TDA vs. DAO

[revchuck38]

I've got an unmatched pair of full-size Beretta PX4s - an F version that I bought new, and a D version that I bought used. The slides for both were sent to Langdon Tactical for identical Ameriglo sights, plus the F was converted to decock-only. I've installed a 12-lb. hammer spring in each and the DA pulls feel identical though I haven't measured them. I can't distinguish an accuracy difference between them; bullet holes appear right on top of the front sight with either. I've got about 4k rounds total through both guns, mostly my hardball reloads with some factory hardball and a few hundred 124-grain +P HSTs and I'm still waiting for the first bobble from either.

I'm trying to figure out which I shoot better so I can concentrate on that one and also buy a backup/training copy. I'm comfortable with DAO since I shot an S&W K frame in IDPA for several years and I'm also comfortable with the DA/SA transition from my previous CZ-75B carry guns.

Today was my first try. I was a bit hurried so I used the 5 Yard Round Up, running it twice with each gun. Results were inconclusive. Scores and splits were close, with a slight advantage to the D version in the support-hand-only strings. Not enough data yet.

I'm going to try again using the Hackathorn test, and maybe the Super Test if time allows. Recommendations for other methods will be gratefully accepted.

[Doc_Glock]

This is interesting. Keep posting your results please.

[Chuck Whitlock]

As a fan of DAO, I am interested as well.

[ViniVidivici]

My choice I'd go DAO, as I'm a fan of consistent triggers and not having to decock. Sounds like you're shooting the same with both.

[jetfire]

I have a 92D and several M9/92F variants, and I genuinely prefer shooting the 92D to all of them. It’s like a 16 shot K-frame and if you don’t like that...well I just can’t help you.

[Gadfly]

I HATED the thought of DAO. The, I got hired by an agency that issued DAO, and the choice was, “learn it”, or “seek employment elsewhere”.

Once I was forced to drink the kook aid, I liked the taste. Sure I am faster with a striker. Much faster. But I never felt unsafe carrying that DAO or later the DAK. Put in the time, and they become easy to shoot.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[CraigS]

As fantastic as the DA is in my B92 w/ Langdon TJIB, I am still more easily accurate in SA. DA takes a little longer and more concentration.

[revchuck38]

I have a 92D and several M9/92F variants, and I genuinely prefer shooting the 92D to all of them. It’s like a 16 shot K-frame and if you don’t like that...well I just can’t help you.

Elsewhere on this forum, I've described my PX4 D as my "18-shot 4" K frame", so we've got a similar perspective.

I went to the range again today and shot both guns back-to-back, again using the 5-yard round up because the heat index was somewhere over 100 and my antediluvian ass doesn't do as well with heat as it once did, so the shorter walks to the target were beneficial. My scores increased and times and splits decreased as one would expect with more practice, but once more it was a coin toss as to which one shot better for me.

I remember reading one time about 10-15 years ago that Ernest Langdon LangdonTactical tried the same thing with 92s and found that for him, at the level he was shooting, the D yielded slower splits. I chalk that up to the huge difference in our skill levels.

I ain't finished with this thing yet.

[jetfire]

Elsewhere on this forum, I've described my PX4 D as my "18-shot 4" K frame", so we've got a similar perspective.

I went to the range again today and shot both guns back-to-back, again using the 5-yard round up because the heat index was somewhere over 100 and my antediluvian ass doesn't do as well with heat as it once did, so the shorter walks to the target were beneficial. My scores increased and times and splits decreased as one would expect with more practice, but once more it was a coin toss as to which one shot better for me.

I remember reading one time about 10-15 years ago that Ernest Langdon LangdonTactical tried the same thing with 92s and found that for him, at the level he was shooting, the D yielded slower splits. I chalk that up to the huge difference in our skill levels.

I ain't finished with this thing yet.

I will always shoot slower splits with a “D” gun than I can with a F/G gun. The thing about a D is that there is a certain amount of required trigger travel that has to happen in order to make the loud noises again, and that takes time.

