I was checking out GearScout and saw this article about a review on GunsAmerica's blog. Here are some interesting quotes from the GA review:
"The drop safety itself is a revelation of sorts and should make a lot of people jump up and down screaming “YES! FINALLY!” Few companies have dared put a manual safety on their striker pistols and this is the first in a gun that can compete with the big boys."
" The FNS is the first gun from a high end manufacturer that breaks this mold and boldly admits that many of us would rather have a manual safety on our double action guns."
This is a bit puzzling. Not only are drop safeties standard on practically all modern handguns, but the safety which the author means to refer to has actually been available on other striker fired pistols including the Springfield XD (ym"sh) and the Smith & Wesson M&P. They're also available without manual safeties, which is how I prefer my striker fired handguns.
"In a duty situation, your gun may be drawn and pointed several times a week, you may be tackled or have things thrown at you, all while pointing your loaded firearm at someone, there is nothing like the confidence of a manual safety to protect you from shooting someone unintentionally."
Every time I have been trained to draw a pistol with a manual safety, I have been taught to remove the safety before bringing the firearm on target. This training worked well for me in real life. I would question the competence and quality of training of anyone who absolutely needed a manual safety in order to not negligently shoot someone.
"If until now, you have stayed away from striker pistols for duty use due to the risk of accidental discharge, the manual safety on the FNS truly gives you the best of both worlds. There are other guns out there that have this feature, but they are not in the same class as the FNS."
Apparently the author feels that the XD and M&P aren't in the same class as the FNS, although in his (exceptionally polite) comments on the GearScout blog, he said that the XDM is "probably the most accurate handgun on the market." I am having difficulty reconciling these two statements. What makes the FNS "not in the same class" as the XD or M&P? The author fails to support his rather bold statement.
I am not a fan of the XD in any major way. I do not like Smith & Wesson as a company. I do like FN handguns, and I have had a significant amount of trigger time with the FNP/FNX/FNS platforms. However, I fail to see how shooting 250 rounds through an FNS in an afternoon, as the author did, gives him the authority to say that it is in a higher class than something like the M&P. The Smith & Wesson product is not a newcomer to the market and has been poked and prodded from many angles since its introduction, to include at least four or five people shooting 250 rounds through it.
Nothing in the review indicated to me that the FNS is in a different class than competing striker fired handguns. And, frankly, nothing in the review indicated to me that the author knows how to properly use a handgun in a "duty situation," or that he is familiar with proper firearms terminology. His only response to the GearScout article was to write incredibly insightful things like "why don't you pull your head out of your ass" and "you are just a parrot repeating marketing materials and misinformation." Well, if by "marketing materials," the author means "proper terminology for firearm components," then he would be correct. For once.
GearScout's initial conclusion about this review was solid.