Semi-Auto Triggers: market trends, choices, and consequences

[GardoneVT]

The 1911 is a good trigger because it's a good trigger for actually putting rounds when and where you want 'em. The manual of arms is incredibly intuitive and ergonomic, unlike the mixed up controls on a P Series Sig.

The 1911 is not intuitive at all for the "99%" of shooters. I've watched a trained Highway Patrolman struggle to clear my 1911 during a traffic stop.

I see most of the discussion is focused on actually shooting the gun. Very little so far is said about the administrative tasks which represent the majority of times people handle weapons. Folks rarely do unsafe stuff with guns when they're on the line; it's the stuff in between that gets people in trouble.

Clearing a gun sounds simple on a PF webpage. To Joe Public it's like doing taxes; what happens first, racking the slide or taking out the mag? Do you send the slide forward next? Do you pull the trigger to show clear or do you put a gun on safe? That's what happens at a range clearing barrel when folks are paying close attention .

At home when it's time to clean the pistol there's additional distractions. Having a risk mitigation trigger system in place can serve as a final warning before Disaster Happens.

[JustOneGun]

Sure. "Range/training" is a subset of "all UD". My issue is some seem to think that subset is the whole pie. The fact a certain training center saw an even distribution on the range doesn't mean there's an even distribution outside that subset. Admin handling is still the area where most "in the wild" UDs happen, as an example. Most folks tend to not draw their gun as many times in 6 months as some of us draw during dry fire in a day or a range outing.

Additionally, things you can do on the range (ie clear your holster every time) become less feasible "in the wild".

I agree with this. Where I think we disagree is what we would do with this. If we were to find a bunch of scientists unrelated to firearms and ask them which is easier, disprove or prove. The answer is obviously disprove. This is where you are IMO. I used to think just like you. Precautionary principle suggests this in the absence of evidence/experience.

Experience has shown I was wrong. I looked around and others experience showed similar. Huh, who would have thunk it. Turns out if I have 70% striker and 20% DA/SA and 10% 1911 that's the ratio of screw ups I get over time. They were put through the same training, same everything and made the same mistakes with the same outcomes. I should be seeing a consistently larger to smaller proportion with the shorter/lighter, lighter and long/heavy pistols. We're not seeing that. Again, we were wrong. Something else is going on.

When looking at why this is I and others have found some likely reasons. Some but not all of the reason is what I've argued above.

[Clobbersaurus]

S&W SD9 (and SD40), while not known as a "shooter's gun", is excellent. While the striker is partially tensioned, it is essentially a DAO striker in that there is a long pull on every shot and it has a full length reset. Holds 15 rounds, is the size of a G19, comes from a major manufacturer, takes M&P sights, has aftermarket support from companies such as Apex, and is routinely available, brand new, for less than $300. The firing mechanism uses a pivoting sear, but instead having ~0.03" engagement with a fully tensioned striker and pivoting down (like a P320), it has 0.06" of engagement of a ~1/3 tensioned striker and pivots rearward. Unlike the P320, it also has a tabbed trigger safety that prevents motion of the trigger (and trigger bar) due to inertial events (drops, knocks, mallets, etc.) which not only prevents the firing bin block from being disengaged, but also blocks movement of the sear.

Again, not a "shooter's gun" but a very affordable and capable HD gun, that is drop safe AF. However, it doesn't look cool on FB/YT/IG.

ETA: The stock trigger pull weight on the SD9 is very similar to that of a stock P320, 7-7.5 pounds. The weighted portion of the trigger pull is just 4-5 times longer than that of the P320.

This post is going to cost me (a little) money. Interesting info Tom.

(Edit)..... SCD?

[BehindBlueI's]

I agree with this. Where I think we disagree is what we would do with this. If we were to find a bunch of scientists unrelated to firearms and ask them which is easier, disprove or prove. The answer is obviously disprove. This is where you are IMO. I used to think just like you. Precautionary principle suggests this in the absence of evidence/experience.

Experience has shown I was wrong. I looked around and others experience showed similar. Huh, who would have thunk it. Turns out if I have 70% striker and 20% DA/SA and 10% 1911 that's the ratio of screw ups I get over time. They were put through the same training, same everything and made the same mistakes with the same outcomes. I should be seeing a consistently larger to smaller proportion with the shorter/lighter, lighter and long/heavy pistols. We're not seeing that. Again, we were wrong. Something else is going on.

When looking at why this is I and others have found some likely reasons. Some but not all of the reason is what I've argued above.

How many did you track? Do you have a spreadsheet or some other data with the breakdown of weapon type and cause of UD?

[holmes168]

The information I've gotten on PF has made me more concerned about the safe operation of a pistol than ever. I've not been one to goof off on the range but want to be as safe as possible while carrying. I believe training and concentration are two of the most important aspects to handling a pistol. Based off what I've read- the Glock seems to be the best compromise between shootability and safety currently on the market. I say this with less cash in my account after spending money on HK. Since I've been more active reading this forum- I've decided to sell the HKs to convert to Glock. I've bought two new gen 4 G-17s and now am deciding between the 19 and 26 as my next purchase. I'll be trying on all my summer shirts this weekend to check concealability of the 19 since I've got one.
I started to carry Glocks a couple years ago and they've always been dependable and even when trying HK- I always had lingering doubts that I'd made the right decision. I'll be ordering the SCD to go along with the Glocks.

[JustOneGun]

How many did you track? Do you have a spreadsheet or some other data with the breakdown of weapon type and cause of UD?

