TP9 vs SD9ve

[Nakanokalronin]

Okay, then change "untrained" to "hardly trained" or for people that more than likely won't practice with their sidearm. I didn't say "safeties" in general either. If a light SAO trigger with a thumb safety or a striker fired gun with no manual safety is fine for everyone then why does the DA/SA mechanism exist?

[TBT]

Untrained or hardly trained, whatever you want to use, it's still incorrect. It's a safety like any other. It's a way to get a very light and crisp trigger pull after the initial shot without having a manual safety to manipulate. Langdon, Todd Green, and countless others have written at length on the benefits and draw backs. I would defer to them if you are looking for more detail.

[Nakanokalronin]

Most DA/SA guns do have a safety which is why most prefer the decocker only models. I can shoot them well, but don't see any benefit to them. A trained person should be able to flick off a simple safety to get a consistent SAO pull.

Todd Green has said he's shot countless DA/SA guns. A quick search brought up his comments below.

1. The DA pull is harder to shoot well compared to SFA/SAO/DAO/whatever. I cannot say that's wrong. All else being equal, having an 8-10# first pull is, from a pure performance standpoint, a disadvantage over having a 3-5# first shot. You can train to overcome it -- both IDPA and USPSA have had multiple national titles won with DA/SA guns -- but it does require proper training and as mentioned previously that training can be hard to find even among otherwise well known instructors.

2. The "DA-to-SA transition" is harder to shoot well compared to SFA/SAO/DAO/whatever. Again, I cannot say that's wrong. In fact, in my experience it's actually the first SA shot, not the DA shot, that tends to be the most trouble for DA/SA shooters and especially for experienced DA/SA shooters. Again, it's not massive nor impossible to overcome, but even a small disadvantage that requires dedicated time to answer is still a disadvantage.

3. Shooter needs to remember to decock. I almost hate to list this because I honestly believe it is 100% the fault of the instructor when it happens, but still in fairness it is a step that SFA/DAO guns do not need.

Now for the pro's:

1. Safety coming out of the holster. A DA/SA gun is always ready to fire as soon as the trigger is pulled with no need to disengage a safety (no need... that doesn't prevent some people from carrying safety-on or being mandated to carry that way). But by dint of a trigger pull that is both longer and heavier than most other actions, there is far more tactile feedback that the trigger is being pulled in between the start of inadvertent unintentional movement and the Big Loud Noise. We've lost sight of this as a community with the prevalence of ever lighter and shorter SFA triggers and candidly I doubt we'll see the pendulum swing back any time soon. Performance on the square range -- particularly by those folks who don't really know how to shoot a DA/SA well -- is real while responding to an unknown assailant in the dark is, for most folks, merely hypothetical. The shooting community always blames the operator for every accident and never considers the role that equipment plays in making some guns more or less likely to facilitate those accidents. So for the most part, I'm barking at the moon on this. I believe it's a huge benefit. When I say it aloud in front of the mirror, there are two of us.

2. Safety going into the holster. While not unique to DA/SA guns, the benefit of having an exposed hammer that can be trapped and controlled during holstering is a significant and demonstrable safety advantage. This is undeniable. I've spent far too much time with far too many departments that have switched from DA/SA guns to SFA guns and seen first hand the result of people who holster too fast with their fingers too close to the trigger, or gear that gets inside the trigger guard, etc. Again, some will argue that it's a training issue and that mistakes are always 100% the operator, but I believe the redundant safety benefit of thumbing the hammer during holstering is huge.

3. DA/SA guns are very shootable with proper instruction and training. As mentioned above, quite a few people have delivered tremendous success with DA/SA guns. While opponents like to harp on the long, heavy first shot they seem to forget about the long string of shorter, light followup shots. Let's compare an average Glock to a typical SIG. The Glock has ~5.5# trigger pull for each shot. The SIG shooter needs to work through a ~9# first shot... and then he's got ~4# trigger pulls until he decocks the gun. With some tuning, the DA pull will still be longer and heavier than the Glock (and thus safer imo) but the SA can easily come down to the 3# range. The first shot is harder, ok. But all the rest are easier.

4. Shooting DA/SA guns trains you to shoot just about any trigger system. I consider this a minor benefit for anyone outside of the professional training realm, but the reality is that if you can master a DA/SA action and maintain your skill level with it, you can pick up just about anything else and shoot it well.

If you read his words, it's about training in order to shoot it well and lots of practice. Many departments and the like use it so there is less likely to be a ND in a high stress situation, because I doubt the departments have highly trained instructors like Todd Green suggests. Most of the people issued one will more than likely not train enough with it, but it will keep the department from getting sued if a ND does damage to someone or something.
He mentions above how it's about a safety when unholstering and getting ready to fire. He sees it as a safety benefit.

I agree that if you can shoot a DA/SA gun well, you can shoot any trigger system well. I shoot DA/SA quite a bit, but I don't feel it's necessary.

He talks about reholstering, but a DA/SA gun still needs to be decocked just like a SAO gun still needs it's thumb safety pushed up.

To be honest I don't see any advantage over a DAO or SAO firearm other than what I've already mentioned. There's a reason why only a small portion of gun companies still produce them. Even Beretta was all about cocked and locked SAO firearms until some military requirements came about.

[TBT]

The only reason Todd isn't currently running a TDA is for health reasons. Not sure how recent those comments are but either or, they still ring true.

If you don't see the advantage that's great. For you. And I won't argue. I wouldn't feel comfortable with my SA trigger from my P07 being on a Glock. A gun with a manual safety like a 1911 (or my P07 if I choose), sure. It's a different discipline. But it's still a safety be it a DA trigger or a thumb. Neither is explicitly there for the untrained or hardly trained.

[Nakanokalronin]

Well I'll concede because I don't have anymore to say, but there is a reason why departments choose it and why the military wants it as a requirement and it's not because military personnel and LEOs are highly trained individuals who keep up with training and practice on a regular basis.

[TBT]

Most LEO seem to gravitate toward striker fired guns nowadays. I expect the military to as well. Eventually. It's just an easier trigger to become proficient with than a TDA. Especially for shooters who lack training and experience.

[Fishbed77]

Okay, then change "untrained" to "hardly trained" or for people that more than likely won't practice with their sidearm.

Again, this argument against DA/SA falls flat, since training and and real world experience (with the pressure caused by threat of loss of life or limb) are two different things.

It also falls flat because there are plenty of folks who are certainly not "untrained" to "hardly trained" who prefer the system, despite access to others (including the previously-mentioned SEALs).


.

[unixfool]

Again, this argument against DA/SA falls flat, since training and and real world experience (with the pressure caused by threat of loss of life or limb) are two different things.

It also fall flat because there are plenty of folks who are certainly not "untrained" to "hardly trained" who prefer the system, despite access to others (including the previously-mentioned SEALs).

I agree. The decocker was more than likely either a design requirement (especially if it's a govt or military contract that they were fulfulling) or the fact that societies on the other side of the world have different needs/wants/requirements.

Any organized unit can train around a decocking weapon, whether it's a paramilitary force or a gun enthusiast group. I've been around guns since I was 18 (I'll be 47 next month). Decockers have never thrown me for a loop. About the only thing one has to train is the thought process of ensuring the gun is decocked before holstering. Carrying a cocked gun with a sensitive trigger doesn't sit well with many folk, even "trained" ones. Some people say the same thing about automatic transmissions (that they're a crutch)...they've their benefits and it gives people choices to offer different mechanisms. Choice is always better, IMO.

[Blindstitch]

Any idea where I can find an inexpensive sight upgrade for the SD9ve that isn't plastic?

[Whirlwind06]

M&P sights fit the SD

http://www.amazon.com/Truglo-Fiber-O...dp/B002Q6CL1W#

[Blindstitch]

Ended up finding this one on ebay for a real steal of $6 shipped. Would be really nice if I could find a front to match for a similar price.

http://www.hivizsights.com/products/...ts/sw2112.html

[indie_rocker]

Wow! $6... I'm jealous!

[osbornk]

Wow! $6... I'm jealous!

Link says $57.80.

[Blindstitch]

Ended up finding this one on ebay for a real steal of $6 shipped

Somedays ebay works.

[KShaft]

I was always of the thought that a consistent trigger pull was always better too. Until I got some time with a DA/SA and found that there are distinct advantages to the operation. Different advantages sure, but they are there all the same.

