|
"Id say your description is pretty accurate. " +1
I prefer exposed hammer guns.
Those are easy to decock if need be and I can clearly see the status of the hammer.
Pro's and Con's?
Hammer Pros:
Easy to manipulate (does not apply to internal)
Seem to hit with more force than your avg striker gun.
.. I've seen more people have light strikes on striker guns then hammer.
Easier to clear debris from it without field stripping.
Hammer Cons:
Easier for debris to block it's movement.
lock time should be longer given the weight of the hammer compared to a striker.
Increase part count and cost
Some hammer springs are strong enough that hammers impact can actually cause the gun to dip in the hand.
Striker Pros:
Simplified design = fewer parts, cost savings, and theoretically more reliable.
Internally concealed means it is protected from manipulation and debris resistant.
Given the striker is generally very light and most of the impact force is provided by the spring a striker gun "should" have faster lock time.
Striker Cons:
Most designs are sensitive to having liquid getting into the strikers channel.
.. dunk it in water good chance it won't fire.
Most designs can not be decocked once charged.. only dry fired.
Most designs are SA, meaning the striker has to be charged to fire.
Honestly though pro's, con's, (and there's probably some I missed) I think in practice there isn't really any clear winner and it's going to boil down to preference more than anything, both systems seem to do the fundamental job.
Almost all new handgun designs are polymer framed, striker fired however.
both of those things make the gun cheaper to manufacture if for no other reason.
|