View Full Version : USGI Triggers
I have a Bushmaster M4 lower with the OEM trigger kit.
I really hated it so I used my mechanical trigger pull gauge to test the weight after the range yesterday. The gauge maxes out at 8#s.
The pull weight was above 8 every time I tested. This is totally unacceptable for me.
I want a trigger system (preferably USGI) that has a 5 - 6# pull weight.
This is my range gun, but also my home defense and SHTF gun so this system has to be reliable. It has to be able to consistently shoot military ammo.
Any ideas gents? I saw the ALG ACT system, any thoughts on how that would fit my needs? I would really appreciate the help guys.
One last thing, I don't want to spend $150+ on a trigger system. This isn't my precision rifle.
ForTehNguyen
05-05-12, 22:16
few of my ALGs average between 6.25 to 6.5 lbs. I would recommend one if you want to stick with a USGI type trigger. I havent seen any of mine go below 6 lbs. Mil spec tolerances are between 5.5 and 9 lbs for AR triggers. So it can be hit or miss. I actually have one trigger that's 5.75lbs, not sure what brand it is.
few of my ALGs average between 6.25 to 6.5 lbs. I would recommend one if you want to stick with a USGI type trigger. I havent seen any of mine go below 6 lbs. Mil spec tolerances are between 5.5 and 9 lbs for AR triggers. So it can be hit or miss. I actually have one trigger that's 5.75lbs, not sure what brand it is.
6.25-6.5 is much better than the around 8.5 I seem to be averaging. Has anyone tried something like a Daniel Defense fcg from their lpk and the JP enhanced reliability (red hammer, yellow trigger) springs? I hear mixed things about the DD lpk.
How many rounds on the trigger? Good wear-in already, or is this a relatively new FCG? I've found that most GI triggers will smooth out and lighten up a bit with use.
My BM trigger has been fired 2000+ times.
ForTehNguyen
05-05-12, 23:17
6.25-6.5 is much better than the around 8.5 I seem to be averaging. Has anyone tried something like a Daniel Defense fcg from their lpk and the JP enhanced reliability (red hammer, yellow trigger) springs? I hear mixed things about the DD lpk.
thing is DD is still mil spec, which can range from 5.5 to 9#. With ALG at least they polish the surfaces the same way on each trigger so there is tighter consistency on the weights and feel.
Its not only the weight thats better on the ALG triggers, the trigger break is crisper and there is less creep. But the big thing is consistency.
The best way to ensure that you purchase a USGI type trigger in the 6# range is to purchase the ALG @ $65.
I recommend the ALG QMS trigger.
Thanks guys. I ended up going with the ALG ACT @ $65.00.
Used MidwayUSA promo (I don't know the rules on this here, but I feel the need to share the promo code with you guys) btw "AR15510" which brought it to $59.00 after shipping and my NRA round up. $10 off $50 order.
I will let you guys know when I get it here and how it works out.
I recommend the ALG QMS trigger.
The best way to ensure that you purchase a USGI type trigger in the 6# range is to purchase the ALG @ $65.
Have you guys been using the ALG triggers? Round count on them? I'm a pretty adamant GI trigger guy but the relative low cost of these has me curious enough to try one again.
To the OP, are you finding less than ideal results downrange? I would be far less concerned with what my trigger pull weights were telling me and way more interested in what my target is telling me.
ForTehNguyen
05-06-12, 08:29
Have you guys been using the ALG triggers? Round count on them? I'm a pretty adamant GI trigger guy but the relative low cost of these has me curious enough to try one again.
To the OP, are you finding less than ideal results downrange? I would be far less concerned with what my trigger pull weights were telling me and way more interested in what my target is telling me.
If you can get a trigger weight scale first, measure all your ARs trigger weights. I actually have an AR trigger that has a lower weight than the rest of my QMS/ACTs, thats just luck of the draw within the mil spec tolerances. I would use the trigger weight scale to find all the worst offenders and change those out.
I found a few high 7# gritty feeling triggers and a low 8#. After changing them out they became smoother low 6# triggers. I actually didnt upgrade 2 triggers because they were already at the typical QMS/ACT weights.
Five guns is hardly a thorough test, but of my five AR's with std FCG's ALL of them were basically a disapointment. All of them gritty, full of creep and heavy. One a Colt, an LWRC , a pair of SPIKES lowers and a new DD.
With USE the grittiness starts to go away and one can also see wear patterns and then take some 600 grit paper/stone and SLOWLY polish things a bit. Fine if one has a LOT of time and ammo.
I spoke with the Geissele folks at SHOT Show at length. I was quite impressed. These folks KNOW triggers.
I'm running four of their triggers now. Two of the SSA's and a pair of the $65 ACT units. I'm very imppressed with the ACT units. Yes they are surely heavier than 4# but they are consistent, creep free and I can live with that far easier than grittiness and my real bitch...CREEP.
Five guns is hardly a thorough test, but of my five AR's with std FCG's ALL of them were basically a disapointment. All of them gritty, full of creep and heavy. One a Colt, an LWRC , a pair of SPIKES lowers and a new DD.
With USE the grittiness starts to go away and one can also see wear patterns and then take some 600 grit paper/stone and SLOWLY polish things a bit. Fine if one has a LOT of time and ammo.
I hear this over, and over, and over again. Did ANY of this cause you to miss the target, or to take more time than you had available to engage said target?
and what is your end use with these guns? If you DID see a detriment on the targets or the timer, in what environment did this occur? And, since you've already made the switch to "better", how did your groups or times improve?
I hear this over, and over, and over again. Did ANY of this cause you to miss the target, or to take more time than you had available to engage said target?
and what is your end use with these guns? If you DID see a detriment on the targets or the timer, in what environment did this occur? And, since you've already made the switch to "better", how did your groups or times improve?
Sorry rob_s . I like a crisp , non gritty trigger. Even sorrier I tried to give an opinion or add something here.
FN in MT
Animal_Mother556
05-06-12, 10:49
Sorry rob_s . I like a crisp , non gritty trigger. Even sorrier I tried to give an opinion or add something here.
FN in MT
I don't think he meant anything by it, man. Rob, correct me if I am wrong, but it just seems like you are very frustrated with people complaining about GI triggers...but they really can't give you any evidence of "better" shooting abilities with lighter triggers. Obviously, Rob is a proponent of GI triggers, and I tend to agree. I see VERY little time differences using lighter triggers. But, I can also see how having a trigger that makes the shooter feel better or more confidant is a good thing.
Here is a quick video of me running a standard-ass GI trigger (somewhere around 7-8 lbs)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C0DLixhOJ1E
I don't think he meant anything by it, man. Rob, correct me if I am wrong, but it just seems like you are very frustrated with people complaining about GI triggers...but they really can't give you any evidence of "better" shooting abilities with lighter triggers. Obviously, Rob is a proponent of GI triggers, and I tend to agree. I see VERY little time differences using lighter triggers. But, I can also see how having a trigger that makes the shooter feel better or more confidant is a good thing.
Bingo!
(and responses like the above really tell me all I need to know about those "opinions")
Sorry rob_s . I like a crisp , non gritty trigger.
Why?
.
I transitioned from shooting a precision rifle with NO creep, smooth, and a ~3# pull that broke like glass to one that was gritty, crept a mile (figuratively), and had a significantly higher pull of > 8#s. I trained with it until i was competent, but when I flip my magnifier over and try to hit a target at distance after transitioning I am left wanting so much more. I also love the USGI trigger for its reliability. The ALG ACT from what I'm hearing and reading will give me a respectable trigger for all ranges, and keep the USGI reliability. So why WOULDN'T I do it?
Have you guys been using the ALG triggers? Round count on them? I'm a pretty adamant GI trigger guy but the relative low cost of these has me curious enough to try one again.
To the OP, are you finding less than ideal results downrange? I would be far less concerned with what my trigger pull weights were telling me and way more interested in what my target is telling me.Rob, the only real reason that I suggest the ALG ACT trigger to the OP is that they seem to be dead nuts consistent on pull weight. Mine has zero creep and breaks right around 6.5 lbs which is what he wants. With a standard USGI you are rolling the dice. Some are actually better than the ACT and some are not.
However as has been mentioned, I actually do have some USGI triggers that feel just as good or better than my ACT trigger, but some that have creep and a heavier pull. There is a bit of a chance in variance in what you are going to get with standard USGI triggers / spring combo's from various manufacturers who make them. The thing that the ACT has going for it seems to be that they are consistent from trigger to trigger. This consistency is probably due to sourcing triggers and springs from the same manufacturer and the process that ALG does on them giving them that good consistency from trigger to trigger.
Now I will mention this with my own personal ALG ACT trigger.....I now have about 2500 rounds through the weapon and the trigger feels exactly the same as it did on round 1. This may be good or bad depending on how you look at it. From my experiences, most USGI triggers get better with about 500-1000 rounds if they started out as a not so good trigger. As mentioned I have a few USGI triggers that are indeed better than the ACT trigger with the same amount of rounds through them. So is the $65.00 price tag worth it? That depends. If someone doesn't want to take a chance on a USGI, or can't wait to shoot 500-1000K rounds for it to get better, then the ACT is a very good option. In reality when I am running the ACT or any USGI trigger at practical up close speeds, I notice absolutely zero difference. I really don't get any benefit even at longer distances out to 450 yards or so. But everyone's skill level may be different.
Many trigger people or fans of certain brands get hurt over what I say but for myself I am not getting any real noticeable benefit with the ACT over a USGI and I do not feel the double the price over a standard USGI is worth it. But for the OP he was to be assured of a 6lb range USGI trigger and I suggested the ACT because they all seem to be right at that pull point. I will also mention, that just as far as my agency is concerned the ACT is a no go, just because of the silver looking trigger. Stupid but true. This is often true for many agencies.
Here is my original ALG thread and video that caused some major butt hurt for a few people......;)
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=101887
I'm a big proponent of good triggers. "Good" doesn't mean light or crisp. Good means reliable and predictable. My experience with GI triggers is that they are heavy, creepy, gritty and unpredictable. That's why I installed a Geisselle SSA-E in my precision rifle and I really like it.
Rob always advises "Just go shoot it". I decided to accept his challenge and installed a GI trigger in my new carbine. It was worse than I expected- the trigger was heavy, creepy, gritty and unpredictable. It was plain horrible and something needed to be done. Not knowing how thin the case hardening was, I didn't want to polish it, so I applied a heavy grease to the sears and pins. That smoothed up the trigger a surprising amount. It's still heavy and creepy, but the grittiness and unpredictability went away.
It is now is reliable and predictable and I have to admit, my GI trigger, well lubed with grease, is a good one. It will never be a fine trigger because it's designed to be a reliable and rugged in the extreme rigors of combat shooting.
Rob, I don't think the ALG trigger will help much with speed as it's design and basic geometry is the same as the GI. In fact, it is the GI trigger with better manufacturing control of the tolerances and as I understand it, deeper case hardening. I have yet to try the ALG, but from the descriptions I've read, it is just as reliable, yet crisper, more consistent and predictable, than the standard GI. That alone makes it worth the price of admission for a new rifle, as a replacement for a worn out or broken GI trigger, or if the shooter wants/needs the same trigger pull in more than one rifle.
