DAO?
- Thread starter ghoffman
- Start date
Rastoff
US Veteran
What I have posted is the accepted definitions taught by the NRA and most pistol schools. As I said before, there will always be those who disagree on this subject.
What's more important is understanding how the triggers work. Here is a short video on the M&P trigger system:
The Glock trigger is different.
I actually went back and reviewed this video earlier this evening. You sent it in response to another question I posted a couple of weeks ago. Thanks again!
I've done some digging on the SIG DAK system...It has two resets, a short one with an 8 lbs pull and a long reset with a 6 lbs pull. I'm going to check one out tomorrow but after all I did to make the Shield shorter and lighter, I have a feeling I won't be leaving the M&P/Apex system anytime soon. Thanks for all you help Rastoff - I'm still not ready for you challenge, I can't hit the barn with my support hand yet!!!
Magload
US Veteran
I don't know if your Academy Sports is like the one here but they do not allow dry firing even with snap caps. All guns have their triggers locked and they will not unlock them. Don
Arik
Member
SRT trigger huh? Boy oh boy do I have a lot to learn!!!!! Wow!
TexasRaider
Member
He's right, that's a good option. The traditional Sig DA/SA got upgraded years ago with the Short Reset Trigger (SRT), which means once you pull the DA trigger and the weapon fires, the slide recoils and goes back into battery, leaving the hammer cocked. If you've kept the trigger pressed back the entire time this occurs, the reset to pull another shot is about 4mm, a very short clean break and "click" to fire the next round.
If you don't like the DAK, be sure to try a SIG SRT. Just make sure that when you dry fire it, keep the trigger pulled back against the frame, rack the slide and then see how short the reset is.
I have it on a M-11 Sig, and it makes shooting steel a lot of fun!
Last edited:
Rastoff
US Veteran
I don't know about the SigSauer triggers, but I have an H&K with the LEM upgrade. Truly an amazing design and the best I've ever seen for a DAO.
The LEM is simply a DAO trigger. The difference is it keeps the main spring compressed just like a SA would with the hammer cocked. However, the hammer drops with the LEM. The trigger cocks the hammer every time, but it really just feels like a long take up. The take up part is about 1lb with a 4lb sear break.
It's a little weird the first time you shoot one, but so much better than every other DAO on the market.
The LEM is simply a DAO trigger. The difference is it keeps the main spring compressed just like a SA would with the hammer cocked. However, the hammer drops with the LEM. The trigger cocks the hammer every time, but it really just feels like a long take up. The take up part is about 1lb with a 4lb sear break.
It's a little weird the first time you shoot one, but so much better than every other DAO on the market.
Bounty
Member
Was a good descriptive post on the DAK trigger system until we got here. Several striker-fired guns have "restrike" capability including the Taurus PT-111G2, PT709, et al.
I've gotten into this deep over on the HK forums.
In my words, the LEM is a DA/SA without a decocker. Maybe that qualifies it to be a SA/DA like some Taurus guns, meant to be left in SA mode but will DA on a dud round/dry fire. The special feature is that it is a two part hammer, and the external part you see lowers as you let off the trigger. It placates the mind to shield you from the distress of seeing a cocked hammer, but is otherwise meaningless. It's as if you took a traditional DA/SA, and hinged the hammer so the top half can rest on the rear face of the slide while the lower half is still sitting on a fully cocked hammer spring. It's a hammer gun trying to be a striker gun- long light trigger pull until you release the fully cocked hammer/striker.
The only functional difference between an LEM and a traditional DA/SA (of the same gun) left in SA mode is less than half an inch of light trigger range, in that the LEM has the longer trigger pull.
I'm pretty much alone on this, but I find the LEM to be just as safe/dangerous as a DA/SA left in SA, because the only difference is less than half an inch of ~2lb trigger travel. Anything that would cause an ND in one, would cause it in the other.
Last edited:
TexasRaider
Member
I stand corrected. Granted, I should have more accurately stated the Glock, M&P and P320 platforms, which are probably the most mainstream and popular striker fired systems right now. Admittedly, I have had little experience with Taurus pistols, aside from a the old PT92. Thanks for the correction.
