Originally Posted by
Aries144
I don't blame you at all for that, especially now that replacement parts have apparently dried up. I was able to purchase a spare disconnector spring back when they were available, so I didn't mind experimenting.
With stock AR-15 triggers there isn't much you can change because it's more about the geometry where the trigger interacts with the hammer. If you look closely next time you fiddle with an AR15, the hammer is pulled rearward ever so slightly as you squeeze the trigger before it's released. A lot like a Glock trigger. That's why you'll notice many really nice aftermarket AR15 FCGs move the interacting surfaces of the hammer and trigger to look more like that on an AK. The designer has more flexibility to reduce the influence of the hammer spring on the weight of the break.
The ARX100 trigger/hammer relationship is different. The geometry is such that the hammer spring hardly has any influence on the break. You can see this for yourself: just reassemble the FCG without the disconnector in place. You'll find that the trigger pull is a pound, maybe less. The fellow who designed the ARX100's FCG designed the trigger pull weight to be regulated by the weight of the disconnector spring, via having the disconnector in contact with the back of the hammer.
I wonder if the triggers on some ARX100s being "two stage" is intentional or a matter of production variation of the parts. My new production ARX100 from this year had the same old one-stage trigger I remember from the first one I bought in 2015.