Just what advantages are you talking about? The DA/SA configuration was a solution to a problem that never existed. Why not just make DAO from the get go just make it a manageable pull. For the not so well trained the first shot takes to long or the second shot gets off too fast or both; or if you have small hands you have to shift your grip. Its counter intuitive. We go from SA pulls on 1911s and BHPs to nice revolver DA pulls to heavy long DA pulls which suddenly becomes a short light SA pull.

Yes you can train through this but what typical cop or soldier who is not an enthusiast, combat arms/SOF unit, SWAT/stakeout unit does this?

I remember with my SIGs (which I think are the best made production hand guns or at least they were when being made in Germany) and my USPs for a quick first shot it was always pull,*sight dips correct* pull, *again sight dips hold tight* squeezeholdsqueezeholdsqueeze BANG! Glock, draw squeeze BANG. 1911 draw, flip, sqee--BANG.

Im sure the SEALs just like the SIG for its workmanship, design, reliability, accuracy, and ergos. Its awesome. I bet though if they could put a different trigger system in it that they werent worried about it passing the 'over the beach test' they would.

Why do you think everyone is coming out with a striker fired, DAK, LEM, DAO, SAO trigger system that typically came on DA/SA platforms?
Its a system you work around not that works for you.

[unixfool]

Yes you can train through this but what typical cop or soldier who is not an enthusiast, combat arms/SOF unit, SWAT/stakeout unit does this?

I don't know about LEOs but most (if not ALL) soldiers have to be intimately familiar with their gun's manual of arms. I'm not sure about the other branches of the US military, but the Army tests it's soldiers during basic and advanced training...they've to qualify and pass before they graduate. After the basic and advanced courses, soldiers are tested annually throughout their careers. They also conduct training throughout the year before they perform their annual qualification. A soldier on the battlefield that doesn't know his weapon is going to put himself and possibly his team in danger. They don't only have to know how to shoot, but also things such as knowing how to clear a malfunction, how to clean the weapon, and even how to zero their weapon. So no, it's not just elite military units that have to have intimate knowledge of their weapons...they all do. SOF shoots more than the average unit, but I'd never think that the common soldier doesn't know their weapon. The above should apply to LEOs as well (and you'll find that there are lots of LEOs that are former military).

I agree with TBT...DA/SA has it's advantages. Those advantages have already been mentioned in this thread, BTW. With ANY weapon, there will always be the requirement of having to be familiar with operating your weapon (which will more than likely require training). Just as MMA fighters pick a certain skillset to hone, gun owners usually pick a manual of arms they're comfortable with. One is not better than the other...not in the objective sense, at least.

[TBT]

Just what advantages are you talking about?

Having a very light and crisp trigger pull after the first shot and not having to manipulate a safety to get it.

I'm not opposed to thumb safeties either and may eventually switch my P-07 over to that configuration. One of the things that I liked about the P-07 was that ability. But like I said, there are advantages to both, they are just different advantages.

Why do you think everyone is coming out with a striker fired, DAK, LEM, DAO, SAO trigger system that typically came on DA/SA platforms?

Because it's easier to become proficient with a trigger like that and... marketing.

[KShaft]

I don't know about LEOs but most (if not ALL) soldiers have to be intimately familiar with their gun's manual of arms. I'm not sure about the other branches of the US military, but the Army tests it's soldiers during basic and advanced training...they've to qualify and pass before they graduate. A soldier on the battlefield that doesn't know his weapon is going to put himself and possibly his team in danger. They don't only have to know how to shoot, but also things such as knowing how to clear a malfunction, how to clean the weapon, and even how to zero their weapon. So no, it's not just elite military units that have to have intimate knowledge of their weapons...they all do. SOF shoots more than the average unit, but I'd never think that the common soldier doesn't know their weapon. The above should apply to LEOs as well (and you'll find that there are lots of LEOs that are former military).

