That’s why I didn’t buy a second one

there are way too many other options out there to settle for less

 

North of 7k rounds through mine on the original striker. I think the striker issue is a bit over done and limited to a small production batch but I could very well be wrong. YMMV

 

Look at the options out there for a 9mm Glock 19 sized pistol that's optics ready. People think there's a lot of options now. I beg to differ. To me, the pistol market is waaaayyy behind the curve for optics ready pistols. My main debate argument on this topic is as follows:

Most pistols require you to punch out a pin to remove the extractor for cleaning. That means removing your optic to punch out the pin. I don't yet own a pistol with an optic, but I'd think once you remove it, for pin point accuracy, you'd want to reverify your point of aim / point of impact (POA/POI) once you put the optic back on. That's completely unacceptable to me. You went to the range, shot it, cleaned it, now need to go back and shoot it again to verify POA/POI...yeah that just seems ridiculously stupid to me. But since I don't own an optic setup pistol, perhaps the POA/POI is so minimal it doesn't matter for practical purposes. I would really like someone to chime in with their experiences in regards to this.

As far as I know, there is Glock, Sig, and FN that don't have pins to punch out to remove the extractor. If in agreement with my assessment, you can buy the 509, and the Apex striker, or you can buy Glock or Sig. Both of those are great pistols. But if you like the way the 509 feels in hand better, you have to make the decision of which priority is highest for you. Or, if you don't mind the optic needing to be removed to clean the extractor, then your choices of what to buy expands dramatically. If the optic returns to zero after removal, then I don't see too much of a big deal over it. But if I'm not mistaken, most people loc-tite their screws on the optics. The 509 boasts that isn't necessary, but I'm not sure I wouldn't loc-tite it any ways. The 509 also has an inherent issue of light primer strikes after being submerged in water...That's another topic in itself. Most people don't seem to mind that - let it drain for about 3 seconds and that problem is cured - but again, most people don't call that an issue.

Also, I think it preferable to be able to cowitness your sights with your optic in case the optic goes down. I'd have to check out the P320 and see what is needed to have sights that cowitness with an optic. I've heard you lose your rear sights when mounting an optic, but I've seen plenty of pics with the P320 with sights and an optic, so I'm not sure if there's anything special they are doing to accomplish that or what. Also, for my personal liking - I love the P320 trigger, but no way I'm carrying that concealed without a safety - but that's just me. I've heard people complain about Glock's mounting systems having tiny screws so short they didn't like the set up. So I think just because you might want an aftermarket striker for the 509 shouldn't necessarily take it out of the running. I consider the above listed a pretty clear picture of options and trade offs, and the 509 still looks like a viable option to me. But these are personal preferences subject to individual discretion. I am by no means an authority on this subject/ Like I said, I don't even own a pistol with an optic. I've shot a couple of my friends, but that's it. So please don't take this as some sort of expert advice - I have just done some looking around and reading because I think optics on pistols are the future and here to stay, and I'm just giving you my opinion based on what my thought process has been through my journey and thought process in regards to.

 

It sounds to me you don't want a 509 so don't get one. You're choice.
I have a 509T and a FNS-9C and have replaced the strikers with the Apex HD Striker. I have shot 100's of rounds with each and I'm very confidence of each gun.

 

I just replaced the strikers in two of my FNS slides with Apex strikers. Easy as can be. Watched the short video on the Apex website to see what I was getting into and then did it. Much easier than removing/replacing the firing pin in one of my CZ hammer fired pistols (with firing pin block set up).

 

Canyon Man, Thanks for the dissertation one the 509, I learned a few things ! That was good.

coupe11, Thanks for the install tip, I have my HD striker sitting around here with all the other small weapon upgrades that I seem never to have time for.

tsymonds, love your avatar, that's cool ( JIMO ) and funny too.

Gun Owner, I wouldn't sit on the fence worrying about the striker, I purchased a 509 months a couple months ago and when I realized there were an abnormal amount of posts regarding the striker meaning the issue may require some action on my part ... I immediately ordered the Apex , I think it was $45. So just as I received the HD striker from Apex... there was an urgent email w/ return label asking for it's immediate return due to some tooling err that was missed ( or something ) . OK... so back it went , which had me wondering .... but honestly they were on top of their end. It was replaced within a week or less.

