New P99 Compact AS, $339

[Doc_Glock]

Enel, you are killing it for me, the P320, VP9, now the P99AS. You make me sad. It's a good thing I'm hating and shooting a Glock right now. (Just please don't go buy a Gen5 Lock and take a mallet to it.)

Glocks are good to go in my book. As are hammer fired HKs and Berettas.

The P99 probably is too unless the striker block gets stuck up or something. If the striker block were to stick, it would absolutely fire on decock.

Compared to a Beretta which physically rotates the firing pin out of the way of the hammer and, well there is no comparison. HK and Sig decockers are similarly robust but I can not totally recall their action.

Finally, you can absolutely “decock” a P99 just like a PPQ with a hammer blow to the rear of the slide. This is less of a deal in the P99 since it is simply decocked at this point and can still fire DA.

[Mike C]

Glocks are good to go in my book. As are hammer fired HKs and Berettas.

The P99 probably is too unless the striker block gets stuck up or something. If the striker block were to stick, it would absolutely fire on decock.

Compared to a Beretta which physically rotates the firing pin out of the way of the hammer and, well there is no comparison. HK and Sig decockers are similarly robust but I can not totally recall their action.

Finally, you can absolutely “decock” a P99 just like a PPQ with a hammer blow to the rear of the slide. This is less of a deal in the P99 since it is simply decocked at this point and can still fire DA.

Seems irresponsible to me to rely solely on the FPBS. I would have expected a redundant system like HK, or Beretta. I still think the pistol is awesome and love that you can decock the striker I am however really disappointed to hear that it relies just on the FPBS to prevent discharge. I wonder if there are any recording instances of the gun ever discharging during decocking. Thanks again for the information, I've never stripped a P99 down, I've only ever had the chance to fire one so this information is very interesting.

[Doc_Glock]

Seems irresponsible to me to rely solely on the FPBS. I would have expected a redundant system like HK, or Beretta.

I agree.

I looked at the HK and Sig again and they would require at least two parts failures to fire on decocking. The Beretta, I can’t even figure a way it could ever happen.

[GJM]

In terms of risk, is decocking the P99 anymore risky than the striker falling from Enel’s mallet? If they are equivalent, couldn’t you leave the P99 in anti-stress mode, with the long travel pull for shot one, but if for some reason the striker released, then rely on the DA mode to fire instead of having a dead trigger like when a traditional striker releases.

[Doc_Glock]

In terms of risk, is decocking the P99 anymore risky than the striker falling from Enel’s mallet? If they are equivalent, couldn’t you leave the P99 in anti-stress mode, with the long travel pull for shot one, but if for some reason the striker released, then rely on the DA mode to fire instead of having a dead trigger like when a traditional striker releases.

Or just holster it SA like a PPQ.

[CSW]

Mine arrived. Nice little gun. Much tighter than my fairly clapped out full sized. They make a nice pair.

Playing with the decocker I came to the realization that during de cocking the design relies solely on the striker block in the slide to stop the striker impacting the primer. While it is effective, it is a less robust and less redundant design than Beretta, HK, or Sig classic decockers.

Muzzle awareness during decocking is a must.

Could you possibly post a pic in your grip?

I wish I had a ton of disposable income to buy one-ofs of all sorts of interesting guns I have no need of. This gun seems interesting. Oh well.

Me as well Dan, me as well.....

[Mike C]

In terms of risk, is decocking the P99 anymore risky than the striker falling from Enel’s mallet?

Point taken.

Or just holster it SA like a PPQ.

