Do trigger systems matter?

[GardoneVT]

"DA vs SA"

"SAO vs SF"

"HK LEM V1 Revision Whatever vs Glock NY1 Generation Y"

So on and so forth.
I haven't stayed in too many Holiday Inns lately, so I won't proclaim myself to have solved every end users needs with regard to trigger types. Speaking strictly of my own performance and measurement thereof, I've found that the mean shooting drill measurements between my DA/SA Beretta vs a Sig P229 and Glock 19-all in 9mm- are only fractionally different. In other words, I suck equally with all three options.

For me, it would seem on the range trigger systems are irrelevant. SF doesn't make me faster then DA/SA, nor does specific familiarity with the 92 necessarily mean I automatically shoot it better then other pistols.

[Peally]

Not really, but some are a little more forgiving than others (super heavy/long DA pull versus 1911).

They're all pretty easy to gank a shot with if you do it wrong.

[ubervic]

This forum is home to many who are quite analytical and love to split even the finest of hairs, so I suspect that there will be much debate in this area. :)

I'm much more of a big-picture thinker and believe the truth is that most of us rationalize the pros vs cons of any given trigger system to support that which we run, or would like to run, while discounting other systems, at least in regards to speed/proficiency.

[SecondsCount]

For pure target shooting, a good crisp single action trigger cannot be beat.

For defensive use and carry, especially appendix, I like something hammer fired.

The reality is that if you spend a lot of time with any gun and focus on it, you will be a good shooter. I was at a defensive pistol class five years ago and one of the top shooters had a Ruger P90. He had been shooting it for about 10 years.

[Nephrology]

Striker fired autos tend to be less expensive up-front than most SA/DA pistols of equivalent quality. I guess that matters some. For a very very new shooter (i.e. first to third time at the range), it might be better to start them on SAO/DAO/Striker. There also might be an advantage to DAO/SAO/SFA pistols for more competitive divisions in some gun games (i.e. USPSA open/limited).

Otherwise no, not really. I do not think that trigger systems should matter for someone shopping for their first centerfire pistol and for any other conceivable use beyond what I said above I think they're all 6 of one, half dozen of the other.

[breakingtime91]

I think for a good shooter it doesn't matter much, I also think at that point the shooter learns their preference

[JBP55]

I think for a good shooter it doesn't matter much, I also think at that point the shooter learns their preference

I think most of the competition shooters have modified triggers in their pistols for a reason including the factory sponsored shooters.

[breakingtime91]

I think most of the competition shooters have modified triggers in their pistols for a reason including the factory sponsored shooters.

? Like I said at that point they know their preference... People I consider good shooters can preform withdifferent triggers, that doesnt mean they dont like improved versions

[Paul Sharp]

Over the weekend I watched Super Dave make a -0 zone hit at the 25 yard line in 2 seconds. Then he made a -1 zone hit at the 50 yard line in 2.2 seconds.

With a box stock, (including stock Glock night sights), Gen4 G17. I handled the gun, and others in the class were able to see the pistol, it was nothing special. The trigger was what you'd expect from a box stock Glock. I've also watched SDave do this with custom Glocks, built to his specs. This causes me to think it only matters if it matters to you.

I'm as guilty as anyone of running down gear rabbit holes looking for answers to the higher performance question. I need to spend that time running down dry fire rabbit holes finding answers guys like SDave, Les Pepperoni, and others already know.

[psalms144.1]

The trigger can matter quite a bit, depending on level of skill and ability. For instance, I have several marginal shooters who struggle a lot with our issued DAK, who do just fine with a Striker-fired pistol. Likewise, while I'm far from a star-shooter, I can handily out-shoot my LEM-equipped P2000 with my striker fired VP9, or my G19 - on any drill where time is a factor. Likewise, I have one guy who's an exceptional shooter, former Active Duty USMC (still in the Reserves) who runs the DAK like a champ, but recently switched his personal 229 to DA/SA with SRT. I now have to watch him like a hawk on the line, because he has trouble remembering to decock...

The reality is that MOST people won't shoot and train enough to realize the capability that an "easier" trigger gives, and the "easier" triggers are ALWAYS less forgiving of careless gun handling. Of course, training blah, blah, blah; Indian/Arrow blah, blah, blah. Average Cleetus is going to use what he/she likes. If they shoot more, and get more competent through practice, more power to 'em.

[Jay Cunningham]

People who spend time analyzing different trigger systems tend to analyze different trigger manipulations to go with them.

For most practical shooting, one can use essentially the same trigger manipulation and get good results with all trigger systems.

Grip and properly focused dry practice will allow this to happen.

[spinmove_]

In general? No, they don't. There are lots of real and perceived pros and cons for each trigger system that is out there. None are perfect. Ultimately it doesn't matter which one is chosen so long as the person using the firearm properly learns all of the idiosyncrasies of that system and becomes both safe and a proficient marksman.

[Wheeler]

I think most of the competition shooters have modified triggers in their pistols for a reason including the factory sponsored shooters.

Competition shooting is a completely different animal than defensive use, especially in games were fractions of seconds count and the shooters are constantly pursuing ever decreasing splits.

If we're discussing the accuracy only games then it's prudent to keep in mind that the shooting is under controlled conditions in a square range environment.

I tracked my times, including first shot reaction, transition splits and actual splits in our local Rimfire Challenge a couple months ago. I was shooting a Ruger 10/22 with a BX trigger group that is set at 4 pounds and a High Standard Sentinel with a stock DA pull of 10 pounds.

Reaction times were roughly the same with both averaging between .39-.56.
10/22 splits were consistent throughout the day at .14.
Sentinel splits would start off at .18 and by the 4th string would increase to .22. Towards the end of the match that increased to .28.
Transitional splits were about the same for both averaging .20 on targets that were close together and .26-.49 on long transitions.

From a purely competitive point of view the heavy DA trigger is a game killer. From a practical use point of view it doesn't matter.

As far as accuracy goes, I've split business cards with a double action .38. The DA isn't the accuracy killer in a competition environment so much as hand strength and consistency. In other words, as my hand gets tired, accuracy and speed fall off. This is where the advantages of a modified SA come into play.

[45dotACP]

I've thought of this myself. My honest answer to myself was that it really doesn't matter and here's why...I've seen guys who really suck with all types of guns and I remember some forum posts (in other forums) by guys who thought it was important and blasted guys like Ben Stoeger for using a Beretta 92 with a D spring in USPSA...right up until he totally wiped the floor with them.

I think some guns are more forgiving, but if you have millions of dry fire trigger presses on them, you're probably not in need of much forgiveness. That said, I still think some are easier to get better with...for instance, I haven't seen a lot of high level shooters use DAO type guns. Not sure this would be an issue though, because revo shooters can still run a long DA trigger fairly fast.


Basically, blaming the trigger is a sign that you need to practice more.

[JustOneGun]

In my opinion there are certain trigger systems that are easier to learn on. If time is of the essence, such as police or military recruits then it does matter. Anyone can learn to do anything given enough time.

I found that the Glock trigger is much easier to learn and teach to a higher level given a set amount of time. Another way to look at is that the ability curve on a graph tends to be steeper than on say a DA/SA. That matters if after two weeks of training you might have to save your life or the life of someone else. My old job had a record of 15 minutes on the street for the recruit to his first shooting. And yes he shot smooth, fast and saved his FTO's life.

If the shooting is for fun or a game, one can look at the long term goals and decide from there. I.e. if you think a DA/SA will help you become a GM in the long run you could start there and fight through the longer learning curve. Sometimes that tougher learning curve can be fun depending on the person.

I personally put the civilian self defense shooter in the same place as police or military. You might get in a gunfight after your first training or you might never get into a gunfight. One thing is for sure, you don't get to decide that all on your own. The bad guy has a say. I want my ability to progress as smoothly and quickly as possible. Once the easy gains are made then I can move onto other things such as tactics or changing my trigger system.

[Tamara]

After spending a bunch of time on Glock and Glock-esque triggers over the last several years, my first range session since 2011 doing anything other than deliberate slowfire with a ~3# 1911 trigger was a hot mess. :eek:

[farscott]

I might be Captain Obvious, but the different trigger types have been developed to address different (real and perceived) needs. Yes, all of the triggers primary purpose is to enable the accurate launching of bullets. But there is a lot more to choosing the proper trigger than just accurate bullet launching. Some systems emphasize speed, some emphasize absolute precision potential, and others emphasize minimizing the impact of errors under stressful conditions, including failures to enable and disable safeties. This is definitely one of those things where "mission drives the gear train".

So for Bullseye, I use the 1911 trigger, which keeps gun movement to a minimum. For carry, I use LEM, which eliminates the need to consider de-cocking or applying a manual safety when holstering as well as being much more forgiving if my finger migrates to the trigger under stress. While I have shot my LEM guns at informal Bullseye matches, that trigger is definitely not optimal for that game. Fatigue really sets in with LEM on the fifty-yard range.

[Casual Friday]

I might be Captain Obvious, but the different trigger types have been developed to address different (real and perceived) needs. Yes, all of the triggers primary purpose is to enable the accurate launching of bullets. But there is a lot more to choosing the proper trigger than just accurate bullet launching. Some systems emphasize speed, some emphasize absolute precision potential, and others emphasize minimizing the impact of errors under stressful conditions, including failures to enable and disable safeties. This is definitely one of those things where "mission drives the gear train".

So for Bullseye, I use the 1911 trigger, which keeps gun movement to a minimum. For carry, I use LEM, which eliminates the need to consider de-cocking or applying a manual safety when holstering as well as being much more forgiving if my finger migrates to the trigger under stress. While I have shot my LEM guns at informal Bullseye matches, that trigger is definitely not optimal for that game. Fatigue really sets in with LEM on the fifty-yard range.

It's somewhat surprising to me the people who don't believe that there are triggers that are better at some things than others given how much this has been discussed at length just on this forum alone. Sucking with everything doesn't mean that trigger systems are irrelevant, it just means a person sucks so bad they can't see the difference. Another factor to consider is that the things that make a good competition gun may or may not make for a good defensive gun, and vice versa. Archery is another good example of this, a bow and arrow combo that is setup to shoot NFAA is not going to be the setup that I'd use to hunt with. Both have their purposes.

The reason I carry and shoot LEM is for the reasons farscott stated in his post, along with a bunch of the reasons nyeti laid out in his "Why I like the LEM as a street trigger" article and forum post. First shot out of the holster SHO/WHO I'm faster and more accurate than with the first DA pull. I know that on a shot timer the LEM leaves something to be desired when compared to other trigger systems, but when the difference can only be measured by a shot timer, I'm not sure that difference is going to have a negative impact in a self defense shooting, but the things that make LEM advantageous just might.