[UniSol]

I have a police trade in 229 .40 in DAO (not DAK) that has really grown on me. I have nothing objective about it to add beyond that, but there's something to it. I put in a lighter Wolf mainspring and greased all the bearing surfaces in the trigger linkage and it is very pleasing to shoot. The auto k frame comparison is a good one.

[Doc_Glock]

I will always shoot slower splits with a “D” gun than I can with a F/G gun. The thing about a D is that there is a certain amount of required trigger travel that has to happen in order to make the loud noises again, and that takes time.

In my experience that time is about 0.08s.

[Gadfly]

Elsewhere on this forum, I've described my PX4 D as my "18-shot 4" K frame", so we've got a similar perspective.


Shit, you are making me want one. and I DON'T need one. Not At All.

But I did find a Used DAO Storm in .40.... Cheap.... and I DON'T NEED IT... But kind of want it.

[revchuck38]

I will always shoot slower splits with a “D” gun than I can with a F/G gun. The thing about a D is that there is a certain amount of required trigger travel that has to happen in order to make the loud noises again, and that takes time.


In my experience that time is about 0.08s.
caleb That makes perfect sense. Assuming for the sake of discussion that the experience of Enel is about the same as mine, the next question might be "Does it matter in the context of defensive (as opposed to competitive) shooting?" IIRC Dagga Boy mentioned that some elite units work with .5 splits rather than max speed in order to maximize accuracy and round accountability. Accurate (10 ring on a B-8 at five yards) .5 splits are doable for me with either gun using both hands on a square range. I agree that faster would be better if I could maintain that accuracy, but is the juice worth the squeeze?

[Dagga Boy]

My take is this. These guns can be shot well. Key word "can". The reality with any trigger is that the more movement, the more effort required to move a trigger, and the more concentration during that movement makes for both more time and more time to impart other errors. That is "bad" for shooting, but good for assessment and thinking. Don't get me wrong on where Wayne and I discuss the .30-.50 plus range as a good range to shoot. It has nothing to do with capability and everything to do with thinking. Those are thinking and assessment speeds. The guys in elite units absolutely can shoot faster, we simply note they tend to practice and work at mastery within their thinking and shooting speed. TDA gives you a thinking trigger when you need a thinking trigger and a shooting trigger when you need a shooting trigger. Negative is it requires training a sub conscious post shooting action (decocking). DAO is a thinking trigger all the time. Nothing wrong with that, just not great for doing a lot of pure shooting stuff. Work a force on force shoot house with a TDA gun cold and it would not be the handicap it would be on a USPSA competition. I spent decades with a 4' Model 13 as my dedicated SIMS bad guy role player gun........lots of folks armed with "shooting" guns and sub machine guns fell to it. I have a 3953 that will likely end up with my daughter at some point to offset her Model 65 3". Doesn't really care much about shooting, totally gets the defense aspect, and understands needing a firearm for protection but simply isn't all that into shooting and being right will be more important than being fast. That may change, but for now she has liked the simple aspect of it. That is the nice thing about the DAO. They are less complex in other administrative actions and the not shooting portion of operation as other systems.

[revchuck38]

Dagga Boy - thanks for the clarification/correction of what I remembered and additional info!

[revchuck38]

So...the availability of a FS G model at a really good price from a forum member just pushed me off the fence. The D will become a well-liked and proven reserve gun, my current F/G will be the primary carry gun until the (at this point in time unfired) G proves reliable and then they'll probably switch roles with the F/G becoming my training gun. I'm glad to be comfortable enough with both modes of operation to have this flexibility. :)

[Bucky]

So...the availability of a FS G model at a really good price from a forum member just pushed me off the fence. The D will become a well-liked and proven reserve gun, my current F/G will be the primary carry gun until the (at this point in time unfired) G proves reliable and then they'll probably switch roles with the F/G becoming my training gun. I'm glad to be comfortable enough with both modes of operation to have this flexibility. :)

What is an FS G model? Is that an FS with a G conversion?

