire. I felt the hammer coming back and was able to recover before something bad happened. If you choose to do AIWB, I would think this would be doubly important. I wouldn't stick a cocked and unlocked 1911 or Beretta in an IWB, much less an AIWB, so it amazes me when people do pretty much the same thing with a Glock or M&P.

Any kind of unconventional or off-body carry (fanny pack, Maxpedition pack, Safepacker, etc) brings up a lot of the same issues. I know one person who carries a Glock 17 in a fanny pack with an empty chamber to avoid having it ND in there. What's the point?

I think Glocks and other striker-fired, no-manual-safety pistols are great for external holster uses, like duty guns, etc. I don't care for them for a CCW application. I know I'm in the minority on this point, but I just can't bring myself to point a cocked and unlocked pistol at my wedding tackle.

With modern, reliable DA/SA guns out there like a Beretta 92, HK P30S, HK45C, etc, there's no need to go to a striker-fired gun just to get a modern, reliable pistol. If a striker gun meets your needs, then by all means, use it. I have nothing against them. They just don't work for my specific needs.

jlw
01-14-2012, 01:36 PM
I find it interesting that Defoor defends his dislike of hammer-fired guns by saying "To me, there is just no good reason to shoot a pistol with a hammer anymore. We don't have different trigger pulls on carbines, so why have them on a pistol?".

The M4 is hammer fired, with a thumb-operated safety. So if he wants a consistent trigger pull that's similar to his carbine, he needs... a 1911?

I had the same thought when I read that though not necessarily confined to the 1911. Hammer-fired pistols can have the same trigger pull from shot to shot.

jlw
01-14-2012, 02:31 PM
I'm a little unconvinced, I guess. The main argument advanced for the DA / SA is that it's easier to shoot successively than a DAO. I struggle with that, but ok. The reason that the DA/SA and DAO are superior to the single action / safe action is that they're better for holding people at gunpoint with your finger on the trigger.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4HcvIH6GpW8

I (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4HcvIH6GpW8) struggle /mightily/ with that.


I'm on the Android and can't see the video, but if it's the female cop who AD's right next to the grounded suspect's face, it's a Beretta and she had manually cocked the hammer upon drawing. My recollection is that she'd been taught that to help her qualify.


This is my understanding as well. She had trouble with the DA pull and the reach to the trigger; so, the staff told her to thumb cock the hammer when she drew the pistol.

mnealtx
01-14-2012, 05:45 PM
I don't think SEALs cared about trigger or anything like that as long as it worked.

That argument would be more convincing if the *rest* of his post hadn't been talking about Sig triggers.

ToddG
01-14-2012, 10:31 PM
I'm certainly not in a position to speak on Defoor's behalf, but my interpretation of his post was pretty simple: he prefers a Glock to a DA/SA because the Glock is more like his carbine triggers, and he recognizes that the DA/SA is very shootable by someone willing to put the time into it.

Let's not turn that into some kind of drama that wasn't intended by him, OK?

GOP
01-18-2012, 12:58 AM
I guess I'm one of the odd balls. I bought a CZ 75 SP01 recently and have put about 1,300 rounds through it. Coming from shooting a couple of Glock matches and also owning an M&P, I fell in love with the DA/SA trigger. So much so that I'm trading my M&P in on another CZ for carry.

Le Français
01-18-2012, 10:24 AM
I'm certainly not in a position to speak on Defoor's behalf, but my interpretation of his post was pretty simple: he prefers a Glock to a DA/SA because the Glock is more like his carbine triggers, and he recognizes that the DA/SA is very shootable by someone willing to put the time into it.

Let's not turn that into some kind of drama that wasn't intended by him, OK?

Absolutely. I posted the link, you may recall, without comment on its contents, which is hardly drama inducing.

If you are referring to someone else, my apologies.

jlw
07-05-2013, 03:50 PM
Mike Panone on the TDA:

http://www.defensereview.com/cz-p-07-duty-combattactical-pistol-the-best-pistol-nobody-knows-about/

He goes into the issue within the article.

YVK
07-07-2013, 12:07 AM
Mike Panone on the TDA:

http://www.defensereview.com/cz-p-07-duty-combattactical-pistol-the-best-pistol-nobody-knows-about/

He goes into the issue within the article.

I handled this thing in a local gun store today. I now understand why gamers like CZs.
Single action pull was featherweight, 3 lbs max, and that's a duty model. I can only imagine what pull weight their competition tuned guns have.
Another funny bit is that one can only have safety OR decocker. I actually prefer decocker that doesn't have safety function, so this variant is fine. The other one is what gave me a long pause, 'cause it is a DA/SA gun with 3 lbs trigger that can only be placed in a DA mode by lowering a hammer on a loaded chamber...

Rich
07-18-2013, 05:04 PM
I think the DA/SA is unfairly maligned, primarily by folks whose entire shooting career has revolved around the 1911 and Glock. They cannot shoot a DA/SA gun well and so they assume it's the gun's fault and not their own. A SIG with the short reset modification ("SRT") is one of the most shootable guns I've ever used.

nyeti is absolutely correct, it does take more effort to master a DA pistol. However, that "more" can be considerably minimized if you learn how to run the gun properly as opposed to having an instructor tell you to buy a Glock instead.

Working on the DA stroke of a DA/SA pistol forces you to develop great trigger control. This makes it much easier to transition to another gun, whereas many people who have lived their lives with 5# (or less) triggers often struggle to shoot a DA/SA well. I've even seen folks who've picked up a SIG or HK and thought the gun was broken because it didn't go off when they lightly brushed against the trigger.

Once you fire that first DA stroke, the SA on most DA/SA guns is lighter (and often shorter) than the consistent trigger pull on competing guns. So you have to learn to make that first shot, but afterwards the gun is in Easy Mode.

It's also extremely important to make decocking the pistol a purely subconscious act. There are different schools of thought on this, but I decock the pistol whenever it dismounts from the target (i.e., it moves into my ready position).

+1

I went from S&W JKL to Colt 1911 and on to DA/SA Pistol
The D/A/SA was pretty simple really.
To tell the truth I took me some time getting use to a 1911 trigger.
For some reason I like to have some weight on my trigger ? But not to much.
Still some of my best groups came from a K frame and 148 WC