Flat faced triggers, yay or nay?

[JohnO]

Put finger inside trigger guard. Press trigger without disturbing the lay of the sights. Type of trigger, curved or flat face shouldn't matter if you know what you are doing. Lastly, just because Joe Cool has a flat trigger changing your trigger will not make you a cool guy too.

[JCN]

Put finger inside trigger guard. Press trigger without disturbing the lay of the sights. Type of trigger, curved or flat face shouldn't matter if you know what you are doing. Lastly, just because Joe Cool has a flat trigger changing your trigger will not make you a cool guy too.

I think that’s one of the common misconceptions from people who have not achieved a high level of competency.

That’s advice for shooting 101 level.

As you get better, there are additional levels and types of trigger press and sight alignments that are appropriate for different speeds and target engagements.

The small squares in the back row are 25 yard plates the size of a palm.

This illustrates the difference in cadence and trigger press for different size and difficulty targets.

It’s shooting 9 major which for me is 124gr going 1400+ fps.



That’s with the stock curved trigger.

[alamo5000]

I do not see how a flat face would lessen the probability of lateral forces being applied.

For me it's not lessening anything. It's just making me a lot more aware of the problem. So in a way it combats the problem but not something that other types of training might do as well.

[JCN]

I do not see how a flat face would lessen the probability of lateral forces being applied. The hard corner just might increase the probability of lateral force, with the hard edge biting into the surface of the index finger’s skin, depending upon the position of the finger.

Assuming the same measurements, at the centers of the trigger faces, a flat trigger face also means a longer reach than does a rounded trigger, which will affect shooters with relatively short fingers.

Personally, I like a flat face, with 1911 triggers, and a rounded face with all other triggers.

For me it's not lessening anything. It's just making me a lot more aware of the problem. So in a way it combats the problem but not something that other types of training might do as well.

There’s actually a physics difference I think.

Here are the triggers in question.

Factory single action CZ for reference.



There is room where you could impart some lateral force on the side of the trigger.



But without that curved side, would that foster just a straight front press?



Mind you, I’m talking about shooting 301 or 401, not 101 like @JohnO is talking about.



Curved trigger is good. But would flat be better?

I bought a used backup gun with a flat trigger and I was struck by the improvement in dot stability in dry fire.

Like people have said this might only apply to short stroke single action.

When triggering while moving and while hard transitioning, it gets more complex than just slow fire on a square range and extra complexity in the sight picture and more wiggle is often necessary to prevent slowness.

[GearFondler]

Flat triggers get more Likes on IG, ergo, they are more better.

[Hot Sauce]

Trigger reach, pull weight, and pull length are important factors.

For DA pulls that tend heavier and longer, curved is better for me because I'm making contact at the first joint and hooking the trigger back.

For SFA I have no strong preference either way, and have liked both curved and flat trigger, but I'm pulling using the pad of the finger so more pressing less hooking. With less leverage necessity, flat works fine.

I do also like a solid amount of pre-travel and a rolling break, which many aftermarket flatties tend to want to eliminate.

With a Glock, I've been a fan of the SSVI Tyr, which is kind of a mid-point between totally and totally hooked.

[OlongJohnson]

I do not see how a flat face would lessen the probability of lateral forces being applied. The hard corner just might increase the probability of lateral force, with the hard edge biting into the surface of the index finger’s skin, depending upon the position of the finger.

There’s actually a physics difference I think.

Here are the triggers in question.

Factory single action CZ for reference.

There is room where you could impart some lateral force on the side of the trigger.

But without that curved side, would that foster just a straight front press?

I'm not shooting at the level you are, but it seems like you missed Rex's point. The flesh of your finger is deformable, and will conform to the shape of the trigger whether the front surface is completely flat or has some curvature to it. As a result, there will be opportunity to apply lateral force to the corner and side surfaces of the completely flat trigger. If you were to wear a hard thimble on your trigger finger, like a slide guitar player or something, you could avoid your flesh wrapping around the trigger and be sure to apply force only straight back. But even that wouldn't work if you didn't keep it flat against the face of the trigger. Rock it up to one side, and you get a force vector acting at the corner with a lateral component.

[JCN]

I'm not shooting at the level you are, but it seems like you missed Rex's point. The flesh of your finger is deformable, and will conform to the shape of the trigger whether the front surface is completely flat or has some curvature to it. As a result, there will be opportunity to apply lateral force to the corner and side surfaces of the completely flat trigger. If you were to wear a hard thimble on your trigger finger, like a slide guitar player or something, you could avoid your flesh wrapping around the trigger and be sure to apply force only straight back. But even that wouldn't work if you didn't keep it flat against the face of the trigger. Rock it up to one side, and you get a force vector acting at the corner with a lateral component.

Ah gotcha.

When I test it back to back, having more flesh on a flat part rather than having a 45 degree angle as part of the main trigger surface you’re actively pulling on seems to resist side deformation.

It’s hard to explain but on a curved trigger if your finger index / grip is rotated 1-2 degrees you can execute a 1-2 degree off axis pull. But with a truly flat surface you can’t easily rotate your finger / index / grip 1-2 degrees as it auto-corrects for the flat surface.

I guess think of this example:
You’re driving a manual transmission car with a round shift knob.

Normally driving in a straight line you pull and push the lever straight forward and straight back.

Now imagine you’re racing the car with racing tires going 1.2g in a corner and you’re pinned in your seat away from the shift knob. You shift to what you think is 4th… but you shift to 2nd because your whole body was rotated over with respect to the gate axis and the round knob let you pull a few degrees off from where you thought you were.

In that situation which I’ve been in, I changed to a knob that had a “beak” in the front so that you could find and more easily torque in the proper axis with improved index, reference and mechanics.

That’s what I’m sensing when playing with this on triggers.

[JCN]

I did some more experimentation and I think it’s along the lines of what @alamo5000 was saying, the flat trigger gives more tactile feedback about where the axis of trigger pull direction is.

Like the round versus beaked shift knob helping orient where the pull axis is when you might be doing other active things. In the case of gaming shooting: moving, transitioning, splitting fast and fighting recoil… basically helping index when you’re adding more complexity at speed (more than just square range perfect mechanics.

[alamo5000]

I did some more experimentation and I think it’s along the lines of what @alamo5000 was saying, the flat trigger gives more tactile feedback about where the axis of trigger pull direction is.

Like the round versus beaked shift knob helping orient where the pull axis is when you might be doing other active things. In the case of gaming shooting: moving, transitioning, splitting fast and fighting recoil… basically helping index when you’re adding more complexity at speed (more than just square range perfect mechanics.

Another thing that has helped me is another thing I was mentioning. I will use an AR trigger as an example. The CMC flat face triggers have the little 'hook' at the end. Now when I place my finger on the trigger I can feel not just the trigger pull dynamics, but where my finger is on the trigger itself. Which to me, that is a big deal (at least in my learning).

Pistol triggers can have a similar type of indexing point.

When I first got a particular pistol I couldn't shoot it worth a darn. After slowing down to a snail's pace and focusing on placement as well as pull, I got better. I replaced the trigger with one that gave better feel for BOTH metrics (finger location as well as pull dynamics) and it gave me the needed feedback to get what I wanted.

I am not anything near a competitive shooter by any means but it did help me learn and progress a lot.

I don't think other triggers are bad by any means (in reference to the shape etc) but some do a lot better job of being a good training aid (at least for my personal learning). It's more like a training aid so to speak that promotes consistency in numerous aspects.

Yes there are things like leverage and other stuff, but the most important things are already mentioned.