VP9 firing pin block design, is it a theoretical safety issue?

[Squib308]

Preface
Ever since the VP9 was released I've been weirded out by the striker block design. While I am without a single piece of evidence or inductive reasoning to suggest it can fail, I wouldn't be a true PF member if my neuroses could be suppressed. Now before I get flamed for hating on HK, I've owned many of their pistols over the years without a single issue. I've never even had to drift a sight for POI correction. I've owned three VP9's with a combined 4014 rounds and not a single stoppage. Given my affinity for TDA's I haven't even considered carrying the VP9 although many do carry it and I'm in no position to question that.

Question
The striker block engages the striker just to the right of the sear. When in battery and under tension, if...and this is a huge if...the striker "nub" were to physically fail this would allow the striker to disengage from both the sear and the firing pin block. Redundancy in design is a good thing, although naturally one wants to incorporate levels of redundancy in distinct areas rather than concentrate them in one spot such as the VP9 appears to do. Other SFA's I've examined appear to block the striker movement in totally different location on the striker, such that it would two highly improbable mechanical failures to discharge. Digging around PF search function I haven't found this specific topic being discussed. Is it something that others have observed or considered? I'm wondering how such design is interpreted or viewed by other PF members with vastly more experience than myself. Thank you in advance.


Picture
Glock tool pointing towards the striker - sear engagement. the small notch on the R side is where the rotating striker block engages, and where my neuroses congregate.

45041

[Doc_Glock]

Preface
Ever since the VP9 was released I've been weirded out by the striker block design. While I am without a single piece of evidence or inductive reasoning to suggest it can fail, I wouldn't be a true PF member if my neuroses could be suppressed. Now before I get flamed for hating on HK, I've owned many of their pistols over the years without a single issue. I've never even had to drift a sight for POI correction. I've owned three VP9's with a combined 4014 rounds and not a single stoppage. Given my affinity for TDA's I haven't even considered carrying the VP9 although many do carry it and I'm in no position to question that.

Question
The striker block engages the striker just to the right of the sear. When in battery and under tension, if...and this is a huge if...the striker "nub" were to physically fail this would allow the striker to disengage from both the sear and the firing pin block. Redundancy in design is a good thing, although naturally one wants to incorporate levels of redundancy in distinct areas rather than concentrate them in one spot such as the VP9 appears to do. Other SFA's I've examined appear to block the striker movement in totally different location on the striker, such that it would two highly improbable mechanical failures to discharge. Digging around PF search function I haven't found this specific topic being discussed. Is it something that others have observed or considered? I'm wondering how such design is interpreted or viewed by other PF members with vastly more experience than myself. Thank you in advance.


Picture
Glock tool pointing towards the striker - sear engagement. the small notch on the R side is where the rotating striker block engages, and where my neuroses congregate.

45041

Great post and I also find this interesting. Don’t have an answer for you other than I suspect firing pins are made of pretty high quality metal and don’t just break in half easily. At least at that part of the firing pin.

I remember having a similar feeling about the Steyr M9 pistol. It was drop safe, did not have a striker block even and was totally dependent on that striker nub. If the striker nub ever failed...well, it was going to fire.

[SecondsCount]

There are thousands of VP9 pistols out there now. Any news of the striker "nub" breaking?

[FreedomFries]

I started a similar thread about 6 months to discuss differences in striker safety/FPB mechanisms, but it didn't get much interest. I assume because most of the designs out there now have no known major unresolved issues resulting in ADs. I can think of theoretical ways a striker could break and bypass the FPB in several designs of SFA pistol, but I don't think this has actually occurred in real life. I imagine the engineers have thoroughly considered the materials they are using and devised ways to minimize the risk of catastrophic breakage. Probably minimizing stress points, adequate thicknesses, and adequate radiuses for parts.

Still, I feel a bit uneasy carrying many types of striker fired pistols in the AIWB position even though I know that the chance of a catastrophic breakage that bypasses safety mechanisms is highly improbable.

As far as nubs breaking off of strikers, I haven't seen this on a VP9, but I did see a picture of a broken nub on an M&P striker (which thankfully has a separate protrusion that engages the striker safety).

[M2CattleCo]

There are thousands of VP9 pistols out there now. Any news of the striker "nub" breaking?


There's millions of 1911s out there too. There's not many reports of sears failing, but I know of two personally.

[SecondsCount]

There's millions of 1911s out there too. There's not many reports of sears failing, but I know of two personally.

But H&K didn't build those that failed ;)

Strikers and sears are cheap. Swap in a new one every 10K rounds if it really bothers you.

