Does it make me wierd...

[CALATRAVA]

That I like the idea of a hammer that I can immobilize with my thumb while I holster?

Thats pretty much how I felt with my CZ p-01. I also appreciated that ability with my Sp101, and my bersa (even though I knew I could safety my bersa)

Do those of you with XD's that need to have the grip safety depressed, but are otherwise glocklike, in their ability to have the trigger snagged while holstering, wish there were a way to keep that striker from releasing?

(A la Ruger SR9 or Taurus PT145's with their striker-fired/manual safety'ed designs)



(standard Glock fan disclaimers apply here: Glocks are wonderful, effective weapons. Got nothin' against them. They're just out of my comfort zone. I don't believe the "safety is between your ears thing", though I know some subscribe to it. Very easy, IMO, for a shirt, etc. to get caught having nothing to do with your finger being on the trigger.)

[CALATRAVA]

I definitely see the thinking behind JMB's design with regard to this.

With a good holster though, I wonder if a da/sa isn't faster in this regard, since you can manually immobilize that hammer, as you reholster, and have nothing in between you and that first DA shot when you draw...

[Adehtla]

I think with any firearm the real safety is between your ears. Every other mechanism is intended to prevent an accident. I feel that the XD is the truest extension of this philosophy in that if you intend for the gun to go off it will. Otherwise, it snags and you're annoyed.

The TLDR version: You're not weird.

[Evo]

It's expensive but if you get an HK with a LEM trigger you get all the same benefit of a pre-cocked striker like a Glock or XD but with a hammer you can immobilize while holstering. They're also just extremely robust and accurate shooters.

[CALATRAVA]

something like a $600 CZ da/sa would work fine for me, if thats the way I decide to go, I think.

[thomasanelson]

Given your parameters, +1 for HK, but I would go with a version that can be de-cocked and put on safe for an added level of safety while holstering. I actually keep my home defense gun in this mode just in cases someone "unathorized" get into my quick release safe.

[regalado1]

My wife agrees with OP, hence she just picked up here first firearm 92fs. I have one, she loves it and so now she has her own. She shot my XD45 and didn't like it. Didn't care for the bigger kick, but really didn't like the comfort factor with no hammer and no positive safety. To each their own. It's all about comfort, right? Feel good, chances are you'll shoot good. (Given proper technique of course)

I, in fact, love my 92fs. Very nostalgic for me as it was my sidearm while in the Army and served as a M60 gunner. Very comfortable with it. But, having said that, I love shooting my XD45 and so I must agree with Adehtla. Never have any issues with no hammer. Constantly thinking safety. Very comfortable with my XD as well.

[morfeeis]

That I like the idea of a hammer that I can immobilize with my thumb while I holster?

Thats pretty much how I felt with my CZ p-01. I also appreciated that ability with my Sp101, and my bersa (even though I knew I could safety my bersa)

Do those of you with XD's that need to have the grip safety depressed, but are otherwise glocklike, in their ability to have the trigger snagged while holstering, wish there were a way to keep that striker from releasing?

(A la Ruger SR9 or Taurus PT145's with their striker-fired/manual safety'ed designs)



(standard Glock fan disclaimers apply here: Glocks are wonderful, effective weapons. Got nothin' against them. They're just out of my comfort zone. I don't believe the "safety is between your ears thing", though I know some subscribe to it. Very easy, IMO, for a shirt, etc. to get caught having nothing to do with your finger being on the trigger.)

This is what sold me on the Ruger P95 and why my next firearm will be a 1911