Of course, each shooter is different. The only way to tell if the ALG is a good, practical investment is to try one. That said, I see no reason why you'd be at a disadvantage shooting your GI trigger against an ALG trigger
the trigger was heavy, creepy, gritty and unpredictable. It was plain horrible and something needed to be done.
Here's what I don't understand. What was the result of this downrange? 10% larger groups than with a "better" trigger? 20%? 200%?
What I'd like to know is how the "better" triggers translate to results down range. It strikes me that we measure shooting in two ways: accuracy and time. The only other reason to modify a firearm, beyond increasing accuracy or decreasing time (assuming we are starting with a reliable firearm to begin with) is ergonomics, which is virtually impossible to quantify and really comes down to personal preference. Is a trigger upgrade an ergonomic choice? And if so, how much time does one need to spend getting used to the trigger in the gun before they set about changing the ergonomics?
If you marry a chick with small tits, do you immediately run out and get her a boob job or do you play with the small tits for awhile and see if it turns out you like them?
I do understand that a lot of this is driven by where people come from. Guys that come to the AR from precision shooting or even hunting rifles are typically the first to complain about the trigger. It is because they are SPOILED by the triggers in the guns they are used to. I recently bought a Winchester Model 70 and I never did get used to how light the factory, stock trigger was nor did I get used to how little movement there was. Guys that come from pistol shooting, like myself, especially Glocks and other modern semi-autos, tend to find the AR trigger to be rather nice. It has a pretty clear takeup, and it breaks pretty crisply vs. the mush we're used to in our handguns.
Of course, then there's the third group, that jumps into the AR first, can't hit shit, changes out the trigger (and maybe gets themselves some glass), borrows mom's car and video camera, and hits the range. What I wonder, even with these guys, is just how much better that trigger and glass make them? In real numbers. "I couldn't hit an 8" plate at 200 yards with the stock trigger but I could ring it every time once I changed out to something 'better'". or "I was shooting 6" groups at 100 yards with the stock trigger but with the 'better' trigger I was getting 3" groups with the exact same gun, optic, and ammo."
Here's what I don't understand. What was the result of this downrange? 10% larger groups than with a "better" trigger? 20%? 200%?
What I'd like to know is how the "better" triggers translate to results down range.
If it's enough of a distraction to the shooter, like that little gap between the trigger guard and grip, could not removing the distraction result in better groups?
If it's enough of a distraction to the shooter, like that little gap between the trigger guard and grip, could not removing the distraction result in better groups?
Can it? How much better?
jklaughrey
05-06-12, 14:20
Can it? How much better?
Speaking from a psychological reference. I supppose one less distraction that will allow uncluttered focus of your mind can in a abstract way increase your accuracy by causing a placebo effect on your confidence. But I dont know, flip a coin. You decide.
Sent from my LS670 using Tapatalk 2
Speaking from a psychological reference. I supppose one less distraction that will allow uncluttered focus of your mind can in a abstract way increase your accuracy by causing a placebo effect on your confidence. But I dont know, flip a coin. You decide.
Sent from my LS670 using Tapatalk 2
It just seems to me that this shouldn't be a difficult thing. There are hundreds of posts about "better", but none of those people can quantify what makes it better? I find that really hard to believe.
Canonshooter
05-06-12, 14:32
Rob, it's both accuracy and time.
When using an AR at pistol-fighting distances and pulling the trigger as fast as you can, there is no difference between a heavy, creepy trigger and a lighter, crisper one. From what I can see, much of today's training (and even carbine matches) are skewed toward this kind of up-close-and-fast shooting.
Coming from NRA high power with it's far greater emphasis on distance and accuracy, the better trigger will allow getting accurate shots off more quickly. The harder you have to yank on a trigger, the harder the rest of the muscles have to work to keep the wobble zone down and the greater the chance shot placement will be disrupted.
My goal with the AR is to have as "fine" of a trigger pull as possible without seriously compromising durability/reliability. So far, I very much like the Gieselle SSA and have found that my slow fire precision shooting has improved with it (though I have not quantified the improvement). But as you have pointed out, hitting multiple IDPA target with multiple shots as fast as possible at 15 yards is an entirely different exercise than hitting a single 6" x-ring at 600 yards, one shot at a time.
IMO, both are good skills/equipment capabilities to strive for.
Can it? How much better?
I don't know but for the people that do get hung up on these things than yes I think it can make a big difference to them. I joined the Army when I was 18 and before that had only fired my Grandfather's .22 pistol, rifle, and 16 gauge double barrel. The Army has made me very adaptable, I never think there is something wrong with the equipment; I always think that I need more training. I never knew there were such things as "bad triggers" and that the gap between the AR trigger guard and grip is a "problem" until I joined internet discussion forums. Heck, the entire aftermarket industry depends on people that blame the equipment before themselves.
jklaughrey
05-06-12, 14:40
It just seems to me that this shouldn't be a difficult thing. There are hundreds of posts about "better", but none of those people can quantify what makes it better? I find that really hard to believe.
Some things just aren't as easy to quantify. Human nature being that it is will rise up to a challenge if told they are the best or posses the best equipment. The mind can be tricked, thereby causing a direct impact upon physical manipulations to a degree. Give.me water and say im average I may not run as fast, give me water that is made from magical unicorn tears that bestow the speed of Hermes. Well I may be faster.
Sent from my LS670 using Tapatalk 2
the better trigger will allow getting accurate shots off more quickly.
How much more accurate? How much more quickly?
have found that my slow fire precision shooting has improved with it (though I have not quantified the improvement).
I don't understand how you can say the part outside of the parenthesis without the part inside.
Some things just aren't as easy to quantify.
time and distance are hard to quantify?
Give.me water and say im average I may not run as fast, give me water that is made from magical unicorn tears that bestow the speed of Hermes. Well I may be faster.
and if I put a timer on you I'll see just how much faster.
jklaughrey
05-06-12, 14:53
time and distance are hard to quantify?
and if I put a timer on you I'll see just how much faster.
Time and distance no, psychological impact with a sample size of one or a few doesn't meet criteria to be wholly objective. I would suppose if one had the time and money you could propose a long term study with a control group and varied subject groups for the purpose of data accumulation which you desire Rob. I am not inclined to do so and will go with what works for me, which is a consistent trigger pull from a quality "milspec" fcg.
Sent from my LS670 using Tapatalk 2
Canonshooter
05-06-12, 14:57
How much more accurate? How much more quickly?
23.61% ;)
How much faster can you run up a 3% grade than a 5% grade?
The harder you have to exert a muscle, the more energy that will be required and the faster fatigue will set in. Fatigue leads to hand tremble, which is never a good thing in precision shooting.
A heavy, gritty trigger will always be a liability in precision shooting, but a lighter crisper one (with equally fast reset) will never be so in fast, close range shooting.
John_Burns
05-06-12, 15:00
When you get off the square range and full sized A-zones for targets the benefits of good trigger are very easy to quantify.
Speed is the main benefit. When breaking a shot to quickly hit a small or moving or both small and moving target a good trigger allows much better timing of the shot.
Apply the same trigger press to both an 8 lbs trigger and 3.5 lbs trigger and see which fires the rifle sooner. If you don't understand the benefit of having the rifle fire sooner rather than later once your eyes like the sight picture then be happy with crap triggers.
It ain’t exactly rocket science.
I bought a 6920 with a terrible 8lb trigger. After 1200 rounds it didn't improve. What did happen was I had a more difficult time transferring back to my primary pistol (1911/4.5lb crisp trigger ) I now have a geissele SD E that feels very similar.
I'm a very solid shooter and have little issue shooting any gun well. (i dont mean to sound obnoxious). I prefer a crisp trigger on any weapon.
I don't understand the trigger hate from some when it comes to ARs.
The fundamentals of accurate shooting have often been stated as aligning the sights on the target and firing the gun without disturbing that alignment. Does a gritty 8lb trigger not affect that?:confused:
I also realize if you primarily spray ARs at rock throwing distances, your not going to realize much difference.
Canonshooter
05-06-12, 15:15
How much more accurate? How much more quickly?
Response #2
Going back 32 years ago when I first got into NRA Bulleye shooting with a .22 pistol, I went from a Ruger with a lousy trigger to a High Standard with a much better trigger. The weight, grip angle and ergos between the two pistols were very similar (both were 5" bull barrels), but the change took me from a 230s shooter to a 250s shooter in one match. So, that would be about a 10% improvement in my scores.
Strapping on an early model Aimpoint to the HS pistol took me into the high 260s/low 270s, which is about as good as I ever got.
Somebody tell Rob Leatham that the 2lb custom trigger job on his IDPA pistol is a waste. :rolleyes:
Here's what I don't understand. What was the result of this downrange? 10% larger groups than with a "better" trigger? 20%? 200%?
To clarify, The only thing I did to the GI trigger in my carbine was lube it with grease. I did not change anything as that would not have accomplished what I set out to do. I wanted to see if I could live with a standard GI AR trigger and to see just how horrible it really was and whether or not it would improve with shooting. My personal experience has been very few triggers get much better even after thousands of uses. So far, that bears out- my GI trigger, which has around a thousand live fires and even more dry fires, isn't much better than I started.
The result down range, after applying grease, was fewer flyers from jerking the trigger during slow, precise fire. With the GI trigger dry, I would get distracted and impatient and jerk the trigger more. The impatience and jerking are on me. As it turned out, the GI trigger surprised me with how well it worked once it was greased. I could concentrate more on just shooting. It may have reduced jerking during fast shooting, I am not good enough in fast shooting to tell.
A rifle will always fire with a horrible trigger as long as it's reliable and there is no question about it- the AR GI trigger is reliable. What I learned (or re-learned, actually) is that as long as a trigger is usable, no matter how horrible, a shooter can still make hits and a good shooter will make good hits. The other lesson I learned was the AR GI trigger can be horrible, but with the simple application of grease, it becomes quite good and as you assert, is the right tool for the job on a fighting carbine.
What I'd like to know is how the "better" triggers translate to results down range. It strikes me that we measure shooting in two ways: accuracy and time. The only other reason to modify a firearm, beyond increasing accuracy or decreasing time (assuming we are starting with a reliable firearm to begin with) is ergonomics, which is virtually impossible to quantify and really comes down to personal preference. Is a trigger upgrade an ergonomic choice? And if so, how much time does one need to spend getting used to the trigger in the gun before they set about changing the ergonomics?
A better trigger is like any other improvement to the rifle. It won't make up for poor technique or lack of skill. I don't say this to tell you what you already know but to explain I agree with you on this.
Let me set a couple of definitions for this discussion- A good trigger is consistent and reliable. Consistent in that it has the same feel from shot to shot, whether it's heavy or light; creepy or crisp. Of course it has to be reliable both so the rifle will shoot every time and does so safely.
A fine trigger may be lighter, crisper, smoother and with less over travel. A fine trigger isn't always a good trigger because all too often, they are less reliable. A light trigger (under say- 4.5 lbs) is often not a good choice for the neophyte shooter even if it is a good trigger.
A great trigger is one that is light, crisp, has no over travel, a short reset, is consistent, reliable and appropriate for the job at hand.
