Beretta 92 Soft Trigger Bar

[LangdonTactical]

Ok, that's a good start to a discussion-for which specific 92 series triggerbars is the Wilson component considered to be an ideal corrective? (and, conversely, which models are not particularly suitable for or benefitted from the Wilson triggerbar?) And how specifically is it corrective in regards to those 92s/triggerbars? While I don't doubt that any 92 can be further and beneficially tuned by improved components/gunsmithing, for a basic platform that's been around since the mid-1970s, it's the drop-lock/locking block that's usually cited as a component needing product improvement, which Beretta indeed addressed in several iterations; and the trigger return spring, which both Beretta and Wolff have addressed.

The triggerbar per se simply hasn't been on my radar as a component particularly in need of massaging, so any detailed information and discussion would be beneficial.

Best, Jon

The Wilson trigger bar does three things. One, it is made of a harder material than the factory, so it makes for a smoother and longer lasting DA trigger job. Two, it has and over travel stop that reduces over travel and therefore reset distance. Three, it pulls the hammer back further in DA than a stock trigger bar and therefore gives more energy in the first DA hammer strike.

It is a really great part and one that I help with from the very start, basically my idea. It was a replacement of the Speed Bump Trigger and a better option than an over travel stop on the trigger.

[Clobbersaurus]

Love this forum, you just can't get this type of information anywhere else!

[JonInWA]

The Wilson trigger bar does three things. One, it is made of a harder material than the factory, so it makes for a smoother and longer lasting DA trigger job. Two, it has and over travel stop that reduces over travel and therefore reset distance. Three, it pulls the hammer back further in DA than a stock trigger bar and therefore gives more energy in the first DA hammer strike.

It is a really great part and one that I help with from the very start, basically my idea. It was a replacement of the Speed Bump Trigger and a better option than an over travel stop on the trigger.

Excellent-thanks for the direct feedback. In your opinion, would my 92D benefit from it, or is this one of the models/case where I should leave well enough alone?

Best, Jon

[SeriousStudent]

Keith, I just picked up a very used 92FS, and have both factory and Wilson trigger bars as spares if you need to try some in your gun.

[KG]

Keith, I just picked up a very used 92FS, and have both factory and Wilson trigger bars as spares if you need to try some in your gun.

Thanks, I'll get in touch next week.

[SeriousStudent]

Cool.

[LangdonTactical]

Excellent-thanks for the direct feedback. In your opinion, would my 92D benefit from it, or is this one of the models/case where I should leave well enough alone?

Best, Jon

You will get some benefit for sure. But mostly from the hardness of the new Wilson trigger bar. If you factory bar is holding up well and the DA Pull does not "stack" and the end of the trigger pull, you may hardly notice a difference.

[JonInWA]

You will get some benefit for sure. But mostly from the hardness of the new Wilson trigger bar. If you factory bar is holding up well and the DA Pull does not "stack" and the end of the trigger pull, you may hardly notice a difference.

Thanks, Ernest. Your feedback is invaluable. With the 92D, given its inherent trigger architecture and smoothness as it is, I'm not sure if there's a significant benefit to be derived, particularly if the DA triggerpull is made even longer.

On mine, there is very little stacking-only the "wall" at the very end of the triggerpull at the break point (and that's minimal, especially at speed). The 92D really has a very revolver-like triggerpull out of the box-and according to one of my friends who's a very experienced Smith & Wesson user, it's like the pull of an expertly tuned classic S&W revolver. The thinness of the Trausch grips significantly beneficially transform the handling characteristics as well, making the 92D handle like a single-stack pistol. The only downside that I continue to work on is that with its relatively long triggerpull distance and front-heavy balance, it's more difficult to fire single-handedly (but especially so weak-handed only).

Another question/concern that I'd have with the Wilson triggerbar is that by my reading of the IDPA rules, as an external modification with non OEM components I would be moved de facto from SSP to ESP. Assuming my interpretation is correct, while I might be willing to go to ESP, the juice would really have to justify the squeeze...

Have you personally, or have you or Bill Wilson known of anyone who's had their 92D provided with the Wilson triggerbar, and what were your/his/their perceptions? As I'm one of Check-Mate Industry's sponsored shooters and Team Check-Mate members, and a perennial competitor with the 92D, including its planned use in IDPA throughout the summer and at at the upcoming August Washington State IDPA sanctioned match, this is something of more than passing interest to me personally; I'm very appreciative and interested in your continued feedback.

Best, Jon Stein

[GJM]

Checking with Bill now.

[GJM]

This is from WC, not IDPA HQ.

"yes it is because the mods that are on the trigger bar are considered internal, not external. I have been running one since we came out with it in SSP and have not been told other wise"