Double hard point trigger?

[David Levene]

It says that you cannot use a system that actively reduces the movements. From my understanding of this thread, Kicker's idea does exactly this.

It actively reduces the movements in much the same way as a properly adjusted trigger, a correct trigger technique or even core muscle fitness reduces fitness. I presume that you want to ban all of them.

You might like to read this thread.

[j-team]

As drawn, it is acting very much like a set trigger.

100% agree.

[TenMetrePeter]

@chia.
What is the difference between an innovation that gives an advantage but still passes a now inadequate test devised before the innovation was devised, and a cheat??

I say its a cheat. Ban it before it takes hold.

Find a loophole in the law and win a case for a client by all means but finding loopholes in sport usually constitutes cheating.

[Chia]

It says that you cannot use a system that actively reduces the movements. From my understanding of this thread, Kicker's idea does exactly this.

It actively reduces the movements in much the same way as a properly adjusted trigger, a correct trigger technique or even core muscle fitness reduces fitness. I presume that you want to ban all of them.

You might like to read this thread.

Thanks for the link. I hope that my legal argument was helpful for Kicker, because that's the spirit it was intended to be. I'm not trying to poo poo what he's doing, in fact it's intriguing enough to give serious consideration. What I did to it is what any bored lawyer with 5 minutes could do. I'm not particularly experienced or knowledgeable in the field. Any lawyer for the investor who looks these over will be both. And they will go over the design with a fine tooth comb. Better to play devil's advocate now then lose in those talks later when you've already put serious money down.

@chia.
What is the difference between an innovation that gives an advantage but still passes a now inadequate test devised before the innovation was devised, and a cheat??

I say its a cheat. Ban it before it takes hold.

Find a loophole in the law and win a case for a client by all means but finding loopholes in sport usually constitutes cheating.

You would be amazed at how similar the two can get. I respect that your point of view has some force behind it, but I'm saying that discouraging people who can poke holes in the system like this is counterproductive. He is sharing the idea because he wants(wanted?) our opinion. If he really wanted to cheat, he wouldn't share it with anyone, especially not a forum full of people who are generally pretty good shooters who could compete with him. Bringing it forward as a design idea lets the concept be explored in a safe environment. It's much better to have an idea considered and rejected intelligently than stupidly carried out.

Personally, I would never use one of those triggers. The concept seems to take away from what the sport is about at it's core: rock solid shooting. If the person has to do weird things like squeezing the trigger really hard before releasing and then lightly brushing it again, that seems removed from the essence of the sport. I want to learn to shoot, not operate a trigger mechanism.

[David Levene]

I say its a cheat. Ban it before it takes hold.

It doesn't need any special rule to ban it as it will fail the equipment control test.

[David M]

I don't know what you are worried about because as drawn it won't work.
The distance between the 500g peak and the reduced 70g point is too short.
You will not be able to control it and will over travel with a resultant
uncontrolled letoff.
You need a lot longer travel to have any hope of it working, also how does
it reset if you abort a shot. The trigger return spring of less than 70g will
not be able reset over the 500g hump to the start of trigger travel.

[JamesH]

Maybe you could make one, good luck controlling it, even if you could it would hardly give an advantage.

[SamEEE]

Take the delta of that graph (dy/dx) and you will find that the rate of change in force compared to displacement will be great compared to the point of reset (B) will be barely discernible to touch.

If you can stop on that point by mechanical aide then what you describe is a set trigger.

My feeling is that it will be reasonably uncontrollable at the point of changing modes. If most modern schools of thought rely on a subconscious type shot coupled with mechanical mastery I believe that this is not the right approach.
My gut feeling is that it will make it a great deal harder than it is already.

People have approached perfect results with ordinary two stage triggers. My feeling is that the failing point is not the mechanical design on the gun. In my opinion I consider the modern air pistol more or less a perfect design.

Edit 2: I liked Ronny Nilsson idea of having a linearly actuated trigger as opposed to a hinging/pivoting one though, he could be onto something there.

[TenMetrePeter]

I say its a cheat. Ban it before it takes hold.

It doesn't need any special rule to ban it as it will fail the equipment control test.

I think it would pass the lift test described in the 2016 rules and guidance. Or is there an extra test not documented?

[David Levene]

I say its a cheat. Ban it before it takes hold.

It doesn't need any special rule to ban it as it will fail the equipment control test.

I think it would pass the lift test described in the 2016 rules and guidance. Or is there an extra test not documented?

Any equipment control officer would want proof that the trigger had been cocked and that the gas system had been turned on.

The way of doing this is to apply a bit more downward pressure to the weight once it has been lifted and make sure that the trigger operates and gas is discharged.

This would not happen with this trigger.

[william]

Any equipment control officer would want proof that the trigger had been cocked and that the gas system had been turned on.

The way of doing this is to apply a bit more downward pressure to the weight once it has been lifted and make sure that the trigger operates and gas is discharged.

This would not happen with this trigger.

Unfortunately I think it could sneak through equipment control. The tester could easily confuse the additional movement for additional pressure, especially with the 500g weight still hanging from the trigger. An electronic trigger scale would reveal the true nature of the cheat, but they seem finicky and operator-dependent.

[David Levene]

Any equipment control officer would want proof that the trigger had been cocked and that the gas system had been turned on.

The way of doing this is to apply a bit more downward pressure to the weight once it has been lifted and make sure that the trigger operates and gas is discharged.

This would not happen with this trigger.

Unfortunately I think it could sneak through equipment control. The tester could easily confuse the additional movement for additional pressure, especially with the 500g weight still hanging from the trigger. An electronic trigger scale would reveal the true nature of the cheat, but they seem finicky and operator-dependent.

As drawn, the weight needs to be reduced to virtually zero before the 70g is applied. That couldn't happen under normal testing procedures where there would always be a minimum of 500g.

It's not 70g in addition to the 500g, it's 70g instead of the 500g.

[TenMetrePeter]

The way of doing this is to apply a bit more downward pressure to the weight once it has been lifted and make sure that the trigger operates and gas is discharged.

This would not happen with this trigger.

now you are introducing a procedure not written in the ISSF rules or guidelines. Post a link if I am wrong.

But an extra nudge on the weight or an extra jiggle upwards of the pistol, both of which I have seen, would discharge the pistol with this design. It could sneak through.

[David Levene]

But an extra nudge on the weight or an extra jiggle upwards of the pistol, both of which I have seen, would discharge the pistol with this design. It could sneak through.

That's the point, it wouldn't.

As I read the drawing, the weight must be reduced to virtually zero before the 70g is applied.

The 500g is used to set the trigger but must then be removed.

[David Levene]

now you are introducing a procedure not written in the ISSF rules or guidelines. Post a link if I am wrong.

Can you think of another procedure that would prove that the trigger has been cocked and that the gas will discharge?

[TenMetrePeter]

well OK have it written in the guidelines! Its not a secret society.
Yes, maybe pick it up, point into a safe box and pull the trigger. Then the EC would feel the cheat. Then recock and do the dead weight test. If anyone develops this crazy trigger the establishment will have to do something equally innovative.

re the dead weight, once trained a human shooter could feel and reduce pull before the second 70g point, a dead weight would drop right through and fire.

[David Levene]

well OK have it written in the guidelines! Its not a secret society.

No, but sometimes you have to apply some common sense.

Yes, maybe pick it up, point into a safe box and pull the trigger. Then the EC would feel the cheat. Then recock and do the dead weight test.

That would only prove that the trigger was able to go off and that the gas was turned on BEFORE doing the trigger weight test, not WHEN doing it.

re the dead weight, once trained a human shooter could feel and reduce pull before the second 70g point, a dead weight would drop right through and fire.

So the trigger would fail. In fact the weight would not be reduced below the 500g so it would never get to the point of firing.

[TenMetrePeter]

ok the diagram shows force on the trigger finger through a given travel. 500g was a bad special case. Change the number on the diagram to a 505g setting same as you would on a regular trigger setting . The trigger would pass the dead weight test. Give an extra 6g push with your finger and it will drop through and fire just like a regular trigger. It's just physics.

[David Levene]

ok the diagram shows force on the trigger finger through a given travel. 500g was a bad special case. Change the number on the diagram to a 505g setting same as you would on a regular trigger setting . The trigger would pass the dead weight test. Give an extra 6g push with your finger and it will drop through and fire just like a regular trigger. It's just physics.

That's not how I read the drawing.

I read it that you have to apply 500g, reduce that 500g down to a very low level and then increase it to 70g to make it fire.
You can't do that with a normal trigger weight test, and you need it to fire to prove that it is capable of firing and that the gas is on.

[Chia]

ok the diagram shows force on the trigger finger through a given travel. 500g was a bad special case. Change the number on the diagram to a 505g setting same as you would on a regular trigger setting . The trigger would pass the dead weight test. Give an extra 6g push with your finger and it will drop through and fire just like a regular trigger. It's just physics.

That's not how I read the drawing.

I read it that you have to apply 500g, reduce that 500g down to a very low level and then increase it to 70g to make it fire.
You can't do that with a normal trigger weight test, and you need it to fire to prove that it is capable of firing and that the gas is on.

That's how I read it too.