TargetTalk

Why are pistols such as the FWB AW93, Pardini SP, Walther GSP, and IZH-35M using a hammer and firing pin used instead of a striker system for Olympic Rapid Fire ? Would not a striker system provide a faster lock time?

Quality of trigger pull, I'd bet. Easier to manage that with all the parts mounted in the same frame.

I've wondered about striker vs/ hammer as well. Rifles seem to have good trigger pulls, and they're striker fired. Some day I'd like to try designing and making my own pistol, and the trigger is a pretty significant part of that.

Pretty sure it might have to do with cocking the striker spring. In a bolt action (or lever action, falling block etc), the striker is held back by the sear and the striker spring is compressed by the shooters hand (and the finally by the camming action of the locking lugs) and held by the locking lugs.

In a blow back semi auto, the striker could easily be "caught" by the sear, and the inertia of the bolt would compress the striker spring, but since there's nothing to hold the bolt closed, the striker spring would decompress and the bolt would push away from the breach face, causing light ignition or no ignition. So, to make it work, you'd need a spring with more force than the striker spring to push the bolt forward and keep it in position. Then the recoil of the case firing probably won't have enough energy to overcome the bolt's recoil spring, causing a malfunction of some kind (failure to extract, failure to feed, etc, etc).

So it might work if you manage to find a set of "complimentary" springs, but since everybody wants to shoot everything from low power standard velocity to super-duper high velocity, I imagine the gun would be really picky about ammo. Then after some time passes and the springs take a "set" it probably won't function correctly either.

Don't get me wrong, it seems like a great idea, and I hope somebody can make it work someday, I just think it might be really complicated to pull off

deboom_j wrote:Pretty sure it might have to do with cocking the striker spring. In a bolt action (or lever action, falling block etc), the striker is held back by the sear and the striker spring is compressed by the shooters hand (and the finally by the camming action of the locking lugs) and held by the locking lugs.

In a blow back semi auto, the striker could easily be "caught" by the sear, and the inertia of the bolt would compress the striker spring, but since there's nothing to hold the bolt closed, the striker spring would decompress and the bolt would push away from the breach face, causing light ignition or no ignition. So, to make it work, you'd need a spring with more force than the striker spring to push the bolt forward and keep it in position. Then the recoil of the case firing probably won't have enough energy to overcome the bolt's recoil spring, causing a malfunction of some kind (failure to extract, failure to feed, etc, etc).

So it might work if you manage to find a set of "complimentary" springs, but since everybody wants to shoot everything from low power standard velocity to super-duper high velocity, I imagine the gun would be really picky about ammo. Then after some time passes and the springs take a "set" it probably won't function correctly either.

Don't get me wrong, it seems like a great idea, and I hope somebody can make it work someday, I just think it might be really complicated to pull off

I think the .22 rimfire cartridges used in competition are probably very similar in recoil energy so I don't think the need to accommodate cartridges of differing power is necessary to the designs. The .25ACP cartridge and .22 rimfire cartridges are used in many types of small striker fired blow-back semiautomatic pocket pistols.

Does the physical configuration of these Olympic Rapid Fire pistols for fitting the human hand to produce best accuracy require the use of a hammer and firing pin system?

"the striker is held back by the sear and the striker spring is compressed by the shooters hand (and the finally by the camming action of the locking lugs) and held by the locking lugs. "

Sorry, I meant to say the striker is cocked by the camming surface in the bolt, not the locking lugs. My fault.


"The .25ACP cartridge and .22 rimfire cartridges are used in many types of small striker fired blow-back semiautomatic pocket pistols.

Does the physical configuration of these Olympic Rapid Fire pistols for fitting the human hand to produce best accuracy require the use of a hammer and firing pin system?"

I wasn't aware any rimfire pistols used a striker system. Do you know the make and models (I'd like to look them up, I'm interested in learning about them)? I admit, I really don't have the experience to answer your second question.

So if a pistol were to be striker fired, that might be better to set it up as a free pistol, as those have locked breeches?

Invictus87 wrote:So if a pistol were to be striker fired, that might be more suitable to a free pistol, as those have locked breeches?