You are right, trigger preference is a personal thing. A horrible trigger, as long as it's reliable, will work. It is my preference to have a good trigger as I find my shooting is more consistent. It would be even better to have a great trigger, although it's not necessary. What may be a horrible trigger to one shooter, may be a great trigger to another. When should a shooter change out triggers? Only the shooter can know that and only, as you correctly point out, after shooting the rifle. If and when a trigger replacement becomes necessary is a responsibility that rests squarely on the shoulders of the shooter.
After setting semantics aside, I find you and I agree more on the subject of AR triggers than we disagree. The AR GI trigger is a good one (with my caveat that it needs grease to eliminate the grittiness).
If you marry a chick with small tits, do you immediately run out and get her a boob job or do you play with the small tits for awhile and see if it turns out you like them?
ROFLMAO! It is far better to get trigger time on small breasts now, than to wait weeks for the larger ones to heal :)
I do understand that a lot of this is driven by where people come from. Guys that come to the AR from precision shooting or even hunting rifles are typically the first to complain about the trigger. It is because they are SPOILED by the triggers in the guns they are used to. I recently bought a Winchester Model 70 and I never did get used to how light the factory, stock trigger was nor did I get used to how little movement there was. Guys that come from pistol shooting, like myself, especially Glocks and other modern semi-autos, tend to find the AR trigger to be rather nice. It has a pretty clear takeup, and it breaks pretty crisply vs. the mush we're used to in our handguns.
This was one of the things that I had a hard time understanding, that there are shooters out there who have little to no experience shooting anything else but ARs and Glocks. I was fortunate enough to be exposed to a wide variety or firearms while growing up and throughout my adult life. I was naive enough to think most people had a similar experience.
Yes, I am very spoiled when it comes to triggers. I have Remingtons that I have adjusted the triggers until they have great pulls- light, crisp, no slack or over travel, consistent and reliable. I have real good triggers in other firearms as well. I had to realize that the difference in experiences and fact I am a trigger snob was interfering with my finding common understanding about his subject on M4Carbine.
My time with the GI trigger in my AR has really helped me to step back and see with a better perspective. Rob, it was my conversations with you that inspired me to give the GI trigger an honest evaluation. It's helped me understand a few things better along the way. An old wolf can learn a few new tricks.
Of course, then there's the third group, that jumps into the AR first, can't hit shit, changes out the trigger (and maybe gets themselves some glass), borrows mom's car and video camera, and hits the range. What I wonder, even with these guys, is just how much better that trigger and glass make them? In real numbers. "I couldn't hit an 8" plate at 200 yards with the stock trigger but I could ring it every time once I changed out to something 'better'". or "I was shooting 6" groups at 100 yards with the stock trigger but with the 'better' trigger I was getting 3" groups with the exact same gun, optic, and ammo."
It helps them not at all. They will shoot the same whether the trigger is horrible, good or great. Equipment does not make the shooter and it takes a good shooter to use the equipment to it's fullest. Better equipment simply lets a good shooter push the limits further.
My shooting skills are average at best and don't get out as often as I'd like. Last time we went out, a bunch of clay pigeons were set up at roughly 175 yards. A couple of the guys started on them with their expensive SASS type 308 ARs with big honkin' scopes and bi-pods, shooting from the prone. I was able to keep up with them shooting offhand or from the sit using my AR carbine with an H1 or one of my open sighted FALs. When I switched to my precision AR, prone no bipod, I cleaned their clocks. Their equipment could not make up for lack of skill and experience
Canonshooter
05-06-12, 15:58
Mistwolf, just thinking out loud - grease on the sear surfaces could capture dirt/grit, which might cause some problems?
Other than any Slip2000 that may find its way there, I don't lube the SSA trigger sear surfaces.
I agree that grease isn't for every situation. I do find that machinery in general handles dirt, grime and dust much better with lube than without and many problems with dirt & grime can be quickly, if temporarily, solved with wiping everything off with a rag and hosing everything down with lube until it can be properly cleaned.
The GI trigger will run dry. It's just mine is horrible without lube and the grease lasts a long time with better film strength than oil
I tried several types of grease on my GI trigger and it helped a tiny bit. However, it only lasted a hundred or so rounds. Moly was the best if I remember correctly.
I've maintained, taught people to shoot, shot, and repaired dozens of AR's. I've rarely seen anyone that bought or built a quality carbine and added a decent sling, RDS, and cheap SureFire come out below $1600.00. For 3-4% more a decent trigger seems a no brainer.
I understand that some people would like a quantifiable number of improvement for various parts. For most of us that number doesn't matter. I don't think anyone needs to apologize for not caring or being able to justify a why. You own it do what you want.
Last year our department allowed SSA's on personal carbines. I can tell you that of the 4 that initially bought the SSA's, they shot 1,2, 4, and 6 on the annual carbine qualification. Number 1 was always there, the other 3 shot considerable better than the previous years. I don't mind a decent trigger but I see no reason not to use something lighter and smoother if possible.
SW-Shooter
05-06-12, 17:19
I recommend the ALG QMS trigger.
The ACT should also be considered, I put the ACT on 3 of my AR's.
ForTehNguyen
05-06-12, 17:49
Can it? How much better?
http://www.hkpro.com/forum/hk416-hk417-hq/152234-alg-defenses-new-act-trigger-test-416-a.html
guy here did a before and after with rapid fire 5 round groups with some LEO guys shooting it. Not scientific but best thing I could find, showing before and after
http://i295.photobucket.com/albums/mm157/HKforFREEDOM/HKs/ALG-ACT-RangeResults.jpg
SW-Shooter
05-06-12, 18:03
http://www.hkpro.com/forum/hk416-hk417-hq/152234-alg-defenses-new-act-trigger-test-416-a.html
guy here did a before and after with rapid fire 5 round groups with some LEO guys shooting it. Not scientific but best thing I could find, showing before and after
http://i295.photobucket.com/albums/mm157/HKforFREEDOM/HKs/ALG-ACT-RangeResults.jpg
Naysayer:
No double blind study? Then it's obviously pissing in the wind. Try that drill with no less than a dozen shooters, without telling them which gun has which trigger. Do that, and then report back to me some significant findings. I think the trigger is better, but only scientific research will prove it to the doubters. I think the pictures are some proof that it's worth the minimal cost. Thanks for the link ForTehNguyen
What's the distance?
Interesting concept. It would be neat to see this between a SSA and a GI using the Modified Navy Qualifier.
SW-Shooter
05-06-12, 19:09
What's the distance?
Interesting concept. It would be neat to see this between a SSA and a GI using the Modified Navy Qualifier.
I'm thinking 15 yards, but could be 7 or 25. It's what would make sense since it's rapid fire. This would be a great task for some enterprising gun writer.
BufordTJustice
05-06-12, 19:11
Short post that should probably be a long post:
I think that, for accomplished shooters, triggers straddle the divide between ergonomics that are preference driven and gun mods that are performance driven.
There will always be people who are looking for hardware solutions to software problems. Trying to get that 'edge', not through hard & diligent work and proper instruction, but through a fancy add-on (like a trigger or a comp). But I'm going to go out on a ledge here and say that even if performance improvements cannot be quantified using any but the most stringent analysis (and even then, I doubt the improvement would be that big), having a consistent trigger like a QMS/ACT is still a benefit over a std shitty mil spec trigger.
I say this as a shooter who shoots better than most in my agency on a shitty mil spec trigger.
There is also a completely unquantifiable component: shooter confidence. Example: I use a Talon Grip rubber grip overlay on my agency issued Glock 21 gen 3 because I have sweaty hands that are slightly smaller than optimal for the frame. Also, it often rains during FL summers and rain + sweat + small hands does NOT equal shooter confidence. I say this as one of the top performing shooters in my agency....especially in stress fire courses. I've been encouraged on more than one occasion to put in for SWAT based on my shooting ability (SWAT Sgt who observed me shooting at the range). But, alas, linebackers make poor SWAT bamf's....what with 12 mile runs in full gear and all that. At 240lbs, I'm a little too big for that, and my knees wouldn't appreciate it either. So a field training deputy I shall remain.....
The addition of the Talon Grips drove my confidence through the roof. It had a MINIMAL effect on my shooting scores. So small, as to not have ANY effect on my annual state or agency quals and to have minimal effect on the stressfire courses.
However, it means EVERYTHING for my mindset and my confidence. The gun shifts less in my hand while firing (actually, it doesn't shift at all now) and I now get a perfect purchase on the gun during my drawstroke every time...even while lying down, in a car, running, crawling, etc. This matters...but none of you could show me numbers to prove for or against it. It was $13 well spent.
NO numbers to back this up, but I DON'T NEED NUMBERS.
Few shooters push their platforms hard enough to have the trigger be the weak link. Even for those who don't, a quality trigger like the QMS/ACT is still money well spent.
Just because one can shoot well with a shitty trigger, does not mean that a cost-effective improvement to consistency AND smoothness is a bad thing.
SW-Shooter
05-06-12, 19:31
One of the very first things they teach (after safety, of course) of BRM is trigger control. I remember sitting for what seemed like forever practicing my trigger squeeze and breath control. To minimize the triggers function in a combat, self defense, or any weapon is a fatal flaw in logic.
Just look at 1911's, M&P's(APEX), bolt guns, and on and on. What's one of the first things that get the most scrutiny? The trigger, well after the sights or optics in most cases. Not all triggers are created equal, as are not all shooters. If you have two equally skilled shooters and they are shooting the exact same weapons, except one has a modified trigger. Which do you think will have the advantage?
As for the Talon grip, I agree. On my 21SF it gave me a degree of confidence that I had lacked with the standard Glock grip design. Sometimes that mental aspect makes the physical aspect excel. Sometimes the new physical hardware is just plain better than its predecessor. On that note, I will retire from further bloviation on this subject.
Through all this argument, can an opponent of the ALG ACT trigger vs the standard USGI trigger tell me WHY I should consider a Colt, DD, LMT trigger over the ACT when everyone seems to be in uniform agreement that a 6# pull is better than a 8# pull, little creep in a trigger is better than a ton of creep, and ACT triggers are consistent and USGI triggers are widely inconsistent even by the same manufacturer? They are the same in reliability as they are all based off of the USGI model. The ACT is just more "polished" both literally and figuratively.
Through all this argument, can an opponent of the ALG ACT trigger vs the standard USGI trigger tell me WHY I should consider a Colt, DD, LMT trigger over the ACT when everyone seems to be in uniform agreement that a 6# pull is better than a 8# pull, little creep in a trigger is better than a ton of creep, and ACT triggers are consistent and USGI triggers are widely inconsistent even by the same manufacturer? They are the same in reliability as they are all based off of the USGI model. The ACT is just more "polished" both literally and figuratively.
Basically would you rather play Russian Roulette with your trigger purchase and risk getting a pos like I have with a ton of creep, pull weight and inconsistent resets, or get a sure thing out of the box like an ACT?
