Elmer Keith & reduced trigger pull....

[Mad Magyar]

I love going to my barber shop since he always has an assorted "oldies-but goodies" gun magazines to read...Anyway, looking at an Elmer Keith article written some 40 yrs ago, he stated that while working as a final inspector at the Ogden Arsenal during WW11 him & his buddy used a quick remedy for reducing the trigger pull on some 1911's.
He altered them by taking a small center punch and throwing up a burr on the inside of the full-cock notch so the sear did not bite as deep in the notch.
Now, this really intrigues me...Has anyone ever used this method or have a pistol so notched? I sure would like to see an image/pic if available...I guess back then that was the most expedient & cost effective way to go...
John, what's your take on this method?

 

[rcmodel]

Yes, I have seen them.
Yes, it works.

I read once of Keith having a gun at Camp Perry so modified.
J.H. "Fitz" Fitzgerald at Colt was so impressed with the trigger he ask to see how it was done.

He then proceeded to take the hammer & sear out of the gun and steal them to take back to Colt for further study!


rcmodel

 

[1911Tuner]

He altered them by taking a small center punch and throwing up a burr on the inside of the full-cock notch so the sear did not bite as deep in the notch.

He then proceeded to take the hammer & sear out of the gun and steal them to take back to Colt for further study!

And so, the standard modification that we know today as the "Breakaway Angle" was born.

 

[Mad Magyar]

Thanks for the replies...I'll buy "coffee & donuts" for a pic of a hammer so altered....

 

[Old Fuff]

Elmer was working with World War Two era hammers, and some later ones were hard enough to resist the hammer & punch treatment. Also many of today's hammers come with reduced height hooks, and you do not want to reduce the sear's engagement any further in those.

 

[1911Tuner]

Fuff...Remind me to describe the one-point-five-pound cheater trigger mod sometime. Neat trick...but ya gotta hit that sucker juuuust right.

I won't post it on an open forum. Somebody could put their eye out.

 

[Old Fuff]

I Know... I know!!!

I don't exactly want to encourage the practice...

 

[Mad Magyar]

Hey, Old Fuff & Tuner, I don't like all these "secrets" of the trade....

 

[Old Fuff]

Believe me, there are better ways, especially with today’s hammers and sears. Most hammers have reduced hooks as it is, and the burr treatment would be unnecessary and possibly counterproductive. Elmer was test firing .45 Automatics and putting a file to anything was a no-no. What he did was a field expedient because he couldn't do anything else.

Most of Keith's contemporaies with less experience got officer's commissions. Elmer, lacking much formal education, got to test fire .45 pistols, and he did so day after day even though his hand was sometimes bloody

 

[1911Tuner]

Magyar, tell ya what. I'll.........

No, no! You'll put your eye out!

 

[Peter M. Eick]

Old Fuff and Tuner,

Given the choice of a field expedient solution to a good trigger pull by Keith and a bad trigger pull by a less experienced officer, I would pick Keith's approach.

I have wondered if he became such a good shot by practice or raw talent? Given his history one could argue both to a certain extent.

I have also wondered what Keith would have thought about the abuse we put on 1911's today ("tactical etc.") and all of the problems with current production guns from diverting them from a true 1911 format.

An interesting points to ponder....

 

[1911Tuner]

I have wondered if he became such a good shot by practice or raw talent?

Hi Peter.

Likely a little of both, with a helping of necessity stirred in...kinda like Annie Oakley. (Miss the shot, and you don't eat.)

 

[Old Fuff]

Elmer didn’t particularly like the 1911 .45, mostly because he didn’t like round-nose full jacketed bullets and their effect or lack of it, on game. On the other hand he gave the model 1917 S&W a thumbs-up so long as it was loaded with his style lead semi-wadcutter bullet. He was a cowboy, rancher, big-game hunter, guide and general all around outdoorsman. His perspective towards handguns came from that background. In his field no one was better, and he was an interesting man to know. His influence is still with me.

I can’t tell you what his opinion on the current breed of tactical 1911 platform pistols would be, but I do know what he thought about gadgets in general. I’d tell you, but this is The High Road, and Art’s Grandma might be around somewhere.

I’m sure you get my drift…

 

[Peter M. Eick]

I get your drift and thanks for the insights.

 

[Old Fuff]

I would note that Elmer’s revolvers often sported cosmetic affectations, such as ivory stocks (weren’t so expensive then). Those on his Smith & Wesson’s were slightly reduced in girth because of his hand size. His pets were engraved, again at a time when the cost was reasonable. He preferred adjustable sights. Gunsmith like Harold Croft might have tinkered with the innards, but Elmer didn’t. I’m sure he would have found the rails to mount things on to be both distasteful and ridiculous, because it would impinge on the utility of the arm. As far as a flashlight were concerned, he wasn’t into clearing rooms or buildings, and the last place I’d want to break into would be Elmer’s house when he was at home. I know that he didn’t like optical sights on a handgun in any way or form. He didn’t care for stainless steel, and I don’t believe he ever owned anything that was nickel plated.

And he could hit what he was shooting at, at ungodly long distances…