Walther Forums banner

1 - 20 of 20 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
10 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hi-


I just purchased a new pps m2 at my lgs, could not pass it up for $260. I am concerned about the m2 sear engagement (the contact between the striker lug and trigger bar (cruicform)). My striker lug is fully supported but at the right most point on the cruciform. However, my concern is that it is only %50 engaged on the cruciform (sear). A quick internet search did not provide any information on the correct or average amount of sear engagement and a call to Walther was pointless as the response was "that information is proprietary and confidential".


I would like to hear what other folks pps m2 sear engagement looks like or the actual specs. from Wather on what it should be.


Thanks
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,395 Posts
The striker lug must align off center to the right to be able to move past the disconnector on the right and the ejector on the left. No issues reported and none with my PPS M2.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Thanks, I am okay with the alignment to the right as the lug is fully supported, my concern is with the amount of engagement of the striker lug on on the trigger bar (cruciform/sear). The striker lug is engaged at about %50, so the amount of the rear surface of the trigger bar (cruciform/sear) covered by the striker bar is is only about 1/2 of the surface.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,395 Posts
I believe if you examine most, if not all, striker fired pistols you will find that the actual surface making contact with the sear is relatively small. The lug and the sear both are 1/16th in in height. My sear shows a 1/32 in contact area. That has proven sufficient across the entire population of PPS M2's in circulation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Thanks, I am used to glocks. My glocks all have around %100 coverage, although the sear may be a bit narrower.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
Does Walther provide any specs. on striker engagement? My call to CS resulted in being told it was proprietary info.?


Glock has an armorers manual with the info.


A good ref is this video:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,395 Posts
I do not own a glock but I can assure you that the sear-to-striker interface is not 100%. The video you attached does not provide accurate pictorial references at all and the use of a pencil drawing and the presenter's hand manipulation is very deceiving with respect to the actual physical actions. What I can tell you is the PPS M2 sear block and striker are virtually identical to, for example, the glock 43. My measurement info above was taken with the disconnector activated to raise the sear face to the cocked position. The striker lug measurement was taken with the striker loaded in the slide as it exists when the slide is returning to battery and the sear catches the striker.

Take a look at the attached 3-d video of the glock 43 action and pay close attention to the segments showing the sear-to-striker interface.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10 Posts
Discussion Starter #8 (Edited)
Thanks. I was looking for something like this. It is a pic from the armorers manual referred to in the video above.


Figure 106 shows 100% engagement, figure 107 shows about 2/3 engagement (minimum anything less is no go), and figure 108 shows insufficient engagement.


My PPS is less than 2/3 engagement around 50%, my glocks are 90-100%


Thanks for the video, but that is someones rendering the image referenced is from the manufacturer. Does this exist for Walther?
 

Attachments

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,395 Posts
Thanks. I was looking for something like this. It is a pic from the armorers manual referred to in the video above. Figure 106 shows 100% engagement, figure 107 shows about 2/3 engagement (minimum anything less is no go), and figure 108 shows insufficient engagement. Thanks for the video, but that is someones rendering the image referenced is from the manufacturer. Does this exist for Walther?

You are correct. Just called glock and they confirmed from 2/3 to 100%. I have never seen similar depictions for Walther pistols.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10 Posts
Discussion Starter #11 (Edited)
chandler5566 thanks. I just picked up this PPS new on Monday. The 50% engagement does not sit well with me. Not sure what to do next, walther CS is of no help I called again and same answer. I have the 30day money back to fall on if I can get the warm fuzzies on this.


The pps was going to be used for appendix carry to replace my 25+ yo S&W 640. I will stick with the 640 for now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10 Posts
Discussion Starter #13 (Edited)
A 10x jewelers loupe and surefire g2 led looking through the rear cover plate of the slide. A visual estimate at the 50%, I did try using dry erase marker on the sear but the contact point of the sear is actually at the top edge where the metal is rolled over a hair from the punch out manufacturing of the part.


glock has a special orange cover plate you can use to see the engagement better, but you can still see it with a loupe between the gap.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
848 Posts
OK
In dry firing. How far does the trigger travel once you disengage the trigger safety and hit the wall?

How far does the striker cocked indicator extend out at the point of trigger release?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10 Posts
Discussion Starter #15 (Edited)
Hi-


Travel to the "wall" is 1mm, after this point you are passing the drop safety shelf and the trigger bar (sear/cruciform) begins to lower. The travel to the "wall" is about 1/2 of what a glock is.


Basically the pps m2 out of the box has competition vs a duty trigger.



An interesting decision by Walther. I bet that the m1 version is closer to a duty trigger.


In addition, with the m2 walther has chosen to re-profile the striker lug, tapering it - making less engagement surface area with the sear/curciform v.s. the m1.



I suspect that travel to the "wall" or disengaging the drop safety shelf is longer on the m1 and the striker sear (cruciform) engagement is greater - we know it has a larger surface area to engage based on the m1 striker lug size vs the m2 tapered lug.

To be clear, I just wanted the go/no-go engagement specs from walther. It's a personal opinion as to what one feels comfortable with in the role they choose for the tool. I, so far - for me, do not feel that the pps is suited for iwb appendix carry with basically a "competition style trigger". I would have no issue with 3-4 o'clock belt carry but in this role the G26 wins for size and capacity, and as I previously stated that is not what I purchased the pps for.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,395 Posts
Basically the pps m2 out of the box has competition vs a duty trigger. An interesting decision by Walther. I bet that the m1 version is closer to a duty trigger. In addition, with the m2 walther has chosen to re-profile the striker lug, tapering it - making less engagement surface area with the sear/curciform v.s. the m1.

I understood from your original post what your concern was and you are absolutely right re a personal preference and what you see as a safety issue.

There are a few major differences in the design of the M2 vs the M1 and glocks. Both glocks and the PPS M1 had interchangeable disconnectors....more so for the glocks. Those disconnectors allowed for reduced pull weight and enhanced sear releases. That, in my opinion is why the sear-to-striker lug interface is greater. The M2 disconnector is fixed....no method or parts to change the angle between trigger bar and disconnector. That design change allows the M2 sear to engage the striker lug with a very slightly reduced margin and remain firmly held by the forward force of the striker spring. No doubt that is why we have not heard of that interface as a safety issue.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
chandler5566 thanks for the additional info.


I do not know enough about the pps m2 at this point to make an informed decision. I wish walther would be more transparent. As you pointed out this is not a glock and I should not be comparing the two.



It is a good sign that no issues have been reported so far. I wonder how many pps m2s are out on the street?


Thanks again for the info.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,395 Posts
psjoe;1220066 I do not know enough about the pps m2 at this point to make an informed decision. I wish walther would be more transparent. As you pointed out this is not a glock and I should not be comparing the two. It is a good sign that no issues have been reported so far. I wonder how many pps m2s are out on the street?[/QUOTE said:
As you discovered Walther's lips are sealed!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
848 Posts
Interesting difference compared to the PPS M1.
I have a PPS M1 and seems like trigger travel is more like the Glock. I would not compare it to a competition trigger. However the trigger travel to the wall and break is less than a gen 3 G26. I can make double taps more quickly with the PPS m1.

Regarding the slope of the M2 . If dry firing, observe the cocked indicator through the cycle. Does it appear that the striker moves much, just before the break? This would correspond to the surface of the cruciform moving along the striker.

If it does could that indicate more or sufficient engagement even with apparent 50% engagement observed.

Also did you try moving the slide side ways normal to bore axis, to see if the engagement was insufficient to prevent tripping?
 
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
Top