SW-Shooter
05-06-12, 19:53
Through all this argument, can an opponent of the ALG ACT trigger vs the standard USGI trigger tell me WHY I should consider a Colt, DD, LMT trigger over the ACT when everyone seems to be in uniform agreement that a 6# pull is better than a 8# pull, little creep in a trigger is better than a ton of creep, and ACT triggers are consistent and USGI triggers are widely inconsistent even by the same manufacturer? They are the same in reliability as they are all based off of the USGI model. The ACT is just more "polished" both literally and figuratively.
Buy the ACT, if you don't like it let me know and I'll buy it off of you in the EE.
Buy the QMS, if you don't like it let me know and I'll buy it off of you in the EE.
Already made my mind up and purchased the ACT.
BufordTJustice
05-07-12, 02:30
Basically would you rather play Russian Roulette with your trigger purchase and risk getting a pos like I have with a ton of creep, pull weight and inconsistent resets, or get a sure thing out of the box like an ACT?
+1
The ALG triggers withdraw you from the 'trigger lottery' and give you a known quantity. Every time.
BufordTJustice
05-07-12, 02:33
Already made my mind up and purchased the ACT.
I own one ACT (wife's AR) and have installed another 3 on the guns of close friends.
There's no magic involved; it will simply be a damn good, smooth, and consistent mil-spec trigger. If you are not satisfied, you could always sell it on the EE for very little $$$ lost....they are in pretty hot demand now.
LOL I hope a mod deletes that guy's (Diablo3Gold) post. I hate people shotgunning random ads on forums.
SW-Shooter
05-07-12, 04:26
diablo3gold
****ING SPAMMER.
Canonshooter
05-07-12, 05:31
Good point on the "hardware" vs. "software" aspect of triggers and trigger control.
The only triggers I truly object to are those that have "glitches" in the pull - as you apply the squeeze, the trigger moves like it's going to break, only to stop again short of dropping the hammer. It takes a lot of concentration to work with a trigger like that and I suspect there's a significant percentage of USGI triggers suffer from that flaw.
The trigger that came with my old BM lower was actually not bad at all - it had creep and over travel, but was not "glitchy" or overly heavy. That said, when it got replaced by the SSA, it was a major improvement for someone who appreciates how a good trigger can contribute (with the correct "software upgrades") to accurate fire.
Any recommendations on trigger grease? It should be here tomorrow and it seems none of my local gun shops carry Tetra or anything like it. Anything I could get at Lowe's or Home Depot?
Any recommendations on trigger grease? It should be here tomorrow and it seems none of my local gun shops carry Tetra or anything like it. Anything I could get at Lowe's or Home Depot?
Not sure about this trigger but regular Geissele triggers come with Mobil 28 grease.
Scroll to the bottom
http://geissele.com/faq.aspx
.
Geissele includes Shell's Aero-Shell #6 aviation grease with their triggers.
I figure that's a pretty good endorsement.
But maybe it's just me...
EDIT: I called Geissele last week because I heard they no longer used Mobil grease. He told me they now use Aero-Shell #6.
.
Few shooters push their platforms hard enough to have the trigger be the weak link. Even for those who don't, a quality trigger like the QMS/ACT is still money well spent.
Just because one can shoot well with a shitty trigger, does not mean that a cost-effective improvement to consistency AND smoothness is a bad thing.
That makes no sense to me. It's better because... it's better? Because we WANT it to be better because we spent $200 on it?
http://www.hkpro.com/forum/hk416-hk417-hq/152234-alg-defenses-new-act-trigger-test-416-a.html
guy here did a before and after with rapid fire 5 round groups with some LEO guys shooting it. Not scientific but best thing I could find, showing before and after
http://i295.photobucket.com/albums/mm157/HKforFREEDOM/HKs/ALG-ACT-RangeResults.jpg
Thank you!
I agree that it's hardly scientific, and who know how coached the shooters really were, etc. but at least it's something. 3 pages and this is the best anyone can do?
I don't understand the trigger hate from some when it comes to ARs.
It's not "hate". That's silly. As is your little snide comment about "rock throwing distance". I couldn't care less what you do. But what I want to know is how do you quantify better? If you can't, at least in my world, it's not actually better it's just something you like. Very few in this thread have been able to admit that they have no earthly idea if it really makes them better, but that they just like it. IMO this is from too much fiddle-****ing around at home and obsessing over shit that doesn't matter.
But, to amuse you and the others...
There are a lot of posts that seem to try to dismiss my concerns because I'm a short-range shooter. That's fine, and fair to some extent. I don't shoot past 200 yards, and if I did I don't think I'd be doing it with an AR, and certainly not one in 5.56 if I was. It's probably the same reason I don't get all the fawning over the 1.x-Y optics either. If I can take a girl that has basically never shot an AR and give her a 10.3" A1-profile barrel with a T-1 on top and get her hitting A/C steel at 200 yards in less than a day (oh, and with a GI trigger) I have a hard time understanding what all these men need with all these gadgets. Are you concerned with hitting smaller than the A/C? How much smaller, at what distance, in what conditions...?
If "rock chucking distance" isn't sufficient to see a difference (and I'm not really clear on what that matter, if group size reduces then group size reduces, regardless of distance. If time reduces then time reduces, regardless of distance) then what is? How far? How small? How fast?
Another question...
is the ACT now the baseline? The QMS?
At $45 even I have to concede that you're not giving up much by going to the aftermarket trigger, but I would still caution newer shooters to get at least one class under their belt and establish baseline skills for themselves to compare against before making ANY changes.
BufordTJustice
05-09-12, 05:44
That makes no sense to me. It's better because... it's better? Because we WANT it to be better because we spent $200 on it?
Please explain to me how it's NOT better.
Rob, I respect you and your opinions. You run a lot of rounds through a lot of guns. But I disagree with you.
A trigger that has a smaller deviation of pull weights averaged over a ten-pull spread than the vast majority of std mil spec triggers is a BETTER TRIGGER when combat reliability and value are maintained (and they are).
If you're not arguing that most people should just settle for a shitty trigger until their skill levels are high enough to take advantage of a better trigger....well if that's not what you're saying, I'm missing your point.
SW-Shooter
05-09-12, 05:47
I'm not sure if I am completely comfortable with you using M4Carbine.net threads in your Facebook posts. But that's not for me to decide whether or not that should be allowed. I just think you should ask what the community thinks about that before you open it up to FB. My 2 cents ain't worth much, but it's all I got.
ETA: I guess if I don't want my posts on M4C seen on FB, I shouldn't post anything at all. I didn't realize that by posting here I was giving consent for an unknown entity to reveal information I thought would be for M4C community use. I realize there isn't anything secretive contained herein, but I am a fairly private person and FB doesn't respect our community, nor our privacy.
BufordTJustice
05-09-12, 05:52
There are a lot of posts that seem to try to dismiss my concerns because I'm a short-range shooter. That's fine, and fair to some extent. I don't shoot past 200 yards, and if I did I don't think I'd be doing it with an AR, and certainly not one in 5.56 if I was. It's probably the same reason I don't get all the fawning over the 1.x-Y optics either. If I can take a girl that has basically never shot an AR and give her a 10.3" A1-profile barrel with a T-1 on top and get her hitting A/C steel at 200 yards in less than a day (oh, and with a GI trigger) I have a hard time understanding what all these men need with all these gadgets. Are you concerned with hitting smaller than the A/C? How much smaller, at what distance, in what conditions...?
Rob, I think you're cherry-picking between advances in carbine technology and refinement.
You openly advocate for modern optics, but you eschew modern trigger refinements. Why one and not the other?
Why not iron sights, a 20" barrel, and an A2 stock?
Why all these go-fast goodies?
I think refinements in trigger design and function are just as tangible, real, and effective as refinements in sight systems.
I can shoot my agency qual course in nearly the same time using my T1 as I can using irons. Does this mean that there is no benefit to the Aimpoint? I think you're becoming slightly close-minded here.
Please explain to me how it's NOT better.
Rob, I respect you and your opinions. You run a lot of rounds through a lot of guns. But I disagree with you.
A trigger that has a smaller deviation of pull weights averaged over a ten-pull spread than the vast majority of std mil spec triggers is a BETTER TRIGGER when combat reliability and value are maintained (and they are).
If you're not arguing that most people should just settle for a shitty trigger until their skill levels are high enough to take advantage of a better trigger....well if that's not what you're saying, I'm missing your point.
If you can't quantify better, it's not better.
so far in this entire thread we have TWO people that are able to even attempt it. One is a link to some targets on another forum, another is a poster who reported improved scores by changing pistols with the "improved" pistol having an allegedly better trigger.
I suspect that the real issue here is that people have no idea what their long-term baseline skills are, hence they are unable to quantify anything. If you never keep records when you go to the range (which, I thought, all precision shooters did and we seem to have arrived at my inability to appreciate a "good" trigger because I only shoot at "rock throwing distances) how can you quantify any standard of "better"? "I shot 6" groups on Friday with my GI trigger and 5" groups on Sunday with the match trigger" would at least be a start, but we don't even have that!
"better feel", "more confidence", "I just like it", etc. are all GREAT reasons (excuses?) for the individual, but how do you translate that to others? This forum is full of threads where some new guy comes in and the first thing people want to tell him to do is change the trigger. Christ, one guy couldn't zero his gun and the advice was "go get a better trigger". Seriously?
I am not arguing against them, despite what I'm sure everyone is probably thinking, but I AM arguing against them in the absence of empirical data to show that they produce improved results downrange. Time and distance. When I tell someone that I am not opposed to them slapping an RDS on a brand new gun and not "mastering iron sights" first it's because I have both passive data from watching 20+ shooters two times a month for 5+ years as well as actual recorded scores on timed drills. I KNOW that better is better and that it translates into performance gains downrange, which is all that matters.
I'm asking questions because I DON'T GET IT. I'm trying to figure out what it is that I'm missing.
Rob, I think you're cherry-picking between advances in carbine technology and refinement.
You openly advocate for modern optics, but you eschew modern trigger refinements. Why one and not the other?
Why not iron sights, a 20" barrel, and an A2 stock?
Why all these go-fast goodies?
I think refinements in trigger design and function are just as tangible, real, and effective as refinements in sight systems.
I can shoot my agency qual course in nearly the same time using my T1 as I can using irons. Does this mean that there is no benefit to the Aimpoint? I think you're becoming slightly close-minded here.
That's too easy of a dodge. Expanding the question to me, other topics, etc. belies an inability to answer the questions I'm asking. I addressed your optic question in my post above, however. But it's off-topic and distracting from the topic at hand.
How much more accurate will I be with an aftermarket trigger than a stock GI trigger?
How much faster will I be with an aftermarket trigger than a stock GI trigger?
How far away do I have to get from the targets to be able to quantify the difference?
How much do I have to spend before I see those gains?
Is a $250 trigger going to be 5x as accurate or fast as a $50 trigger?
Or, probably a better way to ask those that have made upgrades...
How much more accurate were you after your change to an aftermarket trigger from a stock GI trigger?
How much faster were you after your change to an aftermarket trigger from a stock GI trigger?
How far away did you have to get from the targets to be able to quantify the difference?
How much did you have to spend before seeing those gains?
Is a $250 trigger 5x as accurate or fast as a $50 trigger?
BufordTJustice
05-09-12, 06:09
If you can't quantify better, it's not better. Please justify this statement.
so far in this entire thread we have TWO people that are able to even attempt it. One is a link to some targets on another forum, another is a poster who reported improved scores by changing pistols with the "improved" pistol having an allegedly better trigger.
I suspect that the real issue here is that people have no idea what their long-term baseline skills are, hence they are unable to quantify anything. If you never keep records when you go to the range (which, I thought, all precision shooters did and we seem to have arrived at my inability to appreciate a "good" trigger because I only shoot at "rock throwing distances) how can you quantify any standard of "better"? "I shot 6" groups on Friday with my GI trigger and 5" groups on Sunday with the match trigger" would at least be a start, but we don't even have that!
"better feel", "more confidence", "I just like it", etc. are all GREAT reasons (excuses?) for the individual, but how do you translate that to others? This forum is full of threads where some new guy comes in and the first thing people want to tell him to do is change the trigger. Christ, one guy couldn't zero his gun and the advice was "go get a better trigger". Seriously?
I am not arguing against them, despite what I'm sure everyone is probably thinking, but I AM arguing against them in the absence of empirical data to show that they produce improved results downrange. Time and distance. When I tell someone that I am not opposed to them slapping an RDS on a brand new gun and not "mastering iron sights" first it's because I have both passive data from watching 20+ shooters two times a month for 5+ years as well as actual recorded scores on timed drills. I KNOW that better is better and that it translates into performance gains downrange, which is all that matters.
I'm asking questions because I DON'T GET IT. I'm trying to figure out what it is that I'm missing.
You're not going to be able to quantify everything. I do a little ground fighting. How do I quantify whether one technique works better than another? Even if I'm able to put some rough numbers on paper, it changes when I change partners.
I suppose you've got to ask yourself if it works better for you. If it doesn't, then I guess you've answered your own question.
And just so we're clear, I'm not getting into the mud slinging against you. I'm not down with that. I think that rock chucking statement was irrelevant and I don't agree with it. Just so we're clear.
I think you're asking for hard data that really isn't available yet.
Based on your logic, this is tantamount to you stating that we should all be running 8lb connectors and NY1 trigger springs in our Glocks. They are, after all, good enough.
A lighter, crisper, more consistent trigger pull WILL have a positive effect on a shooter. This may depend on their skill level, but it WILL help. You're asking me to count the number of rain drops in the flood. Just because somebody hasn't come up with an appropriate and accurate rubric for measuring these types of performance improvements, it does not mean that there are not improvements to be had.
BufordTJustice
05-09-12, 06:12
That's too easy of a dodge. Expanding the question to me, other topics, etc. belies an inability to answer the questions I'm asking. I addressed your optic question in my post above, however. But it's off-topic and distracting from the topic at hand.
How much more accurate will I be with an aftermarket trigger than a stock GI trigger?
How much faster will I be with an aftermarket trigger than a stock GI trigger?
How far away do I have to get from the targets to be able to quantify the difference?
How much do I have to spend before I see those gains?
Is a $250 trigger going to be 5x as accurate or fast as a $50 trigger?
Or, probably a better way to ask those that have made upgrades...
How much more accurate were you after your change to an aftermarket trigger from a stock GI trigger?
How much faster were you after your change to an aftermarket trigger from a stock GI trigger?
How far away did you have to get from the targets to be able to quantify the difference?
How much did you have to spend before seeing those gains?
Is a $250 trigger 5x as accurate or fast as a $50 trigger?
So, you are asking the forum as a whole to justify every single part on their gun that is 'improved'.
I could ask you the same questions about your performance before and after using a red dot. But those numbers would vary from day to day, course to course, gun to gun, and ammo lot to ammo lot.
Does this mean you should go back to irons if you didn't have those numbers for me?
BufordTJustice
05-09-12, 06:17
How much more accurate will I be with an aftermarket trigger than a stock GI trigger?
How much faster will I be with an aftermarket trigger than a stock GI trigger?
How far away do I have to get from the targets to be able to quantify the difference?
How much do I have to spend before I see those gains?
Is a $250 trigger going to be 5x as accurate or fast as a $50 trigger?
Or, probably a better way to ask those that have made upgrades...
How much more accurate were you after your change to an aftermarket trigger from a stock GI trigger?
How much faster were you after your change to an aftermarket trigger from a stock GI trigger?
How far away did you have to get from the targets to be able to quantify the difference?
How much did you have to spend before seeing those gains?
Is a $250 trigger 5x as accurate or fast as a $50 trigger?
I think you're asking for numbers that don't exist.
Could you imagine a race car driver asking his crew chief these questions about engine/brake/suspension/aerodynamic improvements to his race car?
It would be silly for the crew chief to answer with anything. The driver would just need to go out and start getting some lap times. The improvements may be more tactile in nature than providing absolute increases in speed around a track.
How do you quantify stability under braking...especially trail-braking into a corner? Formula one engineers have slaved for decades to put accurate algorithms on paper for data like that. And that involves less of a human element, I would argue, than shooting a gun.
EDIT: Further, for those that may in the future put down before and after numbers who DO NOT see a performance improvement from a new trigger, but who DO experience an increase in shooter confidence due to the feel of the trigger....are they just experiencing the placebo effect from their fancy $200 Geissele trigger? Should they just sell it at that point if their performance hasn't been meaningfully enhanced?
My accuracy at speed greatly increased with a trigger upgrade as did my precision accuracy at distance.
I based my decision on scores and times from two different types of matches I shoot. Shooting Multi Gun matches I saw my times gets faster and my accuracy improve and I attributed that to having a better trigger which wasn't as easy to pull off target when shooting quick strings of 2-3 shots in the 10-50yd range.
I also participate in a rifle match which is shot for time at 200yds & 300yds. You have to knock down (8) 7"x13" steel plates using iron sights only. Again the improvement was easy to see when I saw my times decrease from the high teens to 11-13 second range.
To me its not much different than a pistol......a poor pistols trigger makes accuracy more challenging....especially at speed since you have to fight it to control your shots.
I have a CMMG 2 stage trigger which gives a crisp 4lb break and cost me $100. I tried an AR Gold which was for me too light for use on a defensive Carbine so I sold it and replaced it with the CMMG.
Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2
NCPatrolAR
05-09-12, 07:35
Let's keep a lid on the tempers guys
How much more accurate will I be with an aftermarket trigger than a stock GI trigger?
How much faster will I be with an aftermarket trigger than a stock GI trigger?
How far away do I have to get from the targets to be able to quantify the difference?
How much do I have to spend before I see those gains?
Is a $250 trigger going to be 5x as accurate or fast as a $50 trigger?
Or, probably a better way to ask those that have made upgrades...
How much more accurate were you after your change to an aftermarket trigger from a stock GI trigger?
How much faster were you after your change to an aftermarket trigger from a stock GI trigger?
How far away did you have to get from the targets to be able to quantify the difference?
How much did you have to spend before seeing those gains?
Is a $250 trigger 5x as accurate or fast as a $50 trigger?
I respect your opinion and agree with you on most things. Your write ups have influenced several of my purchases....but this argument in general is bizarre.
Did you answer the above questions when you attached your aftermarket stock or rail or anything else you changed from the stock configuration of a 6920? What are your answers to those question concerning the Vltor stock you are using in your one video for example?
Gun makers and gunsmiths have been tinkering with triggers for centuries. Are really arguing that a crisper and some times lighter trigger has zero net affect on the ability of the shooter to place shots more accurately?
I also noticed when you post on the topic that you seem to make assumptions that every shooter debating a new triggers has limited or no experience shooting. There also seems to be an assumption that everyone looking to upgrade their trigger is trying somehow fix their lack of shooting skills.
I shot my stock Colt trigger well within the bounds of what is considered combat accurate. In the first two classes I took, I scored in the top 5 of 16 or 18 in the Mod Navy Qual they ran (2nd best in the 2nd class).
But, having shot Bullseye for 12 years (and a little CMP) I knew what a good trigger felt like and how if affects things. I always seemed to fighting the GI trigger. After I installed an SD E it was much easier to make shots, especially 25 yards and out. I no longer am distracted by the trigger and am able to better concentrate on other fundamentals.
Not to mention, it was far easier to transfer back to shooting my pistol which had a similar trigger. The GI trigger was having the same affect on me as a weighted bat has on a batter waiting to go up to the plate...but in a bad way.
If you can't quantify better, it's not better.
Better (adj.) - of more excellent or effective type or quality :D
Straight Shooter
05-09-12, 08:43
I have now lived long enough, that Ive seen one shooter, ask another, "WHY" he doesnt like a heavy, gritty trigger.
Just.......damn.
Im pulling that one out my sleeve next time Im called to task on something here.
I guess all the guys doing double action revolver trigger jobs and the like all these years were full of shit.
Also, OLDSTATE...I agree with something you said. A LOT of times someone asks a question, they ARE treated like its the first time theyve ever held/shot/owned a firearm, I seen that several times.
IF improving trigger pull is wrong or not needed or whatever has been suggested here, then GENERATIONS of gun men have been wrong for a long time. And if thats wrong, then changing anything to make it better, more shootable is wrong too. Go back to 1/12 twist rates. A1 handgaurds WITH NO ATTACHMENTS.
Carry handles. Ect, ect. Ive never heard nor met anyone in real life who calls himself a shooter, who doeasnt think and know that "good" triggers improve shooting ability.
There aint no doubt that ROB_S has got more rounds downrange WITH AR's than I, and is a very knowledgeable shooter. Even tho Ive re-read his posts 2-3 times now, I still must be missing his point, his intention, or something. Someone feel free to elaborate.
Animal_Mother556
05-09-12, 09:20
I have now lived long enough, that Ive seen one shooter, ask another, "WHY" he doesnt like a heavy, gritty trigger.
Just.......damn.
Im pulling that one out my sleeve next time Im called to task on something here.
I guess all the guys doing double action revolver trigger jobs and the like all these years were full of shit.
Also, OLDSTATE...I agree with something you said. A LOT of times someone asks a question, they ARE treated like its the first time theyve ever held/shot/owned a firearm, I seen that several times.
IF improving trigger pull is wrong or not needed or whatever has been suggested here, then GENERATIONS of gun men have been wrong for a long time. And if thats wrong, then changing anything to make it better, more shootable is wrong too. Go back to 1/12 twist rates. A1 handgaurds WITH NO ATTACHMENTS.
Carry handles. Ect, ect. Ive never heard nor met anyone in real life who calls himself a shooter, who doeasnt think and know that "good" triggers improve shooting ability.
There aint no doubt that ROB_S has got more rounds downrange WITH AR's than I, and is a very knowledgeable shooter. Even tho Ive re-read his posts 2-3 times now, I still must be missing his point, his intention, or something. Someone feel free to elaborate.
AR15 carbines are meant to be fighting rifles. Most will never use their AR over 300 yards. They are not meant to be 1000 yard target guns (though some are used that way).
You mention that people doing trigger jobs on double action revolvers are full of shit. Is there no difference between a single action and double action trigger? We are talking about a single-stage rifle trigger here...BIG difference.
Rob likes USGI triggers in AR15s...I think you are under the assumption that he is talking about ALL trigger types. That is just silly. Lighter triggers in handguns is GENERALLY seen as a good thing (remember Jerry Miculek). But, we are talking about a fighting rifle/carbine here.
