Which scenarios are these each best in?
Hammer has second strike capability and works better when wet.
Striker works better when there's a large amount of debris that would otherwise clog the hammer channel.
>>30380143
>Hammer has second strike capability
"Second strike" is not a valid solution to a malfunction in an autoloader. It works in a double-action revolver because the trigger pull chambers a new cartridge. That doesn't happen in an autoloader, so at best it could possibly rectify a bad primer. Tap/rack/bang is a much more comprehensive process for autoloading pistols.
>>30380229
You're going to pull the trigger again 300x times in an emergency before you realize what's going on. Considering statistically it's more likely to be a light strike or hard primer rather than a dud, the feature could save your life.
My grandfather (before he passed away) had a compact revolver loaded for .38. It featured an internal hammer that he swore prevented snagging if he pulled it from his belt. He never had a confrontation so I don't know how useful this feature was. Anybody have more info on this? I never see them for sale.
>>30380263
This
>>30380369
S&w bodyguard and ruger lcr have internal hammers. S&w also used to make one with a hammer that was mostly enclosed, but could still be cocked for single action fire.
SAO hammer
>>30380263
Where do these statistics come from?
I'd like a citation
>>30380407
Dud rounds haven't been much of an issue for decades, light strikes/hard primers however still occur.
>>30380143
>Hammer has second strike capability
>second strike
shhhh
shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
ssssssssssshhhhhhhhhhhhhhut
theeeeeeee
fuck
uuuuuuuuuuuuup
Pistol with hammer tends not choke on hard primers as much as striker-fired pistol.
>>30380661
chill out bro
Have some horse milk
