[GeorgiaJoe]

A couple weeks ago I polished the sear face and the work on the ejector. The cylinder was a mirror finish from the factory. I wouldn't call it gritty or smooth. I only feel the uneven pressure when taking very careful aim and pulling VERY slowly. As I pull, a bit past the half way point of travel the required pressure to keep it moving increases then suddenly "breaks free" to continue travel. A short travel later you hit another resistance just before it breaks to release the striker. I would describe it a two take-ups.
So if I'm practicing to be most accurate I get through the first resistance and then when I feel the next one I know that any movement will release the striker. You don't feel any grit when doing a normal "follow through" trigger pull.

Today is rainy again so being stuck inside I started looking further for the source of the resistance. I was obsessed with getting rid of the uneven resistance. With the slide off pressing on the connecter to load the cylinder didn't cause the resistance that I was feeling. I could reproduce the uneven feel by placing the striker's mating surface against the sear and pushing the striker forward as the spring normally would then pulling the trigger. I had noticed that the sear action pushes the striker back before breaking free but with the slide off I could see the striker "ramp" (I'll call it) drag on the back wall of the slot in the housing that the sear is in. (See the picture with the striker in place.) I looked at the bottom of the striker to see the uneven surface on the "ramp". I polished it and that helped a lot. Then I took the sharp edge off that back wall of the slot and the pull is smooth now.

 

[Meho1277]

Well knock me down and call me shorty, thats great!!!

 

[chandler5566]

With the slide off pressing on the connecter to load the cylinder didn't cause the resistance that I was feeling.

That first bump is the connector depressing the striker safety. With the slide off push the striker rearward while depressing the striker safety. When the striker moves behind the striker safety release the safety to trap the striker. Then try a slow and fast depression of the striker safety.....I believe you will feel a very slight drag when pulling slow.

As for the interface between the sear and striker lug I am a bit confused with your description. Try this: Measure the height from the top of the striker lug to the top edge of the slide. Then measured the height of the sear to the top edge of the frame. My measurements yield 20/64ths as the height of the sear and 18/64ths for the striker. That means the interface between the two is only 2/64ths (1/32nd). That's why I get concerned with modification of those surfaces.

My guess is that the drag you feel when the sear is dropping down is due more to the coil striker spring and not the two faces of the sear and striker lug. Those two surfaces on my CCP are very shiny and smooth. The improvement you feel after rounding those two surfaces is probably due to the sear dropping off/slipping past the striker lug a little quicker.

 

[GeorgiaJoe]

That first bump is the connector depressing the striker safety. With the slide off push the striker rearward while depressing the striker safety. When the striker moves behind the striker safety release the safety to trap the striker. Then try a slow and fast depression of the striker safety.....I believe you will feel a very slight drag when pulling slow.

As for the interface between the sear and striker lug I am a bit confused with your description. Try this: Measure the height from the top of the striker lug to the top edge of the slide. Then measured the height of the sear to the top edge of the frame. My measurements yield 20/64ths as the height of the sear and 18/64ths for the striker. That means the interface between the two is only 2/64ths (1/32nd). That's why I get concerned with modification of those surfaces.

My guess is that the drag you feel when the sear is dropping down is due more to the coil striker spring and not the two faces of the sear and striker lug. Those two surfaces on my CCP are very shiny and smooth. The improvement you feel after rounding those two surfaces is probably due to the sear dropping off/slipping past the striker lug a little quicker.

This go round I didn't touch the sear or the striker surface that comes in contact with the sear. I polished out the ridge on the bottom of the striker that the red arrow is pointing at in the picture attached. That surface comes into contact with the housing at the spot marked with the red dot which was a 90 degree edge. As the trigger was pulled the sear pushed the striker back and the surface that is now polished was dragging on the 90 degree edge where the red dot is until the ridge at the red arrow hung up on the 90 degree edge requiring more pressure to overcome. Once the ridge cleared the 90 degree edge there was a short travel to the point of the striker breaking free of the sear. With the ridge polished off and the sharp edge chamfered there is no hang-up as before. The striker may set a little lower as the chamfer contact to the polished surface allows. The only difference that I feel is the trigger moves with constant resistance requiring a constant pressure until the striker releases. Much smoother than before the polishing and chamfering. The trigger requires the same pressure as before, without the sticking spot, and as well as I can tell the same travel and reset.

 

[1917-1911M]

If it were any other pistol I would find this hard to believe. So what you are saying GeorgiaJoe is that with a cocked pistol.....striker hook caught behind the sear....that when you pull the trigger the dropping sear presses the striker rearward as it rotates down causing the rear of the striker hook to hit the steel system housing...red spot. That would certainly screw up trigger pull if not stop it altogether. The last thing a small, light weight, mim'd (?) part like the striker needs is for the hook to be banged into from both directions. I'm surprised metal fatigue doesn't rapidly set in and the hook simply break off. Are you sure you have this analysis correct?

The next question I have is why not take a bit of metal off the system housing rather than the rear of the hook? The housing should be much stronger than the light weight hook. What stops rear movement of the slide? 1917

 

[GeorgiaJoe]

When I pull the trigger I can see and feel the red button cocked indicator come further back a little. I think it is from the seer moving down but not straight down; more of a circle radius as the seer rotates downward pushing the striker back.

I put some dry erase marker on the surface of the hook that I removed the rough spot from (see the red arrow on "contact" image). You can see that some of the dry erase got scuffed off of that surface after I put it back together in the process of cocking and pulling the trigger. I think that it still comes in contact with the chamfered surface marked by the red dot rubbing the dry erase off. Now that the rough spot that the red arrow points at is gone it is a much smoother trigger pull.

It feels like the slide travel is stopped by the spring around the barrel being compressed and the piston getting to the back of it's cylinder.

See my "BeforeAfter" image to see my best representation of what I am saying. Note the rough spot on the striker and how it will hang up on the 90 degree sharp edge.
I know the striker is setting lower than I would expect but how else is the dry erase getting rubbed off of the striker. And taking the rough spot off definitely smoothed out the trigger pull.

 

[Meho1277]

Very nice illustration Georgiajoe, but i think the witness marks that you are getting, IMO, are when the striker moves over the sear, before it catches it, which in turn, indicates how much surface area, of the striker, is being held by the sear, its just indicated on the back side of the striker "hook".

 

[GeorgiaJoe]

That explains it. I couldn't see how the striker could be down there.
Thanks for the eye opener.

 

[GeorgiaJoe]

That explains it. I couldn't see how the striker could be down there.
Thanks for the eye opener and clearing my tunnel vision.

 

[imaoldfart]

I see its not must me having the occasional double post. Something silly going on with this site.

 

[1917-1911M]

If it were any other pistol....again....I'd find it very hard to believe that the recoil spring, striker spring and piston/gas cylinder stop the slide. Springs being compressed solid to stop a slide would not last long in my opinion. Something solid stops rearward movement of the slide. The muzzle end of the piston is held in place by a very small pin as I recall. It would not likely last long if it were tasked with stopping the slide. Take the recoil spring off and the striker....then see what stops the slide. I'd do it but I can't find one of these things for $50.

Regarding the sear. All such sears have a radius with the ends rotating in a circle. The angle of engagement between the sear face and hammer/striker hook determine if the angle is positive, neutral or negative. What you have illustrated would be a very positive engagement....that makes for a very safe trigger but not one with a good pull. I know it is just a drawing without any measurements or attempt to portray what the CCP sear is actually doing. But, if the rotation followed the dashed black line the striker would be pushed way rearward. Same for a 1911, a revolver hammer, etc. If the striker hook were slanted back to the dashed line ( assuming you have portrayed the rear movement correctly for this comment ) then as the sear rotated downward the striker would neither move forward or rearward. That would be a neutral engagement....good trigger, not particularly safe.

If the striker hook were slanted even more rearward so that as the sear rotated down the striker would move forward, that would give you a negative engagement....very smooth trigger but very dangerous as the striker/hammer could slip off the sear at any moment including when cocked and your finger nowhere near the trigger. Most really good triggers approach the neutral engagement angle while still staying on the positive side of things. The next improvement would be to minimize the amount of travel the sear has to make before releasing the striker/hammer.

A positive engagement catches more securely, provides a safer angle when wear to the parts might eventually happen, etc. but does not produce the best trigger. If in fact the rotating sear is noticeably moving the striker rearward several things could be causing a rough trigger....compression of the striker spring which might be dragging along on something in the striker channel...same for the striker moving rearward and dragging along the channel. Same for the striker hook dragging on something.

I'm still not convinced the rear of the striker hook is banging into the steel system housing as the sear rotates. I just can't imagine even Umarex letting that happen.

So what stops rearward movement of the slide? Anyone. 1917

 

[1917-1911M]

The other thing that jumps out to me regarding the trigger on the CCP is the amount of leverage the trigger bar has at the engagement end of the cylinder. It does not have much.

Look at the leverage the trigger bar has on the sear of a PP pistol. 1917

 

[chandler5566]

If it were any other pistol....again....I'd find it very hard to believe that the recoil spring, striker spring and piston/gas cylinder stop the slide.

Not stop.....just slow it down sufficiently for the opposite reaction force of the springs to reverse the direction of the slide. You are right in that it's not just those three forces that are involved in the process. There's also the friction and energy required to activate other moving parts that are engaged partially or fully throughout the rearward motion.