You sound like some documentary narrator reading off a cue card.
I am a Marine, Army, and OIF vet. Active duty 8 years between the two. I spent a little time in the chair force security forces reserve. I qualed expert in the chair force and army handgun quals(since that whats were talking about). I of course qualed also in the army and Marine Corps with the rifle. The only guys who are trained to any good proficieny with the rifle who are not combat arms in the armed forces are the Marines. The army is trained adaquately at best. From being in the Marines and then going into the army (mistake) I was scandalized at how they handled thier weapons. It was like dealing with a bunch of civilians who get ar's because they thought they were cool and have shot it a few times. Only difference is that the civies might actually handle their rifle with a bit more care. Once again this does not include the combat arms/SOF guys. I would not trust the average soldier if stuff got hairy too much in anything other than a static defense in which they would be able to perform decently, but Id trust them a lot more than someone in the air force or navy. Theyd be pretty much useless.
Soldiers arent automatically trained on the handgun, you have to need one to get one unless you are senior enlisted or something other than a butterbar. I knew how to handle the m9 better than the guys who had been formally trained(from basic military handgun training, which besides a course of fire Im not sure what that entails... couldnt have been anything too indepth) on the side arm and shot much better even without any formal training on the handgun from the military while in the military(2nd best in my Bn and botched the kneeling not having shot kneeling with a handgun before). Their training is not near enough to overcome the DA/SA obstacle as once again they get trained enough to qualify; and that basically means they can shoot at a range with very limited profeciency. Training consists of once, MAYBE twice a year. Its not for optimum performance its for checking a box to say 'my guys are trained!!!' Yeah right...
Oh and clearing malfunctions? Yeah tap rack bang and thats it. Loddy freakin da. I cant even remember if they do the SPORTS drill or not. They arent rifle men period. Most in the military dont even have that mindset.

Rank and file cops are no different. Most cops are not shooters or gun guys. Their training all around is enough to say they can hit a man sized target at 25 meters so many times with so many shots. Check the box. Shoot at an unarmed guy a crap load of times and miss, and when you hit its all over the place. Thats what happens when you look to your gun to solve all your problems and then cant shoot it for $!&#.

[peggysue]

I found one on e-bay for only $5.00 delivered...wow thanks for the heads up

[unixfool]

Originally Posted by KShaft

You sound like some documentary narrator reading off a cue card.
I am a Marine, Army, and OIF vet. Active duty 8 years between the two. I spent a little time in the chair force security forces reserve. I qualed expert in the chair force and army handgun quals(since that whats were talking about). I of course qualed also in the army and Marine Corps with the rifle. The only guys who are trained to any good proficieny with the rifle who are not combat arms in the armed forces are the Marines. The army is trained adaquately at best. From being in the Marines and then going into the army (mistake) I was scandalized at how they handled thier weapons. It was like dealing with a bunch of civilians who get ar's because they thought they were cool and have shot it a few times. Only difference is that the civies might actually handle their rifle with a bit more care. Once again this does not include the combat arms/SOF guys. I would not trust the average soldier if stuff got hairy too much in anything other than a static defense in which they would be able to perform decently, but Id trust them a lot more than someone in the air force or navy. Theyd be pretty much useless.
Soldiers arent automatically trained on the handgun, you have to need one to get one unless you are senior enlisted or something other than a butterbar. I knew how to handle the m9 better than the guys who had been formally trained(from basic military handgun training, which besides a course of fire Im not sure what that entails... couldnt have been anything too indepth) on the side arm and shot much better even without any formal training on the handgun from the military while in the military(2nd best in my Bn and botched the kneeling not having shot kneeling with a handgun before). Their training is not near enough to overcome the DA/SA obstacle as once again they get trained enough to qualify; and that basically means they can shoot at a range with very limited profeciency. Training consists of once, MAYBE twice a year. Its not for optimum performance its for checking a box to say 'my guys are trained!!!' Yeah right...
Oh and clearing malfunctions? Yeah tap rack bang and thats it. Loddy freakin da. I cant even remember if they do the SPORTS drill or not. They arent rifle men period. Most in the military dont even have that mindset.

Rank and file cops are no different. Most cops are not shooters or gun guys. Their training all around is enough to say they can hit a man sized target at 25 meters so many times with so many shots. Check the box. Shoot at an unarmed guy a crap load of times and miss, and when you hit its all over the place. Thats what happens when you look to your gun to solve all your problems and then cant shoot it for $!&#.

