Yes/No: Do you improve your serious-use Glock triggers?

[GRV]

Anonymous poll time!

Please vote only if you currently run or have a significant history of running a Glock for: carry, duty, and/or nightstand use. The question is to be applied only to Glocks you use for those purposes (not range toys or competition guns). If your answer is different for different Glocks that you run in those three use cases, please vote "Yes, improved."

To qualify as "No, unimproved.":

Gen3 (or earlier) Glocks:
- Must have Glock OEM standard connector or a heavier Glock OEM connector ("+").
- Must have Gen3 Glock OEM trigger bar. (If there's an "earlier" trigger bar I'm forgetting, that's fine, as long as the gun came with the same type.)

Gen4 Glocks:
- Must have Glock OEM "." "Dot" connector or a heavier Glock OEM connector (Standard or "+").
- Must have Gen4 Glock OEM trigger bar.

All Glocks:
- Must have Glock OEM 5.5 lbs striker spring (stock) or heavier Glock OEM striker spring.
- Must have Glock OEM standard coil trigger spring (stock) or heavier Glock OEM trigger spring (NY1 or NY2).
- Must have Glock OEM firing pin block and Glock OEM firing pin block spring.
- Must not have any intentional polishing, ".25 cent trigger job", or equivalent.
- Must not have any work done to coat trigger parts (e.g. NP3) or otherwise change trigger characteristics (e.g. pre-travel, over-travel, etc.).
- All trigger parts must be Glock OEM and must not be intentionally modified in any way from purchased form (e.g. sanding down the trigger shoe, making the trigger safety sit flush, etc.). Trigger parts include: firing pin, firing pin spring, firing pin safety, firing pin safety spring, trigger mechanism housing, connector, trigger spring, and trigger with trigger bar.

Swapping a stepped/serrated-faced trigger bar (G19) for a smooth-faced trigger bar (G17) is acceptable as "No, unimproved." provided it is Glock OEM and of the same generation.

Wear and polishing from regular use is acceptable.

Maritime spring cups are acceptable.

Gadgets are acceptable.

All box-stock full-size and smaller Glocks should qualify, AFAICT.

Non-trigger part modifications that enhance performance (such as grip, magazine catch, slide stop lever, barrel, and sights) are acceptable.


If one or more of your most recent serious-use Glocks does not meet the above, please vote "Yes, improved.".
- White-label or red-label box-stock G34/35s that still have a "-" connector in them (stock) are "Yes, improved." (Blue-label do not come with a "-" connector.)
- A "-" connector with a NY1/2 trigger spring is "Yes, improved."
- Any 3rd party trigger parts means "Yes, improved."
- Any intentional alterations of Glock OEM trigger parts from their purchased form means "Yes, improved."



This is only intended for data gathering purposes regarding this objective distinction.

This is not intended to make any statement about what is or is not acceptable in a trigger for any particular use case. This is not intended to be a witch hunt nor to criticize or judge anyone for their choice of trigger. Hence the anonymity in the poll. Moreover, I am well aware that this is a controversial and subjective definition of the terms "Yes, improved." and "No, unimproved.". If I had better simple terms to use, I'd use them. I considered "modifed/unmodified" but that seemed even more controversial.

Feel free to discuss details or anything vaguely relevant. Heck, for all I care, we can have another 50 page argument over the pros/cons of the LEM trigger

[Luke]

My prediction:

17 pages
6 thread drifts
2 people so but hurt they block someone.



Although I don't currently carry glock, I have before and have modified them and left them stock. One I put a 3.3 revo connector in it and changed it after 1 live fire session. Just too light and too little preteavel. I like a decent polish and a minus connector.

[Mr_White]

Many conditions

You might consider including a stipulation that No votes are only for guns that have received regular parts replacement on things that need it, like the trigger spring, firing pin spring, and firing pin safety spring. Otherwise you might end up with some No votes based on guns that have trigger, firing pin, and/or firing pin safety springs that are long overdue for replacement and are a reliability risk, but give a really sweet rolling-break ~4.5 lb pull in "stock form."

[GRV]

My prediction:

17 pages
6 thread drifts
2 people so but hurt they block someone.

Every one of the many key presses needed to form and post this thread was full of great pain and anticipatory regret. Obi-wan is about to get a serious Force gut punch.

[GRV]

You might consider including a stipulation that No votes are only for guns that have received regular parts replacement on things that need it, like the trigger spring, firing pin spring, and firing pin safety spring. Otherwise you might end up with some No votes based on guns that have trigger, firing pin, and/or firing pin safety springs that are long overdue for replacement and are a reliability risk, but give a really sweet rolling-break ~4.5 lb pull in "stock form."

I get what you're getting at, but I'm content to leave it as is for now. There's a lot of stuff imperfect about this formulation, but the abstract costs (ambiguity, butt hurt, etc.) of other formulations just don't seem worth any possible benefits to my underlying core interest. I considered getting picky with things like spring cups and spacer sleeves too, but ultimately decided the impact of anything there is negligible or would be covered by existing stipulations (e.g. work done to change trigger characteristics).

ETA: FWIW, any benefits reaped from shooting the crap out of stock parts is kinda just a consolation prize for putting in that much time with unimproved parts. Also, believe it or not, Glock does not provide any regular parts replacement schedule in the armorer's class for any parts other than the recoil spring. So drawing a line there is going to be really tough.

Okay, fine, I'll say this though, to qualify as "No, unmodified." you must also know or reasonably believe that your Glock would pass an armorer's inspection, e.g. all safety checks, sear engagement, and so on.

[Wondering Beard]

White-label or red-label box-stock G34/35s that still have a "-" connector in them (stock) are "Yes, improved." (Blue-label do not come with a "-" connector.)

Considering that G34/35 with a "-" connector are still stock as they came from the factory, I'm not sure they should be labeled "yes, improved".

Nevertheless, since my gen3 G34 is a fun gun and you ask about serious guns, my answer will remain "no, unimproved"

[Greg]

My prediction:

17 pages
6 thread drifts
2 people so but hurt they block someone.
Several attempts to change subject to HKs


Although I don't currently carry glock, I have before and have modified them and left them stock. One I put a 3.3 revo connector in it and changed it after 1 live fire session. Just too light and too little preteavel. I like a decent polish and a minus connector.

FIFY

[Irelander]

I vote yes. I run a Gen3 G19 with a G17 trigger bar with "-" connector and NY1 trigger spring. I am trying to talk myself into the Apex Action Enhancement Trigger.

[TCinVA]

My Glock internals stay as they came from the factory.

[GRV]

Considering that G34/35 with a "-" connector are still stock as they came from the factory, I'm not sure they should be labeled "yes, improved".

Nevertheless, since my gen3 G34 is a fun gun and you ask about serious guns, my answer will remain "no, unimproved"

I thought about this some, but to phrase it selfishly: the existing stipulations are in fact the ones I am most interested in seeing data on.

The fact is, Glock does not condone white/red label box-stock G34/35s for duty use for precisely this reason. They put standard connectors in blue-label Gen3 G34/35s and dot connectors in blue-label Gen4 G34/35s. If someone runs a "-" connector G34 for carry and counts as "No, unimproved.", then it seems ridiculous to count a box-stock G17 with a "-" connector as "Yes, improved.", and if we swap the stance on that too then we're down the hill. To be clear, whether or not people swap for an OEM "-" connector is in fact one of the distinctions I'm most interested in preserving and having represented in the data.

Of course, Glock also condones the "-" connector plus NY1 for duty, so one could argue this should be "No, unimproved.", but there's been a strong contingency represented here in the past of people who chose that combo precisely because it is somehow easier or better to shoot than the stock setup. So again, not a perfect or objective set of criteria, but I think its the one that'll get closest to the numbers I'm curious about.

This again is why I'm trying to stress that these criterion are not trying to make a point about anything. I'm totally cool with people using this thread to debate what should be "acceptable" or "not acceptable" for various use cases, but that's really a totally separate issue from the objective data collecting question and I hope everyone can read past the imperfect language of "improved/unimproved" and not get these two things tangled.