View Full Version : Restrike capable?
Not exactly sure what this means. On the Sig web site they say that the 290 is restrike capable in case of a hard primer. Does this mean that you just pull the trigger again to fire? Do striker fire guns have this ability? Or only hammer guns?
It's a useless capability in my opinion. If you are properly trained in basic pistol operation, you should preform an immediate action drill. Tap, rack, assess. Nowhere in my many years of firearms training has anyone attempted to teach me to just keep pulling the trigger if the gun doesn't fire....
It's a useless capability in my opinion. If you are properly trained in basic pistol operation, you should preform an immediate action drill. Tap, rack, assess. Nowhere in my many years of firearms training has anyone attempted to teach me to just keep pulling the trigger if the gun doesn't fire....
Only for a revolver! :p
Yes,
Almost all DA/SA hammer fired pistols offer restrike.
A few hybrid striker pistols do as well.
RAM Engineer
12-07-16, 14:52
Like Cory said above: If the bullet doesn't go bang the first time, don't keep f***ing around with it. Get it out of there and get a fresh round in. WHICH is EXACTLY what you are doing when you keep pulling the trigger on a revolver...moving on to a fresh chamber.
Defaultmp3
12-07-16, 15:07
It's a useless capability in my opinion. If you are properly trained in basic pistol operation, you should preform an immediate action drill. Tap, rack, assess. Nowhere in my many years of firearms training has anyone attempted to teach me to just keep pulling the trigger if the gun doesn't fire....I have been told that under stress, while attempting to shoot at speed, it is not uncommon for one to keep pulling the trigger before one processes the fact that the gun is no longer shooting due to a bad/hard primer. In such an instance, a second strike capability may have some use.
pointblank4445
12-07-16, 16:09
FWIW,
If you have a gun (say a comp pistol or precision rifle) that is not used to or doesn't like harder primers, repeated attempts will ultimately deaden the primer completely and render it incapable of ignition. If you have a single light hit by chance and follow that up with a solid primer strike (or put it in a gun built to fire harder primers/milspec), there is a chance to achieve ignition...a CHANCE. Is that juice worth the squeeze? The argument is that a squeeze of the trigger is "faster" than immediate action. It may be, but when there is an (at best) 50/50 chance for a "click" or "bang" on the second pull, that "time" is now a complete waste. Armchair quarterbacks at work...most likely one's that couldn't work a DA/SA semiauto anyway...
Extolling "second-strike" capability as a desirable feature in a "combat handgun" or as an apt technique is completely stupid.
Mysteryman
12-07-16, 16:30
I have been told that under stress, while attempting to shoot at speed, it is not uncommon for one to keep pulling the trigger before one processes the fact that the gun is no longer shooting due to a bad/hard primer. In such an instance, a second strike capability may have some use.
Th vast majority of type one stoppages(no bang when you expected one) are due to unseated magazines which means you either didn't chamber a round to start or you got off one round before the gun failed to load another due to an unseated magazine. Pulling the trigger repeatedly is a waste of time. I don't doubt that you may pull the trigger repeatedly before processing a stoppage while under stress. However a dead trigger is far more informative than one that works while under stress. Auditory seclusion, tunnel vision etc all play against you and having a trigger that functions with a gun/cartridge that doesn't may give you a false sense of "hey I'm chucking lead down range" when in fact you're simply dry firing the shit out of your gun. Your immediate action drill/response should be instinctive and will greatly reduce the possibility of repeated trigger pulling. Second strike capability is a bullshit marketing gimmick.
MM
titsonritz
12-07-16, 16:42
Second strike capability is a bullshit marketing gimmick.
MM
The bottom line. Lock the thread.
MountainRaven
12-07-16, 16:53
Th vast majority of type one stoppages(no bang when you expected one) are due to unseated magazines which means you either didn't chamber a round to start or you got off one round before the gun failed to load another due to an unseated magazine. Pulling the trigger repeatedly is a waste of time. I don't doubt that you may pull the trigger repeatedly before processing a stoppage while under stress. However a dead trigger is far more informative than one that works while under stress. Auditory seclusion, tunnel vision etc all play against you and having a trigger that functions with a gun/cartridge that doesn't may give you a false sense of "hey I'm chucking lead down range" when in fact you're simply dry firing the shit out of your gun. Your immediate action drill/response should be instinctive and will greatly reduce the possibility of repeated trigger pulling. Second strike capability is a bullshit marketing gimmick.
MM
Bill Blowers, in a Primary & Seconday video on YouTube describing his unique manual of arms for pistols states that he has only seen a couple of trained shooters have type ones due to an unseated magazine and that most of the type one malfunctions he had seen were a result of bad primers (particularly as the quality of plinking ammunition drops to keep prices low).
Nevertheless, he does not recommend utilizing a pistol's restrike capability, but simply removes the Tap part of "Tap Rack Bang". (He also said that this works for him and with the guns he uses, and that it may not work for you and will not work for everyone.)
Thanks for all the info. I agree that training should resolve this by chambering a new round. I just wanted to be sure what they were talking about. I'm a hammer fire guy but the new p320 has gotten my attention. Can any one briefly explain how a striker fire mechanism works?
Defaultmp3
12-07-16, 17:35
Th vast majority of type one stoppages(no bang when you expected one) are due to unseated magazines which means you either didn't chamber a round to start or you got off one round before the gun failed to load another due to an unseated magazine. Pulling the trigger repeatedly is a waste of time. I don't doubt that you may pull the trigger repeatedly before processing a stoppage while under stress. However a dead trigger is far more informative than one that works while under stress. Auditory seclusion, tunnel vision etc all play against you and having a trigger that functions with a gun/cartridge that doesn't may give you a false sense of "hey I'm chucking lead down range" when in fact you're simply dry firing the shit out of your gun. Your immediate action drill/response should be instinctive and will greatly reduce the possibility of repeated trigger pulling. Second strike capability is a bullshit marketing gimmick.
MMThe vast majority of stoppages, sure, but that's arguably because most shooters have poor manipulations; I have never had that occur to me, though I have had other stoppages, due to dead primers, rounds that didn't feed properly due to size issues, etc. I'm not disputing than an immediate action drill is far preferable, or saying that we should make sacrifices in order to gain a second strike capability; nor am I saying that plastering it on as a marketing point isn't a gimmick, just merely that second strike is not completely useless.
Nevertheless, he does not recommend utilizing a pistol's restrike capability, but simply removes the Tap part of "Tap Rack Bang". (He also said that this works for him and with the guns he uses, and that it may not work for you and will not work for everyone.)Ironic, given that his company's name is Tap-Rack Tactical.
I'm a hammer fire guy but the new p320 has gotten my attention. Can any one briefly explain how a striker fire mechanism works?
Super simple version: Rather than a hammer fired mechanism where the falling hammer strikes the firing pin which strikes the primer, in a striker fired gun the trigger pulling aft pulls the striker aft against spring tension until it (the trigger bar or sear) eventually slides off the bottom of the firing pin/striker, allowing it to fly forward under spring tension and strike the primer.
ETA: here's a great video that shows how the Glock mechanism works through a cutaway gun:
https://youtu.be/pThsdG0FNdc
The restrike capability of most double action autos is a very minor - but not worthless - benefit.
Bad primers and light firing pin strikes are not uncommon and frequently a second attempt will work.
A second pull of the trigger
1) is very natural - especially for inexperenced auto shooters
2) literally takes a fraction of a second
3) can quickly and easily be performed with one hand
In addition, a full release and subsequent pull of the trigger is the proper remedy for a failure to fire caused by the trigger not fully resetting from the previous shot due to operator error.
I recently had a primer fail to ignite despite what appeared to be a solid hit. The training round fired on the second strike after being rechambered. I will still confidently carry that Glock 26 despite its lack of instant restrike capability.
It's a useless capability in my opinion.
Correct. End of story!
I have been told that under stress, while attempting to shoot at speed, it is not uncommon for one to keep pulling the trigger before one processes the fact that the gun is no longer shooting due to a bad/hard primer. In such an instance, a second strike capability may have some use.
I've done this with my USP45. Not under stress, per-say, but just having some fun with a mag dump. I was firing as fast as I could and second-struck a round that didn't go off the first time; it did go off on the second hit and through the rest of the mag I went. I didn't even realize what happened until it was over. I confirmed with one of my buddies.
Just sayin'.
ramairthree
12-07-16, 22:27
Correct. End of story!
Many things get taken out of context of of timing/eras.
When the 1911 was first replaced by the M9,
The most common FTF was considered to be a hard/Failed primer,
Which would most likely go off with a second strike.
Then Glocks came on board and the lack of a second strike was back.
I've done this with my USP45. Not under stress, per-say, but just having some fun with a mag dump. I was firing as fast as I could and second-struck a round that didn't go off the first time; it did go off on the second hit and through the rest of the mag I went. I didn't even realize what happened until it was over. I confirmed with one of my buddies.
Just sayin'.
Is that USP DAO? Because most folks don't reset far enough to re-engage the DA pull.
I've had a few bad center fire primers. I've had multi bad rimfire primers.
A second attempt never worked. I want to know as soon as a round fails, and I want a new round in ASAP.
Bill Blowers, in a Primary & Seconday video on YouTube describing his unique manual of arms for pistols states that he has only seen a couple of trained shooters have type ones due to an unseated magazine and that most of the type one malfunctions he had seen were a result of bad primers (particularly as the quality of plinking ammunition drops to keep prices low).
Nevertheless, he does not recommend utilizing a pistol's restrike capability, but simply removes the Tap part of "Tap Rack Bang". (He also said that this works for him and with the guns he uses, and that it may not work for you and will not work for everyone.)
Unless his context is purely competition, that is full of fail.
Key words: 'only a couple' and 'most'
Immediate action should be a process to clear ALL fail to fire, feed or eject malfunctions not requiring remedial action. Not just most.
Everybody has to have something quirky to differentiate themselves, in this case I think it is a disservice to the safety of a majority of shooters.
Once again, unless he is speaking to the strictly competition shooter.
MountainRaven
12-07-16, 22:54
Unless his context is purely competition, that is full of fail.
Key words: 'only a couple' and 'most'
Immediate action should be a process to clear ALL fail to fire, feed or eject malfunctions not requiring remedial action. Not just most.
Everybody has to have something quirky to differentiate themselves, in this case I think it is a disservice to the safety of a majority of shooters.
Once again, unless he is speaking to the strictly competition shooter.
20 years of police service following 6 years in the army. So duty and defensive use.
The man himself:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c8Qie-pvCIM
Lots of good info, good videos too!
Mysteryman
12-08-16, 04:37
Unless his context is purely competition, that is full of fail.
Key words: 'only a couple' and 'most'
Immediate action should be a process to clear ALL fail to fire, feed or eject malfunctions not requiring remedial action. Not just most.
Everybody has to have something quirky to differentiate themselves, in this case I think it is a disservice to the safety of a majority of shooters.
Once again, unless he is speaking to the strictly competition shooter.
I agree but then again I also disagree even for the competitive shooter.
An unseated magazine is still a potential problem, and is more common than what Mr. Blowers proclaims, I've personally witnessed it over a dozen times at matches and much more frequently at the range watching people shoot. Just my experiences and neither are a life altering situation. Either way the time it takes to tap the magazine then rack and re engage is minimal regardless of the venue. the TAP is cheap insurance that comes with a negligible time penalty. TAP RACK is also used with rifles(add in the tug to ensure it is seated) so it's muscle memory for both systems.
An additional note for the second strike discussion. Seeing as not all handguns have that capability it would be ignorant to teach/preach multiple trigger presses as a standard manual of arms when it is a specialized movement reserved for fewer and fewer guns these days.
MM
Mr. Goodtimes
12-08-16, 04:41
It's a useless feature... from an end user level, we have no idea why the round didn't go off. Get it out of the chamber as fast as possible and get shooting again. I'd rather do a tap, rack and bang vs sitting there with my thumb my ass doing the jitter but pulling away at a round that isn't going to fire.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Is that USP DAO? Because most folks don't reset far enough to re-engage the DA pull.
Nope. Crazyness happens. I've got 12k+ through that pistol with three training classes. I know it quite well.
I was having issues with some RWS 230g 45. Each box I'd get maybe 1-2 times where the round wouldn't go off. First thing I did was get the round outta there. However, I'd later pick it up off the ground, re-chamber, and hit it again. They always went off the second time. Fast forward to the mag dump(s) at the end of the day and I know for sure the same FTFire happened... but that time I just kept squeezing, dropped the hammer a second time on it and off it went.
Definitely not the best course of action but I think in a panic, very close quarter situation a lot of people – including one’s who think they won’t – will just keep reciprocating that trigger.
20 years of police service following 6 years in the army. So duty and defensive use.
The man himself:
I would agree that given his parameters - the stoppage occurs in the middle of a string, not first or second shot - the magazine is not at fault and his way is the quickest. The problem I have is that, by definition of those who coined the term, immediate action is just that: immediate, without thought.
Unless you are willing to accept the possibility of hearing a loud click because it was the magazine, the technique Blowers espouses requires an additional thought process. Normally the thought process should be: 1) didn't go bang and with no conscious sorting of alternatives 2) tap, rack, threat/bang. Blowers' technique adds several: 1) didn't go bang; 2) first/second shot or middle of string (first extra thought) 3) decide whther to tap or not (send extra thought) 3) execute. Those extra thought add up to extra time.
I've seen enough FTF's after recruits (and veteran officers) do in-battery reloads that I could not in good conscious teach any technique which did not involve seating the mag. YMMV
I might also add that operationally the fail to extract does not present as most folks set it up to practice - lock action to rear, insert dummy round or fired case, insert loaded magazine, let slide go forward on first round in magazine. Very often they will present as a slightly out of battery slide because the extractor has jumped off the case rim and did not leave sufficient energy for the slide to travel far enough to the rear that it tries to pick up another round.
Additionally, the real world failure to extract often involves a case that is obstinate enough to require a good, firm grip on the slide to successfully cycle.
One of the things that always frustrated me in training the masses immediate action was the stand your ground mentality of the square range. Getting off the threat axis is, arguably, the most important element of immediate or remedial action. It is not the speed of the kata.
JMO
ramairthree
12-08-16, 23:45
I agree but then again I also disagree even for the competitive shooter.
An unseated magazine is still a potential problem, and is more common than what Mr. Blowers proclaims, I've personally witnessed it over a dozen times at matches and much more frequently at the range watching people shoot. Just my experiences and neither are a life altering situation. Either way the time it takes to tap the magazine then rack and re engage is minimal regardless of the venue. the TAP is cheap insurance that comes with a negligible time penalty. TAP RACK is also used with rifles(add in the tug to ensure it is seated) so it's muscle memory for both systems.
An additional note for the second strike discussion. Seeing as not all handguns have that capability it would be ignorant to teach/preach multiple trigger presses as a standard manual of arms when it is a specialized movement reserved for fewer and fewer guns these days.
MM
You are right about current weapons selection. However in an era when everyone was using an M9, squeeze tap rack squeeze was a very viable TTP that had your gun shooting fast r most of the time
BuzzinSATX
12-09-16, 06:09
Not exactly sure what this means. On the Sig web site they say that the 290 is restrike capable in case of a hard primer. Does this mean that you just pull the trigger again to fire? Do striker fire guns have this ability? Or only hammer guns?
So...hopefully by now the whole "restrike" issue has been clarified LOL! But I just thought I'd add that I own and often carry a Sig P290 and I like mine. Long DA trigger pull, kinda heavy, and not the smallest 9MM sub, but for me, I find it very accurate and can bang 6" steel plates with very good consistency out to 35 yards when I focus.
I bought mine on sale and using "Cabelas Bucks", but they can be found on the G&R website for a great price.
YMMV
titsonritz
12-09-16, 13:35
I've had a few bad center fire primers. I've had multi bad rimfire primers.
A second attempt never worked. I want to know as soon as a round fails, and I want a new round in ASAP.
My experience and opinion as well. I'm not going to fiddle with a second strike, I'm going to put in a new round.
dwhitehorne
12-09-16, 15:22
You are right about current weapons selection. However in an era when everyone was using an M9, squeeze tap rack squeeze was a very viable TTP that had your gun shooting fast r most of the time
My experience mirrors exactly what 26Inf said but I was curious about the above quote. I pulled out my December 1987 USMC Service Pistol Marksmanship Manual and sure enough under the Immediate Action section the first step is Squeeze the trigger again. I definitely didn't remember that. David
ramairthree
12-09-16, 20:31
Well, it's not like there was a tier 1 lead unit mastering the M9 as its primary sidearm.
The M9 was only a primary or secondary weapon for a minority of guys at the time.
When we traded in the 1911s, I think it was 1987, maybe 1988, the AMU sent a MTT over to give a two week class on it.
Immediate action was squeeze and keep on shooting,
Or squeeze, tap, rack, squeeze if it did not keep on shooting.
Same TTP retaught during an SOT MTT (basically the equivalent niche as SFAUC has now).
The highest Army pistol training I know of using the M9 was SFARTEC. I did not do it, but at least in the early 90s I have been told it was used then. As was safety manipulation with the weak side hand. I do not know how long either continued to be taught.
Mysteryman
12-09-16, 21:19
You are right about current weapons selection. However in an era when everyone was using an M9, squeeze tap rack squeeze was a very viable TTP that had your gun shooting fast r most of the time
Right, and the TTP for your AR is to use the forward assist to ensure the bolt is seated. Both are retarded actions that accomplish nothing.
MM
ramairthree
12-10-16, 00:15
Right, and the TTP for your AR is to use the forward assist to ensure the bolt is seated. Both are retarded actions that accomplish nothing.