Having a weapon that feels good in your hand is valuable...( JIMO ) plus if you changed your mind you could sell it.

I'm no authority on 9mm carry guns... and am biased also... however I do spend foolish money on things FNH for some reason.

 

I think the notion that FN does not care about this issue is wrong. Having spent my career inside a corporation, I can tell you that in corporations, what is going on inside, and what is disclosed to the public are way different.

I am confident that FN is fully aware of the complaints that are out there, and that their engineers are working hard to understand the problem and develop a solution. This is their flagship handgun. No way are they going to let its reputation get tarnished and just stand there and watch. My guess is that they will announce as soon as they have a solution in place.

 

First of all, no firearm is 100% reliable 100% of the time. If you’d done much more than cursory research you’d have taken note that all or nearly all of the striker failures have been a result of doing precisely what FN advises not to do; dry fire. “Regularly very firing your FN 509 pistol for practice or training may result in damage to the striker”, is a direct quote from the owner’s manual. Not surprisingly there are some brainiacs who have ignored this, and after repeated dry firing had a striker failure, then complain(whine) that their Glock or some other firearm doesn’t have this restriction. Huh? You figure the logic out, no one has as yet provided rational explanation.
I’ve got 2.5+k rounds through my 509t without a single failure to load, fire or eject. Wish I could offer up the same reliability report on my Glock 19’s, Sig 938 or Kimber’s. In fact my Sig had to go back to Sig because it kept kicking out the magazine after discharge. Turned out to be a minor defect, granted not as disabling as a broken striker, but likely fatal in a defensive encounter.
While the Apex striker appears to be the “fix of choice” for those who’ve had failures or who are concerned about it, time will tell, especially with the “dry fire” action cowboys. I will however add that Apex aftermarket products have earned an excellent reputation from users.
As for FN not addressing the issue, baloney. Just because they haven’t issued a recall doesn’t mean they’re not concerned or taking measures to determine the cause and remedy. I haven’t heard of anyone who’s sent their 509t back to FN who has since had a issue with the replaced striker.
I favor carrying my 509t over all my other firearms, all of which are CC sized. I don’t worry (wring hands here) about reliability any more than with anything mechanical, but I don’t insist on doing what the mfg. advises not to do either.
While I understand why you might have concerns, sounds like you’ve already made up your mind not to get a 509, sooo what’s your point? Just sayin.

 

I find some agreement with what Shadetree says. We must remember, there are plenty of people out there with high round counts that have had no issue with their strikers. And a lot of the reported breakages came from people who did dry firing. Not all had done that or done it a lot though. I'd sure like to think it was a batch problem, but if that were the case, I think FN would have figured that one out by now. A slight loop hole was that people with FNS pistols got the new OEM striker when the service bulletin came out, and were never advised not to dry fire it. The FNS manuals don't state not to dry fire.
However, the real reason for this post is I did a little you tubing on the 509 tonight - Although I'm a .40 guy for the most part, the 509 mid size is just such a pretty pistol lol...and 9mm in a smaller compact pistol doesn't bother me so much. Full sized, I'll stick with my .40's though. But I'm digressing...I saw the 509 lineup of pistols are different than the FNS lineup of how you remove the extractor. I don't know why FN went this route, but unlike the FNS lineup, the 509's have a pin to punch out to remove the extractor, and as you might have guessed, yes it's under the cut out for the optic...which means the optic must be removed to clean the extractor. And yes I know, that's not done on every cleaning - but I like to do it about every 1000 to 1500 rounds. I'm really curious if I'm over reacting to this aspect of optic mounted pistols, and hoping someone chimes in regarding how hard it is to remove the optic if it's loc-tited down, and it's return to zero. I guess that might be hijacking this thread, but the OP hasn't returned for additional input since his first post on the thread, and it does serve as a consideration when purchasing an optics ready pistol. I'm really glad to have my two FNS pistols. I'll have to have them milled out if I want to mount an optic, but it seems to be a better platform in the area of ease of disassembly. I personally think FN's pistols are pretty top notch, even with the whole striker issue thing. I'm really glad Apex made their HD striker - for some - myself included, it was a worrysome.

 

I don't think this is a batch issue, and I don't think people with high round counts disproves anything.

I think the problem is inherent in MIM.

When you start with billet, it has been rolled, so many casting defects that were in the ingot, inclusions, stringers, whatever, have been squashed around enough to disrupt them, and there is data that shows micro bubbles can actually be closed up in the hot rolling process, so rolled billet is usually good stuff. MIM, on the other hand, starts as metal powder that is mixed in with a binder, like plastic, so you can get the powder to flow into a mold. THe plastic is then burned off and the powder fuses. As you can imagine, by starting with particles, the chance that you end up with an internal defect due to a clump, or uneven powder distribution is higher. This means that you might have a bunch of good ones, but 1 in 100, or 1 in 1000, or whatever, will have an internal defect. If you then add additional stress from dry firing, that defect will begin to grow, and eventually will grow to catestrophic failure. Net, you can have a MIM part and 999 out of 1000 will perform fine, but you will occasionally get a defect. Of course, if it is 1 in 1000, that is a bear to test in the lab, but it will show up once you ship a few thousand guns ... so that's what I think is going on.

 

Do you know if the FNX 45 uses a MIM strker?

The one thing I noticed is that if other firearm manufactures are using MIM strikers, why are there not many people complaining about this issue with other guns?

I have never bought a gun that had so many people complaining about a certain defect.

 

An Apex striker is about the same cost as a new magazine (I know, expensive magazines, but then so are the P07/P09 CZ magazines).

Not many real users, of anything, buy it and never modify it, never try to improve it, let alone treat it with kid gloves for fear of breaking it. How many drivers buy sports cars and never see how fast it'll go, how quickly it will accelerate, how quickly it will stop or how it handles on a curvy road? While I have no reason to do mag. dumps and feel no need to bury my pistol in mud prior to firing it I will still "use" it. I had no problem ordering the Apex strikers. In a month or so I'll order two more for the two 4" slides I have out in my shed.

My newest M&P has an Apex trigger kit and barrel in it.

My newest XD has a PRP trigger kit in it.

Many of my CZs have CGW parts in them (springs, sears, hammers, etc.)

Very little comes "out of the box" perfect for everyone. A lot of us don't mind making sure (at least in our minds) that our tools enforce our confidence in getting "the job" done.

 

"Not many real users don't modify their weapons" I'm a real user. There's been a pistol on my side since 1983. I've never modified a weapon. Never used a part from a source other than the OEM. But I also didn't run to FN to get a MIM striker replacement for my machined ones either. To the O.P. I say...... you have already made up your mind and this is all a mute point. You made up your mind before you found a need to post now you just have to follow your decision. Remember that today firearms are never designed or build by gunsmiths. They are designed by computer. A computer operated by a non gunsmith. An engineer who may likely have gotten a degree without ever having done work with his hands. Then plastic is molded and parts assemblers used at low cost to put a product together. No matter what brand you settle on. No craftsmanship, just profit engineering. The fear you have found in your heart for FN, will be found in other brands too. Good luck.

 

Well said 0119, well said!
Thanks to all of you who offer up your well thought out opinions and positions on these topics. Nice to see we’re not all droids and can come to different suitable conclusions that meet our individual needs and satisfaction.

 

...Not many real users, of anything, buy it and never modify it, never try to improve it, let alone treat it with kid gloves for fear of breaking it.

As 0119 notes, there are many real users who never modify or mess with their guns. The same is true of car owners. But an awful lot of them DO mess with their guns and their cars.

That said, I'd argue that the majority of gun owners who shoot competitively do modify their "game" guns. No big deal, either way, if the results (of modifying or not modifying the guns) satisfies the owner. Either route can be correct -- FOR THAT OWNER!

As a long time moderator on another forum, I can say that too many folks make modifications before they really understand their weapon or have used it enough to appreciate what really needs to be done. Then they spend more time and money UNDOING what they previously did.

Some of my guns are virtually stock, but a number of them have been tweaked -- by me or by a prior owner -- and the tweaks have made them better guns. Your mileage may vary.

 

The internals of my 509T remain as purchased from FN. I’ve added a red dot optic and a PMM compensator. The red dot has been on the 509 since new and the comp has about 2k rounds of the more than 7k run down the pipe so far. Trigger was gritty when new but a lot of rounds and some grease has made it nice and usable. It’ll stay as is until it dies as far as I’m concerned. I can print 3-4” groups at 25yds with it so what more do I need?

 

Just get the Apex striker, it's just shy of $50.

 

Do you know if the FNX 45 uses a MIM strker?

The FNX is a hammer-fired gun. Hammer-fired guns don't use strikers. Striker-fired guns can use MIM strikers, but not all strikers are produced using the MIM process.

I don't know if there are any other FNX parts that are MIM.
______________________________________________________

Creating an Metal Injection Molding (MIM) part is a very expensive and specialized process and is typically only used for high volume parts. Once set up and perfected the MIM process can create a reliable and precise part at a lower cost. Not every gun maker does MIM production in house.

When MIM was first introduced, a number of gun makers farmed out the components that would be produced using that process. Some of the early parts from a couple of sources failed. Ever since then, MIM has had a bad name.

Like plastic guide rods, MIM parts get a lot of flak from users -- but there have been remarkably few problems in recent years across the industry. Few of the folks avoiding MIM parts have experienced MIM part failures, but a lot of people are afraid of MIM parts.

 

Could someone explain why Glock uses a MIM striker and it doesn't have all the people complaining about the striker breaking?

Considering it seems many other gun manufacturers are using MIM not so save money, yet they don't have known issues like the FN 509 of continuous failed strikers.

This is what I do not get, there are many other guns that use MIM strikers, yet they don't have lots of people complaining.

I've seen this many times, usually when there is a known issue in any product, it usually is a real problem. It is obvious FN is putting out a defective product and yet they are not even owning up to that there may be an issue.

This leads me to not having any trust in FN.

 

Could someone explain why Glock uses a MIM striker and it doesn't have all the people complaining about the striker breaking?

Simple...Glock Perfection.


While I say that somewhat jokingly, they’ve had a long time to perfect (improve) engineering processes and QC. Comparatively, the FN MIM striker hasn't yet had the scale of time, volume, or QC. In manufacturing, continuous improvement goes a long way....identify a weakness and engineer a strength from it.

 

On a pretty much glock centric forum, a few months ago, they were talking about one of the members going to a training session only to find out the tip of the mim striker had broken off on his duty/carry Glock that very morning (didn't know it till the class started and it wouldn't go BANG).

They make forged strikers (aftermarket of course) and a lot of those guys have switched out to those in place of the mim strikers.

Everything breaks. My Browning came home from the gun store with a broken firing pin. I was field stripping it to inspect, clean and lube it and noticed a pin lying on the floor. I was trying to figure out how a pin could have come out of the frame/slide when I noticed the rounded tip on it. About 1/2" or so of the firing pin was just lying on the floor. I bought two to replace it. If it happened once, it could happen again.

My S&W M29 stripped out the little t-slot nut that fits in the frame for the rear sight elevation adjustment screw the first weekend I had it. Had some trouble getting that one. Oh, that was in about 1983 or 84 when S&W was making the guns so many people today prefer.

My S&W 586 would shoot about a box of ammo before the very tight cylinder to barrel throat clearance would start to drag as powder residue built up. Clearance from the factory was around 0.018" if I remember correctly. That was in 1981. Again, back in the day when they were supposed to be good. Don't get me wrong, both are very nice revolvers.

My M&P 9MM FS I bought about 10 years ago began to fail to release the striker on the very first range session.

My M&P .357 SIG keyholed ammo that my Glock M31 shot just fine.

Etc, etc., etc. Every company has bad stuff get through QC and out to the customer.

 

Got me a tactical model and got an apex striker after I saw it was an issue. Should be good to go easy swap no big deal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Does the Apex striker fix the gritty trigger?

 

It didn't on either of mine. Parts have to wear in together. My triggers were starting to feel pretty good and the Apex strikers sort of put them back to where they were when new. The sear has to push the striker to the rear and then where they contact the sear has to move down off the striker "dogleg" or tail in order to release the striker and fire. That spot/area on the factory strikers had begun to smooth out some between dry fire and live fire at the range and the new Apex strikers put half that combination back to "factory new" surface conditions.

To be honest. I did a small/light amount of stoning on both of mine with a 280 grit (plus oil) stone followed by a little more stoning with a 600 grit stone (plus oil). I reinstalled the Apex striker in the FNS Compact and it was returned to the same feel as prior to the Apex striker installation. What I did was (get impatient and) speed up the wear in process between the sear and the new striker. Then I pulled the Apex striker out of the 5" slide and did the same thing. It was a little more random when I put if back in the slide. Some pulls were great, some a little longer/draggy. The longer I dry fired it the more consistent it became.

Anything metal that moves against another piece of metal has to "wear in" some before it becomes smoother. You're wearing off the high spots. Wax on a car's paint fills in the low spots with wax and makes it smoother to the touch (as well as protecting the paint). Wearing in of to metal surfaces wears off the high spots and makes them smoother. Smoother = less friction and a different feel (better, in my opinion).

Stoning/polishing the metal is something you don't do without some practice. You don't want to remove too much metal or change contact angles - unless you are an expert and do that for a living and know exactly what to do and why (which I don't, I just smoothed it a bit and was very careful to go slow and not screw up the angles.)

At first I was comparing (wrongly) the feel of the FNS trigger to the M&P 2.0 trigger kit I got from Apex. If you've got a 2.0 and you want an awesome trigger, buy an Apex kit that replaces most of the factory parts (I don't remember the kit number but it was the top of the line Apex kit). That 2.0 M&P is the best striker fired trigger I have now and better than some of my hammer fired CZ pistols. Not scary light, scare awesome. You have to shoot it to believe it, and then shoot it some more to convince yourself it's really that good.

But on the FNS all I replaced was the striker. And the trigger parts/function is different, too. Took it a few trigger pulls for me to realized that. The FNS is not an M&P, the trigger function is different, I didn't have a full Apex kit - just the striker.

I spent $100 for two strikers. I replaced the strikers in two FNS slides with Apex strikers. Give me a month or so and I'll order two more Apex strikers for the two 4" slides.

After all, it's not about 100% certainty they will never break, it's about making me feel better about their reliability vs. the factory strikers. We've got a 22 page thread about factory striker breakage/replacement. Where's the thread about Apex strikers breaking? There ain't one. We know how people are. If they put Apex (or any company that makes aftermarket/upgrade parts for guns) parts in their FNS and it broke, most of them would be all over the internet (some would even temporarily join new forums just to) complain about how bad the upgraded parts were. I see it pretty often.

Your factory striker may last you as long as you need it. I just prefer to take care of something before it breaks. I prefer to keep my FNS clean, lubed, regularly inspected, loaded with the most reliable/accurate ammo I can get, or make, for it and to practice with it (need to do that more often till I figure out whether or not it will fit into my needs or end up in the safe.

 

I just bought the striker for piece of mine and the gun is amazing. Takes less than 2min and it’s worth it


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

After having one of my 509's break a striker, I have replaced all of my FN striker fired guns with the Apex striker. I also have another FN 509 Midsize MRD on order and my Apex striker will arrive before the pistol.

 

And there’s no reliability issues with just adding the apex hd striker?

 

4 FN's. 2 9c's from when first introduced. Thousands of rounds. No broken strikers. 509, nope no broken striker even though it is MIM. 4 FN's none with a gritty trigger. 4 FN's, 0 dry fires except for disassembly. 0 issues.

 

I was the same way, thousands of rounds and no problem, then one broke. I decided to change the striker on any FN that might be a carry gun, then decided to just change them all.

 

I don't see logic in replacing parts that haven't broke. Especially if the evidence at hand is merely the hearsay of "people" on the internet. The internet has made an entire profession (news media) and generation (anyone under oh say 60) into all out liars! It's gonna take something more than reading something from fictitious people on the clouds of the internet, to make me believe FN is putting out a substandard part.

 

I wasn't going to replace mine until I had one break, then I saw it first hand. (refer to post 30)