iMagUdspEllr
New member
I have read about trigger take-up (doesn't affect accuracy), creep (may affect accuracy?), and over-travel (some say a little is better and some say none is better).
I read an article (talking about rifle triggers) that said over-travel is desirable because if you have no over-travel (or very little) then while the firing pin is igniting the primer your finger is "hitting" the over-travel stop and this causes the rifle to vibrate a little bit before the bullet has left the barrel (and thus slightly affecting accuracy). So that author advocated having a little more over-travel than many people seem to advocate, in order to ensure your finger is still in motion ("over-travelling") while the bullet leaves the barrel (eliminating the movement caused when your finger causes the trigger to hit the over-travel stop until after the bullet has left the barrel). I don't know if there is any truth to that... I'm just repeating what I read.
That article triggered me to think about over-travel in handguns. I believe a good trigger is even more important in a handgun for accuracy because your firing hand also assists with supporting the weapon and pointing the weapon let alone pulling the trigger. It seems to me that you might want to have over-travel in a handgun for the same reason that author suggested having over-travel in a rifle.
However, my opinion shifted as I began to think about it more. It seems, due to your strong hand not just being responsible for breaking the trigger but also supporting and aiming the gun, over-travel might be an undesirable thing as your hand sympathetically closes and squeezes all your fingers together in order to follow your index finger's lead (thus causing the gun to shift minutes of a degree off target as the hammer falls to ignite the primer).
Then again, I don't see why the barrel wouldn't shift slightly off target due to your finger "hitting" the over-travel stop before the bullet has left the barrel.
What are your opinions, experiences, and theories on the subject?
I read an article (talking about rifle triggers) that said over-travel is desirable because if you have no over-travel (or very little) then while the firing pin is igniting the primer your finger is "hitting" the over-travel stop and this causes the rifle to vibrate a little bit before the bullet has left the barrel (and thus slightly affecting accuracy). So that author advocated having a little more over-travel than many people seem to advocate, in order to ensure your finger is still in motion ("over-travelling") while the bullet leaves the barrel (eliminating the movement caused when your finger causes the trigger to hit the over-travel stop until after the bullet has left the barrel). I don't know if there is any truth to that... I'm just repeating what I read.
That article triggered me to think about over-travel in handguns. I believe a good trigger is even more important in a handgun for accuracy because your firing hand also assists with supporting the weapon and pointing the weapon let alone pulling the trigger. It seems to me that you might want to have over-travel in a handgun for the same reason that author suggested having over-travel in a rifle.
However, my opinion shifted as I began to think about it more. It seems, due to your strong hand not just being responsible for breaking the trigger but also supporting and aiming the gun, over-travel might be an undesirable thing as your hand sympathetically closes and squeezes all your fingers together in order to follow your index finger's lead (thus causing the gun to shift minutes of a degree off target as the hammer falls to ignite the primer).
Then again, I don't see why the barrel wouldn't shift slightly off target due to your finger "hitting" the over-travel stop before the bullet has left the barrel.
What are your opinions, experiences, and theories on the subject?