[FastSS]

I have found myself fairly annoyed by a bit of a paradox lately.



The ATF calls the M&P (Glock and several others) a DAO pistol. Granted, pulling the trigger does draw the striker back from a half cocked position before releasing it, however I don’t think these pistols can truly be classified as DAO.



Glock style actions have been around for quite some time, and it might be time to make some sort of new classification for them.



My reasoning is this: While the action might be technically double action, the procedure is not. When you have a failure, the weapon must be treated like a single action weapon. In my mind, in order to be classed as double action, a pistol must be able to repeat a strike on a failed discharge.



In my small little world I see the following:

Single Action: Pulling the trigger releases a fully cocked hammer or striker. Failure to fire requires a tap rack and roll or if possible a re-cock and a follow up trigger pull. The weapon must be cocked each time before it can be fired.



Double Action: Pulling the trigger cams back the hammer or striker from a normal resting place before releasing it from a fully cocked position. Failure to fire can sometimes be remedied by simply pulling the trigger again.



Glock style actions fit neither of those. They must be initially cocked to a half cocked state. Only then does pulling the trigger pull the firing pin/striker back fully before releasing it. And like I said, a stoppage must be dealt with like a single action…



It’s late/early and I might be slightly inebriated but I still think I have a valid point.



So, does anyone agree or am I just full of you know what?



Perhaps

1.5 action

Glock action

If the round doesn’t fire you must tap rack and roll action?



I can’t be the only one here…

 

[Guest]

you make a good point

 

[FastSS]

Every pistol I've ever owned has been double/single with one exception: Desert Eagle.



The rest are: Walther P99, Walther P22, HK USP Tac .45, HK USP Compact .357Sig, Sig P232, Keltec P32 (which was the worst excuse for a single action ever... I just let it reset to full double every time so it was more likely to actually go off next time I pulled the trigger)



The insurance – so to speak – of being able to squeeze again has served me well over the years. I’ve had a couple of stoppages while running timed drills that would have required a tap rack and roll with a SA or Glock style action that I was able to overcome with the time required to pull the trigger that second time. Believe me, there is a HUGE difference in time between simply pulling the trigger again, versus a TR&R; and not that much difference between pulling the trigger again and having to do a TR&R anyway and just doing the TR&R to begin with.



We had some NASTY ammo about a year back and we were doing some bill drills and el presidente. I’m sitting there bangin away,.. anything that wouldn’t go the first time usually went the second time. My buddies with glocks had no such luck. That day I frequently saw one or two extra reloads and a TON of TR&Rs during a drill that should only take 12 shots with one standard reload after the first six rounds!



Eventually I started running one of their glocks just because it made for damn good failure practice! I usually mix snap caps in with my range magazines anyway if I'm heading to a range that doesn’t mind some of my antics. While the training is good, you almost get to the point where you expect a failure and deal with it rather than having a good idea that you will get a failure, and dealing with it when it comes, and then finding that the next 2 rounds wont fire…



When you think about it, having a glock 21 require a reload OR TWO in a 6 shot leg, you’re dumping between 8 and 21 dud rounds on the ground in an effort to only fire 6! Like I said, amazing practice!



Hell even glock calls their action a “safe action system” rather than DAO or SAO



Anyway /Novel its time for some sleep

 

[Jester]

I agree, but it will be tough to change. its more of a single action in the way you actually have to manually cock the "hammer" in the glock and M&P, funny that the XD is 100% cocked and they call it a single action.

 

[matt7184]

I agree that it is a hybrid action.



However, you are not thinking like a bureaucrat.



These are the boxes you have to check

DAO, SAO, DA/SA



Choose one

 

[PhilM]

I like Beretta's coined phrase..."constant action."

 

[ysued]

Aren't these guns called Striker Action or Striker Fired??



Or am I making this up??



Y

 

[matt7184]

They are striker fired rather than hammer fired. However, the amount the striker is cocked (instead of hammer) will determine if it is SAO, DAO, or "Safe Action".

 

[ysued]

They are striker fired rather than hammer fired. However, the amount the striker is cocked (instead of hammer) will determine if it is SAO, DAO, or "Safe Action".

Would the M&P be considered DA or Safe Action??



Y

 

[FastSS]

I would call it what glock does: "Safe Action" but the acronym is already used for the much more common Single Action. Although I believe glock actually calls it a “Safe Action System” which might be acceptable if I didn’t have it out for Glock.



I refuse to go the way of Xerox and Kleenex by calling it a Glock Action.



And like I already stated, it doesn’t seem right to call it a Double Action pistol.



Hybrid Action seems to make the most sense and use the most neutral of terms to give it a nice technical and strictly objective feel.

 

[matt7184]

I use hybrid action personally since every company calls it something else.



Dan or another smith here can detail the specifics, but the M&P is closer to safe/hybrid action than DA. The striker is not fully cocked. The sear finishes cocking it with its camming action. Then the sear drops to release the striker.

 

[MI_Jester]

Interestingly enough, Glock does't trademark "Safe Action" though they always put it in quotes on their site. Several of their trigger components and functions are patented, but it would be possible for everyone to use "Safe Action" as a description of semi-cocked DAO.



The issue is with marketing. For Smith or anyone else to begin using "Safe Action" to describe their guns, then they listener has to be familiar with Glocks, and then they get reminded of Glocks every time the Smith (or other) rep talks about triggers. That's just bad marketing to make your customers think about your competions products.



MI_Jester