[Squib308]

But H&K didn't build those that failed ;)

Strikers and sears are cheap. Swap in a new one every 10K rounds if it really bothers you.

in practice I agree with SecondsCount that the #’s support the VP9 as safe and unlikely of direct risk to a user. like others my decision to only AIWB a TDA is a personal one, and that includes the VP9.

however as addressed in the OP, inductive reasoning is a not a solution for what could be a design shortcoming. history is overflowing with examples of mechanical designs that were well built but lacked redundancy. combined with other factors like human error or (frequently) cost saving measures for maintenance led to a catastrophic failure.

[Greg]

Waiting for the hate directed at OP for placing a Glock tool near an HK....

[SecondsCount]

I'm a big fan of redundancy but you drive a car every day with one steering shaft to the front wheels that if it broke at 70 mph could be a very bad situation.

Has there ever been a case where a sear or striker has failed in an unmodified gun that caused injury to a person?

Glock has a drop safety but nothing else to prevent someone from shooting themselves in the leg when the trigger is "accidentally pressed", which happened often enough that the term "Glock Leg" was created.

If you want redundancy, carry an 80 series Colt with a grip safety, firing pin safety, and a thumb safety :cool:

[FreedomFries]

I'm a big fan of redundancy but you drive a car every day with one steering shaft to the front wheels that if it broke at 70 mph could be a very bad situation.

Has there ever been a case where a sear or striker has failed in an unmodified gun that caused injury to a person?

Glock has a drop safety but nothing else to prevent someone from shooting themselves in the leg when the trigger is "accidentally pressed", which happened often enough that the term "Glock Leg" was created.

If you want redundancy, carry an 80 series Colt with a grip safety, firing pin safety, and a thumb safety :cool:

You're absolutely right. We routinely accept risks by using mechanical devices without giving it any second thought. Cars, bikes, planes, nose hair trimmers, etc. Somehow though, none of these scare me as much as certain types of SFA pistol holstered next to my sack. It's irrational I'm sure, because I don't know of any cases where someone was injured from a spontaneous sear or striker failure in an unmodified firearm.

There's still a lot of us out there who are going to obsess about it though. Maybe someone will make a YouTube channel about torture testing strikers to exploit us for ad revenue. Maybe videos where they throw various strikers into a bucket of rocks and feces, stomp on them, and then make assertions about which designs are better?

[SecondsCount]

You're absolutely right. We routinely accept risks by using mechanical devices without giving it any second thought. Cars, bikes, planes, nose hair trimmers, etc. Somehow though, none of these scare me as much as certain types of SFA pistol holstered next to my sack. It's irrational I'm sure, because I don't know of any cases where someone was injured from a spontaneous sear or striker failure in an unmodified firearm.

There's still a lot of us out there who are going to obsess about it though. Maybe someone will make a YouTube channel about torture testing strikers to exploit us for ad revenue. Maybe videos where they throw various strikers into a bucket of rocks and feces, stomp on them, and then make assertions about which designs are better?

We don't need more stupid rock, mud, sand, water, hammering, dropping from airplane Youtube videos :rolleyes: but I would take more 90K round tests done in TLG style :cool:

What we need is for someone to do a failure analysis (FMEA) on the part. Being that it is an HK part, I am certain that it is overbuilt, and the reality is that it is a low stress component compared to the tip of the striker, extractor, ejector, etc. It is also protected from additional stresses by being internal to the slide, unlike a sear in a 1911 which is supporting an exposed hammer, and can be struck by external objects.

Honestly, I would be more concerned about the 1/8" travel of the trigger to make the gun go bang than the striker failing. While I own and really enjoy the VP9, I only carry something with a LEM trigger in the appendix position :cool:

[Bucky]

There's millions of 1911s out there too. There's not many reports of sears failing, but I know of two personally.

In either case, did the gun fire or did the half cock notch do its job? If the gun fired, was a trigger job involved?

I’ve seen many an improperly trigger job done on a gun where they screw up the half cock notch. I happen to have one from a former reputable Smith.

Simple test, lower your 1911 hammer to half cock. Then try and pull the trigger. If the hammer falls, gun needs a-fixin’.

[M2CattleCo]

One caused an unintended double, I don't think the other one did.

The first was a Colt MIM sear which are regarded by the best 'smiths in the county as being some of the toughest and longest lasting sears there are, the other was an STI IIRC.

[Alpha Sierra]

The things some of you guys obsess about......SMH

If such an incredibly low probability failure is a concern, dump the gun and buy one with a DAO or DA/SA trigger and be done with it.

Somehow I think that won't happen and this thread will reach 753 pages.

[Greg]

In either case, did the gun fire or did the half cock notch do its job? If the gun fired, was a trigger job involved?

I’ve seen many an improperly trigger job done on a gun where they screw up the half cock notch. I happen to have one from a former reputable Smith.