As for the striker to sear interface my measurements indicate that interface is 1/32" to 3/64". Keep in mind that the trigger weight for the CCP is around 5.5lbs. If the interface were the full 5/64" of the sear height it would require considerably greater force to rotate the sear rearward to effect release of the striker. There is also the force required during the trigger pull to rotate the cylinder, activate the disconnector and compress the FPB.

If the striker lug were impacting the sear block I believe we would have seen that reported quite some time ago. My striker lug has no marks at all. Also, I just had trigger work done by a gunsmith and he polished only the sear and the cylinder resulting in an extremely smooth pull to release and reducing the pull weight to 4lb.

 

[1917-1911M]

Not my pistol but one that showed up on the Forum some time ago. Since there is no take down lever along the length of the pistol or under it the answer has to be in how the slide is dismounted. And that has to do with punching in the rear of the striker assembly on the original pistol or sliding the release over on the newer version. I don't have one of these as you guys know. So, I'm unable to assess exactly the amount of spring compression when the slide is fully stopped, pistol assembled. It appears from the above sheared off counter plate that the the plate and some components of the striker spring assembly stop the slide.

Sure the gas system plays a part in slowing the slide, the recoil spring also does as does the mainspring shall we say. The springs always play "a part" but it would be a tricky and probably impossible engineering feat to design a pistol where the various springs could consistently stop a slide at just the right point when you have solidly held pistols, limp wristing, 115 gr, 124 gr, 148 gr +P, clean and oiled, dirty and dry, etc. It is essential that the slide move rearward enough to allow a spent case to eject, cock the hammer/striker and be far enough rearward for the face of the breech rail to shove the next round out of the mag. So, something stops the slide at a precise point on semi autos. It appears one player is the counter plate. I can't assess how the striker assembly plays its part without a gun in hand but somewhere in there is what stops the slide. Which is likely why the assembly was redesigned and why during the recall we were seeing double front roll pins being inserted into the rear system housing....the front pin was taking a beating from the impact the counter plate was placing on it. Which means the plate was doing some heavy work.

I don't know how the new system works but I suppose it was beefed up as well as designed for easier disassembly. The striker is very light as is the striker spring....I don't see either stopping the heavy slide. If so, they should show some marks. As I recall the rear striker spring assembly had to be pressed in to free it from the counter plate hook, then the slide had to be retracted so that the extractor would clear the chamber cut, then the rear of the slide could be lifted. If the recoil spring was going solid or the piston hitting the bottom of the gas chamber then the slide could not be retracted...so those two aren't stopping the slide. It would seem it is something in the striker spring assembly.

Mr. Chandler, I expect your trigger improvements come strictly from careful polishing of all working parts in the fire control chain. The only oddity to me at the cylinder is the contact with the ejector. I'm still wondering what that is about. Compact part and just not enough room to separate the two....or some actual function like the little bump on the right side of the frame of the older P22 that jiggled the drop safety. We could never see any other reason for the bump which is no longer on the newer pistols.

I can't think of reading of any sear/hook work on striker pistols other than polishing. Is it ever done? Or does movement of the striker have way too much play in it to precisely fit the sear to the hook? Anyone. 1917

 

[1917-1911M]

The picture above does show a polished area on the front of the sear. Perhaps that is what is putting the mark on the rear of the striker lug as it passes over with each shot. 1917

 

[chandler5566]

Mr. Chandler, I expect your trigger improvements come strictly from careful polishing of all working parts in the fire control chain. The only oddity to me at the cylinder is the contact with the ejector. I'm still wondering what that is about. Compact part and just not enough room to separate the two.... 1917

Yes, careful and professionally performed polishing but only on the sear and cylinder. He also slightly rounded the 90 degree edges on the cylinder. That is all he did. We discussed the ejector to cylinder relationship and our conclusion was that the designer/engineer decided the bottom "shaft" of the ejector needed to be elongated to give it strength and the added length placed the bottom into the cylinder's path so a channel was cut to allow for it. The bottom of the shaft does not touch the bottom of the channel but it could make minimal contact when the cylinder is fully displaced.

 

[Meho1277]

Quoted from 1917
"It appears from the above sheared off counter plate that the the plate and some components of the striker spring assembly stop the slide.

Sure the gas system plays a part in slowing the slide, the recoil spring also does as does the mainspring shall we say. The springs always play "a part" but it would be a tricky and probably impossible engineering feat to design a pistol where the various springs could consistently stop a slide at just the right point when you have solidly held pistols, limp wristing, 115 gr, 124 gr, 148 gr +P, clean and oiled, dirty and dry, etc. It is essential that the slide move rearward enough to allow a spent case to eject, cock the hammer/striker and be far enough rearward for the face of the breech rail to shove the next round out of the mag. So, something stops the slide at a precise point on semi autos. It appears one player is the counter plate. I can't assess how the striker assembly plays its part without a gun in hand but somewhere in there is what stops the slide. Which is likely why the assembly was redesigned and why during the recall we were seeing double front roll pins being inserted into the rear system housing....the front pin was taking a beating from the impact the counter plate was placing on it. Which means the plate was doing some heavy work.