Rastoff
US Veteran
Semantics. Like I said, there will always be those that disagree. That's OK, it's more important to understand the trigger than to agree on what it's called.
The LEM is by definition a DAO (see post #5). The trigger cocks and releases the hammer every time no matter what.
McE, your assessment is correct. Drop the hammer on an empty chamber or a dud and the mainspring is not set by the slide and must be compressed by pulling the trigger.
The difference from a DA/SA is in how the hammer works. A DA/SA left in SA has a fully cocked hammer. If the sear were to let go, the gun would fire. In the LEM, the hammer is down. If the main spring is released, the gun won't fire. Every gun, unless it has a trigger block like the M&P or 1911, will fire if the trigger is pressed. The type of action is completely irrelevant.
Is one action safer than another? This is another subject that causes endless and pointless debate. The type of action isn't listed in any of the 4 basic rules of gun safety.
I'd really like to find out if the LEM would fire IF
-firing pin block was defeated
-internal "unseen" part of hammer gets released
When you say "In the LEM, the hammer is down.", it's half correct. The top part of the hammer is indeed down, but the lower part is still fully cocked.
It is entirely possible that if the internal hammer was released (main spring is released, as you say), it would still have enough force to fire a round as it runs into the resting top part of the hammer (again, if the firing pin block was defeated).
I can't speak with the certainty that you speak with, about how a DA/SA hammer being dropped (ignoring firing pin safety) would definitely fire whereas the LEM experiencing the same condition would NOT fire. I think it might, I'm not so certain that it wouldn't as you are.
-firing pin block was defeated
-internal "unseen" part of hammer gets released
When you say "In the LEM, the hammer is down.", it's half correct. The top part of the hammer is indeed down, but the lower part is still fully cocked.
It is entirely possible that if the internal hammer was released (main spring is released, as you say), it would still have enough force to fire a round as it runs into the resting top part of the hammer (again, if the firing pin block was defeated).
I can't speak with the certainty that you speak with, about how a DA/SA hammer being dropped (ignoring firing pin safety) would definitely fire whereas the LEM experiencing the same condition would NOT fire. I think it might, I'm not so certain that it wouldn't as you are.
Last edited:
Bounty
Member
No harm no foul brother...just wanted to keep those who would have read that statement and accepted it as blanket doctrine from getting confused.
As I stated, great description of the DAK trigger. I'm sure many here would not have had the necessary experience with it to provide the comparison data point.
Rastoff
US Veteran
I think we'd both agree that these guns are crazy safe. So many things have to be defeated that the guns simply won't fire without human intervention.
However, if the firing pin block was defeated and the main spring were released, rotating the inside hammer bushing, I'm 100% positive the gun wouldn't fire. There are two reasons for my confidence. The first is the simple fact that there isn't enough momentum in the internal bushing, without the hammer, to overcome the firing pin return spring, and send the firing pin into the primer with enough force to ignite it. The second is the aspect of the H&K USP you forgot, the hammer block.
The H&K USP LEM works like this:
When the gun is fired, the slide cocks the main spring. As the trigger is released, the hammer follows it down. There is a hammer block similar to the half-cock position on a 1911. This block keeps the hammer back about 1/16" from the firing pin. This gap will prevent the gun from firing even if the main spring were released.
So, for the H&K USP LEM to accidentally discharge, the sear would have to fail, the firing pin block would have to fail, the hammer block will have to fail and the force delivered to the firing pin will have to be enough to overcome the firing pin return spring.
Just to keep this on track, all of this has nothing to do with the terminology used to describe the trigger system. You may call it what you like.
It would seem then the DA/SA has the same benefit of a hammer block, as the falling hammer would fall to the position it would as if you were to use the decocking lever to drop it.
You're absolutely right that a lot of safeties have to fail for an accidental discharge without a trigger pull. That's largely the reason I think keeping a DA/SA in SA in the holster is no more dangerous than the LEM, but you get a nicer trigger every single pull. No one seems able to process the idea of carrying a gun SA with no manual safety in a holster, it's just unanimously denounced as a bona fide idiot move (until it has a hinged trigger, I guess).