From MY personal experience...I shoot just as well with a USGI as I do with "better" triggers. Having used both...I use USGI now.
How do you quantify a better lay?
Did she get you off faster? Did she get you off with fewer calories expelled?
How can one lay be better than another lay? All pussy is the same? Go **** the easiest, ugliest slut you can find because you can't quantify a good lay from a bad?
You mention that people doing trigger jobs on double action revolvers are full of shit. Is there no difference between a single action and double action trigger? We are talking about a single-stage rifle trigger here...BIG difference.
A bad trigger is a bad trigger regardless of type or application
Rob likes USGI triggers in AR15s...I think you are under the assumption that he is talking about ALL trigger types.
I think we are mostly talking about AR triggers but also triggers in general.
Lighter triggers in handguns is GENERALLY seen as a good thing (remember Jerry Miculek). But, we are talking about a fighting rifle/carbine here.
This concept baffles me. Also, Jerry uses and aftermarket trigger in his AR
From MY personal experience...I shoot just as well with a USGI as I do with "better" triggers. Having used both...I use USGI now.
For me its easier to shoot well with a better trigger but not necessary.
......
Animal_Mother556
05-09-12, 09:37
Christ, one guy couldn't zero his gun and the advice was "go get a better trigger". Seriously?
I'm asking questions because I DON'T GET IT. I'm trying to figure out what it is that I'm missing.
That is pretty friggin sad.
Rob, I am not sure that you (we) are missing anything at all. The more I think about this, the more I think it is a "preference" issue.
If people prefer a "crisp", "smooth", "light" trigger on a fighting rifle...good for them.
But for me, I will stay with "gritty", "heavy", "creepy" triggers...because I DON'T EVEN NOTICE IT ANYMORE. I actually had to get my carbine and dry-fire the trigger a few times after reading this thread. I couldn't really tell you anything about it, other than "it works". I am just that used to it.
Rob, don't sweat it, man. Just leave it be for now.
Straight Shooter
05-09-12, 09:38
My comment on the double action trigger jobs was SARCASM.
And I also used it as an example of trigger work being done to improve the shootability of certain weapons.
Yessir, I am aware of the differences in triggers. Again, I used the previous as examples.
I am under no impression of anything. I read the mans words, as I said 2-3 times now.
If he, or you, or anyone else shoots better with GI triggers...God bless, great! But to chide, question or make someone else feel ignorent for even asking about improving a stock trigger WAS WRONG, PERIOD. The OP wasnt even wanting a target trigger...just a better trigger. To ask WHY he wants a crisp, grit free trigger is absurd to me, and apparently others. Myself, I loathe a gritty trigger,
but weight, up to a reasonable point, doesnt bother me.
Again, not doubting Robs ability or knowledge, but I do disagree very much with him on this issue, is all.
Animal_Mother556
05-09-12, 09:41
A bad trigger is a bad trigger regardless of type or application
I said nothing about "bad" triggers.
Straight Shooter
05-09-12, 09:55
The OP never said anything about not being able to zero his gun.
He said he had a Bushmaster with a stock OEM trigger, and he hated it{the trigger pull} because it was over 8 pounds and gritty.
He wanted a smoother, lighter weight pull of around 5-6 pounds.
I saw NOONE tell him to get a better trigger so he could zero his gun.
Only so he could SHOOT better. Ive shot enough, and trained enough folk to know, if youve got a problem with the trigger..your gonna have a problem hitting, period.
Talk about not understanding something, explain this to me. If I read Robs words correctly, he only uses GI triggers because he thinks they are the most reliable, is this correct? So all the other triggers out there, that work day in ,day out, for thousands and thousands of rounds, and are far smoother, and POUNDS lighter, and still 100% reliable, you have NO use for them? Is it possible Rob, you might shoot even better with one of these triggers without giving up reliability? Im trying to get my mind around Robs dislike or these triggers, not being argumentative.
For the record, I did go with a USGI style trigger. Just one that has been sweetened up with a nice NiB coating made by a high quality aftermarket trigger manufacturer for combat needs. ALG, Gieselle or however you spell it, same shit.
I shot fine, I was disgusted with the trigger. I gave it time to smooth out (more than 2k rounds) didn't happen. I figure typical BM b/s. This ensures I get a high quality USGI trigger and I am not in the trigger lotto.
I think there are different strokes for different folks. I think there is a trigger for every need. Starting a FB poll or post because of this is childish. :nono:
ALG ACT came in the mail today. I will install and report back. :)
RogerinTPA
05-09-12, 10:33
Personal opinion here, but unless an individual is shooting in a competitive environment (Slow Fire), shooting beyond 200Ms (the further the better), shooting a tricked out precision weapon, AND is a very skilled shooter, you will not be able to quantifiably determine the additional benefits of a precision trigger vs a stock trigger. The M4geries that we play with are not designed for that, but are more than accurate enough to do the job it was designed to do. Do distractions effect your shooting? Yes. Should you reduce as many distractions as you can? Yes, but...it's a mental game and a mindset issue more than anything else. In the overwhelming majority of the people owning a firearm, the weapon if far more accurate than the shooter is capable of. I have shot numerous weapons of other people complaining about an accuracy issue with this or that on their weapon, and guess what? It wasn't a weapon issue, it was a shooter issue. I see it in class after class where a guy has a high speed carbine and a dude with the stock carbine, with iron sights no less, smokes his ass. It takes way more than a trigger job to get a more accurate result. Yes there are those that will say that putting more custom parts on a gun will make a shitty shooter less shitty, but wouldn't it be more beneficial (increased skill and less cost) to work and enhance the shitty shooters fundamentals than giving him a tricked out race gun and declaring him, less shittier?:p
1371USMCFL
05-09-12, 10:43
How much more accurate will I be with an aftermarket trigger than a stock GI trigger?
How much faster will I be with an aftermarket trigger than a stock GI trigger?
How far away do I have to get from the targets to be able to quantify the difference?
How much do I have to spend before I see those gains?
Is a $250 trigger going to be 5x as accurate or fast as a $50 trigger?
Or, probably a better way to ask those that have made upgrades...
How much more accurate were you after your change to an aftermarket trigger from a stock GI trigger?
How much faster were you after your change to an aftermarket trigger from a stock GI trigger?
How far away did you have to get from the targets to be able to quantify the difference?
How much did you have to spend before seeing those gains?
Is a $250 trigger 5x as accurate or fast as a $50 trigger?
I'll bite.
List 1.
1) Mechanically, it will not. Putting the weapon into the device that pulls the trigger the same time, from the same position (can't remember the name), and you will not see a difference.
2) How much faster? Completely dependent on individual's potential for finder strength and speed. An "ability ceiling" you could call it, is different from person to person. Example: Women. They may have the same potential for speed as a man, but lack the hand strength to pull the heavier trigger as quickly as a man. Another example could be the flash to bang time of a target presenting itself to you and you having an accurate round on target fired. Having a predictable break point allows for you to prep the trigger so as soon as you have a solid sight picture, you can apply the pulling force to fire.
3) How far till you see a measurable accuracy change? From shooter to shooter this could vary greatly. If you take someone who has solid fundamentals, you may not see a change in accuracy till he is taking shots at distance rather than facial recognition ranges. What that X distance is, is personal to him.
4) You spend what YOU the shooter wants to spend based off WHAT HE WANTS out of the fire control group.
5) No. To expect an base x 5 increase in ability based off a trigger, your high.
List 2
1) How much more accurate was I after switching to an SSA? At close range, no difference in speed or accuracy. I do not train myself to dump rounds into a target at the cyclic rate. When your moving in real battlefield where you can't call timeout to reload the 6 mags you went through in a minute, you have to be ammo conscious. At distance, my groups became tighter and first round hits were easily manageable. I was able to break the shot when I had the sight picture I wanted and with less muscular effort.
2) How much faster? I don't know, I don't have a shot timer. I do know that my flash to bang time when putting rounds on pop-ups and moving targets went down and my hits went up.
3) I didn't see the difference until shooting beyond 100.
4) I spent $170 on the SSA
Think outside of the high round count, close range shooting box. The reason, in my opinion, you are not grasping is because of the style of shooting YOU do and train others to do. My opinion is based off combat tours to shitty countries, so it may not mean shit.
Personal preference is unquantifiable, IMO.
I didn't like my colts trigger for a long, time. I did i light flitz on my parts. Only enough to brighten the metal. This helped some by feeling less gritty, but did not decrease the weight or increase the "crisp" to my feel. But I've noticed in the past few months, that the grit has smoothed out some to an acceptable point. I have considered a Geiselle trigger. But for right now, my stocker will suffice. There are other things, like ammunition, that rank higher on my purchasing priority. I have zero problem with people wanting a badass trigger. I can understand people who want to see a quantifiable improvement with parts. But not everyone is buying with that intention.
Think outside of the high round count, close range shooting box. The reason, in my opinion, you are not grasping is because of the style of shooting YOU do and train others to do. My opinion is based off combat tours to shitty countries, so it may not mean shit.
^ This
Also, I saw the videos with Kyle Lamb. Didn't he just work with Geiselle to develope a trigger? I guess Billy G duped Lamb pretty good. :)
NCPatrolAR
05-09-12, 13:58
Let's keep the talk about triggers and not Rob's Facebook page(s).
Just as an added data point regarding the use of the USGI trigger... have a look at this video.
"Shooting my 16" BCM BFH Middy upper at Las Vegas Steel Target. Ammo was 77 grain SMK with 24.3g RE15. Optic is Vortex Viper PST 1-4 mrad reticle. Definitely pushing the optic. Used Shooter for iPod for firing solution. Had to add .4 mil to adjust. Target was ranged with 10x mil dot scope. Wind was 15mph gusting to 20 at the muzzle. Trigger is stock USGI."
http://youtu.be/N9KOp65ImwE
Just as an added data point regarding the use of the USGI trigger... have a look at this video.
"Shooting my 16" BCM BFH Middy upper at Las Vegas Steel Target. Ammo was 77 grain SMK with 24.3g RE15. Optic is Vortex Viper PST 1-4 mrad reticle. Definitely pushing the optic. Used Shooter for iPod for firing solution. Had to add .4 mil to adjust. Target was ranged with 10x mil dot scope. Wind was 15mph gusting to 20 at the muzzle. Trigger is stock USGI."
http://youtu.be/N9KOp65ImwE
What is your data? What are you comparing?
I think we need to clear the spin that has been created here.
No one has said you NEED a good trigger but that they are helpful. It seems that when ever a person suggests they are considering an aftermarket trigger, the haters spin it into "I can't hit the broad side of a barn from the inside without one".
Nonsense.
The data point is that a USGI trigger is every bit as capable as an aftermarket trigger. And I wouldn't call consecutive hits on an 18" plate at 750y "hitting the broad side of a barn from inside".
What makes you think I am an aftermarket trigger hater? I use an SSA and SSA-E in my AR's and I only own 2. I guess some people might be disappointed that they spent over $200 on a trigger for long range shooting when a USGI gets er dun too. But that isn't the point I was trying to make.
If someone says you need one for long range work.... its nonsense.