[revchuck38]

What is an FS G model? Is that an FS with a G conversion?

FS = Full-size, G = factory-configured de-cock only.

[rsa-otc]

A little late to the discussion but let me add my 2 cents. IMO DB is on the money. For CCW/Duty carry double action is a more deliberate action. Gives you time to see, assess and react. One of the few times I had to pull my gun on duty if I had a SA or SF gun there would be a teenager with at the very least an extra hole in them today. Having that DA trigger stroke allowed me to stop my trigger pull prior to the gun going off. IMO having every trigger pull a deliberate action is not a bad thing.

I have been teaching defensive revolver to people for going on 40 years and I can count on one hand the number of people I wasn't able to get to pass our Q course which has always been harder than the state course. Any time we got together with another company or PD my guys crushed them. The last time half way through the day the other departments instructor asked that we not post the scores and just enjoy the hot dogs and hamburgers. They were shooting Sig 229's at the time, our guns were all DOA revolvers.

For the record I am fortunate that I get to start teaching beginners one or two students at a time and get to stomp on bad habits hard immediately before they become ingrained. Most PD or agency trainers don't have that luxury in an academy setting.

[hufnagel]

My take is this. These guns can be shot well. Key word "can". The reality with any trigger is that the more movement, the more effort required to move a trigger, and the more concentration during that movement makes for both more time and more time to impart other errors. That is "bad" for shooting, but good for assessment and thinking. Don't get me wrong on where Wayne and I discuss the .30-.50 plus range as a good range to shoot. It has nothing to do with capability and everything to do with thinking. Those are thinking and assessment speeds. The guys in elite units absolutely can shoot faster, we simply note they tend to practice and work at mastery within their thinking and shooting speed. TDA gives you a thinking trigger when you need a thinking trigger and a shooting trigger when you need a shooting trigger. Negative is it requires training a sub conscious post shooting action (decocking). DAO is a thinking trigger all the time. Nothing wrong with that, just not great for doing a lot of pure shooting stuff. Work a force on force shoot house with a TDA gun cold and it would not be the handicap it would be on a USPSA competition. I spent decades with a 4' Model 13 as my dedicated SIMS bad guy role player gun........lots of folks armed with "shooting" guns and sub machine guns fell to it. I have a 3953 that will likely end up with my daughter at some point to offset her Model 65 3". Doesn't really care much about shooting, totally gets the defense aspect, and understands needing a firearm for protection but simply isn't all that into shooting and being right will be more important than being fast. That may change, but for now she has liked the simple aspect of it. That is the nice thing about the DAO. They are less complex in other administrative actions and the not shooting portion of operation as other systems.

You do realize I just added another link in my sig to one of your posts, right? :D
You summed up in words the swirly thoughts that were in my head perfectly.

(edit: will get linked once I figure out why i'm having sig overflow problems)

[jetfire]

caleb That makes perfect sense. Assuming for the sake of discussion that the experience of Enel is about the same as mine, the next question might be "Does it matter in the context of defensive (as opposed to competitive) shooting?" IIRC Dagga Boy mentioned that some elite units work with .5 splits rather than max speed in order to maximize accuracy and round accountability. Accurate (10 ring on a B-8 at five yards) .5 splits are doable for me with either gun using both hands on a square range. I agree that faster would be better if I could maintain that accuracy, but is the juice worth the squeeze?

I can get a DAO auto like my 92D down to about 0.25ish splits, whereas my 92F I can run around 0.17, so I’d agree that 0.08 is about the “difference.” Here’s the thing though, and where I agree with DB - I have a very hard time imagining a purely defensive shooting situation where I’d NEED to shoot 0.17 splits to achieve victory. I generally agree with the idea that for purely a defensive shooter, 0.30 is a perfectly acceptable “fast” speed, since at that speed you’re shooter just slower than it takes for your brain to process visual stimulus.