![]() ![]() If the shooter can’t hold this weapon on target, then it’s the shooter who has a problem rather than the trigger and firing system on this weapon. But even out of the box, I’d be hard pressed to understand why anyone would think this weapon needs any tuning whatsoever. My personal opinion? It’s still one of the best triggers out there, and according to my research any gunsmith worthy of the title will be able to tune your trigger with just a bit more effort. Some claim that it unnecessarily complicated the original design, degraded the trigger by making it stiffer and adding an almost imperceptible (in my view) amount of trigger creep before the hammer trips, and gunsmiths complained that the new design is more difficult to tune to competition standards. That last Series 80 feature is a bit controversial. ![]() ![]() In that article I said of the Series 80 firing pin block and the reported effect on the trigger: an M1991A1 - Shooting Review), so I already knew that the Series 80 trigger is one of the best I’ve ever encountered in a semiautomatic. I previously reviewed the M1991A1 used in the above video (see: A 1911 by Any Other Name Would Be. I was pretty shocked at the results of this comparison. 45 ACP through it, so break-in shouldn’t have been a factor. This particular M1991A1 has perhaps 100 rounds of. IV Series 70 against the aforementioned M1991A1. I took video of the first test, which pitted the Mk. On each cocked weapon I depressed the grip safety, took up the trigger slack, and then slowly and carefully squeezed the trigger until the sear tripped and the hammer fell. This was a pretty simple test of triggers, and admittedly perhaps a bit subjective as I used no measuring equipment in this test. IV Series 70 swimming against school of M1991A1
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |