peacebutready
Member
Thanks. Maybe Taurus' springs should be left alone.
Alloy-framed 2" .38 misfiring after trigger job
- Thread starter peacebutready
- Start date
- Status
Thanks. Maybe Taurus' springs should be left alone.
ArchAngelCD
Member.
peacebutready,
I don't blame you for not going back to the original shop, I wouldn't. I also see no reason not to give the bill for refinishing your 1911 to them. They need to be held accountable for their actions and mistakes. They probably used Cold Bluing on the slide from what you described, that's not acceptable IMO.
I don't blame you for not going back to the original shop, I wouldn't. I also see no reason not to give the bill for refinishing your 1911 to them. They need to be held accountable for their actions and mistakes. They probably used Cold Bluing on the slide from what you described, that's not acceptable IMO.
I've had one for years and used it as a "knock-around" with no problems at all, and I consider it to be an equal to current J-frame Smith & Wesson's. That said, I haven't fooled with the springs, and after about 1000 cycles following a combination of dry-firing and shooting the action had smoothed out like it should.
Because of small lockwork parts (hammer and trigger in particular) and the location of hammer and trigger pivot points, it is difficult to get a lighter but reliable double-action trigger pulls on anybody's small-frame revolver. First, the trigger lacks the leverage needed to rotate the hammer backwards plus the hammer's light weight requires a stronger spring to gain the momentum needed to insure ignition. Then for balance the trigger return spring needs to be matched to the mainspring. If it's too weak you may short stroke the trigger and jam the action.
The only exception that comes to mind is Ruger's new LCR, because it was designed from the ground up as a DAO, and the trigger and hammer pivots moved to gain maximum leverage. This can't be done very well in a SA/DA system.
I should note that the S&W J-frames made today and Taurus snubbies have similar firing pin/spring set-up's, but I hear fewer complaints about the former.
This and cylinder end-shake may have nothing to do with your ignition problem, but it is a mistake to become so focused on one thing (springs) that you overlook other possibilities. I have no idea what your (former) gunsmith did, and this makes it hard to make suggestions.
fastbolt
Member
Perhaps the intention of my comment was less clear than it might have been.
Granted, as an armorer one of my concerns is to minimize exposure to unnecessary liability, for both myself and the agency which covers my work, when I maintain, service and make corrections or repairs to agency-owned or authorized firearms used as dedicated defensive weapons. This extends to anything I've done requiring explanation in a court proceeding.
I've listened to an armorer instructor (also an armorer for his agency) describe his experiences in being subjected to detailed questions about servicing, maintenance and repair during court testimony. He said it was important to consider that an attorney might well obtain a copy of a factory armorer manual and ask detailed questions in order to try and impeach the credibility of an armorer regarding knowledge, or whether factory service/repair methods and procedures were followed. Deviation from what the factory trains or authorizes an armorer to do may have unwanted consequences.
If I stick to what the factory teaches, or may additionally authorize, it's easier to defend when questioned because then the factory can bear the burden of justifying what I was trained to do.
However, in my way of thinking, a more immediate unwanted and tragic consequence would be if I deviated from normal procedures and the use of factory parts, and something I'd done to either an agency weapon, or an authorized personally-owned weapon, caused it to fail to function as designed and intended in a critical moment ... and resulted in the serious bodily injury or death of the user. Not something I want on my conscience.
Armorers aren't trained to be gunsmiths, although an occasional armorer might also be a gunsmith by virtue of other schooling (I'm NOT a gunsmith).
When I service or repair someone's firearm as an armorer, I'm not doing so to "improve" or "modify" it, or make it into a "better" target/leisure/sporting arm. I want it to reliably and consistently function according the manufacturer's design specs. I leave the gunsmithing to the factory smiths and licensed gunsmiths.
Certaindeaf
member
I'd never swap to lighter springs on a fighting gun, and what 2" is not? Slicking up the action should suffice to uh, slick it up. If the thing (any DA revolver) won't set off CCI primers 100% in DA mode, the thing is not fit to carry.
1911Tuner
Moderator Emeritus
Hell hath frozen over and the Missouri is flowing backward.
We're in complete agreement.
Who woulda thunkit...
Certaindeaf
member
Oh pshaw.
I've only had one revolver with a trigger job and it was superb. It was stoned and polished, I do not believe any springs were touched. I've thought about having the same guy polish up my EDC revolver but I've gotten so used to the heavy pull and return, I'm afraid I may not like it.
Certaindeaf
member
There's nothing like a tuned wheelgun.. even and perhaps especially with factory springs. If anything, the gun will be more reliable as there is less resistance for the system to oppose.
Red Cent
Member
My M60-10 has been appropriately polished, lighter rebound spring, factory hammer spring. There are a couple of small mods that can be done to offset a portion of the DA weight but I would not post them here.
I would agree with most and say that your J frame is good to go. Tuning the J frame and clones should not be done by the inexperienced or by just any gunsmith.
My 60 has a seven pound, very smooth pull, with little indication of stacking. I handload Federals but the 60 will pop CCIs and Winchesters.
That said, I edc a Colt lw Commander.
I would agree with most and say that your J frame is good to go. Tuning the J frame and clones should not be done by the inexperienced or by just any gunsmith.
My 60 has a seven pound, very smooth pull, with little indication of stacking. I handload Federals but the 60 will pop CCIs and Winchesters.
That said, I edc a Colt lw Commander.
.44 Associate
Member
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2012
- Messages
- 51
Dawei's experience matches mine. I've had Wolff springs in several Tauri (including an 85 CH) and they caused severe problems in all of them. Going back to the original springs returned them to serviceability.
MCgunner
Member
Can't say it any better than this. +1
I cannot imagine even WANTING a better trigger in MY 85UL. Hard to fix perfection right out of the box.
Red Cent
Member
These old hands will never outrun a softer rebound spring. Or a pawl spring, or a bolt spring, or a.................................
Capt. Ct.
Member
I put a lighter striker spring in a Glock 19. Had two light primer strikes in 50 rounds. I put the stock spring back in. No problems. I would put the stock spring back in and call it good.
peacebutready
Member
Update on the Taurus 85UL
I went to pick up another gun that was cerakoted. I brought the Taurus 85UL to have the original springs put back in. They have a gunsmith but one of the guys (don't know his qualifications) said putting in the original mainspring(?) and leaving the aftermarket smaller (trigger return?) spring should take care of the misfires.
I just read this thread when I noticed Old Fuff said "Then for balance the trigger return spring needs to be matched to the mainspring. If it's too weak you may short stroke the trigger and jam the action."
Grrrrr.....Now I'm not certain whether to try it like this or bring it back to have the factory trigger return spring installed.
I went to pick up another gun that was cerakoted. I brought the Taurus 85UL to have the original springs put back in. They have a gunsmith but one of the guys (don't know his qualifications) said putting in the original mainspring(?) and leaving the aftermarket smaller (trigger return?) spring should take care of the misfires.
I just read this thread when I noticed Old Fuff said "Then for balance the trigger return spring needs to be matched to the mainspring. If it's too weak you may short stroke the trigger and jam the action."
Grrrrr.....Now I'm not certain whether to try it like this or bring it back to have the factory trigger return spring installed.
243winxb
Member
Factory springs work best with all brands and types of ammo.
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
Most factory guns are oversprung to overcome inherent roughness in the action. Factory springs work best with factory actions. As was said, if you slick up the action, you don't need heavy factory springs.
Try it for a bit and see if any problems develop. In particular fast double-action the action (dry fire with snap caps and live fire) to see if the revolver hangs up because of short stroking the trigger.
Unlike the Smith & Wesson, a Taurus with a transfer bar safety does not have to rebound the hammer. Thus the trigger spring does nothing but push the trigger in its return cycle.
"Slicking (polishing) the internal parts does nothing more then reduce (but not eliminate) friction, and it has little affect on the hammer's impact on the firing pin and subsequent ignition of a primer. If correctly done it makes the trigger pull feel smoother, but burnishing the parts at contact points through dry firing does much the same. Any reduction in spring tensions will have some relationship to reliability. Sometimes it shows up in the form of misfires and sometimes it doesn't. In a defensive handgun it is better to be slightly over-sprung then to go in the other direction. At least that's my opinion for what ever it's worth.
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
That depends on where and how bad the roughness is. I've spent a lot of time stoning the hand slots of Colt SAA's and replicas. The hand is directly attached to the hammer and slides through its slot as the hammer falls. So that roughness and that of the hand itself has a direct impact on the speed of the hammer fall. As does any roughness in the hammer pivot hole, the hammer well and in single actions, the hammer can even be hindered by roughness at the top of the grip frame.
Nearly all of my three dozen revolvers have been slicked up and treated to lighter springs. Yet I have NEVER had a problem with reliability, even with the harder CCI primer cups.
Nearly all of my three dozen revolvers have been slicked up and treated to lighter springs. Yet I have NEVER had a problem with reliability, even with the harder CCI primer cups.
Rob0321
Member
I put the Apex Tactical J-Frame kit into my 642. Their claim is that a slightly longer firing pin makes up for the lighter springs. I am not completely sold on their claim, however the end result was that my wife can now pull the trigger with 1 finger instead of using both hands (it isn't specifically hers, but I'd like her to be able to use it. She also has fibromialgia which limits her grip strength, amongst other things).
The only FTFs that I've had have been with PRVI ammo, and then it is only about 1 in 100. I haven't had any issues with Winchester, Double Tap, Magtech or Remington UMC ammo.
The only FTFs that I've had have been with PRVI ammo, and then it is only about 1 in 100. I haven't had any issues with Winchester, Double Tap, Magtech or Remington UMC ammo.
peacebutready
Member
Off Topic: Colt Python
Off Topic:
I would be neat if Colt brought back the Python. I read insurance reasons prevented them from seriously considering it. My guess is the hammer pulled back without an external safety.
I think there was an insurance/liability issue before the Colt Series 70 came out. They may have got around that by labeling it a special edition, at least at first.
Should a person avoid writing an off topic post like this even if it is identified from the get-go? I'm not sure about the etiquette.
Off Topic:
I would be neat if Colt brought back the Python. I read insurance reasons prevented them from seriously considering it. My guess is the hammer pulled back without an external safety.
I think there was an insurance/liability issue before the Colt Series 70 came out. They may have got around that by labeling it a special edition, at least at first.
Should a person avoid writing an off topic post like this even if it is identified from the get-go? I'm not sure about the etiquette.
It’s called “thread-jacking,” but the moderators will tolerate it up to a point. If it’s way out of line – and especially if it gets contentious it may get the thread locked. So far you haven’t done anything that would rate anything but a mild beating with a wet noodle.
Concerning the Colt Python. We have had many past threads on the subject, so by going to the forum’s Search Feature and using the key word “Python” you’ll soon know a whole lot more then you expected.
Short answer: The problem isn’t insurance or liability, it’s economics. The design originated in 1908 when high quality, hand fitted guns were the norm. Today if they truly duplicated the “old” Python it would cost more then most potential customers would pay. Someday you may see a new gun with the old name, but the guns won’t be the same.
peacebutready
Member
Maybe it could be a Colt Custom Shop gun. Priced on the high side I guess it would be a low volume, high margin (profit) model costing maybe 1500 to 1700 dollars. I think they would sell a certain amount like Les Baer, Wilson Combat, and Ed Brown sell their very expensive 1911's. Another way it could be worth it for Colt is the attention the company would get.
Maybe a small outfit like the ones listed above should make a Python-like revolver.
Tony_the_tiger
Member
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2011
- Messages
- 905
Like others have indicated, the firearm should be at 100% ignition regardless of ammo or primer choice. I'd call S&W and tell them it misfires. They'll cover shipping and restore it back to factory spec. Then, use professionals or the factory if you need work done on it.
- Status