For me the beauty of the system is the ability to decock and have the pseudo safety of a DA/SA with the heavyish longer first pull in AS as GJM pointed out, this combined with no sacrifice in shoot-ability is what intrigues me so much about the system. That is where my head is at anyways. Maybe I need to pick one up and pickup a PX4CC and shoot them against one another. I love DA/SA in what they offer but have felt that my WHO shooting is sacrificed too much, (mainly because I suck at it) when using a TDA for that DA shot. I know that it can be overcome with time but who's to say I have that time. It is a similar battle with LEM for me. Over time I've kind of come to the realization there is no better mouse trap as everything is a compromise. It is just a matter of finding something that I feel doesn't compromise anything too much in one particular area has been the most difficult for me. I think the P99AS strikes a very good balance as does the TDA guns but without the steep learning curve of TDA or the difficulty of running something like LEM, SHO, WHO and at speed with great accuracy.

Either way, I find the system intelligent despite what I feel was an error on the engineering and design with regard to reliance upon FPBS. I do however think that GJM has got a very valid point. I have never seen a FPBS fail unless it's been boogered with and the springs swapped. I think if I owned a P99AS I would just annually swap out the FPBS spring to give piece of mind and help ensure proper reset during functioning.

To anyone who's had recent CS interaction with Walther USA is parts availability still nonexistent? How were you treated?

[GJM]

1) Walther CS has treated me well on several occasions.

2) as we often do on PF we drill down in minutia, and that is what makes this place great. However, to back out a bit, guns have many attributes — accuracy, reliability, shootability, ergonomic safety in handling and mechanical safety. Using aviation as a guide, over 80 percent of accidents are the result of pilot error, as opposed to mechanical error. In this thread we have drilled down into theoretical mechanical safety exclusively — and come up with the conclusion, for example, that a Glock is “safer” focusing on mechanical design, but ignoring the user safety aspects of a relatively short striker trigger. I bet for every mechanical failure that leads to a ND in a modern pistol, there are 100 or more that are the result of human failures.

[Mike C]

1) Walther CS has treated me well on several occasions.

2) as we often do on PF we drill down in minutia, and that is what makes this place great. However, to back out a bit, guns have many attributes — accuracy, reliability, shootability, ergonomic safety in handling and mechanical safety. Using aviation as a guide, over 80 percent of accidents are the result of pilot error, as opposed to mechanical error. In this thread we have drilled down into theoretical mechanical safety exclusively — and come up with the conclusion, for example, that a Glock is “safer” focusing on mechanical design, but ignoring the user safety aspects of a relatively short striker trigger. I bet for every mechanical failure that leads to a ND in a modern pistol, there are 100 or more that are the result of human failures.

It is great to hear their CS is coming along. I did enjoy the PPS gen 1's I had. Wouldn't mind grabbing another set one day along with some P99's.

When I first started with firearms as a pup I thought some firearms were inherently safer than the others based on their mechanical attributes but haven't felt that to be the case in some time. I agree one must not rely solely on mechanical attributes to mitigate poor handling and safety but instead rely on solid judgment and training. That being said, I still like to have as many stop gaps in place for those times that one might make an error due to stress or lack of attention. Whether it is a DA, LEM, the AS mode, a Gadget, or the excellent decocking system like the 92's have I look at all of these things as layers of safety. I do prefer redundant layers of safety as they act as a cushion in those instances mentioned or when a mechanical failure is present. All things mechanical can or will fail, it is only matter of time. I liken all of these things to the redundancies on an airplane. Don't always need it until you do.

[olstyn]

Seems irresponsible to me to rely solely on the FPBS. I would have expected a redundant system like HK, or Beretta.

My understanding has always been that there's a part of the decocker button itself that protrudes down and catches a lug on the top of the striker when the pistol is decocked, meaning that it isn't purely relying on the firing pin block/safety plunger. My experience testing it matches up with this; I've fed an empty, primed case into my P99c AS and pulled the trigger all the way to the rear with the decocker held down. The gun did not set off the primer when the striker fell. Given that the trigger was pulled, the firing pin block/safety plunger had to have been fully deactivated, so something else must have stopped the striker's forward travel. Therefore, unless I'm missing something, which I very well could be, Enel's understanding of the system must not be complete/correct. It might not be as mechanically robust as the Beretta system, but it seems to me that there's more going on than just the FPB/SP.