Striker vs Hammer Fired?

Are than any benefits to one or the other? recoil? trigger? or any thing else, this will be my first pistol

 

No difference in recoil but there is a fairly big difference between the action types and the pros and cons of each.

More important than hammer vs striker is single action only (SAO), double action only (DAO), or single action/double action (SA/DA).

In a SAO trigger, the striker/hammer is fully cocked by cycling the action and the trigger simply releases the striker/hammer and allows it to fall, firing the weapon. Because the trigger is only releasing the striker/hammer the mechanism is very simple so the trigger can be made smooth, light, and consistent from one pull to the next. The 1911, Springfield XD, and the Walther PPQ are examples of SAO's mechanisms.

In DAO's, the trigger both cocks the striker/hammer and drops it. Because the trigger must compress the striker/hammer spring before firing, DAO's tend to have heavier trigger pulls. Well made DAO triggers can be very smooth and consistent despite the weight of the pull. DAO's are commonly available as safety options on guns since the heavier trigger pull acts as an extra safety. One plus of DAO's is if the weapon does not fire, it is possible to pull the trigger again without cycling the action again.

SA/DA triggers are really only available in hammer fired guns (post if you think on an exception). These trigger often use long heavy double action trigger pulls for the first shot (this is part of the safety mechanism), then the action is cycled, the hammer cocked, and all subsequent shots are a light single action. Mechanical complexity makes SA/DA triggers difficult to make light and consistent. CZ's, Sigs, and H&Ks often have SA/DA mechanism.

There are hybrids too. The Glock is a partial cocked striker fired gun. The trigger is kept reasonably light and consistent by partially cocking the striker then finishing cocking with the trigger pull. These mechanisms try to balance safety, good trigger pull, reliability and cost.

In general, I think striker fired guns like the Glock, Ruger SR series, Walther PPQ, Kahr, Springfield XD, S&M M&P, etc have great quality, reliability, and price and all have fairly good triggers. One of these would be my recommendation for a first purchase and I have owned two of the above.

...But I personally love the SA/DA configuration. I have Sigs, CZs, and a Magnum Research Baby Eagle in SA/DA. I love each of them I and cannot tell you why. I do know the Sigs and Baby Eagle have better triggers than the CZ though you do pay for it upfront for the improvement. If I someone took away all my SA/DA guns tomorrow and told me I had to pick something else, I would probably go with a single action, hammer fired gun like a 1911 or hi-power.

Bottom line, I recommend striker fired, but I buy hammer fired.

 

^ good info.

Im a fan of sig because of the sa/da you can carry it safely with one in the chamber and have the hammer down. Same goes for h&k.

Some people prefer striker fire for a duty/combat weapon. Their reasoning is that if something gets in the way of the hammer your weapon will not fire.

 

redes thanks for all the info, im looking at some FN pistols FNX (hammer fired) and FNS (striker fired), ive shot the FNP and was a big fan the fnx is supposed to be an upgraded version of that. I havnt shot an FNS but ive read alot of good things on it, and im a left handed shooter so thats a big plus that there both fully ambidextrous. I think with what you posted and some more info i was reading last night im gonna go with the FNX, I know FN is a really good company but i dont feel super comfortable going with the FNS since it is very new, not knowing if there gonna have any kinks to work out of it

 

I have heard great things about the FN handguns but I am not real familiar with them. One thing to look at is the safety/decocker arrangement. SA/DA pistols usually have one of three safety mechanisms:

A decocker which safely drops the hammer and relies on the lang heavy trigger pull as the primary safety. It has the advantage of not needing to manipulate a safety in order to fire, but at the cost of different trigger pulls from first to second shot.

A safety only allows for consistent trigger pull from first to second shot. The drawback is you have to train to flick the safety off. In this configuration the DA is only there in the case of a light strike when you need to pull the trigger twice on a bad primer (many people would argue the correct course of action is to manually cycle the action, clear the bad round and keep shooting).

A safety/decocker is a doubly safe arrangement. You have to flick the safety off to shoot and you have a long heavy trigger pull. The drawback of course is there are basically two steps before you are to the light, single action trigger pull.

The is no correct arrangement. The FNX seems to have the safety/decocker. I would suggest you see if you can rent one or another pistol with a similar safety/decocker and practice a quick double tap from safe a dozen times or so just to see what your comfort level is with that arrangement.

Also, I understand the FNX is an updated version of the FNP. If the new features are not a deal maker to you, you might find a better deal on the FNP if it will meet your needs. Either I think you will have a quality handgun.

 

personally i like striker-fired tupper guns... mostly i like the consistency in the trigger from shot to shot, from 1st shot to last... i believe in stressful situations, combined w/ your training (draw, pull, slack-out..), consistency is of utmost importance... w/ a SA/DA type pistol (i.e. beretta 92F etc..), which might normally be carried hammer down, your second pull would be inconsistent from the first... i also like hammerless because it's one less thing to snag on clothing, etc..