G. Wedge, do you care to expand on the thinking behind the LDA's trigger? From what I read it is pre-cocked when you rack the slide, as with any single action weapon. And when you pull the trigger all that happen is that the hammer is brought back, not against the tension of the main spring however, and then the sear is tripped. In my eyes, after reading this explanation of the trigger system and handling one, what I see is a single action with a gimmicky trigger and hammer. Since the double action pull is so light, only being resisted by the super light torsion hammer spring, and not the main spring, I don't see this system providing any added safety over a SA 1911. And while the trigger is nice for DA it's not nicer then a clean SA so what's the point?
Tell me about the Para LDA's trigger?
- Thread starter Axion
- Start date
Axion, I'd love to tell you about the LDA. Thanks for the invitation.
The LDA design uses the best of both worlds, and takes full advantage of new technologies. After all, what better platform to use than the 1911 semi-auto.
The great part of the LDA design is that Ted found a way to let the gun do half the work; that is...cock the main spring. That's what allows it to be a Light Double Action. It uses a sear, and a "cocking cam" to perform functions similar to that of a typical 1911 single action, however the hammer design prevents the action from allowing sear/cocking cam separation unless the hammer has been cycled back by a trigger pull. When cocked, even though the hammer returns to a forward position, it cannot rest on the firing pin due to the design.
Where safety is concerned, if you don't pull the trigger, the hammer will not go back, and the sear cannot be separated from the cocking cam.
When you add to that:
- A thumb safety
- A grip safety
- A series 80 firing pin safety
I don't see how the safety aspect can be questioned in any way.
The definition of a double action firearm is quite simplistic, and has been based on the only available technologies of the day.
One might even choose the argument that a "true" double action allows you to continuously cycle the action without ever discharging the firearm. Well, that's true for those types of double actions, but not for the LDA.
If anyone feels that is a disadvantage of some type, allow me to pose a question.
Given that modern good quality factory ammunition is extremely reliable, and the possibility of faulty ammunition from these reputable manufacturers is about 1 in a million, and given that every agency in United States instructs their people to rack and reload in the event of a non-discharge, if you were to pull the trigger, and the firearm did not fire would you…
a) Keep pulling the trigger
or
b) Rack the slide and get a round in the chamber that will actually fire
As we all know, definitions do change from time to time as technologies become available, and the LDA certainly qualifies as precedent setting in this category.
The LDA was never meant to be a replacement for a single action 1911. After all, if Ted weren’t J.M.B's #1 fan, our pistols would not hold true to the pure lines, original design dimensions, and overall appearance of that renowned design.
Irrespective of whether you are a 1911 purist, you should appreciate the LDA design because of what it represents and I actually find it hard to understand why there are those who would still strike down the LDA for reasons without merit, even though there are a large number of people who find the LDA appealing for many reasons.
I personally feel that this type of blanket criticism is a disservice to the shooting public.
Thanks for the opportunity to discuss this.
Cheers,
George
gwedge@paraord.com
The LDA design uses the best of both worlds, and takes full advantage of new technologies. After all, what better platform to use than the 1911 semi-auto.
The great part of the LDA design is that Ted found a way to let the gun do half the work; that is...cock the main spring. That's what allows it to be a Light Double Action. It uses a sear, and a "cocking cam" to perform functions similar to that of a typical 1911 single action, however the hammer design prevents the action from allowing sear/cocking cam separation unless the hammer has been cycled back by a trigger pull. When cocked, even though the hammer returns to a forward position, it cannot rest on the firing pin due to the design.
Where safety is concerned, if you don't pull the trigger, the hammer will not go back, and the sear cannot be separated from the cocking cam.
When you add to that:
- A thumb safety
- A grip safety
- A series 80 firing pin safety
I don't see how the safety aspect can be questioned in any way.
The definition of a double action firearm is quite simplistic, and has been based on the only available technologies of the day.
One might even choose the argument that a "true" double action allows you to continuously cycle the action without ever discharging the firearm. Well, that's true for those types of double actions, but not for the LDA.
If anyone feels that is a disadvantage of some type, allow me to pose a question.
Given that modern good quality factory ammunition is extremely reliable, and the possibility of faulty ammunition from these reputable manufacturers is about 1 in a million, and given that every agency in United States instructs their people to rack and reload in the event of a non-discharge, if you were to pull the trigger, and the firearm did not fire would you…
a) Keep pulling the trigger
or
b) Rack the slide and get a round in the chamber that will actually fire
As we all know, definitions do change from time to time as technologies become available, and the LDA certainly qualifies as precedent setting in this category.
The LDA was never meant to be a replacement for a single action 1911. After all, if Ted weren’t J.M.B's #1 fan, our pistols would not hold true to the pure lines, original design dimensions, and overall appearance of that renowned design.
Irrespective of whether you are a 1911 purist, you should appreciate the LDA design because of what it represents and I actually find it hard to understand why there are those who would still strike down the LDA for reasons without merit, even though there are a large number of people who find the LDA appealing for many reasons.
I personally feel that this type of blanket criticism is a disservice to the shooting public.
Thanks for the opportunity to discuss this.
Cheers,
George
gwedge@paraord.com
john in jax
New member
You GO Mr. Wedge ! +11111111111111111
I currently own 3 Para LDA's in .45acp.
7.45s LDA
C7.45s LDA
12.45 LDA
I've owned a whole lot of 1911's and even built a few, and it's just my oppionion, but for the very reasons Wedge mentioned above I like the Para LDA's better.
