Walther Forums banner

1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I am thinking of buying the QA version of the P99. I would be interested in opinions and or comparaisons with the Glock trigger.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,225 Posts
To me the P99 trigger is crisp, the Glocks is spongy.

To me the Glock resets quicker than the P99.

Other than that I like the P99 better overall.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
539 Posts
Check out the trigger pull graph on the waltheramerica.com site as well. It doesn't replace hands-on feeling but explains the various triggers (and there are lots of them :) very well.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
304 Posts
The standard Glock trigger is lighter at 5.5 lbs than the QA's which is around the 7.7 lbs mark.  I find the difference noticeable, but I have considerably more "trigger time" on Glocks than the P99 QA.  If someone comes out with a good trigger pull reduction system (i.e. something similar to Glock's 3.5 lbs connector) for the QA, I'm buying it.

If you want a consistent, Glock-like trigger pull in the P99, the QA is as close as you'll get.  As has been mentioned the reset is quicker on a Glock, but you have to be at the higher end of shooting and engaged in rapid fire for this to come into play.  For most, I don't see this as an issue.

As Devin said, I find the P99 to be superior to the Glock as well.  It's nice having a decocker to make the gun safe. Also I've found the P99 to shoot tighter groups than the Glocks.  I still like Glocks, but I feel the P99 is an evolution for the concepts that Glock made so successful.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
539 Posts
Didn't the NYPD modify Glock triggers to make them heavier? Not that it matters for this discussion but if I remember that correctly it may be an indication that some perceive the Glock trigger too light for operation without a safety. Depending on the application (self defence, carry) a somewhat heavy trigger seems like a good idea to me. I would carry my AS in decocked mode.

BreakerDave: when you decock a QA it won't fire at all, right? You need to move the slide back a bit to get it to cock again? I would agree that's a good feature to have.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
310 Posts
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Nocturnal @ Feb. 16 2005,9:23)]Depending on the application (self defence, carry) a somewhat heavy trigger seems like a good idea to me. I would carry my AS in decocked mode.
But if you do that with the QA model, then you have to recock the gun (after you draw it!) before you can fire. At least with the standard AS version you have the option of the 9 lb double action trigger pull. If you're carrying the gun in a proper holster that covers the trigger, then that's more than enough safety for me. I'm always willing to put up with the inherent problems of a double action shot over the possibility that when I pull the trigger, nothing happens! That's why I want to get my AS before they disappear!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
304 Posts
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Nocturnal @ Feb. 16 2005,9:23)]Didn't the NYPD modify Glock triggers to make them heavier? Not that it matters for this discussion but if I remember that correctly it may be an indication that some perceive the Glock trigger too light for operation without a safety. Depending on the application (self defence, carry) a somewhat heavy trigger seems like a good idea to me. I would carry my AS in decocked mode.

BreakerDave: when you decock a QA it won't fire at all, right? You need to move the slide back a bit to get it to cock again? I would agree that's a good feature to have.
Yes NYPD has a heavier trigger pull than the standard one from Glock.  I believe it is around 8.5 lbs.  It is a purely bureaucratic move.  One's finger either belongs on the trigger or it does not.  I've seen video of officers who have had AD's and am familiar with several instances of improper holstering that produced AD's.  Believe me, the problem wasn't the weight of the trigger pull.

Regarding your QA question, you have it right.  Decocking a QA makes it unable to fire until the slide is moved partially rearward and resets the striker.  It's a nice feature for leaving the range or taking the gun apart.  Often shooters are taught to rack the slide for a visual inspection and then go hammer down prior to holstering / bagging the gun and leaving the range.  I've seen some AD's occur this way.  Either someone wasn't paying attention or robotically loads a fresh magazine.  There is a video cicrulating of a female police officer who did this prior to holstering her gun after the apprehension of a suspect.  The bullet hit the ground nearby and scared everyone.  -She was used to going hammer down and holster on her range.  That doesn't work so well with a live round in the chamber.

With Glocks, the trigger has to be pulled as part of the disassembly process.  Ideally, the shooter should've checked to make sure the gun was empty, but sometimes people don't or they expect to see nothing so they see nothing and BLAM!  Having the decocker allows you to avoid that.  

Of course, safe gun handling would help you avoid all of the problems.  I would never carry the QA without one in the pipe and the striker in its preset, partially cocked position.  If I'm in an armed confrontation, I already have enough going on. I don't need to add to my difficulties by messing around with the Israeli method of cocking as part of my draw.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,180 Posts
[b said:
Quote[/b] (BreakerDave @ Feb. 16 2005,10:50)]
...

With Glocks, the trigger has to be pulled as part of the disassembly process.  Ideally, the shooter should've checked to make sure the gun was empty, but sometimes people don't or they expect to see nothing so they see nothing and BLAM!  ...
There are a few handguns that require you to pull the trigger as part of the field stripping process. I believe the S&W 9Ve? is another.

I don't think that this is a wise choice in the design of a handgun. Especially one like the Glock in which the trigger is the safety. It forces you to violate one of the basic handgun safety principles.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,134 Posts
I will add my opinion of the QA.  I originally wanted an SA since I had one before in 40 S&W, but could only get a QA from my supplier.  Now I will never go back to an SA for the reason of the consistent trigger pull.  I shoot more accurately and consistently with the QA that anything I have shot before (except for the 1911 models of course).  I never could master the 2 stage Glock trigger, and the single action/double action thing of some guns require a change in trigger finger grip which kills consistency.  With the QA I start pulling and "BANG" and the round is on target!  I understand the apprehension of having a partially cocked striker and the problems with reholstering,  but if you treat it like a revolver or a glock there should never be a problem.  I would never use anything other that a form molded holster that does not collapse!!!  I like the decocking option also, when I have someone who wants to see it, just pop the button in and it is 100% safe.  When I put it away I get in the habbit of decocking it whether one is in the pipe or not.  The QA is just a great compromise between single action and double action.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
539 Posts
Yeah, it's hard to justify a design like that, especially when it's common knowledge that a fair number of accidents happen during cleaning/stripping. Someone figured that a warning was good enough but then forgot there are plenty of careless people with guns, unfortunately.

I've actually been reading articles in various rags from Mas Ayoob and Steve Gonzales that advocate using the safety whenever possible. According to Gonzales this is almost all the time. The Ayoob article (Guns March 05) shows that he can shoot as quickly with a gun that is on safe and one that is not. In this case he used a customized S&W auto that had a safety added. I love my P99 but the lack of a safety is sometimes a little troublesome. If I were to get a CCW (unlikely) I might look into getting a gun with a safety.
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top