I was about to pull the trigger on a 509M but started noticing complaints about the striker breaking and causing discharges
I carry appendix so that is a no go

Have they sorted it out?

you guys have experience with this happening?

Supposedly FN switched from a forged striker to a MiM striker at some point and the first few batches of Mim strikers were not heat treated properly. Those particular strikers were seeing some breakages. I have never heard of them discharging because of it though, not sure where that came from...

FN supposedly made a slight adjustment to the heat treat and everything is fine now. Also, Apex is working on an improved, forged striker that will fit all the striker fired FN pistols. It isn't available just yet but they are close.

In the grand scheme of things, breakages still seem pretty rare and I would still buy the pistol if you really like it.

My first 509 was delivered with a broken striker. It wouldn’t fire a round. I don’t know why a broken striker would cause a discharge unless a piece was stuck protruding from the firing pin hole in the slide.

the 509 is a double action pistol so the striker isnt fully cocked. Your dick, balls and femoral artery are safe

Apex Tactical is launching a new Heavy Duty Striker for the 509 and FNS models within a couple weeks.

I wondered if this would satisfy the safety issue with some older FNS guns, but they wouldn't give me a straight answer. At 50 bucks a pop, I'd kind of like to know...

MIM? Are they trying to be the new Sig?

Everyone is using MiM these days, it's the way of the future.

MiM is really just a more efficient type of casting and no one ever complained about the strength or quality of good castings (think Ruger, CZ and engine blocks). Like casting, using quality material and good molds along with proper heat treatment and proper parts design are all equally important to achieve the proper strength and quality of the MiM parts being made.

As time goes on, the manufacturers will perfect the art of MiM and these issues won't exist outside of the typical (occasional) Q.C. slip that all companies have. We are stuck in the middle of the manufacturers dealing with the leaning curve involved with MiM on mass production lines, hopefully they will all figure it out soon.

If Mim really bothers you, Glock does not use any Mim parts last I checked. They use sheel metal stampings for most of their parts. Their Extractors, strikers, and polymer parts are old fashioned castings (the slow version of MiM).

Sorry, but someone gave you bad info. Glock has used MIM for several years (7 or 8 now, IIRC) for several parts. The locking block, firing pin and extractor, at the very least, are all MIM now, and there may be more on the Gen5 guns. This is why Glock now recommends replacing the recoil springs on a round count basis and is likely the cause of the "Brass To Face" fiasco several years ago.

I went to the glock armorer course for the second time last year (the first time being about 10 years before that) and the instructor said all those parts were cast. Maybe he meant to say MiM because he was an older guy and MiM is kind of like casting? Glock has always recommended recoil springs on a round count basis, that is nothing new. Glock did up the recoil spring service life when they went to the dual recoil spring assembly.

Anyways, whether Glock uses MiM or not doesn't take away from the general theme of my post. MiM is here to stay and there is nothing wrong with it, so long as it is done properly.