I've acquired each of mine used, and I send them in to Joel at Para's Service Center in TN almost as soon as I get them. He is VERY customer service oriented and has fixed or replaced any questionable parts for FREE even if they were not covered under warranty. And to make FREE gunsmithing even better, it has never taken more than 7 days to get my LDA's back in my hands.
Failure to Feed problems in any 1911 style pistol, including the single stack LDA's, can often be fixed by tweaking the clip/magazine to better align the bullet. If your magazine has a follower that can't be adjusted (usually with a pair of needlenose pliers) you might want to try a different follower, or magazine. Both of my single stack LDAs have had ZERO malfunctions with std gov model 1911 mags.
The clips/mags for the double stack models are a whole different animal - -thankfully my 12.45 performs flawlessly - - it is my primary CCW.
I currently own 3 Para LDA's in .45acp.
7.45s LDA
C7.45s LDA
12.45 LDA
I've owned a whole lot of 1911's and even built a few, and it's just my oppionion, but for the very reasons Wedge mentioned above I like the Para LDA's better.
I've acquired each of mine used, and I send them in to Joel at Para's Service Center in TN almost as soon as I get them. He is VERY customer service oriented and has fixed or replaced any questionable parts for FREE even if they were not covered under warranty. And to make FREE gunsmithing even better, it has never taken more than 7 days to get my LDA's back in my hands.
Failure to Feed problems in any 1911 style pistol, including the single stack LDA's, can often be fixed by tweaking the clip/magazine to better align the bullet. If your magazine has a follower that can't be adjusted (usually with a pair of needlenose pliers) you might want to try a different follower, or magazine. Both of my single stack LDAs have had ZERO malfunctions with std gov model 1911 mags.
The clips/mags for the double stack models are a whole different animal - -thankfully my 12.45 performs flawlessly - - it is my primary CCW.
G. Wedge-
First off thanks for the response. Secondly I don't doubt that the LDA is safe, I'm sure it is, I just don't think it's any MORE safe then a traditional 1911. That there is my problem with it. In my mind the principle justification for a double action pull is that they add some level of safety. Now I own, and very much like, a sig with a DA/SA trigger so I'm not a DA basher but I still vastly prefer a good SA pull to any DA pull. So if the DA pull isn't somewhat heavy so that it provides some measure of safety I don't see the point.
But in the end if someone really wants a DA 1911 then that's fine by me
First off thanks for the response. Secondly I don't doubt that the LDA is safe, I'm sure it is, I just don't think it's any MORE safe then a traditional 1911. That there is my problem with it. In my mind the principle justification for a double action pull is that they add some level of safety. Now I own, and very much like, a sig with a DA/SA trigger so I'm not a DA basher but I still vastly prefer a good SA pull to any DA pull. So if the DA pull isn't somewhat heavy so that it provides some measure of safety I don't see the point.
But in the end if someone really wants a DA 1911 then that's fine by me
It's my pleasure Axion. Obviously, you measure the extra safety found in a double action by an increase in trigger pull weight. That's fine with me, but others also measure the extra safety provided in a double action by trigger pull length.
To each their own, after all, that's what makes the world go 'round.
Just so you know though, we do get requests to up the trigger pull weight for people who find the extra comfort in pull weight combined with the mechanical dynamics of a double action only, so in the event you needed 8 to 10 pounds, we certainly could accomodate you.
Cheers,
George
PS: Kermit, my opinion is that you are truely missing out. You should try one if you ever get the chance, and see for yourself...you could be very surprised.
gwedge@paraord.com
To each their own, after all, that's what makes the world go 'round.
Just so you know though, we do get requests to up the trigger pull weight for people who find the extra comfort in pull weight combined with the mechanical dynamics of a double action only, so in the event you needed 8 to 10 pounds, we certainly could accomodate you.
Cheers,
George
PS: Kermit, my opinion is that you are truely missing out. You should try one if you ever get the chance, and see for yourself...you could be very surprised.
gwedge@paraord.com
Hi Mosin. I'd love to comment on it. In my 7+ years here at Para, I have never heard of any such report. That's why I decided to come in and discuss the LDA, and try to weed out the misinformation.
Cheers,
George
gwedge@paraord.com
Cheers,
George
gwedge@paraord.com
Thanks. It may be worth more thought. I think the trigger pull is smooth and easy to shoot, and I can see the safety advantage for unconventional carry, like a fanny pack. There are at least three unhappy customers above, I guess they slipped past you without your knowledge.
robertbank
New member
George didn't mention it but I will. Todd Jarett's LDA has now got over 250,000 rds through it and on it's 4th barrel. Now before anyone says , 'Yea but his gun has different parts", Nope just an out of the box LDA. Nobody else makes the LDA trigger, hammer sear group in any event.
As to why the D/A many police departments don't, for their own reasons, allow S/A 1911's but do approve of the LDA system. Suspect that was one market this gun design was aimed at, pardon the pun.
Incidently I have a PXT extractor in my SSP and it works great! I prefer the internal design of the coil spring extractor that Para went to. A major improvement over the older design.
Take Care
Bob
As to why the D/A many police departments don't, for their own reasons, allow S/A 1911's but do approve of the LDA system. Suspect that was one market this gun design was aimed at, pardon the pun.
Incidently I have a PXT extractor in my SSP and it works great! I prefer the internal design of the coil spring extractor that Para went to. A major improvement over the older design.
Take Care
Bob
Last edited: