[Troyroder]

In the 1990s the then Chief of Staff of the US Army, General Eric Shinseki, directed that the army would transform to meet future worldwide threats. The ultimate goal of this vision became the Army’s Future Combat System (FCS). However, it would be many years before this system would be in place. So, an interim solution using modified current production vehicles was created. This solution was called the Interim Brigade Combat Team (IBCT). (This was later renamed to Stryker Brigade Combat Team, or SBCT, after the Stryker vehicle was fielded.) The original FCS and IBCT goals were that the US Army would be able to deploy a brigade, anywhere in the world, within 96 hours. Also, the unit's vehicles should be transportable by C-130 to a range of 1,000 miles. After the Stryker was deployed, the FCS goal of being C-130 transportable was changed to transporting three vehicles aboard a C-17.

[Sylvester]

In 1999, the US Army requested proposals for vehicles to equip the recently conceived IBCT. [3]. The Stryker ICV (the GM/GDLS Proposal) won this competition against different wheeled (4-, 6-, and 8-wheeled variants) and tracked competitors (Bionix ICV, from Singapore; M113 variant, from Turkey; and UDLP ). The Stryker MGS (the GM/GDLS Proposal) won its competition against two wheeled competitors (one from Cadillac Gage Textron, and the other from GDLS without GM) and only one tracked competitor (M8 Armored Gun System from UDLP). The Source Selection Authority (SSA) established the following criteria for evaluation, listed in order of priority: [links]

[translator]

Stryker proponents have countered with the following points:

[TodX]

Putting Strykers up against armored formations, even with a 30-millimeter cannon, brings to light the real problem with the Stryker. It has thin skin. This is where Capt. Gregory’s argument that anti-tank capabilities have proliferated among both state and non-state actors since the Stryker’s introduction comes into play, but not in the way he intends. Currently, Stryker armor, hard steel augmented with ceramic panels, is only capable of protecting against direct fire from a 14.5-millimeter machine gun and fragments from indirect fire systems. This is easily defeated by most of the armored vehicles in the Russian inventory and a far cry from the Bradley Fighting Vehicle, which has a reactive armor package that protects against multiple anti-armor munitions. You could put an Abrams main gun on a Stryker and it still wouldn’t change the fact that both the vehicle and the infantry squad sitting in the back are vulnerable to anything bigger than a machine gun.

[mikegogulski]

What is a Stryker?

[ichi]

The issue is not that Strykers are not sufficiently powerful to slug it out with tanks, but that Stryker unit commanders are encouraged to treat their formations like tank formations at the training centers. Stryker commanders are told to use their cavalry to fight for information just like an armored brigade would, only to find that without the heavily armored Bradley, in no time at all they no longer have a cavalry squadron. Instead of being encouraged to use their infantry to their advantage, they are told to move in formation, resulting in Strykers taking on T-80s with .50-caliber machine guns. Not even in a MILES environment will that math work. [links]

[wiskathecat]

Stryker formations became popular during the war in Iraq as commanders began to understand their usefulness in counterinsurgency operations. Being wheeled, the Stryker could move more quietly than the Bradley and dismount more troops (nine, compared to the six carried by a standard Bradley), overwhelming the objective and surprising those inside. The demand for Stryker formations began to outstrip supply, causing the Army to transition several armored brigades into Stryker brigades.

[TTBit]

The Stryker is an eight-wheeled armored vehicle that, along with the black beret, was an initiative brought forth by former Army Chief of Staff Gen. Eric Shinseki. Initially called the interim armored vehicle it was intended to be a bridge between the combat vehicles of the time and a future combat system that never came to fruition. The Army made a clear distinction from the M2 Bradley, which is designated an Infantry Fighting Vehicle (IFV) by designating the Stryker’s most common variant as an Infantry Carrier Vehicle (ICV).

[sunglasses]

The difference between an IFV and an ICV seems subtle at first, but their use in doctrine could not be further apart. The Bradley was designed to fight through to an objective, only dismounting its small number of infantry once it arrived. Infantry, however, is not the priority with the Bradley. This made it a good vehicle to fight alongside M1 Abrams Tanks. The Stryker on the other hand has a different job entirely.

[julia6roberts]

Once done firing, the pin is pulled backward by the spring, the slide cocks the hammer (also called a reset), and the pistol is waiting to fire anew.

[silverman]

Of course, safety is the most crucial thing no matter what model, regardless if we talk about Glock , Heckler & Koch, Beretta, or any other model. We encourage you to use weapons in a safe way. According to the National Rifle Association , there are few rules to take into consideration when using a gun, regardless of what type. And one of the most important ones is to make sure that the gun is unloaded and the safety is on. [links]

[knightmb]

On the other hand, hammer-fired weapons are excellent for more experienced people. Their most significant benefit is the precise trigger pull and accurate shooting sessions.

[wbgtrfv]

First, let’s talk about striker fired vs hammer fired power. A striker-fired gun will have a consistent trigger pull all its lifetime. Of course, unless the weapon is modified. And even if it is, the trigger weight will remain the same after the modifications. And this is a great and convenient feature since it gives you more consistency. When you train with this pistol, the trigger weight will remain the same. It will provide you with a lot more control over the gun, especially as the practice hours pile up. [links]

[jgarzik]

S&W saw some mixed success eating into the domination GLOCK enjoys in the law enforcement market. The M&P offers different sized backstraps to accommodate shooters’ different hand sizes, with reasonable friction to the grips. The trigger on the M&P uses a hinged trigger as opposed to the more common blade dingus. The trigger pull is generally considered gritty, with a so-so reset, placing it in the bottom third of the bunch. here

[Leonassan]

The Ruger American Pistol has nice lines, even if it looks somehow sinewy. The pistol is relatively heavy for a polymer pistol, but the upside is that it makes for a soft-recoiling firearm. Like the GLOCK, the slide is only serrated at the rear. The grip of the Ruger feels smaller than the others, but does have changeable straps. The grips themselves are not as textured as the other pistols. The Ruger uses a blade-style trigger safety. The trigger pull itself leaves a bit to be desired. It is rather mushy or spongy, and has pretty long reset. more

[HariposterAA]

FN FNS-9
The FNS is a full-sized pistol from the renown Belgian firearm manufacturer Fabrique Nationale d’Herstal (often referred to as FNH or just FN). The FNS has a rather basic appearance. It’s not quite as spartan as the GLOCK, but it certainly isn’t the prom queen of the bunch. It is the foreign exchange student that has that certain je-ne-sais-quoi that really intrigues you when you spend some time with her.

[KanyT]

The grip appearance is a little blocky, but the grip texture is really surprising. It offers a solid grip, and almost may be a touch pokey. Slide serrations both front and rear that aren’t particularly noteworthy. The trigger is hinged, and seems to have less of a curve to it than most of the others. It isn’t quite flat faced, as has become popular in aftermarket offerings.

[Stephen Gornick]

The P320 may not be as slick looking as the VP9, but it has a clean, modern look. It has serrations front and rear. The grip has a short beavertail and is taller than the other pistols in the group. The P320 is the only pistol of the group that does not use a passive trigger safety. It does have a slightly heavier trigger than the others, but it is top three with the VP9 and PPQ. There is very little slack and a nice clean break (even if it could be ½ pound or so lighter). The positive reset is really good as well. here