DA/SA G43

[leathermaneod]

I didn't mean to imply that they are or are not. Simply stating that I have a mental block against carrying anything with an unblocked firing pin (I.e. j frame/lcr) while I'm riding. I think I said "floating" in my post but that's probably incorrect terminology since they are tensioned by a spring. Point is they don't have a firing pin block like most modern semi autos (I get that the size/weight of the firing pin doesnt call for one thd same way a semi's does). I guess if I went up to a k frame snub the hammer mounted pin would be acceptable but that is a rather large gun relative to my preferences.

I've wrecked impressively before and I like guns with lots of internal redundancy! I'm comfortable enough with the glock's striker/drop/trigger safety but still interested in a DA option....

I could be wrong on this, but I believe that J frames do effectively prevent the hammer from contacting the firing pin unless the trigger is pulled. Hopefully someone more knowledgeable than I will clarify.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Bucky]

I agreed to whoever said this is an untapped market. The XD-E was a valiant effort, though a high bore axis gives a stubbier grip than necessary.

[OlongJohnson]

3913 is much bigger than a G43. CS9 would be closer in size. Neither can easily be converted to decock only.

There were a handful of third-gen 69xx and/or 39xx shipped from the factory in decock only configuration. A few more were converted, some by the factory. AFAIK, that factory service option dried up around 2010 or a little before. In any case, the guns are around but sought after, the parts might be findable.

If you must have a polymer frame and can tolerate DAO, trying Kahrs until you find a reliable one may be your best bet.

[RevolverRob]

S&Ws made since the mid-1940s are unless the hammer block was removed. I'm pretty sure Rugers are, unsure about Colts but I think the later production ones would be.

All of the Colt DA revolvers in the common frames D, I, Police Pocket, Official Police etc. from ~1900 have hammer block safeties in place, until the transfer bar models came out in the 1970s (Lawman and later SF models, etc.). The Army/New Army/New Navy models developed prior to 1900 do not have the hammer block safeties.

Smith and Wessons, pre-1945 also have hammer block safeties, but these can break and drop down out of place and allow the gun to operate while no longer retaining the hammer block safety (they can of course also be removed as you note). The Colts can technically do the same thing, but the positioning of the hammer block makes it less likely for the gun to keep running, if it breaks it is more likely for it to tie up the action than a Smith.

Ruger has always used a transfer bar type safety in their DA revolvers.

[Chuck Whitlock]

I've wrecked impressively before and I like guns with lots of internal redundancy! I'm comfortable enough with the glock's striker/drop/trigger safety but still interested in a DA option....

If you must have a polymer frame and can tolerate DAO, trying Kahrs until you find a reliable one may be your best bet.

I second the suggestion to check out a Kahr. I find that the all-stainless K9 carries better than the polymer-framed CW9.

Also, as an aside, the trigger internals on my CW are blued and not stainless...sweating all over it without cleaning caused a rusty, gunky mess that did not let the trigger return without manually pushing it forward. It cleaned up fine, but it is something that I keep an eye on now.