You can't make that argument. YOUR usgi may be great. Mine has an 8+lb pull and is inconsistent. They quality control on them is terrible. They are never CONSISTENT. You may have won the trigger lottery but that doesn't mean all usgi triggers are the same.
Fair enough, let me be more clear. A 'good' USGI trigger is all you really need, to include the ALG USGI triggers.
BTW, I'm only spotting in the video and it isn't my rifle.
The data point is that a USGI trigger is every bit as capable as an aftermarket trigger. And I wouldn't call consecutive hits on an 18" plate at 750y "hitting the broad side of a barn from inside".
What makes you think I am an aftermarket trigger hater? I use an SSA and SSA-E in my AR's and I only own 2. I guess some people might be disappointed that they spent over $200 on a trigger for long range shooting when a USGI gets er dun too. But that isn't the point I was trying to make.
If someone says you need one for long range work.... its nonsense.
In wasn't referring to you
BufordTJustice
05-09-12, 15:40
Fair enough, let me be more clear. A 'good' USGI trigger is all you really need, to include the ALG USGI triggers.
BTW, I'm only spotting in the video and it isn't my rifle.
Since we are basing what we do on absolute need.
I guess you should trade in your rig for an A1 with triangle handguards.
We are all so far past 'need'. I don't think this was ever about 'need'. The word 'need' doesn't have a place in this discussion.
If somebody is depending on an aftermarket trigger to mask their poor shooting fundamentals, then we have already established that they need to train and be trained. I don't think this conversation was ever about the 'hardware solutions for software problems' crowd.
I will also note that I can make do with a gritty 8lb milly trigger. Does that mean that I should not desire a better one?
Does that mean that I should not desire a better one?
Absolutely not. As the owner of a few 'fancy' triggers myself I prefer them over a USGI trigger all day every day. There was a prevailing tone in this thread that you want a 'fancy' trigger for over 200y or for precision/long range shooting. I posted the video to say "Look at what this guy is capable of with a USGI trigger."
http://i1237.photobucket.com/albums/ff469/clj94104/b277eb1d.jpg
Freshly installed ALG ACT. I think my mechanical trigger pull scale is a little off (heavy by about 0.25), but it still registers at about 6.0-6.5. I can live with that.
Now I must go clean up the rifle because as you can see my fingers were greasy.
Had to use Mobil1 synthetic grease for the pins, nothing else was available. Used some Tetra lube for everything else.
Now literally the only thing left from Bushmaster on the rifle is the lower receiver itself. LMAO
Think outside of the high round count, close range shooting box. The reason, in my opinion, you are not grasping is because of the style of shooting YOU do and train others to do. My opinion is based off combat tours to shitty countries, so it may not mean shit.
You, and others, can continue to mask your inability to quantify "better" all you want, but it's not working.
You say faster, but you can't tell me how much faster. You say tighter groups, but you can't tell me how much tighter. How on earth do you then know that they are faster and tighter?
In wasn't referring to you
Of course not, you were referring to me. But your personal attacks and snide little quips don't change the fact that you can't quantify better.
Keep posting. Your hole keeps getting deeper.
I could ask you the same questions about your performance before and after using a red dot. But those numbers would vary from day to day, course to course, gun to gun, and ammo lot to ammo lot.
Yes they would! Thank you for noticing!
This is why we look for long-term trends. This requires record keeping during range visits, or at the very least a decent memory. This is so that we can quantify "better" both in terms of our abilities as well as validate our gear choices.
Of course, it's easier to simply ignore fact and go with "feel".
If an aftermarket trigger made you faster, how much faster and in what drill?
If an aftermarket trigger made you more accurate, how much more accurate and at what distance and in what application?
Is this really so hard to understand?
I might also ask, if you can't answer those questions but are happy with your aftermarket trigger nonetheless, why do you care what some jerk on the internets with a funny hat thinks? Me thinkest some of thou doth protest too much.
Has nobody heard of an a priori argument?
Do you need hard data to prove that a lighter, crisper, more consistent trigger will produce better results, or is it a conclusion you can reach just sitting there on your couch thinking? This is clearly a case where an a priori argument suffices.
NCPatrolAR
05-09-12, 18:58
Of course not, you were referring to me. But your personal attacks and snide little quips don't change the fact that you can't quantify better.
Keep posting. Your hole keeps getting deeper.
Enjoy the time out
Now literally the only thing left from Bushmaster on the rifle is the lower receiver itself. LMAO
Can you "quantify" your feelings on that! :lol:
Seriously though, how does the new trigger feel? Less creep, cleaner break, etc.
Rob, as I mentioned in my last post I was able to see a measurable difference between my times and accuracy when shooting at speed in both short range multi gun events and local plate matches which are shot iron sight only at 200yds & 300yds. For the shorter range stuff I measured my improvements by noticing faster raw times coupled with increased A zone hits and decreased C's and D's. For the plate matches my times decreased by almost half due to fewer missed shots.
I previously ran a GI trigger which was worn in and smooth. I shot it well.....but my times, scores, and accuracy improved when I switched to a trigger which was lighter and had a shorter reset. Over the years I have tried a few different things and I always decide on what goes and what stays based on whether it makes me faster, more accurate, or both.
Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2
Can you "quantify" your feelings on that! :lol:
Seriously though, how does the new trigger feel? Less creep, cleaner break, etc.
It feels a lot better. 2+lbs lighter pull, no creep, crisp break, very consistent. $65 well spent
It feels a lot better. 2+lbs lighter pull, no creep, crisp break, very consistent. $65 well spent
Well then, that's all that matters. Bottom line, you're satisfied with your decision.
Has nobody heard of an a priori argument?
Do you need hard data to prove that a lighter, crisper, more consistent trigger will produce better results, or is it a conclusion you can reach just sitting there on your couch thinking? This is clearly a case where an a priori argument suffices.
Your post here
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=103811
, #10, is outstanding.
SW-Shooter
05-09-12, 19:56
http://i1237.photobucket.com/albums/ff469/clj94104/b277eb1d.jpg
Freshly installed ALG ACT. I think my mechanical trigger pull scale is a little off (heavy by about 0.25), but it still registers at about 6.0-6.5. I can live with that.
Now I must go clean up the rifle because as you can see my fingers were greasy.
Had to use Mobil1 synthetic grease for the pins, nothing else was available. Used some Tetra lube for everything else.
It is indeed the ACT, old man-itus. It is indeed the ACT, the ALG top dog.
It's hard to tell but isn't that the QMS? It looks like it is a little shiny, could be the flash. If it's black it's an ACT, if silver it's a QMS (basically a top shelf ACT).
Actually that's backwards. The QMS stands for Quality Mil Spec. The ACT stands for ALG Combat Trigger. The ACT has a NiB coating and is the higher end USGI. So yes it is their top of the line USGI
ForTehNguyen
05-09-12, 20:28
It feels a lot better. 2+lbs lighter pull, no creep, crisp break, very consistent. $65 well spent
glad to hear you like it, most of my AR triggers are changed out with QMS/ACTs
Im confused, where did someone say an aftermarket trigger would make them a better shooter?:confused:
SW-Shooter
05-09-12, 20:58
Actually that's backwards. The QMS stands for Quality Mil Spec. The ACT stands for ALG Combat Trigger. The ACT has a NiB coating and is the higher end USGI. So yes it is their top of the line USGI
Ha, all this time I had it backwards. I had the ACT and thought I had the QMS. How did I miss that? I'm getting old and all of the acronyms just blur together anymore. Just a slight case of CRS, I had it right here in the main thread. https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=97266&page=5
Littlelebowski
05-09-12, 21:51
I bought a 6920 with a terrible 8lb trigger. After 1200 rounds it didn't improve. What did happen was I had a more difficult time transferring back to my primary pistol (1911/4.5lb crisp trigger ) I now have a geissele SD E that feels very similar.
I'm a very solid shooter and have little issue shooting any gun well. (i dont mean to sound obnoxious). I prefer a crisp trigger on any weapon.
I don't understand the trigger hate from some when it comes to ARs.
The fundamentals of accurate shooting have often been stated as aligning the sights on the target and firing the gun without disturbing that alignment. Does a gritty 8lb trigger not affect that?:confused:
I also realize if you primarily spray ARs at rock throwing distances, your not going to realize much difference.
I've noticed a lot of 1911 guys just cannot handle anything other than a crisp, light trigger. Personally, I'm pretty happy with stock Glock triggers and the USGI trigger with an extra power hammer spring. I'll also say that my shooting drastically improved when I ditched my Nighthawk Predator for a stock Glock 19.
In other words, I put down the crutch and learned trigger control.
I've noticed a lot of 1911 guys just cannot handle anything other than a crisp, light trigger. Personally, I'm pretty happy with stock Glock triggers and the USGI trigger with an extra power hammer spring. I'll also say that my shooting drastically improved when I ditched my Nighthawk Predator for a stock Glock 19.
In other words, I put down the crutch and learned trigger control.
The "crutch" thing is getting tired.
I can handle any trigger but prefer a nice one. It takes me about 10 rounds of ammo to shoot a unfamiliar gun as well as I shoot one of my own.
Trigger control in universal regardless of the weapon, so I'm confused how you would get better by switching to a different gun. Maybe you should have mastered trigger control before you spent the money on a Nighthawk.
Littlelebowski
05-09-12, 22:16
The "crutch" thing is getting tired
Pretty sure I haven't mentioned it. I'd be happy to supplant my findings with targets and witnesses. There's plenty of folks on here that have seen me shoot with said heavy AR trigger and stock Glock. I use the extra power hammer spring to ignite the hard Soviet surplus ammo's primers on my 5.45 AR. 0-300 yards at the Kyle Defoor adv cabine class, I didn't give up anything to the Marine infantry officer shooting besides me who was using a Noveske with a lighter trigger and an ACOG versus my 4 MOA red dot. That being said, his and my groups were neck and neck at just about every range as was our times.
I know too many people who can't handle anything other than a light, crisp trigger to not call it a crutch.
I've noticed a lot of 1911 guys just cannot handle anything other than a crisp, light trigger. Personally, I'm pretty happy with stock Glock triggers and the USGI trigger with an extra power hammer spring. I'll also say that my shooting drastically improved when I ditched my Nighthawk Predator for a stock Glock 19.
In other words, I put down the crutch and learned trigger control.
Same here Duderino. Shot a 1911 for years but finally got over the "breaking icicle vs glass rod" masturbation on the 1911 forums and was shooting my pd turn in g19 just as well after a few hundred rounds. That's amazing since it is like shooting a "staple gun" according to those other folks.
One thing that I didn't see mentioned in this thread; if your gi trigger is that terrible, check your lower. After one horrible CMMG exerience, I buy my lpks from grant and have really good gi triggers. Swap FCGs with a buddy and see what washes out. If the pin holes in your lower are drilled out of speck you might still be disappointed even after spending some big dollars.
Pretty sure I haven't mentioned it. I'd be happy to supplant my findings with targets and witnesses. There's plenty of folks on here that have seen me shoot with said heavy AR trigger and stock Glock. I use the extra power hammer spring to ignite the hard Soviet surplus ammo's primers on my 5.45 AR. 0-300 yards at the Kyle Defoor adv cabine class, I didn't give up anything to the Marine infantry officer shooting besides me who was using a Noveske with a lighter trigger and an ACOG versus my 4 MOA red dot. That being said, his and my groups were neck and neck at just about every range as was our times.