I don't know how the new system works but I suppose it was beefed up as well as designed for easier disassembly. The striker is very light as is the striker spring....I don't see either stopping the heavy slide. If so, they should show some marks. As I recall the rear striker spring assembly had to be pressed in to free it from the counter plate hook, then the slide had to be retracted so that the extractor would clear the chamber cut, then the rear of the slide could be lifted. If the recoil spring was going solid or the piston hitting the bottom of the gas chamber then the slide could not be retracted...so those two aren't stopping the slide. It would seem it is something in the striker spring assembly.

I can't think of reading of any sear/hook work on striker pistols other than polishing. Is it ever done? Or does movement of the striker have way too much play in it to precisely fit the sear to the hook? Anyone. 1917[/QUOTE]"

The sole part that stops rearward movement of the slide is the gas piston, the striker, striker spring or the counterplate have nothing to do with it. When the firearm is at full battery, only the first ring of the piston is inside of the gas chamber, when a round is fired, and gas pressure at its highest, the first ring of the piston seals off the end of the gas chamber, holding the slide closed, only, when the bullet leaves the muzzle, does the pressure drop, relieving the pressure in the gas chamber, allowing the slide to move back. When the piston bottoms out, the recoil spring returns it to full battery, once again, keeping in mind, that the pressure has dropped drastically by now, due to the bullet leaving the muzzle, hence, the much lighter recoil spring needed to cycle the slide at drastically reduced pressure. Now, as the slide goes back, it rides over the spring loaded sear, and the sear catches the spring loaded striker. Now, 3 things have to happen
1 the saftey set to fire, because it disconnects the trigger bar from the cylinder.
2 As the trigger is pulled, the first safety to move, is the drop safety, as the cylinder rolls around, it pushes up on the drop safety, moving out of the way.
3 As the cylinder continues to roll, it pushes up on the sear, which in turn, causes the rear of the sear to drop, allowing the spring loaded striker to shoot down its bore, hitting the primer, and setting off the whole chain of events, all over again.
All that the counter plate does, is hold the locking catch in place, so when the slide cycles, the slide stays in place, held by the locking catch, the barrel itself and partially by the gas piston.
As far as the ejector is concerned, there is a channel machined out for the ejector, but ONLY to allow the cylinder to rotate, it sits in the system housing, and is pinned seperately from the sear and connector. The ejector plays NO part in stopping the slide, and only purpose is to eject the spent cartridge.

And Mr. Chandler5566 is also correct when he speaks of spring resistance of the recoil spring and the striker spring slowing it down as well. This is all done under reduced gas pressures, due to the slide being held closed until the bullet leaves the muzzle.

 

[1917-1911M]

Meho....when you want to quote there is a quote button at the bottom right side of the post you are wanting to quote. Just click on it and it will automatically open a new post for you with the material quoted ready to go. If you don't want the whole previous post to show up you can delete the portions you aren't interested in. You can also multi quote from several threads by hitting the multi quote button. 1917

 

[1917-1911M]

The sole part that stops rearward movement of the slide is the gas piston, the striker, striker spring or the counterplate have nothing to do with it.

Hmmmm....now that is pretty interesting. I cannot determine something like that without a gun in hand. So thanks for responding. Regarding the rest of the pistol I have understood how it functions from watching the initial teaser video Walther released before the pistol. It is a good video even if you have to watch it ten time to catch all of the details. They show the safety being rotated to fire, the right side of the arm rotating to allow the trigger bar to rise and engage the cylinder. You can see the disconnect/sear parts rotate including the springs under them being compressed. The animation moves to the magazine, slide chambering a round, the striker hitting the primer, the gas port lighting up red followed by the gas cylinder as the round travels down the barrel. I thought it a pretty good illustration of exactly how the pistol functioned. But, it did not show a lot of details. Not the kind EkJungs video show (early link in this thread I think). EkJung takes the rear system housing all apart, safety out, sear pin out allowing the sear/connector to be removed, the ejector pin, etc. Then he takes the trigger assembly out. We've been digging into the details of this pistol for years.

So I understand all of that...but none of that tells me why the pistol suffers stoppages, the mags drop out or....what stops the slide. So I find your answer pretty interesting. I understand that the slide is slowing down but what I would like to know is how does the piston withstand whatever amount of battering it receives. Specifically the tiny pin that connects it to the slide and does the top of the piston bottom out in the cylinder? Thanks. 1917

 

[GeorgiaJoe]

Yes, careful and professionally performed polishing but only on the sear and cylinder. He also slightly rounded the 90 degree edges on the cylinder. That is all he did.

Are you talking about the edges that have arrows pointing at in the attached image? If so which ones? red, black, and/or green?