Tracked five years, average of 35 recruits per class, average 3 classes per year (hi was 53? and low was 15?.) High number of classes was 5 in a year and low was 2). Sadly I'm an old retiree. No more access. While I can be a PITA, even in retirement I'm not willing to buck the department and give you info even if I had it. I value my healthcare and LEOSA both of which would/could be effected still.

I do know that there are some older numbers from some of the private ranges and someone on this thread said they believe Tom Givens has some numbers about that. Other than looking at your own department and talking to some the folks in Internal Affairs if they'll give up the info I'm not sure you're going to get info for hard and fast numbers. Some of the people I spoke to when I started suspecting this was IA detective from other departments who where becoming instructors at a train the trainer class. Some of them didn't track it and their department didn't want to due to, "only a downside" in their perception. Other's did. What the older detectives told me was that their department got either better or worse and then over time went right back to the roughly the same numbers of UD's, bad shoots etc.

That last concept was important to me because I've seen it over and over again. Not just for real life problems, but for range/FoF/Shoothouse problems and qual problems. Give a person a different gun and they will get worse if they are given a harder to use pistol (DA/SA/LDA) and a bit better if given an easier (For me I'd hand them a Glock). Some of the average and all the below average shooters ended up right in the same place given enough time. But some people that were average or above got better and stayed better when given a Glock. Some of them got significantly better.

One of the great things about police instruction is I get to track each one for weeks (if they are other agencies) and years if they are ours. I got to see how many holstered with a cocked DA/SA. How many holstered without engaging the 1911 safety. Obviously that is a pure number. I didn't track it. They were retrained and if they didn't fix it, they were thrown off the range, not to be an officer. Not much tracking of the individual there.

[crossrifles]

Mediocrity has blurred vision in some. Some actually believe your equipment can make up for a lack of skill or those old guns (TDA) can't do what striker guns can. My agency is currently replacing TDA pistols for striker guns, so I hear and witness a lot of expensive noise.

Being an LTT alumni, I've been fortunate to discuss training issues with Mr. Langdon and actually make some success in refocusing efforts in things that matter. As a weapons trainer for my agency, it's been shocking to see the lack of proper techniques applied to TDA guns, which I believe is a contributor to the camp that see's the long DA pull a hinderance. They just don't understand how to shoot the TDA and apply proper techniques, so they curse the DA first shot. A lot of the blame here is toward the instructor staff not teaching the proper techniques or just not knowing.

Statements like "oh this striker gun is so much easier to shoot." for them it's somewhat true. They lined up the sights perfectly and snatched the trigger hard and still had terrible shot placement, but it felt easier to them. Your striker gun didn't improve your score for qualification, but your margin for error in the realm of an ND did increase dramatically.

I do place a premium on Instructors who can shoot TDA pistol well and teach classes with them.

my opinion,
Ray Piedra

[BehindBlueI's]

Tracked five years, average of 35 recruits per class, average 3 classes per year (hi was 53? and low was 15?.) High number of classes was 5 in a year and low was 2). Sadly I'm an old retiree. No more access. While I can be a PITA, even in retirement I'm not willing to buck the department and give you info even if I had it. I value my healthcare and LEOSA both of which would/could be effected still.

I do know that there are some older numbers from some of the private ranges and someone on this thread said they believe Tom Givens has some numbers about that. Other than looking at your own department and talking to some the folks in Internal Affairs if they'll give up the info I'm not sure you're going to get info for hard and fast numbers. Some of the people I spoke to when I started suspecting this was IA detective from other departments who where becoming instructors at a train the trainer class. Some of them didn't track it and their department didn't want to due to, "only a downside" in their perception. Other's did. What the older detectives told me was that their department got either better or worse and then over time went right back to the roughly the same numbers of UD's, bad shoots etc.

That last concept was important to me because I've seen it over and over again. Not just for real life problems, but for range/FoF/Shoothouse problems and qual problems. Give a person a different gun and they will get worse if they are given a harder to use pistol (DA/SA/LDA) and a bit better if given an easier (For me I'd hand them a Glock). Some of the average and all the below average shooters ended up right in the same place given enough time. But some people that were average or above got better and stayed better when given a Glock. Some of them got significantly better.

One of the great things about police instruction is I get to track each one for weeks (if they are other agencies) and years if they are ours. I got to see how many holstered with a cocked DA/SA. How many holstered without engaging the 1911 safety. Obviously that is a pure number. I didn't track it. They were retrained and if they didn't fix it, they were thrown off the range, not to be an officer. Not much tracking of the individual there.

Ok, how many UDs in that 5 years?

[Inspector71]

In 2008-2009, I did a eleven month TDY to FLETC as a FI. With the issued H&K P2000 V2, LEM, we were averaging 3-5 student failure rate on qual day. This was when the big hiring push was in full swing and we were getting 48-person classes arriving every week. The students that failed got remedial instruction and another attempt at qualification about a week later. Of these, another 3-4 would pass, but we had to wash out the other 1-2 that could not. I particularly remember one CBP class that had an unusual 7 students fail on first attempt at qual day. One of the permanent FLETC staff instructors that day turned on his heels, rolled his eyes and said to me " We never had failure rates like this when we issued the Glock 17". Food for thought.

[DAB]

it would be interesting to study how many that failed never had shot a gun before. or how many that easily passed had grown up shooting as kids.

shooting well takes time to develop as a skill, somewhat like riding a bike. once you know the basics, it's pretty easy to get on target after a few warm up shots. but if you are new to guns, and someone hands you one and attempts to teach you in a few hours what others have spent years learning, they are at a severe disadvantage.