Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 61

Thread: Glock trigger manipulation

  1. #11
    Site Supporter JHC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    North Georgia
    Quote Originally Posted by GJM View Post
    Joe, I made a quick video showing how I used to work the Glock trigger when, for example, shooting a 25 yard group, and then how I do it now. The Gadget really makes the trigger motion visible from behind.


    http://youtu.be/2tj4uXIE8Kc
    Great illustration. Thanks!
    "I realized all the mindset talk was useless without action and that with action, all the mindset talk was unnecessary." - Mike Pannone

  2. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by GJM View Post
    To cut to the chase, I recently have been manipulating the Glock trigger like a good S&W DA revolver trigger. No prepping, and one continuous press. This has yielded good results at 100 yards, inside 7 yards, and everything I have tried in between. This method works especially well for me with just one hand. I also believe it offers a safety advantage, since you are getting on the trigger later, and skipping the "prep" step during the presentation which could lead to unintended loud noises. I believe the main reason it works well with the Glock trigger is, rather than try to turn the Glock trigger into a poor example of a 1911 trigger, you use the creep in the Glock trigger to give you a compressed surprised break, which minimizes anticipation.
    Subscribed.


    Okie John

  3. #13
    I started doing this after much frustration with the glock trigger after learning a TDA third gen smith as my first handgun. I think that for me the glock trigger is better learned this way, and the gun shot like a revolver more than a poor approximation of a good single action trigger. I have not shot DA revolvers extensively, but I understand the concept of the continuous press and let the whole travel back out during recoil. Glocks would probably have a better reputation for being accurate if shooters learned this way instead of prep/break/ride the reset. Great thread GJM.


    Sent from my iPhone, I apologize in advance for typos.

  4. #14
    My first comment will be that I think any person who is very very good at anything needs to understand that what they do and what they may "get away with" or be "successful" with may not automatically translate well to others. It is possible that they are the exception and not necessarily the rule.

    This is just my experience and yes some people do indeed get better results from various techniques, including a more standard revolver type manipulation which may include "first finger joint" placement on the trigger and a pull from the start to finish without, getting rid of pre-travel first and starting from the sear engagement or "the wall".

    A few quick ones from my experiences and for standardization sake, I will reference a standard Glock 5.5 trigger with a good deal of pre-travel or "take up".

    - Hand size or "trigger reach" will be a big factor on what type of finger placement we should use. I very much do not like frame contact with the sides of the trigger finger when it is in contact with the trigger. IMO/E the majority of shooters are better off with a gap between the trigger finger and frame. Again, a select few can get away with it and generally that is more experienced shooters who more fully understand what is happening throughout the trigger pull and what it exactly it is that they are doing. The majority of the time, lesser skilled shooters or newer shooters with frame contact will have a "push". Some may put so much torque or pressure with the support thumb, that the trigger finger and frame contact with the trigger fingers primary hand and is the "counter balance", or vise versa where they put more pressure with the support thumb to counter the "push" imparted with the trigger finger. These are generally better shooters who understand this and it is a purpose oriented technique. It might be contradictory to my own preferences where I prefer more "neutrality" but that does not make it "wrong". Just a different type of "right" perhaps.

    - I tend to get a bit on the lower side or more to the tip of the trigger, especially as distance or accuracy precision is more needed vs pure speed to hit on say a larger target. Many people are directly in the middle and that is OK. The lower you are, the more leverage you get and the less the resistance or pull. I also like the tip of the finger and tip of the trigger as I get a more tactile or precise feedback. Exactly the same as I prefer for a 2.5lb trigger on a precision rifle with quality optics. You can very much "see" trigger finger influence / results with magnification at long distances with a precision rifle. For myself I will not pull a precision rifle trigger with frame contact or a first joint placement and I simply extrapolate that trigger finger / pull information to a carbine and pistol with better results then other finger placements. OTOH, with a heavier pull revolver as an example, my trigger finger placement and trigger pull is a completely different story.

    - Up close, larger acceptable hit zone for speed and for myself, there is not much along the lines of hitting any "wall" before starting the pull. I do not tend to break trigger finger contact on the trigger, but I definitely go way past "trigger reset" maybe all the way to the trigger forward most position. One thing to note for those who only attempt to "ride to reset" is it is very noticeable in a stock Glock as you tend to "hear" the audible "click" of the trigger resetting, no matter how fast they think they are running the trigger. So do I "reset under recoil"? You bet I do. You cannot hear the reset when I, or others who shoot with this method. But even resetting under recoil up close and fast, there is no real "prep" to the "wall" as there is no time for it. So, yes a reset under recoil, but NO prep to the wall first, just a straight pull through.

    - When taking longer precision shots, it is very different in that I do indeed prep the trigger to "the wall" . Again I equate my breathing and pull the same as a precision rifle with attempting to obtain as small of a "wobble zone" as possible with as little influence I can put on the weapon itself with the trigger finger / hand. For myself, I definitely cut down on the "wobble zone" with the pistol if I prep the trigger and take it to the "wall" first. After hitting "the wall" I am not attempting to "time" or "make" the weapon fire as in the exact microsecond but I do "pull" all the way through the trigger after starting from the "wall". In other words, after starting from the "wall" I am not "staging" the trigger thereafter in small incremental applications of pressure, but I am applying consistent and constant pressure until the striker releases, or pulling all the way through to the break. Only difference is that I started that pressure after first hitting "the wall".

    - I tend to shoot steel at distance for instant feedback. Steel targets are similar or the same sizing. At 100 yards I will hit the same sized steel with just about any trigger pull type. So for myself to fully understand the differences in my own technique, I need to push distances to the 200 yard mark, or shoot paper from 100 yards where I can clearly track group sizes / shot placement. But it is easier just to push back distance and shoot steel. At greater distances is where I really start "seeing" the benefits of various trigger pull types and how I perform with each of them. Again, no two people are the same but running around 700 shooters on the Glock this year, we definitely saw the benefit of accuracy / precision when the shooters got rid of the pre-travel and started the pull from the "wall". Again these are more average shooters and the better the shooter the less difference you will probably see.

    I would like to add that not everyone gets the same results. So I do teach people to use different pull types to suit them, then I try to take that technique and make them better at it. I will also note that I might have a completely different take on the topic a year from now. If I do, it just means that I am continuing my own learning process.

  5. #15
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Savannah, GA
    I frequently put our shooters on a trigger press graph, where they press a Glock trigger that has a sensor in it which plots a line on a computer screen for trigger finger force on the Y axis and time on the X axis. When you press straight through the trigger with constantly increasing pressure, it looks like a smooth and fairly straight diagonal line up until the trigger breaks. When you prep the trigger, you see a diagonal line, and then it flattens out because the force is held constant, and then you see a spike when you press through the break point. This spike is never consistent from one trigger press to the next, especially when you put shooters on a timer and have them try to draw and shoot under a par time. You get a good visual representation of what they do to the trigger with varying levels of par time. The shooters who press straight through the trigger from start to finish usually show a similar trigger graph regardless of the time compression, although they may press through the trigger faster with a faster par time, the graph still shows an straight increasing force line until the trigger breaks.

  6. #16
    Site Supporter CCT125US's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    London, Ohio
    Quote Originally Posted by YVK View Post
    In this case, working trigger a'la short DA does try to create a surprise type of break, but clearly avoids staging.
    It is an interesting discussion. I think that LEM trigger, with its unique features, is very helpful in understanding "dos and don'ts" of a trigger press.
    I recently began expirementing with the LEM P30. I am having extremely good results running it like my old faithful v3. I need to update my journal, so as to not muddy up this thread. Good to see others working similar issues.
    But hey, the country is going to hell and we will all be in re-education camps in a year. So what the hell do I have to lose? - Sensei

  7. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by givo08 View Post
    I frequently put our shooters on a trigger press graph, where they press a Glock trigger that has a sensor in it which plots a line on a computer screen for trigger finger force on the Y axis and time on the X axis. When you press straight through the trigger with constantly increasing pressure, it looks like a smooth and fairly straight diagonal line up until the trigger breaks. When you prep the trigger, you see a diagonal line, and then it flattens out because the force is held constant, and then you see a spike when you press through the break point. This spike is never consistent from one trigger press to the next, especially when you put shooters on a timer and have them try to draw and shoot under a par time. You get a good visual representation of what they do to the trigger with varying levels of par time. The shooters who press straight through the trigger from start to finish usually show a similar trigger graph regardless of the time compression, although they may press through the trigger faster with a faster par time, the graph still shows an straight increasing force line until the trigger breaks.
    This is very interesting, and consistent with what I believe I am experiencing. I notice it especially long range and with one hand, which are obviously greater tests of your trigger press.
    Likes pretty much everything in every caliber.

  8. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by givo08 View Post
    I frequently put our shooters on a trigger press graph, where they press a Glock trigger that has a sensor in it which plots a line on a computer screen for trigger finger force on the Y axis and time on the X axis. When you press straight through the trigger with constantly increasing pressure, it looks like a smooth and fairly straight diagonal line up until the trigger breaks. When you prep the trigger, you see a diagonal line, and then it flattens out because the force is held constant, and then you see a spike when you press through the break point. This spike is never consistent from one trigger press to the next, especially when you put shooters on a timer and have them try to draw and shoot under a par time. You get a good visual representation of what they do to the trigger with varying levels of par time. The shooters who press straight through the trigger from start to finish usually show a similar trigger graph regardless of the time compression, although they may press through the trigger faster with a faster par time, the graph still shows an straight increasing force line until the trigger breaks.
    Interesting results. What I found recently with a large sample size of average level shooters going to the Glock is that if the shooter could manipulate the trigger straight to the rear without being too far on either side of the trigger causing a push or pull, the actual trigger manipulation was not the issue. But rather in a lesser trained shooter who has poor isolation control over their trigger finger in relationship to the rest of their hand, that the hand became the over riding issue and not really the trigger pull type.

    Basically since we are apes with opposing thumbs we tend to grab things in a manner where we induce a sympathetic response with all of the hand itself. When we move our trigger finger, the other fingers of this same hand want to move in relationship to the trigger finger. It is actually a big skill for a shooter to learn how to isolate the trigger finger from the rest of the hand. To a certain degree our opposite hand may want to mirror that same movement. But if we just stick to the primary shooting hand, the entire hand most particularly the pinkie and ring finger want to close which induces pressure on the bottom front edge of the frontstrap of the weapon causing a rearward push. Combine that movement with certain smaller hand types and the pronounced hump on the backstrap of the Glock and you have rotational issues which induce the muzzle dip or low impact that. The left push is often times the frame contact of the trigger finger or poor finger placement.

    The left push or low and left push is an extremely common complaint / issue in shooters going to a Glock. If I averaged it with my test group (around 700 shooters) I would say that about ~40% of the shooters would exhibit this left or low and left push, opposite of course for lefties. The fix was finger placement and hand alignment to set up a straight to the rear pull with no influence on the frame, plus giving them the concept of attempting to isolate the trigger finger and not to induce crush on the frontstrap with the pinkie and ring finger. Interestingly I can immediately take a shooter with a low impact issue and hand them a Glock with a grip reduction, particularly the reduced backstrap and this dip dramatically decreases or completely goes away with no explanation of what is happening or tweaking of their form prior. It is definitely my belief that with certain hand types and the pinkie and index finger crush that the exaggerated hump of the Glock backstrap very much exacerbates or amplifies the issue.

    I would be interested in getting more information on your test equip and protocols. Might be interesting to conduct similar tests and expand it to various pressure points on the grip of the weapon. Would also be interesting to see results of highly skilled shooters who do various methods side by side. If you don't mind sharing I would like to hear more on the testing apparatus.

    Quote Originally Posted by GJM View Post
    This is very interesting, and consistent with what I believe I am experiencing. I notice it especially long range and with one hand, which are obviously greater tests of your trigger press.
    I am similar in that when I draw and shoot one handed, more trigger finger is used.

  9. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by Surf View Post
    I am similar in that when I draw and shoot one handed, more trigger finger is used.
    My finger position does not vary one versus two hands. I am between the tip and first crease, sort of middle of the pad.

    Origami, independently, reached the same conclusion as I did as regards what part of the finger he uses, and pressing the trigger in one continuous motion.

    If you press the trigger straight back, why does it make sense to bifurcate the press into two (or more) parts, with the wall as an intermediate stop, since the wall doesn't fire the shot?
    Likes pretty much everything in every caliber.

  10. #20
    Holy smokes.....I'm ahead of my time. Larry Vickers described the triggers in my Glocks as just like a little DA revolver. I use a similar trigger press mainly from a management thought than a shooting thought (I prefer to get on the trigger far later than most). I also use a grip with my strong thumb on the back of my base of the support thumb and my support thumb fairly straight up and on the slide. It helps take my bottom fingers out of the press. This grip works well for me because it helps take the fingers out of my Glock press and keeps my thumb off the slide release on most of the HK's.
    I am still working through the VP 9 to figure things out as to where everything goes and how to press it.
    Just a Hairy Special Snowflake supply clerk with no field experience, shooting an Asymetric carbine as a Try Hard. Snarky and easily butt hurt. Favorite animal is the Cape Buffalo....likely indicative of a personality disorder.
    "If I had a grandpa, he would look like Delbert Belton".

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

TLG 1970–2016 RIPRampageForTheCure.org