Page 24 of 24 FirstFirst ... 14222324
Results 231 to 240 of 240

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

  1. #231
    Member Alpha Sierra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Western Ohio
    Quote Originally Posted by MistWolf View Post
    It's not about semantics, it's about the confusion it creates.
    DA/SA is universally understood to mean: a pistol with a hammer that fires the first shot as double action and all subsequent shots as single action, until it's decocked.

    If there is a DA/SA striker fired pistol, it's not a very popular one and doesn't change the common usage of the term.
    Last edited by Alpha Sierra; 04-03-2019 at 01:26 PM.

  2. #232
    Site Supporter Les Pepperoni's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    SRQ - Florida
    Quote Originally Posted by Alpha Sierra View Post
    DA/SA is universally understood to mean: a pistol with a hammer that fires the first shot as double action and all subsequent shots as single action, until it's decocked.

    If there is a DA/SA striker fired pistol, it's not a very popular one and doesn't change the common usage of the term.
    "Gimme that clip over there, homie!" - I'm sure a 1945 GI in Europe might not get what Enrique from East LA means by that, but that seems to be where this argument is kinda headed.

  3. #233
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    In the desert, looking for water.
    Walther P99AS is DA/SA, and striker fired. Whatever the crappy Canik copy of it is, supposedly has the same mechanism.

  4. #234
    Quote Originally Posted by Duelist View Post
    Walther P99AS is DA/SA, and striker fired. Whatever the crappy Canik copy of it is, supposedly has the same mechanism.
    I wouldn't necessarily dismiss it as crappy. It's not expensive, but it seems to be well made. Came out of the box with Warren sights. I have not had any issues with mine yet, but it is still pretty early.

  5. #235
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    South Louisiana
    Quote Originally Posted by Alpha Sierra View Post
    You know what anyone means when they say DA/SA. I know it, and so does pretty much everyone else except one guy.
    Make that two guys. My "small" carry gun is a P99C.

  6. #236
    Member cor_man257's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Florida
    DA/SA. I know it when I see it rule definitely applies.

    The vast majority of gun owners arent going to differentiate between ignition type and trigger type. Most don't know what a firing sequence is. Most dont even know what an action type is.

    Among informed shooters (like most pf posters) its still a small segment that would think of strikers when thinking of DA/SA.


    About the topic at hand... i cant think of anything for 2019 that hasnt been said by @Dagga Boy in the past. A dozen times.

    -Cory
    Last edited by cor_man257; 04-03-2019 at 05:44 PM.

  7. #237
    Something that bothers me a bit about these discussions when they come up is that everyone focuses sooo hard at the action type, often neglecting the fact that action type is one of many different things that can be a factor in the usability, particularly the safe, reliable, and effective usability of a firearm.

    I know that some people will probably disagree with me here, but I think people dismiss pistol ergonomics a little bit too readily on some of these discussions as just a "training issue." Sure, you can train to get around any number of issues, but that doesn't mean they don't matter. On the whole, I think I'd prefer the gun that I have more confidence in being able to have total, complete control over with the least amount of effort. In the end, the more proficient I can become with a given pistol, the better off I am. Obviously the trigger type, action, firing mechanism, and all of that plays into this, but there are so many different things that can and do go wrong when handling a gun, I'd prefer to focus on a holistic measure of overall controllability than just a single factor.

    There are some pistols that I've tried out that I wouldn't feel nearly as comfortable holding in a gunfight simply because I wouldn't be able to retain nearly the degree of positive control on the pistol versus others. Even if they had one of the safest actions out there, if the gun is much harder for me to retain personal control over it, then I'm at risk of losing that firearm in a scuffle. Now, how much more or less likely is that than having an ND? I don't know that anyone can provide an accurate number that works for everyone there, but it's at least something that I think needs to be considered. Otherwise we're in danger of localized optimization. That could also take the form of "I want the most shootable gun I can find" which ends up with people optimizing their carry gun like some shooters optimize their race guns. It's a very shootable gun, but people sometimes might miss the big picture that way. Likewise, a DAO spurless gun might provide the absolute best in ND resistance on some level, but maybe it's not a great choice when other factors are taken into consideration (maybe it is?).

    It just seems like we can't lose sight of the total picture of the gun as a specific instance and all of the considerations that come along with that from reliability, ergonomics, control, durability, maintenance, and so forth that come along with that pistol.

    Sorry for the rant. I'll stop myself now.

  8. #238
    Quote Originally Posted by Les Pepperoni View Post
    "CMORE" and "reliable optic" in the same sentence is like asking Siri to divide by zero...

    Are you referring to their slide ride crap? I have several CMores, have friend with several CMores, all of which 15 plus years old and never an issue. They have probably the best reputation for reliable USPSA Open optics, prior to the slide ride craze.

  9. #239
    Site Supporter Les Pepperoni's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    SRQ - Florida
    Quote Originally Posted by Bucky View Post
    Are you referring to their slide ride crap? I have several CMores, have friend with several CMores, all of which 15 plus years old and never an issue. They have probably the best reputation for reliable USPSA Open optics, prior to the slide ride craze.
    Yes. I'm being cheeky. But only a bit: I've seen plenty where the windage screw housing cracked and the optic wouldn't hold zero. Cracked bodies seem to have been common for a while...

    The bridge-mounted optics take far less abuse than the slide-ride optics, though, and I wouldn't trust an RTS2 for anything but .22 duty or practice...

    What everyone loves about the CMORE is the price, the fields of view and that it is an understood quantity for open...

    If I were building an open gun today, I'd use a CMORE...

  10. #240
    Site Supporter Les Pepperoni's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    SRQ - Florida
    Quote Originally Posted by arcfide View Post
    Something that bothers me a bit about these discussions when they come up is that everyone focuses sooo hard at the action type, often neglecting the fact that action type is one of many different things that can be a factor in the usability, particularly the safe, reliable, and effective usability of a firearm.
    I think your rant is actually pretty through-provoking, but let me challenge you a bit here: Isn't action type really the greatest mechanical influence on all the factors you mentioned?

    E.g. there are safe, known parameters for trigger weight, length of pull, etc. and there is also doctrine that details the safe usage of the various action types.

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •