Hammer-fired vs. Striker-fired

So, in another thread, someone mentioned their preference of hammer-fired over striker-fired. I, too, have the same preference. I have an affinity toward my Beretta PX-4 handguns. My favorite being my PX-4 in .45ACP (a discussion that has been beaten to death at least several times on this forum, but we all know God’s caliber was even used by David, as he only needed one stone - 230 grains of Heavenly intervention :sunglasses:).

What reason(s) do you prefer hammer-fired over striker-fired (or vice-versa)? The winner gets a nice single malt of their preference - at their cost. :sunglasses:


Well, my hammer fired include an M9 and 1911, and visually, the Glocks just can’t compare.
Bought some Turkish 9mm, hard primers and hot. Recoil a bit crazy, bottoming out the spring on my G19, had to put stiffer striker springs in a few guns to deal with the primers…the M9 just said “whatever”…shoots everything, hard , soft, hot, anemic… doesn’t matter. The 1911, SA Range Officer…same thing, just in .45. Those two are my falling plates guns, 6" plates at 25 yards, and handle it well. Third striker gun is an SR-22, crazy reliable shooting an unreliable caliber…
No malt for me, drinking days long gone,but got some nice honey infused iced white tea, think I’ll have another cup.


I prefer striker fired.

I want the same trigger pull, every single time, with no manual safety, and a “pretty good” (or better) trigger in the preferably 4-6 lbs range.

I don’t want to spend more than necessary, and I want something with tons of aftermarket support for holsters and sights and optics and the like.

In the modern age, that means striker fired polymer frame.

I don’t particularly care what it looks like, it’s a tool that I hide in my pants, not a fashion statement.


I’m hammer guy for sure… :smiling_imp:
This is a personal preference and I don’t see any other reason that I have chosen hammer over striker.

I started shooting with striker, because I was told, it was the best choice for a new shooter. Was it true? I don’t know.
I really liked my first handgun - PPQ.
Then I found a “problem” with striker not being good for dry fire practice. Constant racking the slide to reset the trigger made my practice ridiculous.
Hammer fired DA pistol came to the rescue. Additionally better balanced weight and classy design caused that I became 1911… actually 2011 lover.
I also feel safer with hammer exposed and being detectable by my thumb.

So I think the real reason I chose hammer fired was the fact that I felt more comfortable with such firearm.

Nothing against striker fired, but this one just doesn’t work in my case, especially with AIWB holster.


The DAVID of TODAY for SURE would prefer STRIKER-FIERED, let’s say “Sig P365 SAS”, no Hammer, no manual safety, no SNAGGING on clothing, and one in the CHAMBER. Best choice for a quick slingshot SHOOTER.


Yes, but hollow point, or full jacket?


1911 ,45, Nothing says STOP! Like a ,45 ACP Federal Law Enforcement 230 grain HP!!!



Obviously, those holes are not from a .45 cal, otherwise the sign would not still be there… :rofl:


Looks like too much finger on the trigger. (I presume he was aiming for the ”O” center.


Well, the story states the stone went into his head, but did not state it exited his head, so it was either HP or his being aware of what was behind his target, used a low-powered delivery system, so as to not harm an unintended target… :sunglasses:


I was the one preferring a hammer-fired pistol as the choice for a first-time gun buyer’s carry pistol - along with discrete controls - slide-stop, thumb-safety, mag release, mag disconnect - it adds another safety feature - especially if the gun is a DA/SA. DA hammer-fired pistols have a heavier DA trigger-pull than DAOs, and are more conducive to learning and improving gun-handling skills, as well. One pistol in this category is the Walther PK380 with its ambidextrous slide-mounted thumb-safety, mag release lever, and mag disconnect. You’re stuck with a 3.6" barrel, but it’s the longest on the market today.

1 Like

To which I still disagree.

I do not believe that adding complexity, adding steps, and making the trigger pull variable, is more conducive to learning and improving. IMO and IME, simplicity and fewer things to keep track of, fewer things changing, is more conducive to learning and improving.

Trigger pulled while loaded, it fires…trigger not pulled, it doesn’t fire…same trigger pull every time. More conducive to learning and not forgetting to engage the safety. Or forgetting to disengage the safety. Or expecting a DA pull and getting a SA, or expecting a SA and getting a DA, or forgetting to decock and trying to put it into the holster under stress in single action with the safety off now there is a danger scenario

Not that there is anything whatsoever wrong with choosing that if it is your choice, but, it’s not really conducive to learning as a first gun/handgun/carry


The other source says he used round nose projectile and actually hit Goliath’s greave, making him motionless.
That would make a point why NJ disallows HP for self defense… it’s just not needed.

1 Like

@Nathan57 is right. This is not about how many safeties and additional levers or long pulls the new handgun has.
To much complexity can work against the new shooter.
I still think that the mental comfort is the priority.
Fortunately we have so many options we can choose from.


The sights were off🤣


I prefer a striker fired, not because it’s better but it is what I am used to shooting and I feel comfortable with it. I have shot hammer fired guns plenty in my career as a Firearms Examiner. I carried a Glock 19 in my career in LE and always qualified at the range with it. I am a firm believer that if it’s not broken don’t fix it.


Shooting up a STOP sign? Something was off for sure!


I mechanically understand a striker fire has to “complete” the striker “cock” as well as overcome the rotating trigger safety, but if a striker fire has a 5 pound trigger pull and a DA/SA has a 5 pound trigger pull in SA, then I honestly don’t mechanically understand how holstering the DA/SA cocked with the safety OFF is any different than holstering the striker fire. The firearm will fire in either case if the trigger is pulled to the 5 pound (or greater) limit, it will not fire in either case if the trigger is not pulled.

I am probably missing something here, and asking for help understanding how the striker fire provides additional accidental discharge protection during holstering over a DA/SA or even a SAO with the safety OFF. Again, from my current perspective none of the 3 designs will fire unless the trigger is pulled.

1 Like

Which DA/SA are we talking about that has a 5 lb SA trigger pull, whose SA trigger pull is also the same length as a striker trigger?

I have fired my share of pistols and have not yet encountered such a thing.

A striker provides a tiny bit more ND protection on holstering vs a DA/SA that was left in SA, because the SA trigger is both lighter and has a shorter travel. Additionally, many striker triggers utilize the dongle in the middle of the trigger as one of the safeties, in which case hooking something on the edge of the trigger isn’t enough to pull it.

Mostly though it’s the “hair trigger” that many are in SA when compared to a factory stock striker (or DA), both light and short. Which is exactly the reason why the DA portion exists

Though my overarching point to my post is that I do not believe a DA/SA pistol with a manual safety is more conducive to a first timer learning. That’s really the main point.