And I'm an Army veteran of 10 years with several combat deployments. I'm not sure why you've such an attitude and are so confrontational. Training will always be key, that was the point I was trying to make. I don't know why you think otherwise. If you or your units weren't training, you were doing it wrong, IMO. Then again, I spent half of my time at Fort Bragg...we practiced for war a LOT. It sounds like you just like to argue...have at it...I'm done.

[Blindstitch]

Peggysue that's great.

[KShaft]

And I'm an Army veteran of 10 years with several combat deployments. I'm not sure why you've such an attitude and are so confrontational. Training will always be key, that was the point I was trying to make. I don't know why you think otherwise. If you or your units weren't training, you were doing it wrong, IMO. Then again, I spent half of my time at Fort Bragg...we practiced for war a LOT. I sounds like you just like to argue...have at it...I'm done

.

I went to Bragg for a short time for SFAS. Im a short bastard so although I would eventually become a 300 PFTer after going there (I was 297 going), the rucking kicked my butt even though all the other PT sessions were pretty easy for me.
My point Being, being there was definitely different than in Germany(1INFDIV). I was under the impression that the 82nd just trained more, and if you were support in a SOF(here SF groups; 10th right? ) unit they trained support guys up pretty good and of course they are training like its their job (because it is). You could kind of even feel that vibe of a more professional/military feel to it. Germany did not feel familiar, more like a neutered PC pseudo military with the sort of leadership(NCOs) that treats underlings like crap to make yourself look better by beating down those beneath you rather than raising them up and teaching them and backing them. Thats how the Marine Corps(treating underlings like younger brothers not tools to get you promoted) was except for the 10 percent as we liked to call em. My platoon sergeant(in the army) even said things similar(about the differences stateside vs europe), they were more concerned with safety checks and twenty line counts than combat efficiency, hence my comment above. It was very juvenile. I didnt expect the army to be as professional as the Marine Corps but this was a very huge discrepancy(but the guys at SFAS were great; cadre and students).

So I can totally believe you being stateside, even more so being at Bragg that you received much better and more training than we did. Im sorry if I came off as a jack ass. And yes that was my point too about training. Which is why I included 'gun guys' or enthusiasts because they train themselves and retain training because they like it.

Have a good one.

[Blindstitch]

I can't believe it took me two months to get to the range but I finally got out and shot 150 rounds through the SD9VE. Being new to handguns I was sure the problem with my shooting was me but I concentrated and took my time and built a pretty good pattern 3 inches to the left of center.

I didn't have my wrench to move the rear sight so I compensated for it.

When I got home I measured the sights again with my caliper and the rear was dead center but the front sight was off center to the right. I tried tapping it over with a punch and I couldn't move it with two different hammers and brass punches.

Any idea how I can move it without breaking the bank?

[Blindstitch]

My review.

The SD9VE shot fine for me. My wife shot it hand she has small hands and limp wristed it causing the only stove pipe of the day.

It shot just like the glock 19 I shot in Vegas last month. The only complaint I had was sometimes when you're pulling the trigger back it feels spongy. Kind of made it feel like I already shot the gun and there wasn't a shell left.

It wasn't like this all the time. Only once or twice per box of ammo. The trigger got better as I shot it so I have a feeling it's only going to get better.

I'm happy with my purchase. I groups shrank the more I used it so once I figure out how to get the front sight where it should be or adjust the rear I should be good to go.

[Blindstitch]

Found this thread again and thought I would update it.

I have around 500 rounds through the SD9VE and upgraded to the apex trigger springs and like it a lot more. Might have to get the apex trigger in the future but I'm getting 5 inch groups at 7 yards. I have a feeling if I handed it to someone who shot handguns for a long time they could do better.

Typically I load 10 rounds at the range and shoot a good group but as soon as I shoot more than 10 rounds my accuracy goes out the window. I think my body focuses on emptying the mag and gets carried away. But if I limit myself groups stay nice.

The one thing I think is interesting is that out of the Winchester, Remington, Federal, Fiocci all feed and shoot the same so far.

Yes the trigger still feels a bit spongy. I think it's that double jointed feature causing all of it. So an Apex trigger would probably make it a lot better or super glue to the joint if you wanted to hold it for 5 minutes under pressure.

All in all I still like the SD9VE and will keep making myself better with it. Yes I do wonder what would have happened if I got the M&P9c but that may be a later gift to myself.