So, in addition to the potential for wear causing a striker fired gun to be more prone to going off when jarred there are some other considerations.GasGuzzler wrote:So it's mostly a way things are issue with some internet stories of mechanical failure. Since I work in retail repair, I know for a fact all designs have flaws and can and do fail. I'd never buy a stainless lever gun or mount a scope on one but that doesn't make it wrong to do so.
A hammer fired weapon with the correct setup SLAMS the hammer into the firing pin and the inertia from the contact forces the firing pin forward in a very positive manner. The mainspring works the hammer and the energy TENDS to be high. This tends to overcome hard primers and possibly dirty firearm conditions.
This may not be the case with some designs where the hammer is minimalist. (I question the Ruger LC guns with dinky small hammers for example.) In designs like the 1911 this energy and the long thin firing pin nose also means the firing pin protrusion during the firing cycle is more than enough. With a limited firing pin protrusion light strikes are more common with either design setup but often striker fired guns have protrusion limited by a shoulder on the striker/firing pin.
A striker fired mechanism uses a spring to drive the striker forward. Typically you have the striker held back by the sear and the trigger pulls the sear out of engagement and allows the spring force to thrust the striker forward. The system tends to be more sensitive to striker spring strength than a hammer fired system. In OLDER versions of this design you could NOT release the compression on the striker spring without dry firing the weapon. This lead to several issues including work hardening the striker/firing pin and broke firing pins and or damage to the slide behind the breach face. With some guns today this problem is minimized by a rather complex decocker mechanism. (Beretta 92 for example.) Earlier decocker designs tended to wear in over time and become a second trigger mechanism. With an exposed hammer design you can manually let the hammer down on an empty chamber to release tension on the mainspring.
Striker fired CAN tend to be less tolerant of dirt in at least two ways.
1) the sear engagement tended to be more of a sliding action against the striker. Any dirt on those engagement surfaces tends to keep them together. This is one of the major flaws with the Luger IMO. Pulling the trigger rotates a L section about a pin in the corner attaching it to the side plate. the other leg presses on one end of the trigger bar that cams the other end out from the Firing Pin/Striker to release it. Any dirt on any of those engagement surfaces tends to mean that the gun doesn't go off.
2) Pocket lint in the striker channel. I am NOT saying it doesn't happen but MOST hammer fired guns don't seem to have a pocket lint in the firing pin channel problem. I have seen or heard about several striker fired guns getting light strikes that went away after the striker channel was cleared of pocket lint. Combine this issue with a striker spring that is weak and you compound the issue.
Note these are mostly my observations with a few designs and as I hope I've indicated may not apply to all designs but may give you an idea of some of the basics for some of the older shooter's distrust of 'striker fired' and 'decocker' weapons. The decocker on a CZ-52 for example is NOT something to trust IMO.