What's the most reliable hammer-fired pistol?

[wild cat mccane]

Good question I am wondering too, but can't be the only thing.

Some of the strikers also choke, like the P320 and PDP. I think there is something also to the rails getting junk into them?

[TunnelRat]

Originally Posted by wild cat mccane

Good question I am wondering too, but can't be the only thing.

Some of the strikers also choke, like the P320 and PDP. I think there is something also to the rails getting junk into them?

The P320 was in their chosen top 4 in terms of performance and the PDP did as well as the Glock, so I don’t know that I would call that choking, especially with how some of the other pistols did. All of them got what was a “Pass” in the harder of the two tests.

The only hammer fired pistols in their top 4 were the Desert Eagle and the Nighthawk 1911. While I think the test is interesting, I’m not sure how much to take from it. I’m probably not going to buy one myself nor would I recommend people buy a Desert Eagle because of this test. I might recommend a Nighthawk, if a person can afford one.

[wild cat mccane]

I think the one thing this proved in the youtube was a lot of those guns failed the drop test for keeping a mag in.

I wish the Walther paddle release was the standard.

[jmr40]

The Beretta and Sig have both long track records of doing well. I suspect the Beretta may have a slight edge with the open slide. But I like the Sig better. If I were issued either of them, I feel well protected. But if I'm paying, Sig.

I've had less than good experiences with CZ, and they have never been widely used anywhere to earn a track record.

[Ricklin]

While I no longer own them, CZ not being widely used anywhere? Both my old CZ 52 and CZ 82 were military issued sidearms. If that is not wide use, I do not know what is.

[Forte S+W]

The H&K USP.

[44 AMP]

What's the most reliable hammer-fired pistol in your mind?

No pistol can be "most reliable" without some defined standards of what reliable ism and isn't. And no pistol is reliable without 'reliable" ammunition.

The pistol that never got used is 100% reliable. But one has no idea how functional it is.

How about a pistol that runs 100% of the time with one kind of bullet at one speed but does not with a different bullet or at a different speed? Is that pistol "reliable"??

IF even one unit from a production run isn't 100% reliable (by the user's definition) does that mean the entire production run is not reliable??

Or turn that around, if the one pistol tested buried in the mud, sand, dust, whatever, functions does that mean every single pistol of that make and model will do the same??

I bought a pistol from a gun shop one time, because it had a very low price tag. The shop had tried to use it as one of their rental guns on their range. I jammed a lot. Like every other or every third round, so the shop was selling it, cheap.

I took the gun home, and tried it, and they were right The gun jammed 3 times on the first magazine. Not "reliable".

Then, I oiled it. The gun ran flawlessly after that, so it was "reliable".

so, which gun is the most "reliable"?? Compared to what??

[rock185]

Reliable since day-1 for me have been FN/Browning Hi Power, SIG 210, CZ75, Beretta 92, HK USP, traditional SIG DA/SA pistols, and some 1911 types.

[Pumpkin]

92 Beretta

[Pumpkin]

Originally Posted by bac1023

Ok now that’s pretty funny…

Yup!