I want a DAO 9mm for pocket carry

[seldon14]

Wanting a Dao for "restrike" capability seems really silly to me. In the many thousands of rounds I've fired, the ones I've seen fired in classes I've assisted with, classes I've taken, and time on the police range, I don't think I ever saw a failure to fire from a centerfire round (barring times that where people running around revolver spring weights).

Most the guns suggested here are not true double actions. I'm hard pressed to think of a true double action capable 9mm that would work well in a pocket, and doesn't suck. The 290 was awful imo.

A sig 239 is the smallest true da semi auto I can think of that is reliable enough to count on for carry.

If you must have 9mm, da, and pocket carry the lcr in 9mm is probably the way to go for current production guns.

 

[BC38]

Wanting a Dao for "restrike" capability seems really silly to me. In the many thousands of rounds I've fired, the ones I've seen fired in classes I've assisted with, classes I've taken, and time on the police range, I don't think I ever saw a failure to fire from a centerfire round (barring times that where people running around revolver spring weights).

Most the guns suggested here are not true double actions. I'm hard pressed to think of a true double action capable 9mm that would work well in a pocket, and doesn't suck. The 290 was awful imo.

A sig 239 is the smallest true da semi auto I can think of that is reliable enough to count on for carry.

If you must have 9mm, da, and pocket carry the lcr in 9mm is probably the way to go for current production guns.

Do you reload or allow reloads in your glasses?
Although I've never experienced it, reading in reloading forums would lead me to believe it is not uncommon for a primer to fail to light off first try due to being almost but not quite fully seated - like one or maybe two thousandths away from fully bottomed in the primer pocket. With a round like that the second strike virtually always fires the round.

 

[BC38]

The Kahr patent infringement suit was regarding the offset barrel lug which the Pocket 9 had (Kahr held the patent). The offset lug provided a lower barrel profile. The suit didn't have anything to do with hammer or striker firing mechanisms.

Good info. I learn something new every day here. Thanks.

 

[BC38]

I'm not going to quote anyone because I don't want to offend. But......you can't help if you don't tell the truth.

Just because a pistol has a hammer doesn't make it double action. The original LC9 is a hammer fired weapon that needs the slide to move to pre-cock it. Essentially, the LC9 is in a pre-cocked condition when it is ready to fire.

A true DA handgun is capable of completely cocking and firing a round by no other means than pulling the trigger, without any other mechanical intervention. REGARDLESS OF HOW A MANUFACTURER DESCRIBES THEIR PRODUCT CLAIMING IT'S DA. Given the OP has specifically asked for that, suggestions of pistols that don't meet that criteria are the equivalent of blurting out "squirrel !!".

Additionally, the entire line of Kahr pistols are STRIKER fired and don't meet the OP's criteria either.

I'm beginning to believe that some negligent discharges are the result of of "knowledgeable" firearms owners not really knowing their equipment or how it truly works.

So you're saying that the fact that working the slide to load the round also pre-cocks the hammer half way, that means the LC9 doesn't fit the extremely narrow definition of DAO? Even though there is no way to release the hammer without first completing the cocking by pulling the trigger? And even though if you could release the hammer from that half-cocked position without fully cocking it first by pulling the trigger it wouldn't have enough energy to fire the round?
Just curious, but whose definition is that?
FUNCTIONALLY in general parlance and vernacular DAO is applied to any firearm that has no other means of cocking and releasing the hammer other than pulling the trigger - which both cocks and releases the hammer. Two (double) actions completed by pulling the trigger.
Seems like a semantic distinction without a difference to me.

 

[seldon14]

Do you reload or allow reloads in your glasses?
Although I've never experienced it, reading in reloading forums would lead me to believe it is not uncommon for a primer to fail to light off first try due to being almost but not quite fully seated - like one or maybe two thousandths away from fully bottomed in the primer pocket. With a round like that the second strike virtually always fires the round.

The lead instructor I helped out used reloads for his stuff. Reloads where allowed to be used by participants but where rarely used afaik. For a carry gun you should be using premium factory defensive loads anyways.