Simple test, lower your 1911 hammer to half cock. Then try and pull the trigger. If the hammer falls, gun needs a-fixin’.

If the hammer has a half cock ledge instead of the original captive half cock notch, the hammer will fall, but with almost no energy. Both Colt and Springfield went to Ledge style hammers 20+ years ago.

[Guinnessman]

The things some of you guys obsess about......SMH

If such an incredibly low probability failure is a concern, dump the gun and buy one with a DAO or DA/SA trigger and be done with it.

Somehow I think that won't happen and this thread will reach 753 pages.

At least it will still be shorter than the P365 thread.🤣🤣😜

[GmanVP9]

Im going to bump this. Ive done some research myself and posted in some other forums
I haven't found anyone mention the nubs on the striker breaking. 2 years later, has anyone else?

[Archer1440]

Obviously not, or you would see one single case if it ever were to happen blown to astronomic proportions.

[GmanVP9]

Good point. Im curious why they put the pin to the side instead of blocking the striker itself

[Archer1440]

Well, what if the striker body were to fail at whatever notch were needed to block the striker? The spring pressure bears on the head of the striker cups, so it would then be free to strike in case of a striker body failure at a notch.

This isn’t a MIM striker, it is billet machined heat-treated steel.

Look, there’s plenty to worry about with any striker gun without worrying about things that basically can’t happen. If you’re uncomfortable with the near impossibility of the scenario you’re evidently worried about, I can’t imagine you would be comfortable carrying any striker pistol.

[sigtoglock]

Well I'm finding this thread to be very interesting. I'm a recently retired science teacher and new gun owner and wanted a gun for home defense, practice at the range, and carry. I just loved the hours spent researching online and decided on a Sig P365XL with Holosun 507K and Phlster AIWB. I'm in love with my new hobby and feel more confident to protect my family if needed. One nagging thought kept me from feeling comfortable carrying aimed at my groin with a round in the chamber like I know I should. After hearing so much about internal safeties I decided I needed to take a deep dive into that subject to regain confidence. What I found about the Sig didn't reassure me for the same reasons as the OP, no redundancy if the back of the striker were to break. Then I discovered Glock. Wow,wow,wow. Their design with several redundancies convinced me to change my whole setup to a 43X mos with the 507K and a new Phlster to fit and I could not be happier and more confident with my decision. I understand not everyone feels the need for that degree of safety design and if I didn't carry appendix I wouldn't feel as strongly about it. Come to think of it, I guess I do have redundancy with an extra testicle. Hmmm.

[FreedomFries]

Well I'm finding this thread to be very interesting. I'm a recently retired science teacher and new gun owner and wanted a gun for home defense, practice at the range, and carry. I just loved the hours spent researching online and decided on a Sig P365XL with Holosun 507K and Phlster AIWB. I'm in love with my new hobby and feel more confident to protect my family if needed. One nagging thought kept me from feeling comfortable carrying aimed at my groin with a round in the chamber like I know I should. After hearing so much about internal safeties I decided I needed to take a deep dive into that subject to regain confidence. What I found about the Sig didn't reassure me for the same reasons as the OP, no redundancy if the back of the striker were to break. Then I discovered Glock. Wow,wow,wow. Their design with several redundancies convinced me to change my whole setup to a 43X mos with the 507K and a new Phlster to fit and I could not be happier and more confident with my decision. I understand not everyone feels the need for that degree of safety design and if I didn't carry appendix I wouldn't feel as strongly about it. Come to think of it, I guess I do have redundancy with an extra testicle. Hmmm.

Ultimately I think you just have to decide based on what you're comfortable with. I also considered some of these fully cocked striker for carry and went with Glock instead. However, between the VP9, M&P, P365, and other striker pistols that all have a striker safety/firing pin block that impedes movement by contacting the striker at a point rearward of the spring cups, there have been zero publicized cases of a striker spontaneously snapping at a point that bypassed the safety mechanism and resulted in a testicular or femoral artery boo boo.

Maybe it could theoretically happen, but with over a million P365 (as of 2020), millions M&P/M&P Shields, and who knows how many VP9/SF9 in circulation, it still hasn't been heard of. If it were to happen, the chances that it would happen to you in your AIWB holster without it happening to somebody else first are astronomically low. And if it happened to anybody, all of the internet would hear about it immediately.

[Clusterfrack]

...aimed at my groin with a round in the chamber...

A gun in a properly wedged AIWB holster doesn't have to aim at body parts.

[TheNewbie]

A gun in a properly wedged AIWB holster doesn't have to aim at body parts.


What about when sitting? Especially in a car.


I’ve never AIWB so I don’t know.

[Clusterfrack]

What about when sitting? Especially in a car.


I’ve never AIWB so I don’t know.

