DA/SA vs SFA vs ... -- 2019 Edition

[spinmove_]

Just saying the slide dimensions on the 93-profile slide are bigger... There is also a different FP block, I think...

Just spit-balling, tho...

So it sounds like it wouldn’t be too terribly crazy to think that maybe a certain company could somewhat easily develop an optics ready 92...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bucky]

Man... Raffica slides have a lot of room on top for optics... They are also beefy... 9Major? Might be doable...

A friend of mine had a Steel I open division gun. IIRC, he came in 19th at Nationals one year. Dot was frame mounted, which I prefer when applicable.

[CraigS]

Dot on a 92? I have an old aluminum mount that replaces the right grip panel and comes up and over the slide to mount the dot level. But the dot is considerably higher than the sights. I have seen some people mounting a C-More at 90 degrees to get the actual window lower and closer to iron sight height. Something like my old mount, but w/o the bend to put it over top of the slide, would be easy to make since it would be basically straight w/ a small jog to clear the trigger bar and slide.

[CLaw]

You make an interesting point. I’ve wondered if the lack of a good TDA ready to mount optic gun is going to cause some that would lean towards a TDA to go a different way just for the option to mount an optic.

Well, I’d say you’re doing a hell of a job in keeping the dream alive. I definitely see the merit in the TDA system. It’s a tough battle though against an arguably simpler system. People like “simple” and “good enough”. Unfortunately I don’t think we’re going to see TDA pistols re-take the market unless there’s some kind of resurgence in thinking about pistols from a “people management” perspective instead of a “pure shootability” perspective.

Currently in my journey as a pistol shooter I’ve gone back and forth on if I want to really move to TDA predominantly over my Glocks or not. I’ve got FAR more trigger time on Glocks than anything else and logistics are a thing for a dude with a family and a zero firearm inclusion profession. That said I don’t really shoot my 92 with some personal tweaks that much worse than my Glocks. The DA press also translates well to practicing with my NPE carry gun (J-frame) so there’s some merit to that as well.

Part of the problem with the Beretta 92 specifically though is that, at the moment, there’s no good way to mount a red dot to it. Granted that is probably not an impossibility, nor is having a red dot a requirement, but it is going to eventually become the de facto sighting system on handguns. I know you’re working on a solution now, and I’m very interested in seeing it’s final form, but it is a thing to consider.

All in all, a TDA pistol does make a lot of sense, particularly to me. Unfortunately, due to logistics, so do Glocks. Not an easy decision to make.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[spinmove_]

You make an interesting point. I’ve wondered if the lack of a good TDA ready to mount optic gun is going to cause some that would lean towards a TDA to go a different way just for the option to mount an optic.

If a person REALLY wanted a mRDS TDA pistol, a person could do a CZ P-09/P-07/SP-01 with a dot without much more trouble than a milled Glock. If a person wanted an mRDS Beretta, they’d be looking at a PX4 or an APX. It’s specifically the mRDS equipped 92 that’s the tricky proposition right now.

Personally my eyesight doesn’t preclude me from using irons for now and I don’t anticipate that it would for some time. As such I’ll continue running irons for now until I start experimenting with dots.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MistWolf]

If only Beretta made a DA/SA single stack..the market is crowded with SFA single stacks.

When you say "DA/SA vs SF", are you talking about the trigger action, or the ignition system? Because a handgun can be DA, SA, DA/SA or partially cocked whether it's hammer fired or striker fired. Striker fired handguns are not limited to one type of trigger action.

As for myself, what ever trigger action an handgun has, I'd like it to be the same every pull. The P365 is a two stage partially cocked trigger action and it suits me just fine.

[Vista461]

Man... Raffica slides have a lot of room on top for optics... They are also beefy... 9Major? Might be doable...

I never noticed the flat top of the slide on that one before. It’s be sweet if they could make a similar slide profile that could be swapped on. I’d get one.

[Sal Picante]

A friend of mine had a Steel I open division gun. IIRC, he came in 19th at Nationals one year. Dot was frame mounted, which I prefer when applicable.

I think a non-reciprocating optic takes far less abuse, is more stable, and makes for a flatter shooting pistol than any slide-ride option.

Dot on a 92? I have an old aluminum mount that replaces the right grip panel and comes up and over the slide to mount the dot level. But the dot is considerably higher than the sights. I have seen some people mounting a C-More at 90 degrees to get the actual window lower and closer to iron sight height. Something like my old mount, but w/o the bend to put it over top of the slide, would be easy to make since it would be basically straight w/ a small jog to clear the trigger bar and slide.

I think there were many systems that tried to place a CMORE over a 92 slide in the past... 90 mount is still the easiest way to get one super low in relation to the bore axis. When I dabbled in open, I always like a 90 mount CMORE vs a straight up... But, this is all preference and something that is totally besides the point.

What is the point again? Slide-ride, optics ready 92 variant.

When you say "DA/SA vs SF", are you talking about the trigger action, or the ignition system? Because a handgun can be DA, SA, DA/SA or partially cocked whether it's hammer fired or striker fired. Striker fired handguns are not limited to one type of trigger action.

You are correct, but we're really arguing semantics here. The only SF ignition pistol, that I know of, that you could decock was the Walther P99. (I may be wrong because decockable SF-ignition pistols weren't generally popular.)

I'm 99% sure that everyone here assumes DA/SA refers to a hammer-fired system... There are some nuanced discussions that come up regarding "fully tensioned" (HK/Modern Walthers) vs "slack" (GLOCK, Kahr) SF systems, which is an interesting discussion really...

[spinmove_]

You are correct, but we're really arguing semantics here. The only SF ignition pistol, that I know of, that you could decock was the Walther P99. (I may be wrong because decockable SF-ignition pistols weren't generally popular.)

I'm 99% sure that everyone here assumes DA/SA refers to a hammer-fired system... There are some nuanced discussions that come up regarding "fully tensioned" (HK/Modern Walthers) vs "slack" (GLOCK, Kahr) SF systems, which is an interesting discussion really...

Technically some of the Canik pistols are SFA that can be decocked (because they’re basically Turkish clones of the P99), but yeah, not too many others. I think the APX has a “decock” button, but it’s primary function is to be able to do a field strip without having to press the trigger.

The vast majority of TDA vs SFA discussions basically boil down to Beretta/CZ vs Glock. Obviously there’s tons of idiosyncrasies there where in some corner of the world two people are arguing over Lionheart LH9 vs Canik TP9DA because: reasons. I think for the sake of this discussion it’s essentially “I can see a hammer and what it does and that first press takes a little more effort” vs “I see a round butt and have to just know what condition my pistol is in”.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bucky]

I think a non-reciprocating optic takes far less abuse, is more stable, and makes for a flatter shooting pistol than any slide-ride option.

Aside from that, I think the ability to build a more robust scope, due to not having the same weight and size restriction, makes for a better built more reliable optic. My open gun has had the same CMore on it for 20 years.