 

[seldon14]

So you're saying that the fact that working the slide to load the round also pre-cocks the hammer half way, that means the LC9 doesn't fit the extremely narrow definition of DAO? Even though there is no way to release the hammer without first completing the cocking by pulling the trigger? And even though if you could release the hammer from that half-cocked position without fully cocking it first by pulling the trigger it wouldn't have enough energy to fire the round?
Just curious, but whose definition is that?
FUNCTIONALLY in general parlance and vernacular DAO is applied to any firearm that has no other means of cocking and releasing the hammer other than pulling the trigger - which both cocks and releases the hammer. Two (double) actions completed by pulling the trigger.
Seems like a semantic distinction without a difference to me.

The original poster stated in a follow-up post he wanted "repeat fire" which I would take as "restrike" capable.

I agree with Nomadmax. The lc9, glocks, m&ps, Springfield, kahrs etc are closer to sa than da.

 

[Telecaster]

We're putting words in the OP's mouth. We don't know if he wants a "true" DAO or just a long heavy(ish) trigger pull. My GUESS is he would be ok with a long heavyish trigger since he's talking about pocket carry. And in MY OPINION (not necessarily the OP's), it doesn't matter if it's a Kahr action or a Ruger LC9 or a S&W J-Frame, the trigger feel is similar and helps prevent ND. Possibly he just doesn't want a short light trigger, possibly no safety lever.

 

[ContinentalOp]

We're putting words in the OP's mouth. We don't know if he wants a "true" DAO or just a long heavy(ish) trigger pull. My GUESS is he would be ok with a long heavyish trigger since he's talking about pocket carry. And in MY OPINION (not necessarily the OP's), it doesn't matter if it's a Kahr action or a Ruger LC9 or a S&W J-Frame, the trigger feel is similar and helps prevent ND. Possibly he just doesn't want a short light trigger, possibly no safety lever.

Actually, he did say what he wanted.

Don't want striker fired for pocket carry-want DAO.
The BG380 is the ideal weapon for me and I have one and use it often. I bought it specifically because it was DAO as opposed to striker. Problem is it is in .380 and I would like one in 9.

I really like the repeat fire capability of the DAO-it is the main reason I bought the M&P380 over the little Ruger 380 in the first place.

I don't know how to interpret that as anything other than wanting a hammer-fired DAO in 9mm with restrike capability. And considering he refers to the BG380 as his ideal weapon except for the caliber, I think it's safe to say he doesn't want a revolver.

 

[gdogs]

So you're saying that the fact that working the slide to load the round also pre-cocks the hammer half way, that means the LC9 doesn't fit the extremely narrow definition of DAO?

Yep, that is correct. Second strike capability (though I agree with another poster above - is unlikely to ever be needed in a centerfire handgun) is a requirement for a true DAO handgun.

 

[rwt1405]

I've never even hear of that one. Must be pretty rare. I like the looks of it. Kind of a DAO P938. What I'm reading says it was discontinued due to a lawsuit by Kahr - which makes me think it must be striker-fired (like the Kahr).

While I did not have the Colt Pocket Nine, I do have a Colt Pony, which is (basically) the .380 version of it.

I bought my Pony new, in about 1997 or 1998 and considered buying a Pocket Nine, but I have to say the trigger (at least on my Pony) was/is extremely heavy/gritty, and I heard the Pocket Nine trigger was very similar, so I passed on getting one (Pocket Nine).

I now wish I had gotten one, as I believe they were only made for 1 year and have gotten some crazy money at times (I’ve turned down $900 for my Pony, so I can only imagine what the Pocket Nine could bring).

 

[rwt1405]

Colt Model Pony .380 Auto Variant-1

Yep, that's it

 

[pharmer]

I'm not a "striker fired" fanboy either. Don't carry in my pocket either. But my 6906 is now 26 years old and though it's never failed in all that time, it's mechanical and even with maintenance, it will wear out. I got a Kahr P9 last year, hasn't missed a beat since 1st round. Granted it's only had 600 or so rounds through it (many different bullets, all brass case). Trigger is closer to my 642 than my Glock 17 too, but striker fired, you gotta rack to clear it (a dud is a sud though). I wouldn't rule one out although I ditched the "extra rd mag" in the mag bucket and got 2 more 7 rd. Someday I'll start carrying it. Joe

 

[rwsmith]

I like my Kel Tec P-11

However they just announced that they won't be supporting it any more but will work on them while parts last. I had abused mine a bit and it wouldn't fire, so I sent it back to the factory and they fixed it for free.