So even folks who dislike a 1911 will, even if begrudgingly, acknowledge it has a pretty phenomenal trigger setup. CRAPPY 1911 triggers are still good in general.

So that said, why haven't we seen somebody take that single element and incorporate it into a piece of tactical Tupperware or something else?

I am not talking about making a 2011 or polymer 1911 I am talking about, for lack of a better analogy, a Glock with a 1911 style trigger/safety.

Why does this straight back pull vs pivot seem to reside only in the 1911 realm?

I am sure this is at some level a stupid question and when somebody tells me its obviously because of X working with Y I will have a light bulb moment but as of this second I can't figure out why this feature never seemed to leave that platform.

VP70 doesn't count. We don't speak of the trigger you pull on Monday and fire on Wednesday.

Take care, shoot safe,
Chris

Other than the new Dan Wesson pistols coming out this year I don't know of another platform that uses the straight back trigger design of the 1911/2011.
But yeah, I agree that the 1911 trigger makes you a better shooter or at least is more forgiving of mistakes.

We all agree on what? No.

Ok Hyperbole aside I have found the vast majority of shooters find the 1911 trigger to be very good and easy to shoot even if they don’t prefer the 1911 platform.

I don't agree. Perfect in what context?

Easiest to use with minimum skill? Maybe. Nothing to prep, nothing to stage, nothing to take up. One of the easiest to learn. It's not necessarily perfection, but there are some very good 1911 triggers.

For some, a good double action trigger may be perfection. For some, it may be a single action revolver. For others, there are some great striker fired, and some really prefer double action/single action, or double action only.

quote:

OK Hyperbole aside I have found that the vast majority of shooters find the 1911 trigger to be very good and easy to shoot even if they don't prefer the 1911 platform.

Sure, but follow your own argument and I believe the answer to your question will quickly present itself. We not only don't see it on pistols, but on rifles or on shotguns that are meant to be used with slugs. Nor, I believe, has anyone come up with a trigger that cannot but go straight backwards regardless of the angle at which the trigger finger touches the trigger. Nor, for that matter, has anyone yet managed to design a pistol where the hand is oriented in such a way that the trigger finger must cross the trigger perpendicularly (although Steyr seems to have come closest). The fact is that pivoting triggers work and work very very well, so there's little to no reason (beyond logic, of course) to insist on triggers that only move straight back when pulled.

Come to think of it, how many firearms could be designed to position the shooting hand in such a way as to truly take advantage of a trigger that moves straight back and forth? Until the pistol grip gained ubiquity along with the AR15, the trigger on just about every long arm pretty much had to move back and up when it was pulled.

My 2 cents, 1)it would take a lot of money to design/manufacture a pistol with that design/system, especially when there is so much competition. 2) Would it sell?

I think it would sell, just because there's a rather glaring hole in my argument. Think of all the target rifles out there with pistol grips or thumbhole stocks that orient the shooting hand in the same way a pistol grip would. The advantage there is its it's possible to orient the hand to pull the trigger as straight back as possible.

The thing is, both the grip and the trigger would have to be aligned correctly to get the fullest advantage out of either. Maybe the stronger argument is "all guns should be designed so that you pull the trigger straight back"?

I agree with your premise, but don't have an answer to your question. I don't know why more designers haven't adopted that style of trigger...maybe it's just easier to implement a pivoting design with a linkage?

One of the things that makes the DWX interesting to me is that Dan Wesson is implementing the straight-pull trigger into their frame design...and although the gun uses 1911 controls, the frame itself appears to be contoured along the lines of the CZ75 series...the possibilities of which are pretty intriguing.

My first experience with the 1911A1 was at MCRD Parris Island in 1964. My follow on experience was Viet-Nam. With that said I have two 1911 series pistols A Colt and a Springfield both are set up with a 4.5 Lb trigger press. On the other hand I have a S&W 4506DA/SA and the list goes on. I'm not married to a particular trigger system.

You can have a nice hammer-sear interface, by why is 1911 the Gold Standard ???
I think a big reason is that all the other wannabes, swing on a pivot.
The 1911 slides straight back on "rails".

So there you have it, one of Life's Great Mysterys solved !

I am a DA/SA guy at heart and while I enjoy a good 1911 I don’t hitch my wagon to them so to speak. I just find it curious that that non pivoting 1911esque trigger never found a wider use as it is very good from a shooters perspective.

The Smith and Wesson model 945 .45 was the answer to making the modern day "1911" which in my opinion means it retained the best feature- the single action trigger but after that it was all pure genius. Linkless barrel, integral titanium barrel bushing, external extractor, cocked locked system and single stack mag. It represented the pinnacle of the Smith semi auto era.
It came in full size 5" , a 4" commander size and even a 3" subcompact ( i just saw a sub compact on gunbroker) , stainless, black, steel and aluminum frame. I had probably 5 of them at one time or another in different sizes. These pistols were 100% reliable, very accurate and great looking.
Sadly they are dinosaurs now, having been relegated to the historical Golden Era of the Smith gen 3 pistols. It's all M&P now.
Does anyone else remember these ??

quote:

Originally posted by cslinger:
I am a DA/SA guy at heart and while I enjoy a good 1911 I don’t hitch my wagon to them so to speak. I just find it curious that that non pivoting 1911esque trigger never found a wider use as it is very good from a shooters perspective.

I have a similar opinion.
I believe that to be a proficient shooter you should be able to pick up any firarm and be able to run it well. This is why I dont really adhear to any one platform or brand. I pretty much just like guns. Lol

The 1911 is a very old and somewhat simple design. A crappy trigger can be refined quite easily with proper basic tools and knowledge. Replace a couple basic parts and a excellent target shooting trigger can be achieved. I love the ol' fashion leaf type spring and petals in the 1911. It is why you have so little resistance at the trigger face. Its old school tech. Other designs use heavy coil or wire formed springs to achieve seer function, trigger return and of corse, one petal for the 1911 grip safety. Formed sheet metal parts are absent in the 1911. Complex designed parts of MIM such as in modern guns like the p320 are the new tech. Browning probably didn't have CAD software to work with so drawing, thinking and calculations made for a timeless and very simple design. BTW cslinger, you never ask stupid questions sir. We enjoy your topics immensly. You add good content to the Pistols Forum. I look forward to what you post. Thank you.

I think it's evolution...

My point sort of dovetails into this thread as well as a previous thread about the notion that the 1911 could be considered the apex of handguns.

Outside the competitive shooting circles, I think the reason we don't see a 1911 type trigger on modern handguns boils down to what is the purpose of a handgun. It's a tool intended for immediate use in personal defense. As such, over the years and many iterations of refinement, we eventually arrive at a tool that does not need to be cocked, de-cocked, or made safe by means of a manual safety.

Therein lies the rub. Any single action pistol with a 1911 trigger will necessitate a manual safety. As such, it will never be the apex of modern design. Anything with a manual safety or decocker opens up the door for an additional mode of human error under stress. Elimination of these extraneous devices allows the operator to focus on one simple principle: Finger off trigger until ready to shoot. Period.

Glock... We didn't invent the semi-automatic handgun. We perfected it.

quote:

BTW cslinger, you never ask stupid questio

quote:

BTW cslinger, you never ask stupid questions sir. We enjoy your topics immensly. You add good content to the Pistols Forum. I look forward to what you post. Thank you.

Thank you for that, although I ask far more then my share of stupid questions. Ask any of the women in my life.

Is the trigger the ONLY evaluation of a handgun? If it was so, why isn’t every handgun a lighter, single-action trigger?

Without getting to far in the weeds, there are applications where other trigger types are more suitable.

quote:

So even folks who dislike a 1911 will, even if begrudgingly, acknowledge it has a pretty phenomenal trigger setup. CRAPPY 1911 triggers are still good in general.

No, no, and no.
Great triggers are great, and crappy triggers are crappy, whether straight back or pivot. Any other discussions are just mental masturbation, as far as I'm concerned.

Maybe better stated is why a single action is easier to shoot than a double action?
All of my SIG da/sa pistols shoot better once they’re in single action mode.
All of my 1911s (SAO) shoot better than my SIG pistols in DA mode.
Mechanics of the design.