Just a purely hypothetical rumination, I'm still curious if the released internal hammer of the LEM is enough to ignite a primer, assuming the rest of the system is ready to go. I just don't see the visible half of the hammer being responsible for all that much inertia to actually bring the total force below what's required for ignition.
It's as if you somehow secured a nail to a hammer and hit it into a board (DA hammer dropping), vs holding the nail to the board and swinging the hammer separately. The weight of the nail (i.e., visible LEM hammer) is just a fraction of what's being brought by the hammer (i.e., hammer spring force).
You're absolutely right that a lot of safeties have to fail for an accidental discharge without a trigger pull. That's largely the reason I think keeping a DA/SA in SA in the holster is no more dangerous than the LEM, but you get a nicer trigger every single pull. No one seems able to process the idea of carrying a gun SA with no manual safety in a holster, it's just unanimously denounced as a bona fide idiot move (until it has a hinged trigger, I guess).
Just a purely hypothetical rumination, I'm still curious if the released internal hammer of the LEM is enough to ignite a primer, assuming the rest of the system is ready to go. I just don't see the visible half of the hammer being responsible for all that much inertia to actually bring the total force below what's required for ignition.
It's as if you somehow secured a nail to a hammer and hit it into a board (DA hammer dropping), vs holding the nail to the board and swinging the hammer separately. The weight of the nail (i.e., visible LEM hammer) is just a fraction of what's being brought by the hammer (i.e., hammer spring force).
Rastoff
US Veteran
No. The inertia of the hammer is much greater when coming from full cocked vs already down.
Your analogy is flawed. In it you still have the full inertia of the hammer head for either scenario. Instead, modify it to say a nail is partially inserted. Now hit it like normal with the hammer. Then rest the hammer on the nail, but now strike the hammer handle just above where your hand is holding it with another hammer. This is what it would be like for the inner bushing on an LEM equipped H&K. Dramatic difference.
Here is a picture of what I mean:
If you hit the hammer with anther hammer where the arrow indicates, it won't drive the nail very far. However, swing that same hammer and you get a lot more inertia working for you.
In each case you have the same mass hitting the nail, but not the same inertia.
Your analogy is flawed. In it you still have the full inertia of the hammer head for either scenario. Instead, modify it to say a nail is partially inserted. Now hit it like normal with the hammer. Then rest the hammer on the nail, but now strike the hammer handle just above where your hand is holding it with another hammer. This is what it would be like for the inner bushing on an LEM equipped H&K. Dramatic difference.
Here is a picture of what I mean:
If you hit the hammer with anther hammer where the arrow indicates, it won't drive the nail very far. However, swing that same hammer and you get a lot more inertia working for you.
In each case you have the same mass hitting the nail, but not the same inertia.
I got a chance to shoot a SIG P226 40 cal DAK last weekend, one of the LEO/owners of the range was very kind and let me run through a couple of mags. What a nice gun!!! One thing I realized right away, the double reset on the DAK would make it harder to shoot the Shield. With the SIG you release the trigger PAST the first reset and I've already got the muscle action going for one reset. I would buy this gun on the spot if the "inside" reset was gone! Another issue for me: getting to the second reset seemed to take forever. I'm afraid I'm a M&P person! I still want to fire the SRT trigger system before I make a decision but I'm going to have to get really lucky to find an opportunity to shoot this one! The M&P Performance Center CORE has the feel I like but I don't need all the fancy optics. I'm leaning towards a 5" 9mm Pro with an Apex trigger. sear, striker, and springs. I have them on the Shield and I really like the way it feels!
Feel free to tell me what you think - there is a couple of hundred years of experience on this forum - I'm all ears!
Feel free to tell me what you think - there is a couple of hundred years of experience on this forum - I'm all ears!
TexasRaider
Member
Hey, whatever you feel best with, go for it. There's a reason Baskin-Robbins has 31 flavors!