Most free pistols already are "striker fired".

j-team wrote:

Invictus87 wrote:So if a pistol were to be striker fired, that might be more suitable to a free pistol, as those have locked breeches?

Most free pistols already are "striker fired".

Thanks for posting that information. I am really out of my depth on the subject of Free and Rapid Fire pistols. A casual look at a few free pistols on the internet let me to believe Free Pistols were mostly striker fired and I appreciate your additional confirmation. What is it about the rapid fire pistols that has them still using hammers and firing pins instead of strikers with faster lock time?

Doesn't the Walther SSP have a striker firing system?

j-team wrote:

Invictus87 wrote:So if a pistol were to be striker fired, that might be more suitable to a free pistol, as those have locked breeches?

Most free pistols already are "striker fired".

Imagine a free pistol, visible hammer, the firing pin integrel part of the hammer, like a revolver...

northpaw wrote:

j-team wrote:

Invictus87 wrote:So if a pistol were to be striker fired, that might be more suitable to a free pistol, as those have locked breeches?

Most free pistols already are "striker fired".

Imagine a free pistol, visible hammer, the firing pin integrel part of the hammer, like a revolver...

ah yes! the old webley & scott free pistol

deboom_j wrote:........

I wasn't aware any rimfire pistols used a striker system. Do you know the make and models (I'd like to look them up, I'm interested in learning about them)? .......

I made an error of overstatement about .22 rimfire stiker fired semis being common but .25ACPs have been common since the early 20th Century. I'll take a look in my books for some .22 rimfire examples.

Spencer wrote:ah yes! the old webley & scott free pistol

Ah yes indeed. Humor? Or is there such a thing?

Roger

How about a Colt Camp Perry free pistol? Back when competition shooting was a tie and jacket affair.

(courtesy of http://www.southernoutdoorlife.com/show ... Camp-Perry)

Well a Glock is striker fired. Have a look.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-e_3Ihpq9T4

However, their trigger pulls don't exactly lend themselves to precision target shooting!

They also have a super heavy recoil spring, and are chambered for large centerfire pistol calibers that are powerful enough to overcome the resistance of said spring.

I just got to thinking, I do have an Advantage Arms .22 conversion for a Glock pistol. I think it may well be striker fired (it needs high velocity ammo to function correctly if I remember, and it still malfunctions regularly). Too bad it's nowhere close to me at the moment, or I'd tear it apart to take a look at it.

deboom_j wrote:.......I just got to thinking, I do have an Advantage Arms .22 conversion for a Glock pistol. I think it may well be striker fired (it needs high velocity ammo to function correctly if I remember, and it still malfunctions regularly). Too bad it's nowhere close to me at the moment, or I'd tear it apart to take a look at it.

I also have an AA .22 conversion kit for my G22. As long as I use the recommended ammunition it works fairly well if the pistol is not too dirty. There are occasional ftf but considering how inexpensive it was and is a conversion unit not a purpose built pistol, it exceeds my expectations.

I spoke to a guy with Pardini who admitted the striker system is technically superior, but designing a pistol to use it is more difficult than a hammer and firing pin system. He mentioned that striker systems were more common when .22 Short was primarily used. Anybody agree with this?

Neither the Pardini or FAS rapid fire pistols for 22 short were striker fired. Both used hammers. I do not believe the Walther was striker fired either, but not owning one, can't be positive.

dschaller wrote:I do not believe the Walther was striker fired either, but not owning one, can't be positive.

Neither the OSP nor the GSP were striker operated. The SSP is.

Roberto Palamà made (late '70s) beautiful competition pistols, under the name of "Patro", with a different percussion system (no hammer). They were very good and the trigger was impeccable and smooth (the trigger-stop had a spring, inside), and the barrel was very short indeed.

http://www.robertopalama.com/immagini/P ... tro_M2.jpg

He also tried different mechanisms, designed for rapid fire competition, also with hammer, as far as I remember, to get a faster percussion.

http://www.robertopalama.com/immagini/P ... tro_M3.jpg