Firearms Talk banner
1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Administrator
Joined
·
26,865 Posts
They're not. You just don't get out much. Striker fired pistols have been around a LONG time- longer than the polymer guns. Ever look at a Baby Browning, A Jennings- or a Luger?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,374 Posts
Colt All American 2000. Available as a steel frame or polymer frame. Bad timing on Colt's part. Introduced tight before the 10 rd mag limit law. Wonder 9's floundered for a while.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,941 Posts
The more correct thing to say is that plastic is a polymer but not all polymers are plastic.

Egg is a polymer.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,941 Posts
The drive to polymer/plastic framed guns isn't only limited to striker fired guns. The trend in most handguns is gradually moving towards polymers. Mostly due to cost and competition in the market place. To remain competitive manufacturers need guns in the same entry level price point as competitors. So most introduce gunsthat are built to be competitive in price. Polymers help keep cost down. Striker fired pistols are also cheaper to produce because they often have fewer parts.

You could check out Sig for polymer framed pistols with more traditional hammer fired DA/SA and DAO configurations. And they run close in price point to striker fires pistols.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,820 Posts
Striker fired pistols are the wave of the future.

So are polymer frames.
I've been hearing that for years. But somehow external hammer pistols seem to keep being made in great numbers.

There are many like myself that just don't like them. It's not about performance or any of the other things I hear bad. It's that I just don't like them. The last plastic fantastic I owned had a hammer. I guess it's like computers. I see them getting easier to use and maintain but that does not mean I have to be one of the masses that has no idea how the magic porn box works. Striker fired pistols are generally easier to work on. That might be great for some people, just not me.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
20,098 Posts
Striker fired firearms are a wave of the past. All bolt action firearms are striker fired.

No real difference in end result a bullet gets fired. Its how well the hammer or striker system is designed that matters. There are just as many crappy hammer designs as there are strikers.

The trend towards polymer involves weight. Lighter guns are easier to carry. Polymer frames however do not tend to balance well as the magazine gets close to empty.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,374 Posts
Guns and roses are indeed the greatest band ever! I should have been more specific. Why are all modern striker fired guns plastic framed?
By your smart alec remark, I guess the Glock does not qualify as a "modern" gun as it was introduced a full 10 years before the "dinosaur" Colt 2000.

Striker fired pistols have the advantage of simpliticy. Fewer moving parts. Easier/cheaper to make.

Polymer is easier/cheaper to produce. Lighter in weight. When properly made, will last a lifetime.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
548 Posts
Not all polymer pistols are striker fired.

Heckler & Koch make a number of poly frame pistols which are hammer guns.

I think I just read something about a poly framed 1911 design pistol. Probably much lighter than a steel frame pistol and easier to manufacture than an alloy frame. (By the way, 'easier to manufacture' means 'cheaper to buy'.) (Usually.)

For what it's worth, I prefer hammer guns. In my mind they are more reliable in terms of ignition. Bolt action rifles work well with strikers, but they have a larger length spring and the compression strength of the firing pin spring in a bolt system is greater - simply because the leverage to cock the spring is greater in a bolt rifle than in a handgun.

I have heard one or two people prefer striker fired guns as the hammer might be blocked or fouled in use and cause a malfunction. Reminds me of horse races.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
22,674 Posts
It's a shame that Stoner didn't use a striker in the AR-15/M-16.

The lock time is much faster than a hammer, and accuracy is enhanced by faster lock time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
it was probably jam either way

It would probably jam before the next squirrel got shot either way. Actually a striker in that rifle might be the answer to some of its flaws. Plus it is mostly plastic or polymer anyway.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,150 Posts
It's a shame that Stoner didn't use a striker in the AR-15/M-16.

The lock time is much faster than a hammer, and accuracy is enhanced by faster lock time.
Gotta disagree with Locotus on this one.

The only "fail to ignites" I've ever experienced were in striker fired pistols. Yes a striker AR "could" employ a stronger firing spring but striker channels filed with grime and brass shavings are "maintenance issue" for pistols and that problem would be exacerbated 10 fold in a "direct gas Impingement" system like an AR.

If there is anything the AR does NOT need, it's 1 more finicky part to clean. ;)

Tack
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Top