Hello? Glocks are double action only (DAO) pistols. As I remember it, they were the first DAO pistols.Bruzilla said:
Larry Gude
Strung Out
Ahmen...
...to that and that MEANS practice!
Which in the case of the spoiled rotten means, oh, about a 50 yard stroll to ye 'ol plate rack.
Sharon said:To each his (or her)own. The best gun is one you know how to use well and are comfortable with. Good luck finding your match.
...to that and that MEANS practice!
Which in the case of the spoiled rotten means, oh, about a 50 yard stroll to ye 'ol plate rack.
Wish I lived closer.Larry Gude said:...to that and that MEANS practice!
Which in the case of the spoiled rotten means, oh, about a 50 yard stroll to ye 'ol plate rack.
T
tikipirate
Guest
2ndAmendment said:
Actually, the Glock pistol is always in a 'semi-cocked' position, so it is in neither the single-action state (trigger pull trips the sear to fire the weapon from a fully cocked position) nor double-action state (trigger pull moves the hammer assembly from home to fully-cocked prior to the sear trip). The 'semi-cocked' method allows the consistent trigger pull of single action without the trigger pull inaccuracies of a double-action weapon.
Were we in the same Glock armorers class? You might remember me. I was the one who was listening.
Last edited by a moderator:
ylexot
Super Genius
I don't know much about Glocks, I'm just trying to understand what you just said because it doesn't really make sense to me. Maybe you could explain that by comparing it to the action of something like a Beretta. For example, my 92FS has three cocking positions: uncocked, half-cocked, and full-cocked. The first shot is double action so the first trigger pull moves the hammer from uncocked to full-cocked and then releases the hammer. Following shots are single action where the hammer is already in the full-cocked position and the trigger just releases it. Are you saying that a Glock is normally in the half-cocked position (which shortens the trigger pull), but there is an uncocked position that is different from what you call "semi-cocked"? What confuses me is that if there is no "uncocked position", then in reality, the "semi-cocked" position is the uncocked position, a Glock would then be a DAO gun, and the "semi-cocked" thing would just be some marketing BS. Basically, if there is no uncocked position that is different from your "semi-cocked", then your "semi-cocked" is truly the uncocked position.tikipirate said:
B
Bruzilla
Guest
tikipirate said:
Tikipirate is right, and the Glock can not be a DAO pistol because there are no double action Glocks. For there to be a DAO version of a pistol there must also be a double action version... otherwise the moniker doesn't make much sense.
Also, there's no way to have a Beretta 92 series pistol "half-cocked." It's either cocked or uncocked. Half-cocking is usually found on older revolvers and early pistols like some of the 1911 series. Half-cocking allows you to have a round in the chamber without the risk of inadvertant contact between the primer and firing pin. Newer pistols and revolvers usually have a special bar or linkage that locks the firing pin until the trigger is pulled, but older guns could go off if a blow was placed on an uncocked hammer with enough force to strike the primer with either an integral or non-integral firing pin.
Because of it's uniqueness, the "safe action" of a Glock isn't exactly single or double action, though it is officially classified as a double-action by the ATF.
Back to the "safe action": Glocks have no hammer, nor conventional sear, no mainspring, and no searspring . When you rack the slide on a Glock, it partially compresses the spring that controls the striker. If the striker were to accidentally release without the trigger being pulled, there isn't enough spring tension to fire a cartridge. Pulling the trigger back compresses the spring the additional distance needed so that it has enough force to ignite the primer.
You guys always have to be so technical.
ylexot
Super Genius
Maybe your definition of half-cocked is different from mine. I define half-cocked to be having the hammer held by the gun in a position between uncocked and fully-cocked. By my definition, my Beretta absolutely can be half-cocked. If you don't believe me, I'll take pictures of it in all three positions.Bruzilla said:
Interesting. Now I can see why Glocks don't fit the conventional definitions. Like I said, I don't know much about Glocks.Sharon said:
Seems you may have missed something?tikipirate said:
<table nof="LY" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="578"> <tbody><tr align="left" valign="top"><td>Sharon said:
</td><td colspan="2" width="501">[font=Arial,Helvetica,Univers,Zurich BT,sans-serif][size=+2]"Safe Action" System[/size][/font]
</td><td>
</td></tr><tr align="left" valign="top"><td colspan="4" height="18">
</td></tr><tr align="left" valign="top"><td colspan="2">
</td><td colspan="2" width="553">
[font=Arial,Helvetica,Univers,Zurich BT,sans-serif][size=-1]The "Safe Action" system consists of three (3) automatic independently operating mechanical safeties which are sequentially disengaged when pulling the trigger and which are automatically re-engaged when releasing the trigger. [/size][/font]
[font=Arial,Helvetica,Univers,Zurich BT,sans-serif][size=-1]Without actuating the trigger it is not possible that a shot is fired.[/size][/font]
[font=Arial,Helvetica,Univers,Zurich BT,sans-serif][size=-1]The revolutionary trigger system consists of:[/size][/font]
</td></tr></tbody> </table> <table nof="LY" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"> <tbody><tr align="left" valign="top"><td height="18" width="15"><img src="http://www.glock.com/clearpixel.gif" /></td> <td>
</td></tr><tr align="left" valign="top"><td>
</td><td width="600"><table id="Table1" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%"><tbody><tr><td align="left" bgcolor="#000000" height="18" valign="top" width="200"></td><td align="left" bgcolor="#000000" valign="top" width="200"> </td><td align="left" bgcolor="#000000" valign="top" width="200"></td></tr><tr><td align="left" valign="top" width="200">
[font=Arial,Helvetica,Univers,Zurich BT,sans-serif]<img src="http://www.glock.com/safety1.jpg" />[/font]
</td><td align="left" valign="top" width="200">
[font=Arial,Helvetica,Univers,Zurich BT,sans-serif]<img src="http://www.glock.com/safety2.jpg" />[/font]
</td><td align="left" valign="top" width="200">
[font=Arial,Helvetica,Univers,Zurich BT,sans-serif]<img src="http://www.glock.com/safety3.jpg" />[/font]
</td></tr></tbody></table></td></tr></tbody> </table> <table nof="LY" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="576"> <tbody><tr align="left" valign="top"><td><table nof="LY" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="199"><tbody><tr align="left" valign="top"><td height="29" width="17"><img src="http://www.glock.com/clearpixel.gif" /></td><td width="182"><img src="http://www.glock.com/clearpixel.gif" /></td></tr><tr align="left" valign="top"><td>
</td><td width="182">[font=Arial,Helvetica,Univers,Zurich BT,sans-serif][size=-1]Furthermore the "Safe Action" system provides a constant trigger pull weight and a constant trigger travel from the first shot up to the last shot. GLOCK pistols are safe when dropped, when they receive any other abnormal shocks and are fully functional at temperatures from -40° to +70° Celsius.[/size][/font]
</td></tr></tbody></table></td><td><table nof="LY" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="168"><tbody><tr align="left" valign="top"><td height="29" width="19"><img src="http://www.glock.com/clearpixel.gif" /></td><td width="149"><img src="http://www.glock.com/clearpixel.gif" /></td></tr><tr align="left" valign="top"><td>
</td><td width="149">[font=Arial,Helvetica,Univers,Zurich BT,sans-serif][size=-1]The GLOCK "Safe Action" system has revolutionized the handgun industry and has been widely adopted by law enforcement and other official users as well as commercial and competition/combat shooting areas due to its simple, fast, safe and reliable application.[/size][/font]
</td></tr></tbody></table></td><td><table nof="LY" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="209"><tbody><tr align="left" valign="top"><td height="29" width="30"><img src="http://www.glock.com/clearpixel.gif" /></td><td width="179"><img src="http://www.glock.com/clearpixel.gif" /></td></tr><tr align="left" valign="top"><td>
</td><td width="179">[font=Arial,Helvetica,Univers,Zurich BT,sans-serif][size=-1]The main advantage of the GLOCK "Safe Action" system is that is has no external safeties. Because of this, the user can fully concentrate on the tactical tasks required whilst being in a stress situation and does not need to think about any safeties to be deactivated.[/size][/font]
</td></tr></tbody></table></td></tr></tbody> </table> <table nof="LY" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="575"> <tbody><tr align="left" valign="top"><td height="56" width="11"></td><td width="564"></td></tr></tbody> </table>
For details, the titles above the graphics are links.
Last edited:
ylexot
Super Genius
I found an interesting article that discusses SA, DA, and DAO:
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BTT/is_160_26/ai_92585765
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BTT/is_160_26/ai_92585765
B
Bruzilla
Guest
The writer of that article does not understand what double action is. Double action does not mean that there are two ways to fire the gun. It means that each pull of the trigger cocks (the first action) and fires (the second action.) A single action pistol performs one action when the trigger is pulled, which is firing. Most double-action pistols can be fired in a single-action mode, provided there is a way to manually cocks the handgun. A double-action only gun does not offer a means to cocks (sorry to keep saying cocks but the singular version of that word is a no-no on here) the gun aside from pulling the trigger, and these are usually identified by the abscence of an exposed hammer.