MM
Again,
You are taking something out of time and era situational context.
It is like calling someone retarded if their thumb is on the back plate of their Glock when they holster,
Because you don't understand what platform they did it on for decades and why.
I think using the safety on the M9 is retarded.
But situational context is policy said they had to.
I think using the weak hand to to disengage it is retarded.
But situational context is enough guys with small hands went through the CIF pipeline they used it.
I have had more second strike primers go off in a 92/M9 over the past 30 years than I have had other FTF with live ammo in non induced training FTFs than I have had other malfunctions. So on that platform it did not accomplish nothing, it resulted in less time not being functional.
If someone is only using a second strike platform I am ambivalent over whether they STRS or TRS.
If they switch between platforms or never use a SS platform it is a negative IMO.
My only goal is shedding light on the history of when second strike capability had some relevance.
Over the decades I have seen many things I have thought were retarded until I understood more about it.
I believe completely that the round should be cleared before pulling the trigger again. However, I've noticed that when it comes to mud/whatever getting between the hammer and the firing pin, usually the next trigger pull clears it and fires the round.
The only single action/striker pistol in my experience that seems to avoid this issue is the hi-power. There is not much that can stop the stock 32lb hammer spring.
Mysteryman
12-10-16, 06:07
Again,
You are taking something out of time and era situational context.
It is like calling someone retarded if their thumb is on the back plate of their Glock when they holster,
Because you don't understand what platform they did it on for decades and why.
I think using the safety on the M9 is retarded.
But situational context is policy said they had to.
I think using the weak hand to to disengage it is retarded.
But situational context is enough guys with small hands went through the CIF pipeline they used it.
I have had more second strike primers go off in a 92/M9 over the past 30 years than I have had other FTF with live ammo in non induced training FTFs than I have had other malfunctions. So on that platform it did not accomplish nothing, it resulted in less time not being functional.
If someone is only using a second strike platform I am ambivalent over whether they STRS or TRS.
If they switch between platforms or never use a SS platform it is a negative IMO.
My only goal is shedding light on the history of when second strike capability had some relevance.
Over the decades I have seen many things I have thought were retarded until I understood more about it.
I appreciate the history of the SS mantra as it is interesting to see what was compared to what is. I'm simply stating that doing so makes no sense and is not a universal manual of arms and therefore should be avoided like the plague. TAP RACK solves most problems without the need for additional information. Pulling the trigger again might solve one problem. I also agree that using the safety on a Beretta is pointless and redundant, then again the Beretta is far from a well designed pistol to begin with. As for being "policy" that's fine when qualifying but anyone with half a brain would purge those methods when deployed.
MM
No real operator would dream of having such a gimmick on their firearm since glock doesn't do it.
LowSpeed_HighDrag
12-10-16, 09:50
Restrike is cool for .22 pistols at the range. If you are serious about carrying a gun, "click" should initiate tap-rack-bang.
My only goal is shedding light on the history of when second strike capability had some relevance.
Over the decades I have seen many things I have thought were retarded until I understood more about it.
Never let history, context, and critical thinking enter an internet argument / chest-thumping session.
For me, the best lesson on the wheres-and-whys of second-strike came from a navy guy with a 226.
Seems simple to me.
If the gun is second-strike capable hit it again. It's blink of an eye fast. Still doesn't fire? Tap-rack.
Gun not second-strike capable just tap rack.
I've had a second strike work and not work rimfire and centerfire. Usually get a bang on second hammer drop.
I would not, however, let 2nd strike capability determine whether I bought or carried a gun. (Okay, unless it was a rimfire, because rimfire stinks)
Always try squeezing the trigger a second or even third time before throwing your gun at the intended target.
Always try squeezing the trigger a second or even third time before throwing your gun at the intended target.
No, just one extra try.
Every round deserves a 2nd chance. :)
LowSpeedHighDrag
12-11-16, 22:43
It's a useless capability in my opinion. If you are properly trained in basic pistol operation, you should preform an immediate action drill. Tap, rack, assess. Nowhere in my many years of firearms training has anyone attempted to teach me to just keep pulling the trigger if the gun doesn't fire....
Unless you're trying to burn thru a case 9mm surplus hard-primer sub-gun ammo.
Glock: Click, tap rack click, tap rack click, tap rack click
Walther P99: Click, bang, click, bang, click, bang
I like the re-strike ability of my Walther, the only time I have needed it was when attemping to burn through a case of Israeli sub-gun ammo.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.