"Easy Triggers"

[Gio]

Generally a lighter trigger will give a good shooter more forgiveness in small trigger press errors. However, it usually won't t mask serious shortcomings in a shooter's fundamentals. A shooter that puts rounds low/left with a stock glock is still going to put them low left with a 3# glock trigger.

I find the consistency I can hit extremely fast splits goes up with a light trigger (I.e. In the .11-.13 range), but so does my propensity to trigger freeze, so none of my competition guns have anything more than a minus connector and a 5# striker spring, and some polishing.

[Mitch]

Generally a lighter trigger will give a good shooter more forgiveness in small trigger press errors. However, it usually won't t mask serious shortcomings in a shooter's fundamentals. A shooter that puts rounds low/left with a stock glock is still going to put them low left with a 3# glock trigger.

I find the consistency I can hit extremely fast splits goes up with a light trigger (I.e. In the .11-.13 range), but so does my propensity to trigger freeze, so none of my competition guns have anything more than a minus connector and a 5# striker spring, and some polishing.

Holy shit. Even if those shots were just blindly thrown at a berm that would be smoking fast. Respect.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RevolverRob]

You know what is easy? Professional basketball. I mean seriously. You dribble the ball, you pass it to other players who dribble it some. One of you shoots it and puts it in the net. You all make millions of dollars. Of course, it helps to be over 6'2" tall and have good cardio. Maybe those are "crutches" given that some all-time great players are/were under 6' tall...But it helps.

Every task, shooting, basketball, driving, rowing a boat, running, etc. Can be broken down into fundamental components. Success comes when you can use those fundamentals, on the fly, to achieve a goal. Primacy comes when you can do all of it with minimal thinking.

I'm of the firm opinion that nothing constitutes a "crutch" if it allows genuine mastery of the proper execution of fundamentals. Because a "crutch" implies a genuine handicap that must be overcome. A 1911 is a perfectly viable shooting handgun, it's not a crutch to make up for poor shooting. People who say that, can't shoot well with their given platform of choice, let alone a 1911. They are failing to recognize that they need to work on fundamental components of their craft, not on advanced things. They blame their own inability to shoot well by claiming that others shoot better because they use easier platforms to shoot.

Shooting a handgun is startling easy to do, but exceptionally difficult to master.

Step 1) Grip the Gun
Step 2) Align the sights on the target.
Step 3) Move the trigger rearward without disrupting the aligned sights.
Step 4) Realign sights.
Step 5) Move the trigger rearward without disrupting the aligned sights.

Repeat.

Are some shooting platforms easier to shoot? Hell yes. And the smart man doesn't handicap himself, by ignoring that fact.

[Gio]

Holy shit. Even if those shots were just blindly thrown at a berm that would be smoking fast. Respect.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm not pulling those kind of splits on every easy target or transition, but I will occasionally see them that low on a close target. I just see them more often with a heavily modified trigger than I do on a stock trigger. That said, I don't think splits that fast matter for self defense or competition.

[xmanhockey7]

At one point I was trying to shoot B8s at 25 using a stock G19 with Trijicon HD sights. I practiced and practiced and practiced. I saw some improvement. Then Steve Fisher told me my sights were holding me back, especially given the fact they shot several inches high at 25. So I got Dawson fibers. That improved my average score 8-10 points. I wasn't great still, but the sights did help. I held off upgraded trigger for a long time. Then a friend was selling a OP TAC trigger on the cheap. Average score went up more like 13 points. And when I went back to a stock trigger I was shooting better than before I bought the Tac.

I still have a lot to improve, but given how much I was practicing I feel the equipment I had was holding me back. I no longer fought a sight picture that has to be really low or a triggger I have a focus extremely hard on to not pull rounds. I can more easily shoot good groups. Call it cheating or crunch if you want. I don't care. Even going back to stock guns I'm seeing improvements in my shooting.

[spinmove_]

At one point I was trying to shoot B8s at 25 using a stock G19 with Trijicon HD sights. I practiced and practiced and practiced. I saw some improvement. Then Steve Fisher told me my sights were holding me back, especially given the fact they shot several inches high at 25. So I got Dawson fibers. That improved my average score 8-10 points. I wasn't great still, but the sights did help. I held off upgraded trigger for a long time. Then a friend was selling a OP TAC trigger on the cheap. Average score went up more like 13 points. And when I went back to a stock trigger I was shooting better than before I bought the Tac.

I still have a lot to improve, but given how much I was practicing I feel the equipment I had was holding me back. I no longer fought a sight picture that has to be really low or a triggger I have a focus extremely hard on to not pull rounds. I can more easily shoot good groups. Call it cheating or crunch if you want. I don't care. Even going back to stock guns I'm seeing improvements in my shooting.

This right here is tempting me to snag an OP DAT or TAC trigger. It never made sense to me that Glock is the only brand of pistol that has a curved trigger face. It's also not really all that different from people getting Cajunized P-07/P-09, or a 92/PX4 with D spring and possibly Competition trigger group, or an Apex trigger for an M&P, or a Hybrid Match LEM for a USP.


Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

[xmanhockey7]

This right here is tempting me to snag an OP DAT or TAC trigger. It never made sense to me that Glock is the only brand of pistol that has a curved trigger face. It's also not really all that different from people getting Cajunized P-07/P-09, or a 92/PX4 with D spring and possibly Competition trigger group, or an Apex trigger for an M&P, or a Hybrid Match LEM for a USP.


Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

Hey bro I'm in Plymouth Michigan if you want to try it out. I actually prefer OP Falx trigger which is curved, but either way I shoot those trigger better than stock Glock. However, going back to stock Glock I do find I shoot better than before.

[spinmove_]

Hey bro I'm in Plymouth Michigan if you want to try it out. I actually prefer OP Falx trigger which is curved, but either way I shoot those trigger better than stock Glock. However, going back to stock Glock I do find I shoot better than before.

I might very well have to take you up on that. I just got done with a live fire session today, but I could be down to arrange something soonish. PM me when you get a chance.

[Gio]

At one point I was trying to shoot B8s at 25 using a stock G19 with Trijicon HD sights. I practiced and practiced and practiced. I saw some improvement. Then Steve Fisher told me my sights were holding me back, especially given the fact they shot several inches high at 25. So I got Dawson fibers. That improved my average score 8-10 points. I wasn't great still, but the sights did help. I held off upgraded trigger for a long time. Then a friend was selling a OP TAC trigger on the cheap. Average score went up more like 13 points. And when I went back to a stock trigger I was shooting better than before I bought the Tac.

I still have a lot to improve, but given how much I was practicing I feel the equipment I had was holding me back. I no longer fought a sight picture that has to be really low or a triggger I have a focus extremely hard on to not pull rounds. I can more easily shoot good groups. Call it cheating or crunch if you want. I don't care. Even going back to stock guns I'm seeing improvements in my shooting.

I am extremely OCD about where my POI/POA is on all my pistols for both defensive and competition use. I've got sets of old Dawson and Trijicon HD front sights in various heights because I'll change loads or ammo and can't mentally deal with a 2" POI shift at 25 yds. I also ransom rest test all my competition reloads to zero in (pun?) on the best accuracy for my gun. It's amazing how a .1-.2 difference in powder charge or a few hundredths difference in overall length can cut a group size in half, but most people don't bother to test their stuff. I wonder how many people are running around with their $4-5k (insert custom 2011 builder) or CZ shadow 2's shooting 4"+ groups bc they load just over minimum power factor and never bother to test it off a rest for accuracy.

[GJM]

I am extremely OCD about where my POI/POA is on all my pistols for both defensive and competition use. I've got sets of old Dawson and Trijicon HD front sights in various heights because I'll change loads or ammo and can't mentally deal with a 2" POI shift at 25 yds. I also ransom rest test all my competition reloads to zero in (pun?) on the best accuracy for my gun. It's amazing how a .1-.2 difference in powder charge or a few hundredths difference in overall length can cut a group size in half, but most people don't bother to test their stuff. I wonder how many people are running around with their $4-5k (insert custom 2011 builder) or CZ shadow 2's shooting 4"+ groups bc they load just over minimum power factor and never bother to test it off a rest for accuracy.

Most people can't shoot well enough to know at 25 yards what is their technique, what is their load, and what is their zero.