When I switched to appendix, I was concerned about this as well. Before I carried a live weapon, I taped a pencil into the muzzle of an unloaded Glock 19, holstered AIWB, and went about my daily business. Every so often I would feel myself up, and locate the end of the pencil.

Worst case, while sitting with back straight or bent forward, the muzzle is aimed through a bit of inner thigh, and maybe some right testicle (I hang left). Driving, the testicle is safe.

I decided this was acceptable, and have been carrying AIWB ever since.

When I holster, I tip my hips out to make sure nothing gets muzzled. Thumb on SCD or hammer adds further safety--especially when holstering under duress-- but personally I would carry a striker-fired gun with a reasonable trigger without a SCD.

[sigtoglock]

Ultimately I think you just have to decide based on what you're comfortable with. I also considered some of these fully cocked striker for carry and went with Glock instead. However, between the VP9, M&P, P365, and other striker pistols that all have a striker safety/firing pin block that impedes movement by contacting the striker at a point rearward of the spring cups, there have been zero publicized cases of a striker spontaneously snapping at a point that bypassed the safety mechanism and resulted in a testicular or femoral artery boo boo.

Maybe it could theoretically happen, but with over a million P365 (as of 2020), millions M&P/M&P Shields, and who knows how many VP9/SF9 in circulation, it still hasn't been heard of. If it were to happen, the chances that it would happen to you in your AIWB holster without it happening to somebody else first are astronomically low. And if it happened to anybody, all of the internet would hear about it immediately.

I hope you're right, but I have seen stories like this one....

https://www.unionleader.com/news/courts/nh-mans-lawsuit-claims-sig-sauer-pistol-fired-without-trigger-pull/article_63c8f130-af21-5eb0-b67d-c12943be8493.html

[parishioner]

I hope you're right, but I have seen stories like this one....

https://www.unionleader.com/news/courts/nh-mans-lawsuit-claims-sig-sauer-pistol-fired-without-trigger-pull/article_63c8f130-af21-5eb0-b67d-c12943be8493.html

Please see this thread:

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?43653-New-2-July-2020-SIG-P320-Lawsuit-and-P320-Concerns

[sigtoglock]

Please see this thread:

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?43653-New-2-July-2020-SIG-P320-Lawsuit-and-P320-Concerns

Thanks for the link. I guess this has been covered quite extensively on this forum. I've got a lot to learn still and it appears that I've just registered with an excellent group.

[FreedomFries]

A gun in a properly wedged AIWB holster doesn't have to aim at body parts.

But what if you have scrotal elephantiasis and it's the size of a basketball?

[Clusterfrack]

But what if you have scrotal elephantiasis and it's the size of a basketball?

TMI, dude. TMI.

[hiro]

But what if you have scrotal elephantiasis and it's the size of a basketball?

Then you have more pressing issues to worry about

[Hot Sauce]

But what if you have scrotal elephantiasis and it's the size of a basketball?

Reholstering AIWB might be a challenge.

[Wonder9]

77334

[bobde1234]

Preface
Ever since the VP9 was released I've been weirded out by the striker block design. While I am without a single piece of evidence or inductive reasoning to suggest it can fail, I wouldn't be a true PF member if my neuroses could be suppressed. Now before I get flamed for hating on HK, I've owned many of their pistols over the years without a single issue. I've never even had to drift a sight for POI correction. I've owned three VP9's with a combined 4014 rounds and not a single stoppage. Given my affinity for TDA's I haven't even considered carrying the VP9 although many do carry it and I'm in no position to question that.

Question
The striker block engages the striker just to the right of the sear. When in battery and under tension, if...and this is a huge if...the striker "nub" were to physically fail this would allow the striker to disengage from both the sear and the firing pin block. Redundancy in design is a good thing, although naturally one wants to incorporate levels of redundancy in distinct areas rather than concentrate them in one spot such as the VP9 appears to do. Other SFA's I've examined appear to block the striker movement in totally different location on the striker, such that it would two highly improbable mechanical failures to discharge. Digging around PF search function I haven't found this specific topic being discussed. Is it something that others have observed or considered? I'm wondering how such design is interpreted or viewed by other PF members with vastly more experience than myself. Thank you in advance.


Picture
Glock tool pointing towards the striker - sear engagement. the small notch on the R side is where the rotating striker block engages, and where my neuroses congregate.

45041

Yes, I have had a Glock striker completely shear off where the 90° section at the back end contacts the sear. It was on a new gun, and I was told the likely cause was bad heat treating of the part. granted this was on a competitor pistol, but it a real thing that can happen. I have also looked at this part of the vp9 and have an uneasy feeling about this. On the Glock, the firing pin safety acts on a different area of the striker, and it got caught. But if that portion broke on a fully cocked vp9, nothing would have caught the striker.