As for the Glock discussion, there's no argument that the gun is 100% safe when there's no contact with the trigger. The problem with Glocks occurs when the finger is on the trigger, which in a crisis situation generally occirs as soon as the gun is drawn.
As for the Glock discussion, there's no argument that the gun is 100% safe when there's no contact with the trigger. The problem with Glocks occurs when the finger is on the trigger, which in a crisis situation generally occirs as soon as the gun is drawn.
ylexot
Super Genius
And that quote means you didn't even read the article because that was one of three definitions for double action (and thus the reason there is confusion).Bruzilla said:
Gee, according to that definition and Sharon's explanation of Glock action, I'd have to say that the Glock is most definitely DAO! I wonder why you said this:Bruzilla said:
What doesn't make sense is that quote. In fact, I'd say it goes beyond nonsensical into the moronic.
T
tikipirate
Guest
Sharon's explanation was much better than mine.
Bruzilla said:
Do you hear yourself?
What you describe isn't a design flaw. It's called USER ERROR and can be the same for most handguns in general. Improper holstering techniques are another instance of user error. Let's take your sentence and substitute morons for Glocks.
If you take or leave the "crisis situation", you've probably just described over 90% of negligent shootings and mishaps. Notice I did not say accidental. A properly functioning gun will not accidentally discharge itself. The only truly reliable safety device isn't found on the gun. Just admit your Glock-hate and quit blaming the equipment for the operator's failure. I understand you and others don't have a high opinion of Glocks (that's okay by me) but to say they are more prone to "accidental" mishap is pure
Without looking at your gun are you 100% sure that safety is on?
I understand now how easily you can shoot yourself in the foot by relying on a mechanical device that may (or may not) be in the position you think it is.It is neither needed nor is it relied upon, so there's no confusion as to a negligent discharge happening while drawing your gun with your finger on the trigger because of, "Oh gee, I thought the safety was on".
B
Bruzilla
Guest
ylexot said:
Oy Vey... the minds of the lower class.
Ok, once again, anything that can only be one thing does not warrant a special classification. For example, a dog does not operate in a dog-only mode because it is only capable of being a dog. Look at the M-1911A1 pistol. By design is it is classified as a single-action pistol as there are no M-1911A1 series pistols that can be fired double action. Therefore, aside from morons, there's no special classification of the pistol as a Single-Action Only pistol. It is what it is. The DAO classification is used when there are variants within the model that warrant it. For example, the Beretta Model 92/96 series is a double-action pistol, however, there is a model called the 92/96G that is a DAO pistol, and is identified by the abscence of an exposed hammer, and was originally designed and sold to guess who? The Police. And why? Because departments wanted to reduce the number of accidental... oops... unintentional shootings resulting from the light trigger pull when the pistol is being fired single action. Oh, just for detail purposes, before anyone does a Jimmy Jump-Up and says "oooooooohhhh I saw a 92/96G with a hammer", there is a subvariant of the 92/96G called 92/96G-SD that's a double action pistol.With all that being said, the Glocks are a double-action pistol as one pull of the trigger cocks and fires the pistol. There is no single-action option variant in the series, so using the classification DAO is not applicable.
As for the article I did read it, and thought the same of it as I do about articles that talk about assault weapons being machine guns. Just because some ignorant doofs are out there misusing terms means that there's an ambiguity as to their meaning, or multiple meanings. A double-action handgun refers to a firearm that cocks and fires on the same trigger pull... period.
Last edited by a moderator:
B
Bruzilla
Guest
Sharon said:Do you hear yourself?
What you describe isn't a design flaw. It's called USER ERROR and can be the same for most handguns in general. Improper holstering techniques are another instance of user error. Let's take your sentence and substitute morons for Glocks.
Well... let's look at this from a numbers standpoint. There have been more moron-accidental-unintentional-whatever discharges from Glocks than from any other handgun. Let me repeat that FACT - There have been more moron-accidental-unintentional-whatever discharges from Glocks than from any other handgun. You can
at me all you like, but that isn't going to make those numbers go away. There have been similar such incidents by police and others using other types and makes of guns, but the Glock series of pistols are way and by far the leaders in this category. So, if the problem with the Glock is not the unique trigger safety, what is it? Are police departments across the country all offering excellent training on other pistols and just not the Glocks? Are Glocks only issued to morons? Sorry... but the answer is the trigger safeties. It's a super innovation for use on the range, but completely wrong for use in high-stress situations. In these situations the natural action for a person is to place their finger on the trigger, and with a Glock there's nothing stopping you from firing the gun at that point. No thumb safety, no long trigger pull, nothing... hence all the wrong people getting shot and bullet holes in the walls and floor.Sharon said:Notice I did not say accidental. A properly functioning gun will not accidentally discharge itself. The only truly reliable safety device isn't found on the gun. Just admit your Glock-hate and quit blaming the equipment for the operator's failure. I understand you and others don't have a high opinion of Glocks (that's okay by me) but to say they are more prone to "accidental" mishap is pure
You're 100% correct! In every firearms and defense course I've ever taught I've taken a loaded handgun, usually a S&W Model 19 and/or a Beretta M-96FS, and dropped them on the floor with the hammers cocked and the safety (in the case of the Beretta) off, just to prove the point that there's no way for that gun to go off by itself... you've gotta have human intervention. BTW, do not try this with an older pistol like a M-1911A1.
Where you're wrong is in saying that "the only truly reliable safety device isn't found on the gun." Sorry to tell you, but they are. Modern handguns and rifles have the only 100% reliable safety devices involved in shooting. The shooter is never 100% reliable and rarely even 75% reliable when it comes to safety. I've known many "expert" shooters who have done incredibly stupid things, and ask any rangemaster and they'll tell you the same thing. And hence... the problem with the Glocks. They are a perfectly engineered pistol that's placed into the hands of imperfect shooters, and pistols with things like thumb safeties and DAO variants are safer in crisis situations than the Glocks are.
As for me, I do have a high opinion of Glocks, in fact I have a Glock 22 on layaway as we speak. However, I will continue to use a Sig P226 as my concealed carry pistol for the reasons we've been discussing. And, you can argue with me all you like, but you can't argue with the numbers... Glocks are involved in unintentional shootings far more than any other gun.
Sharon said:Without looking at your gun are you 100% sure that safety is on?
Uh... YES! I can't think of a pistol, with a safety/safeties that I've ever fired that you wouldn't know by feel if the safety was on. And on the better ones I can even tell you without moving the action if there's a round in the pipe or not... even if I'm in total darkness or blindfolded... so
that.Sharon said:It is neither needed nor is it relied upon, so there's no confusion as to a negligent discharge happening while drawing your gun with your finger on the trigger because of, "Oh gee, I thought the safety was on".
I don't really understand your statement, but let's compare the drawings of a revolver, a Beretta M-92FS, and a Glock in a high-stress/combat situation, defined as one that you'll be making an imminent shoot/no-shoot decision within seconds of drawing your gun. In these situations, the gun will be drawn with the finger on the trigger. This is not the firing range where you have plenty of time to be safe and keep your finger along the frame until you're ready to fire. With the revolver, you can pull the trigger about 3/4 of the distance of its travel and still not fire the gun, so there's a lot of safety margin there. Also, most combat shooting training involving revolvers involves drawing the gun with your finger on the trigger and your thumb on the hammer spur, which allows you to put positive pressure on the hammer to overcome inadvertant trigger travel. With the Beretta M-92FS, with the thumb safety on (as it should be) you can inadvertantly pull the trigger 100% of its travel distance and not fire the gun. With the Glock once the finger is on the trigger and the trigger motion is started, the safeties are off and there's no counter to inadvertantly pulling the trigger. Once again, there's a reason why the numbers for Glocks are so high as compared to other guns.
Last edited by a moderator:
ylexot
Super Genius
Oh, I understand...you're a flippin' idiot! There are three action types for Berettas:Bruzilla said:Oy Vey... the minds of the lower class.
SA only (or SAO for the logically-minded
)DA/SA (most Berettas...i.e. the 92FS)
DAO (these are designated with a D as in 92D)
The G variants have no safety...just a decocking lever...and that came as a requirement from the French, not law enforcement. I'd expect better accuracy of information from someone in a non-communist-gun-law state who proclaims himself as a firearms expert.
By my definition of DAO, the DAO versions are not designated as DAO because SA and DA/SA pistols exist. They are desgnated as DAO because every single shot is double action. There is no ability to fire single action. Therefore, they are Double Action Only or DAO. I guess this is different from your definition, but how can you prove that my definition is wrong?
You think that Massad Ayoob is "some ignorant doof"?Bruzilla said:
Do yourself a favor and look up his name in Google and/or Amazon. He is very well respected...definitely more respected than you...and he deserves it...because he knows what he's talking about. And, BTW, he agrees with me...from the article I linked said: