I thought that was my line?Originally Posted by JHC
Well that rascal has many a post opining how something about the Glock hardware makes it easy for many to shoot ok but tricky to shoot at a very high level.
I thought that was my line?Well that rascal has many a post opining how something about the Glock hardware makes it easy for many to shoot ok but tricky to shoot at a very high level.
@Enel what kind of shooting would you use as your baseline to determine how good/forgiving a trigger is? I think I know the answer but want to make sure I’m not assuming anything.
What trigger(s) do you find the most forgiving for you?
Do you think overtravel has anything to do with it? In my opinion overtravel has more to do with it than take up but Glocks don’t have much overtravel so maybe I’m wrong about that.
Triggers I seem to shoot well:
That CZ75SA. May have something to do with the gun being heavier than the trigger pull though.
HK P30 DA/SA
Glocks, especially Gen 5.
I like the Advanced Supertest as a measure of performance, and any gun I can score over 290 on the AST will usually put up a 98+ on 25 yard slow fire.
I think over travel is may be important and may be part of the reason my single handed shooting with Beretta 92s suffers.
I am going to experiment with heavier trigger return springs in my remaining LEM gun and see if I can improve my performance.
I think the vast difference between the initial trigger pull and the break on the LEM is what I don’t like about them. Has a “sloppy” feel to it.
I have several thoughts on pre-travel trigger weight.
First, in regards to SFA pistols: My experiences and preferences are with Glock and HK (VP); with Glocks, the pull intrinsically tends to be a bit heavier, with a discernible wall, and a crisp break, and an extremely short reset. On my HK VP40, the pull is a bit lighter, with a softer wall, and a slightly longer reset. Both are examples of what I'd call a two-stage pull, comprised of the initial take-up followed by the wall/break. On Glocks, this can be transformed into a heavier, single stage pull with a more discernible reset via the substitution of a NY1 or NY2 spring instead of the coil trigger spring. On Gen4 Glocks, I really like the feel of the OEM coil spring set-up, while on Gen 3 Glocks, I modify the pull on individual Glocks to my preference, based on my feel and index with a given Glock (I use only OEM Glock components for such action mods).
Given both platforms, I find that I shoot the HK VP a bit more naturally, accurately and faster. However, given the nature of it's triggerpull characteristics, I thing for most people, especially casual users and less trained, a Glock is a better duty choice, because of the slightly heavier pull and more discernible wall prior to the break.
Second, on hammer-fired pistols: In the past year or so, while I have others, the two platforms that I've heavily committed to and concentrated on are my Beretta 92D (with action mods with Wilson Combat components) and my HK P30L, originally in V1 (light) LEM, now in V1.5 LEM. The Beretta has abou a 6 - 6.5 lb triggerpull as modded, with a very long reset, but the pull is exceptionally smooth, and the gun is extremely accurate. Due to the gun's overall length and somewhat heavier weight, combined with the long trggerpull distance, I find that accurate single-handed firing is a bit of a challenge, especially weak-handed firing.
With the HK, I really liked the LEM concept, but found the V1 LEM to be a challenge, due to the very light initial take-up, followed by the abrupt change in pull weight/characteristics when the wall was reached. Here's what I had done by HK to change that, and it only took one spring to do so:
First, my utmost appreciation to everyone that I worked with at HK on this-Customer Service Reps Tommy and Beth, and Armorers Ryan and Daniel. They were unfailingly polite, professional and genuinely interested and uniformly supportive in my quest-and that covers about a month of repeated calls and detailed discussions. And after this resolution, they stressed if I needed to revisit or go deeper, they were there for me. THAT'S superb customer service and aftermarket support-literally some of the best in the business I've encountered. Oh, and one other thing-the pistol was shipped to HK on Monday, and they had it back to me on Thursday. HK also removed some residual movement that remained with the Small backstrap at the top of the tang where it joined the frame (it was of no real operational consequence, but a bit irritating, and HK was happy to resolve it; apparently there may be some minor play due to the Small backstrap mold, or possibly incurred during the backstrap plastic's curing after molding.
Equally, thanks to Coyote41 here and TooSixy at the HK Pro forum, whose advice (and patience) over the past month or so as I dived deep into improving my V1 LEM was invaluable.
So-Where did I end up? My goal was to have a more "shootable" HK P30L V1 LEM, but without sacrificing the threat-management tenants of the LEM action-particularly the long pull length before firing. More shootable for me I determined (with much help from others, definitely including on this thread here) was to be a heavier, more resistant trigger pull, with the desire for the triggerpull characteristics to be transformed if possible from a dual stage (initial/wall-break) into more of a single-stage pull, with a more continuous/unbroken pull from inception to break. In other words, mitigating against the initial "flying through the air" initial pull (with its inherent lack of feel/ tactile feedback, then being met with "hitting the wall" towards the end of the long pull process. I am satisfied with both the overall LEM triggerpull length and the reset as it comes from HK. My premise is that this set-up will serve well as a threat-management tool, but be more shootable for other venues, such as IDPA. Yeah, I want my cake and be able to eat it too...
My P30L V1 came with standard-weight springs uniformly for the hammer spring, the trigger return/rebound spring, and the firing pin block spring. At this point, after much discussion and input from multiple parties, HK only needed to change one spring to meet my goal (or to take the first good-faith stab at it): the standard weight trigger return/rebound spring was replaced with the newer HK medium-weight trigger rebound/return spring (234773). Coyote41 has additionally provided me with the lighter-weight firing pin block spring (209296), which I may experiment with later; I gave HK a free hand in putting one in mine when it was there, but they felt that there simply wouldn't be a discernible benefit from it, and chose to keep the OEM standard-weight FPBS (209962) in place. I may experiment with it in the future (thanks again, Coyote41).
Dry fire with the new set-up reveals that the medium-weight TRS has indeed favorably (for me, at least) changed the triggerpull characteristics, making it somewhat similar to that on my Beretta 92D DAO, upgraded with Wilson Combat improved triggerbar and springs. The triggerpull feels to be about 6 to 6.5 lbs., (very similar to that on my upgraded 92D) and the weight gives me a much improved triggerpull feel, in that more weight/resistance is provided, giving, at least to me, more control throughout the triggerpull process. The differentiation between the initial pull and the wall is significantly muted. I'm impressed, and plan on running the pistol in next Saturday's IDPA match.
Essentially, I have a bit of a hybrid LEM between V1 and V2, with some of the characteristics of the V4/V4.1 (but without the triggerpull shortening of the 4.1, which is somewhat expensive, and requires more parts, for reportedly incremental results). Call mine with the medium-weight TRS a (and otherwise standard-weight FPBS and HS) a V1.5, perhaps.
I subsequently competed in a local 7-stage IDPA match with the P30L with the new medium trigger return spring (TRS). This was my first live-fire with it, but I had a week of concentrated daily dryfiring.
While my overall match score placement was fairly low, due to my relatively slow stage completion times (part of which is getting used to the nuances of the new pull, part due to the intrinsic nature of the LEM action, most of it due to natural slowness on my part...sigh), my accuracy was tied with my second best IDPA lowest number of points down since I started shooting shooting IDPA in 2007. It was also by far the best accuracy results with the P30L to date, and equaled/tied my best IDPA match accuracy with my VP40.
Key take-outs and perceptions: (and keep in mind that these are for me, applicability towards you might well vary)
1. The medium TRS did exactly what I hoped: it provided more tactile feel throughout the entire triggerpull, from inception to break, and provided a more natural, less abrupt segue when the wall was hit.
2. The tendency for vertical stringing that Dagga Boy/Darryl discussed with LEM was effectively eliminated, as the new medium TRS seems to make the entire triggerpull a continuous/single-stage pull-through its entirety.
3. Reset is unaffected, regarding both reset distance and feel.
4. Overall triggerpull length is unaffected by the new TRS (unlike the 4.1 LEM, which slightly shortens the triggerpull distance {shortening the initial take-up distance prior to the wall being reached}).
5. Shooting with the "V1.5" LEM was much, much more natural than with the OEM V1 LEM. I was able to concentrate more on target acquisition and prioritization (index and sights) with triggerpull naturally, and seemingly seamlessly occurring as necessary. For me, that's huge-and a huge win in and of itself.
In short, the medium TRS "LEM V1.5" is a win for me. I was naturally able to make successive headshots (and with very tight 2-shot groups), both at medium and short distances. While one match/event does not provide anything approximating a methodological scientific analysis, it certainly provides significant confirmation for me. I feel totally comfortable in deploying it for duty, and will run it in at least one, if not two February matches, and for the upcoming 2-3 months without any further changes/modifications (with a concurrent daily dryfire program) to see if continued use verify my initial extremely favorable impressions and results.
Conclusions to date: Some triggerpull weight and feel that it provides throughout the triggerpull travel process throughout the ENTIRE triggerpull is extremely important-much more than than trying to have a light pull. My initial thought when I got into LEM was that a light pull comparable to the pul weight of my SFA guns would be ideal-empirically, I found this not to be the case, that more weight was needed to provide adequate tactile feel and feedback for the best trigger control and results, at least for me; YMMV.
Best, Jon
Last edited by JonInWA; 02-17-2019 at 08:59 AM.
For the most part either a Glock or 1911 trigger may be most shootable based on which is getting my emphasis. I've shot more consistent accuracy pure 1911. Best hitting at speed has been leaning 19X/G45, but . . .that's what I've been shooting mostly for some months. Yet I still think it holds a lesson as my years tracking certain drills shows me running PR level for 7 yard speed stuff with them.
But even within Glocks I'm hitting differences. @GJM has argued the merits of not staging a shot at the wall but don't stop the continuous movement. I noted the point but didn't heed the advice as at the time I was really happy with hits staging at precision (at speed we don't stage of course). And cause I was shooting a lot of 1911 then and that's a staged SA pull by nature and KKM barrelled Gen 3s.
With the 19X and G45 I'm not digging the staging style. At all. His earlier point now resonates. I haven't seen pretty 5 shot slow fire groups like a KKM in a Gen 3 or 1911 but under a time constraint that kept me moving it was very good for such tasks.
Today having worked so much seeing what I could do with my G48 which had a wall I could stage to, it's confused me a bit shooting the 19X Slowfire precision. (sigh, long sigh)
I think I've got it figured out.
“Remember, being healthy is basically just dying as slowly as possible,” Ricky Gervais
I think I remember @P.E. Kelley talking about the speed of trigger movement being as important than anything else. One speed from beginning to end and the same speed during the reset. My personal experience is I do my best shooting when I’m moving the trigger as he advocates. It doesn’t matter if I’m shooting groups (my nemesis), accuaracy at speed, or pure speed shooting.
This really makes me want to spend time with a DA only pistol. I have revolvers but it’s a pain resetting the press to load 38 and I’m almost out. Factory 38 is more expensive than 9mm too. Would be easier to find a true DA only pistol somewhere.
GreggW, my recommendations for a good DA only pistol without breaking the bank would be a Beretta 92D/92D Centurion or one of the Smith & Wesson 3rd Generation metal-frame DAOs. Both platforms have eminently usable triggers out of the box, and the Berettas in particular can be further tuned with excellent recently available aftermarket upgrade components. Best, Jon
Last edited by JonInWA; 02-17-2019 at 12:42 PM.
A V1 USP trigger feels spongy to me in DA compared to a classic Sig trigger, if I go back to back. I think it's just flex in the parts, maybe the polymer frame. I don't notice it when shooting.
.
-----------------------------------------
Not another dime.
I think this concept is precisely what led TLG to his particular LEM spring arrangement: Heavier TRS gives more feedback on the take-up, while lighter FPBS and Hammer Spring clean up the final break. You also get a much more lively trigger reset, which speeds up splits, and encourages resetting the trigger under recoil.
I've been shooting my V7 (heavy LEM) USP and V1 (lite LEM) P30L together in the last few range sessions. I was surprised how much more I liked the heavier pull of the USP, but I did. The entire stroke feels more taught and "present", and I think adding necessary pressure to the pretravel encourages the strong hand to apply even gripping pressure earlier, and discourages milking the trigger.
Reply With Quote