Revolver Double Action Trigger Pull

[Waveski]

Dibbs said: ↑
Considering the DA on a revolver it usually it's only safety, I prefer as heavy a DA pull as possible.

Not I. (Kleanbore)

Nor I.

 

[MikeInOr]

The DA pull on my Dan Wesson revolver is actually on the heavy side... but it is "geared" for a considerably shorter trigger pull than the S&W's and Rugers that I have shot. The short quick pull makes for quite quick followup shots.

My Webley revolver on the other hand is just Heavy, Heavy Heavy. It almost feels like someone put an extra heavy spring in it some where in its life. I have had friends that thought it was broken... nope, just very stiff.

 

[Jonesy814]

I have a 3" S&W model 60 Pro. Originally the trigger pull was a hair over 12# and a little rough or gritty feeling. I installed a Wolff reduced power 8# mainspring. I also polished the rebound slide & where it rides in the frame, and put a 16# rebound spring in. Now the trigger pull is a nice and smooth 10.75#. I have only shot about 70 rounds of my reloads with CCI primers, but had 100% ignition. I intend to polish the rebound slide and put a 16# rebound spring in my other 2 airweight J frames, but will leave the factory mainspring as they are carry guns

 

[Waveski]

My Webley revolver on the other hand is just Heavy, Heavy Heavy. It almost feels like someone put an extra heavy spring in it some where in its life. I have had friends that thought it was broken... nope, just very stiff.

Some designs are like that. Take a close look at 2 seemingly similar S&W .38 sp. K frames ... The square butt is a m.1905 and is essentially the same mechanism we know today - including and especially the rebound slide under the side plate. The round butt m.1902 , on the other hand , has no rebound slide - the trigger reset is accomplished by means of the second leaf spring in the grip frame. It can be seen lying alongside the upper front strap.

The da trigger on the model of 1902 is nasty. The rebound slide innovation improved trigger S&W pull considerably. I'll have dig these two out and put them on the scale to refresh myself as to the difference.

 

[Riomouse911]

I shot both of my .22’s today, 50 rounds, 25 yards, two-handed DA with a decent cadence. (A shot every 1.5 to 2 seconds or so) Ammo was CCI Mini Mag 40 gr RN .22LR and CCI Maxi Mag 40 gr JHP in .22 WMR. Targets are full sized NRA B-27 from Action Target.

The flyers on both targets are 100% my fault. I can’t blame it on the breeze, cold, nuthin’.



The model 48-4 has a decent DA trigger pull weight, but it’s a little bit rougher than the older and apparently tuned 17-2. I had one FTF with the CCI, but it fired when rotated in the chamber so I’ll blame it on priming.


The 17-2 was shooting much better than I was, most of the 9-ring shots were from me rushing to finish. (I only had 30 minutes to shoot)

The CCI Mini Mags had two FTF, one fired when rotated in the cylinder and the other was rotated twice (for three hammer strikes) and never fired.

The DA pull weights were pretty close, but the smoothness of the 17-2 clearly shone through and looked better for me on paper. If I can get the 48-4 smoothed as nicely as the 17-2 I’ll be in hog heaven!
Stay safe.

 

[Waveski]

You stated 7# 7oz. da for your model 17 ... that is pretty light for rim fire. My stock 17 comes in at about 9# 9oz. On a percentile basis that is quite a difference. Given that trigger wt. , and the usual reliability of MiniMag , I'll bet that you are marginal on primer strike.
Does that revolver ever have a ftf in single action?

 

[Riomouse911]

No, and to be honest I believe this was the first time I’ve had a FTF in this gun.
I was surprised how light the pull was when I broke out the Lyman gauge.

They both were purchased used so I don’t know what was done to them, if anything, so I can’t say whether or not they were touched by an expert. All I know is the pull is really nice, and when I do my part they shoot very well.

I willl be more cognizant of any FTF in the future. If it becomes an issue I’ll probably replace springs to improve reliability.

Stay safe.

 

[Eddietruett]

I like around 2lbs SA for target revolvers and 6-7lbs DA for SD guns. One thing a master gunsmith told me one day and then demonstrated is "there is a huge difference in smooth and light".
You can take a 10lb smooth DA and shoot it better than a 8lb DA if it is not as smooth. He's done many trigger jobs through the years for me and he is one of the best I've seen, but now days its hard to get him to do any revolver work. His son-in-law is taking over and does real good, but as good as the master. I'm sure its because of the heavier cylinder, but I don't think there is anything better than shooting a N frame S&W with a properly tuned smooth action. Just seems better than a K or L frame.

 

[Waveski]

I willl be more cognizant of any FTF in the future. If it becomes an issue I’ll probably replace springs to improve reliability.

I'm pretty darned sure that your 17 has had work done to it. If the owner was really into target/comp shooting he/she may even have gone with a specific ammunition.
I have a m.15 Smith that was tuned to the extreme. About 7# da, but not reliable. Being strictly a range gun , I "cheated". Instead of swapping out the main spring altogether I employed the old trick of placing a spent primer cup over the end of the strain screw as a shim. That brought the strike just up to the point of consistent ignition , the increase in trigger wt. being only a few ounces. Certainly not an exact science - every primer cup dimple being different - bit it worked.

 

[Riomouse911]

I'm pretty darned sure that your 17 has had work done to it. If the owner was really into target/comp shooting he/she may even have gone with a specific ammunition.
I have a m.15 Smith that was tuned to the extreme. About 7# da, but not reliable. Being strictly a range gun , I "cheated". Instead of swapping out the main spring altogether I employed the old trick of placing a spent primer cup over the end of the strain screw as a shim. That brought the strike just up to the point of consistent ignition , the increase in trigger wt. being only a few ounces. Certainly not an exact science - every primer cup dimple being different - bit it worked.

Allegedly it was owned by a female target shooter from the 1960-70’s so it surely was dialed in back then.

I’ll keep an eye on the FTF and see if it was that ammo (one Mini Mag was surely a dud) or if it’s across the ammo spectrum and is a gun issue.

Thanks for the suggestions!

Stay safe.

 

[geo57]

Ever shoot a Harrington Richardson Sportsman? Really makes the veins on the forearm stand out. Or , for that matter , a S&W model of 1902 , which has a leaf spring in the grip frame acting as a rebound spring.

In the 80's I acquired a Colt Lawman . DA pull had to be 18-20 lbs. I didn't have it very long.

 

[9mmepiphany]

In the 80's I acquired a Colt Lawman . DA pull had to be 18-20 lbs.

Not too surprised. The coil spring powered Colts were infamous for their triggers

 

[wagonburner]

Smooth is more important than light.

What GRIZ22 says.

 

[Typetwelve]

Is ignition compromised at that pull weight?

Absolutely. I had my 627 reworked by a local smith who is superb at trigger jobs. I told him I wanted to take the trigger pull down to shoot DA only, mostly 38 spcl. He took it down to the point where it will not reliably ignite magnum primers (fine by me)...I have to use moon clips to get it to reliably ignite factory 38 spcl. My 38 spcl reloads with federal primers ignite just fine, moon clip or no. Single action is darn near useless it is so light now, it takes near no pressure to pull in SA, I never use it.

With that said, that gun can ring some steel and group like god intended it to...it is seriously fast, controllable, and accurate for what I wanted if for. I would never contemplate using it for self defense.

On the other hand, my Super Redhawk is bone stock...and will remain that way. I want it to reliably ignite magnum primers ever time. I won't even put reduced power springs in it.

(I'll say that I wish that digital trigger pull gauges weren't so costly, I'd like to have one...but I mostly consider it a novelty item and it isn't worth the $50 to me.)

 

[Kleanbore]

I think it very imprudent to have anyone reduce the trigger pull weight of a firearm, for legal reasons. The firearm will likely be tested against the factory specs by the police armorers, and if not by them, certainly by any civil plaintiffs that come out of the woodwork.

Smoothing a trigger is something else.

This has been discussed at length here dozens of times, and it was recently the subject of a Law of Self Defense blog post.

 

[Jim Watson]

My Webley revolver on the other hand is just Heavy, Heavy Heavy.

The da trigger on the model of 1902 is nasty.

Observations like this make me wonder if our ancestors did much double action shooting other than in close range self defense.

 

[SteadyD]

I think it very imprudent to have anyone reduce the trigger pull weight of a firearm, for legal reasons. The firearm will likely be tested against the factory specs by the police armorers, and if not by them, certainly by any civil plaintiffs that come out of the woodwork.

Smoothing a trigger is something else.

This has been discussed at length here dozens of times, and it was recently the subject of a Law of Self Defense blog post.

While I may be wrong, I think having a trigger smoothed can also cause a reduction in pull weight due to less friction.

 

[MikeInOr]

Observations like this make me wonder if our ancestors did much double action shooting other than in close range self defense.

The "Story" I was told, for what it is worth, is that the British officers had to qualify with the Webley shooting it double action. I have a couple of friends that don't have the hand strength to shoot my Webley double action. I will say that once I mastered shooting the Webley in double action all the posts about bad triggers on this or that EDC are just silly!

 

[Typetwelve]

I think it very imprudent to have anyone reduce the trigger pull weight of a firearm, for legal reasons. The firearm will likely be tested against the factory specs by the police armorers, and if not by them, certainly by any civil plaintiffs that come out of the woodwork.

Smoothing a trigger is something else.

This has been discussed at length here dozens of times, and it was recently the subject of a Law of Self Defense blog post.

To me, it's no different than taking a hot rod and finally designating it for track use only. That's how I view my 627...it's a (pardon the lame term) "race gun" only. I'd never, EVER take that thing out on public roads aka, use it for personal defense.

My "around the house" gun is a bone stock Charter Bulldog...cheap, effective, something I wouldn't get angry having a case # etched into it should I have to use it for business.

 

[shoebox1.1]

To me, it's no different than taking a hot rod and finally designating it for track use only. That's how I view my 627...it's a (pardon the lame term) "race gun" only. I'd never, EVER take that thing out on public roads aka, use it for personal defense.

My "around the house" gun is a bone stock Charter Bulldog...cheap, effective, something I wouldn't get angry having a case # etched into it should I have to use it for business.

Where’s the “ double” like button lol

 

[Kleanbore]

To me, it's no different than taking a hot rod and finally designating it for track use only.

Probably so--to a very large extent.

But I can see where an ND, either in your hands or in the hands of someone else at the range ,could lead into the unhappy trails of alleged negligence due to a modification.

 

[.38 Special]

I think it very imprudent to have anyone reduce the trigger pull weight of a firearm, for legal reasons. The firearm will likely be tested against the factory specs by the police armorers, and if not by them, certainly by any civil plaintiffs that come out of the woodwork.

Smoothing a trigger is something else.

This has been discussed at length here dozens of times, and it was recently the subject of a Law of Self Defense blog post.

So, pretty much every competitive handgunner is imprudent?

 

[Kleanbore]

So, pretty much every competitive handgunner is imprudent?

I wouldn't say so.

 

[.38 Special]

I wouldn't say so.

You pretty much did, unless I missed something. Lightened trigger pulls are almost standard in pistol competition, and "I think it very imprudent to have anyone reduce the trigger pull weight of a firearm..."

 

[Kleanbore]

You pretty much did, unless I missed something. Lightened trigger pulls are almost standard in pistol competition, and "I think it very imprudent to have anyone reduce the trigger pull weight of a firearm..."

I should have specified that I was referring to any firearm that is kept or carried for self defense, which is where most risks of liability involving NDs apply.

Competition?

Those guns that have very light trigger pulls should never be purposely pointed at people. But that does not fully eliminate the risk of civil or criminal liability for gross negligence.

I would not pin a 1911 grip safety, and I would pay a lot of attention to what trigger pulls would likely be considered acceptable.

If I could buy a competition pistol from a manufacturer's custom shop, I would do so, rather than having a private gunsmith work to my specification