I know too many people who can't handle anything other than a light, crisp trigger to not call it a crutch.
It's mentioned by many WAY too much. And it's no more of a crutch than power steering on your car.
You have no clue as to my shooting ability but you imply I can't handle anything but a custom 1911 trigger?
I was introduced to serious shooting as a teenager through Bullseye. In 2 years I was shooting Master class with iron sights. (I switched to a red dot shortly after they were approved)That's one hand shooting with a pistol at 25 and 50 yards for those who are unfamiliar with the sport. I think I have the trigger control thing down.
I think there is common ground here, and I don't think it's too hard to find or all that complicated.
For many (almost certainly most) shooters, the USGI trigger is not the bottleneck. Rather, it is the finger of the shooter manipulating it. $200 would be much better spent on ammunition and range time. That seems obvious to me.
Now, for some shooters who have mastered the fundamentals and are looking for a little extra edge, an aftermarket trigger (read: Geissele) might be a worthwhile purchase, but not always...some of the shooters at this level will choose to stick with USGI triggers for one reason or another.
Rob_S and Lebowski, just to name a few, I'm confident are highly competent. They appear to advocate USGI triggers, and have both articulated why. Rob_S has noticed that he loses control of the fundamentals when he moves away from the USGI and sees little or no performance benefit. Lebowski uses an extra power spring to get consistent ignition with hard primered 5.45. Makes sense.
And that's the important part, to have a reason for what you do. The reason I used and use Geissele 2 stage triggers in my AR's is to keep my triggers consistent from platform to platform. While in the military, I had a variety of platforms that I could choose from depending on the mission (M110, MK12, M4). In order to keep a consistent trigger pull, I had SSF's in the MK12 and M4. The M110 obviously has KAC's 2 stage...different, yes, but still a 2 stage trigger with similar characteristics. So that was my rationale.
On the civilian side, I again went with Geissele's because, again, I was used to them. I don't think anybody who's seen me shoot a rifle would tell me that I have a crutch. I'm at a level of competency where a lighter 2 stage allows me a bit more control that I like to take advantage of. I'm not convinced by anything in this thread that I'm doing something wrong. But I also don't think an aftermarket trigger is a necessity, even for the most competent of shooters. I think you've just got to do an honest self-assessment, determine your wants and needs based on your own circumstances, and make a decision. I just don't see how this is so contentious.
SW-Shooter
05-09-12, 22:35
When you belittle (or attempt to) people for making a choice of what they put on THEIR firearm, and then push them into a corner to prove it has any benefit you become a bully.
I think this is the kind of thread that needs to be locked down, all because a few people want to thump their chests with their "intellect" and make people feel small. Perhaps because they are some wanna be gun writer, or are trying to make a mark in life they so much feel the need to make. I enjoyed it more when he wrote just the facts and left out his opinions. It got worse over the past few weeks, maybe it was an agenda, maybe he was just tired of people spending money on what he deemed useless. Either way, put a pair of fuzzy dice on your AR/M4, I could give a rats ass. As long as you enjoy this disease and sport, more power to you. My final post on this subject.
I think there is common ground here, and I don't think it's too hard to find or all that complicated.
For many (almost certainly most) shooters, the USGI trigger is not the bottleneck. Rather, it is the finger of the shooter manipulating it. $200 would be much better spent on ammunition and range time. That seems obvious to me.
Now, for some shooters who have mastered the fundamentals and are looking for a little extra edge, an aftermarket trigger (read: Geissele) might be a worthwhile purchase, but not always...some of the shooters at this level will choose to stick with USGI triggers for one reason or another.
Rob_S and Lebowski, just to name a few, I'm confident are highly competent. They appear to advocate USGI triggers, and have both articulated why. Rob_S has noticed that he loses control of the fundamentals when he moves away from the USGI and sees little or no performance benefit. Lebowski uses an extra power spring to get consistent ignition with hard primered 5.45. Makes sense.
And that's the important part, to have a reason for what you do. The reason I used and use Geissele 2 stage triggers in my AR's is to keep my triggers consistent from platform to platform. While in the military, I had a variety of platforms that I could choose from depending on the mission (M110, MK12, M4). In order to keep a consistent trigger pull, I had SSF's in the MK12 and M4. The M110 obviously has KAC's 2 stage...different, yes, but still a 2 stage trigger with similar characteristics. So that was my rationale.
On the civilian side, I again went with Geissele's because, again, I was used to them. I don't think anybody who's seen me shoot a rifle would tell me that I have a crutch.
Consistancy is a great point. I think this can be expanded to a side arm. I have trouble moving back and forth from a 8 pound single stage GI AR trigger to a handgun with a 4.5 pound trigger. By trouble I mean it causes me to pause mentally. It's kinda like when I drive my wife's car which has a far more touchy brake pedal. The first stop I make always seems to be a jarring one.
For me I prefer a 2 stage trigger. I like the ability to set up a shot with more precision if I need too.
I think this is a part of the affinity for 1911 triggers. While technically a single stage, most are set up with a little pretravel which to me is a defacto first stage.
This topic is almost pure stupidity at this point on this site. Some great shooters like a non USGI trigger in this rifle, some still like the USGI, others do well with either one. I sure as hell ain't going to argue with say Travis H. who was a huge proponent of a USGI, but now generally prefers an upgraded trigger even though he arguably by his own account shoots about as well with either. Nor am I going to argue with Larry V. who says he prefers a standard USGI in this platform. Is there anyone else posting in this thread going to argue with them either?
Having said that I have done a considerable amount of testing over the past couple years on this lone topic with thousands of rounds fired. Some people are absolutely offended by my results and my own personal thoughts on the topic and call me a hater? I personally have no financial etc, etc benefit from NOT speaking my mind or expressing my own opinion, so I do it. Most with a dog in the fight will either say good things or nothing at all. I try to remain impartial and express my real opinions good or bad.
As for triggers I own many "fancy triggers" and run them all the time. I will freely admit that a shooters skill will dictate much. I am definitely NOT against aftermarket triggers, however I am against them being suggested to certain shooters where the real problem is the software and not the hardware so to speak. It is my opinion that the shooter should be the most important fix and often times suggesting any item be it a trigger or a comp etc, is often a disservice to the shooter themselves. Far too many times incorrect suggestions are made to upgrade the hardware and not the shooter. IMO some items only mask the true problem in the shooter and that the immediate improvement often does not lend itself to the shooter actually trying to fix the real issue which is the one staring at them in the mirror. The following are only my results, or thoughts on the matter......
- Geissele makes THE absolute best triggers in their class and / or categories.
- In my experience, the ALG ACT does EXACTLY what the claims are from the manufacturer. It is up to the individual to decide if the extra cost is worth it or not. Do I personally feel the double the price is giving me any "added value"? None that I can see whatsoever and the following observation is actually a negative IMO.
- I now have about 2500 rounds through my ALG ACT trigger. It has zero creep, and a nice break right around 6.5lbs. It feels the exact same after 2500 rounds as it did on round #1. I have a few USGI triggers that have a better feel and a few that are worse. This may be a good or a bad thing, depending on how you look at it. I actually have a few USGI triggers that are better or have become better over time with the same round count as my ALG. Some might be happy with the ALG consistency remaining the same over time which may be valid, but I personally like the thought that the trigger can get better than what my ALG feels like.
- I absolutely do not shoot any faster with an aftermarket, two stage, etc, etc, trigger over a USGI trigger. In fact I arguably shoot slower, .01 sec to be exact. I have video comparisons using a Colt USGI vs my SSA and another comparison of a different Colt USGI trigger vs my S3G trigger. Even with the Colt USGI vs the Geissele S3G I ran splits of .10's with the USGI and could only muster .11's on the S3G. Again I will readily admit that there are not a lot of shooters out there running .10 splits with USGI or aftermarket triggers with or without a basic accuracy standard attached to it.
- On a non-precision battle type rifle with NO magnification (red dot), with an inherent accuracy in the 2-3MOA range I was unable to tell any discernible differences in accuracy all the way out to 450 yards in the above mentioned triggers. I absolutely cannot qualify if any differences from shot to shot might be a barrel accuracy issues, lack of magnification issue or trigger pull. I come from the long range precision / counter sniper world and I do feel that I have excellent trigger control. So in essence I personally see no differences in my shooting that I can account to a "better" trigger. NO DOUBT ON A PRECISION RIFLE, WITH GREAT INHERENT ACCURACY AND A GOOD GLASS, WHERE I AM SHOOTING FOR EXTREME PRECISION, I WANT A DAMN GOOD TRIGGER!
- HERE IS THE BIG PROBLEM THAT I SEE that often is missed by the majority of shooters who purchase or build a rifle in this class.....They do not properly lubricate all of the correct spots on the fire control group of a USGI trigger set up. I am often asked if I can help someone with their USGI trigger. I will do a simple yet complete lubrication of the fire control group and do in the neighborhood of 50 or so dry fires with pressure on the hammer and the USGI trigger is noticeably better. There is an ABSOLUTE reason that some types of aftermarket trigger companies will include lubrication and mandate lubrication points on the fire control group. This should be done on ALL rifles picked up direct from the manufacturer or when you assemble one on your own. probably 99% of your average shooters / assemblers out there don't do this, or don't even have a clue that this can help. It will not always make an immediate difference however it will usually make a difference in regards to creep that is noticeable. Some people think I perform witchcraft on the trigger when a simple lube and quick 5 min dry fire set of the trigger can do wonders.
I have zero problems ultimately with how someone wants to spend their own money, but I definitely will always preach that if I think the shooters skills might be the biggest issue that they perhaps spend the time and / or money on upgrading the shooter and not the rifle. AND YES, I do believe that there are methods that can ultimately produce a much higher quality shooter in the long run teaching them how to effectively use iron sights and a USGI type trigger. I personally do it all the time even when starting with highly experienced shooters. I will often instruct long range precision shooters on a heavier pull trigger also before going lighter.
Again EMMV.
When you belittle (or attempt to) people for making a choice of what they put on THEIR firearm, and then push them into a corner to prove it has any benefit you become a bully.
I think this is the kind of thread that needs to be locked down, all because a few people want to thump their chests with their "intellect" and make people feel small. Perhaps because they are some wanna be gun writer, or are trying to make a mark in life they so much feel the need to make. I enjoyed it more when he wrote just the facts and left out his opinions. It got worse over the past few weeks, maybe it was an agenda, maybe he was just tired of people spending money on what he deemed useless. Either way, put a pair of fuzzy dice on your AR/M4, I could give a rats ass. As long as you enjoy this disease and sport, more power to you. My final post on this subject.
That was pretty insulting to a person who has contributed a lot here. If an educated, experienced shooter chooses a different trigger, that is fine. A custom trigger as the go-to recommendation for any new shooter that doesn't pull one hole groups after a couple hundred rounds is questionable at best.
NCPatrolAR
05-09-12, 23:04
This thread has run its course.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.