Striker fired full sized pistol list

[madoka]

I was compiling a list of full sized striker fired pistols in 9mm and came up with this:

- Arsenal Striker One
- Canik TP-9
- Caracal CP660
- FMK 9C1
- FN FNS 9
- Glock 17
- HK VP9
- Ruger SR9
- S&W M&P 9
- S&W SD9ve
- Sig P320
- Springfield XD9
- Steyr L9a1
- Taurus 24/7 OSS
- Walther PPQ

Am I missing any?

Are all striker fired guns polymer?

[Sigmund99]

Canik TP-9.

I'm assuming you are referring to guns currently in production because a historical list would have quite a few more models on it.

[CAGLS]

Arsenal Striker one.

[nick]

Springfield XDM9

[tbc]

Striker fired full sized pistol list

Kahr TP9 and T9
Steyr M1-A9

[96snake]

Isn't the fnp da/SA?

[jb octane]

Isn't the fnp da/SA?

Yes.

FNP - DA/SA
FNX - DA/SA
FNS - Striker

[Sigmund99]

S&W SD9ve series.

I'm laughing that I missed the Steyr guns on that list because I have an L9a1 sitting in jail.

[ElvenSoul]

HiPoints

[19K]

P99.
Fn 5.7

[mafbloggerdanny]

Fn 5.7

not 9mm

[Mutenri]

P99.
Fn 5.7

not 9mm

Also not striker fired. Single Action Only concealed internal hammer.

[TMB 1]

My favorite 9mm P08 Luger.

[Lead Waster]

To answer "Are all striker fired guns polymer", I don't think so. However, I wondered about this myself ... why are the two features almost always together? Sure there are hammer fired polymer guns, but typically they are striker fired.

After some pondering, I've come up with this answer ...

Polymer frames are light and cheap to make. Honestly, I think they are a great innovation. But why striker fired?

I think it's because, if you look at the striker guns, you'll see that when they are cocked, all the tension and stress of the striker spring is in the slide, with of course, the "sear' holding it back, but when firing, the action/reaction of the striker is contained within the metal slide.

A hammer fired gun requires that the hammer be mounted securely to the frame. With a polymer gun, that means the hammer spring is contained in the frame, and when you fire the gun, the movement of the hammer and reaction in the spring is contained in the frame and when the hammer hits the firing pin, the "shock" is transferred to the frame, particularly whatever part the hammer pivots on. So ... perhaps in a polymer frame, the frame is not rigid enough or perhaps repeated firings would wear out the hammer pin hole or something like that.

Does that make sense? The frame of a striker fired gun does not take much stress from firing. Obviously there is the slide movement and the recoils assembly works against the frame, but there is nothing for a hammer to wear on as it fires.

Or perhaps a polymer frame holding a hammer would not be rigid enough to keep the hammer aligned?

In anycase, my theory (based on nothing) is really an observation of how a striker works and the fact that the energy to strike the primer is contained entirely in the metal slide in striker guns. If you had a Glock slide, you could actually place a round in the chamber and fire it without the frame attached, by pulling back the striker (like a pinball launcher) and releasing it. With a hammer fired gun, you'd require something to keep alignment of some sort of hammer, and you'd have to tightly hold the slide and strike the firing pin with it, so your body ("frame") is an important part of the firing mechanism.

My 2 cents on why "polymer" and "striker" go together so often.

And again, yes, I know there are hammer fired polymer framed guns (FN pistols).

[Click Boom]

i guess "full size" is kinda debatable, some of those are closer to the g19 than g17.