The Original CZ Forum
CZ PISTOL CLUBS => CZ Polymer Pistols: P10, P-07, P-09 => Topic started by: earlan357 on September 20, 2019, 09:55:08 AM
-
The CGW #10320 Reduced Trigger Pull Striker and Spring for my P-10 came in yesterday. I did some comparisons and ran it through my trigger dyno. This was with my custom trigger springs and with my disconnector recut to 39 degrees. I'll put the stock parts in tonight and retest. Trigger is CGW's aluminum with pre-travel adjusted.
The #10300 Striker has the same leg profile as the OEM one, 90 degrees to the shaft. The #10320 has more of an "S" shape. It looks to be about 6 degrees from vertical, then radiusing slightly shallower near the tip. This allows the trigger to "roll" slightly just before the break.
The included striker spring looks almost identical to a Wolff 4# spring. The have the same wire diameter, O.D., free-length, and coil count. However, due to the alloy CGW chose, it's heavier and behaves more like a 4.5# striker spring with peak force being 10oz heavier.
Unlike the OEM striker, there's little improvement to be had by polishing. I clamped the striker in a vise, and used a metal rod backed with wet 2000 and 3000 grit sandpaper to hand polish the striker leg before final buffing. I also slicked up the shaft slightly near the transition from where it narrows. I eeked out just an ounce from before.
With the #10320 and 4# Wolff spring, the trigger is just too light for action shooting. My attempts to find the wall quickly often resulted in AD'ing the trigger. Tonight I'm going to reinstall my factory disconnector and play with both the 4# and CGW springs, as well as my 4.5# Wolff spring. I'm hoping one of the combinations will maintain the 1# of pre-travel but increase the wall/break to 3#, similar weights as a 1911/2011 tuned for action shooting. Then it's off to the range for live-fire testing.
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-dMtPV8EPWAs/XYTPD87KnYI/AAAAAAAADf0/V37GHx5-0oIU-hiE2_GlTae8yvpUAMkrgCEwYBhgL/s1600/IMG_3101.JPG)
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-hjwB1ybktAc/XYTPDzXBflI/AAAAAAAADf8/LwSHoWcZN5s73bSG216ZNFLyOlLupGCTwCEwYBhgL/s1600/IMG_3104.JPG)
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-MPEeQuO7uc0/XYTPD6iO0HI/AAAAAAAADf4/J7WNrw7WlyAdX2O_YsKBDsLOSUG7j7UagCEwYBhgL/s1600/IMG_3105.JPG)
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-KkdoHoMaKug/XYTPEkOtbeI/AAAAAAAADfw/U9FBXuk6Ky8PN6pvZItGNtSQ-VykvCuCgCLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/p10%2Bcgw%2Bstrikers.png)
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-nHSjS5aOv-I/XYTY4uZ3T9I/AAAAAAAADgQ/V8PyhtlJ3vYsCcQDiqzr60Mxrz7rVeRewCLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/CGW%2BStriker%2BSprings.png)
-
So, maybe it will be just right with a factory (maybe polished) 45 degree disconnector?
I just got home from shooting my P-10S at 100 yards with no changes other than the 10300 CGW striker and 4# striker spring and that combination is pretty darn good for me. A little polishing when I put in the CGW trigger and disconnector spring and I'm done, I think. I'm thinking the 39 degree disconnector would need a way heavy striker spring, like 5#, to get a 3-4 lb trigger pull.
Looking forward to reading about what you find out when you swap parts this weekend.
Joe
-
I re-installed the OEM 45 degree disconnector with a polish job. I kept my custom trigger spring and used the 4@ Wolff striker spring. The break weight (2lbs 12oz) is now the same as the SA on my SP-01 with just over 1lb of take-up. I spent an hour chasing par times in dry-fire and only had one "AD" when I tried to beat a 4.6 sec El Prez. The over-travel is back but the break is so crisp I'll live with it. It feels like a mil-spec AR trigger just lighter. The CGW reduced reset spring is necessary with a sub 4# trigger. Otherwise, the reset is sluggish.
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-k3jeUR-FzEY/XYWu4bw1NnI/AAAAAAAADgw/uz3p0qaShkIHlimXK_gPLTyDUpJsCcF0QCLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/p10f%2B4%2523%252C%2BCGW%2Bstriker%252C%2Bearl%2Bspring.png)
-
So, how would one get the blue curve shape at 3 lb 8 oz?
Any chance you got the curves labelled backwards? The blue curve should match the 39 degree? Less force, more travel? Or did I miss which direction the angle is cut? Is the modified disconnector steeper or flatter? I have to go look at your original post. Right now, it is too early for me to think well.
I'm beginning to think that it is easier, mechanically, to tune/modify the P-10 internals than it is to modify sears/hammers. At least it is for competent engineering minds like yours and David's.
Joe
-
So, how would one get the blue curve shape at 3 lb 8 oz?
Any chance you got the curves labelled backwards? The blue curve should match the 39 degree? Less force, more travel? Or did I miss which direction the angle is cut? Is the modified disconnector steeper or flatter? I have to go look at your original post. Right now, it is too early for me to think well.
I'm beginning to think that it is easier, mechanically, to tune/modify the P-10 internals than it is to modify sears/hammers. At least it is for competent engineering minds like yours and David's.
Joe
39 degrees from horizontal so flatter. Mechanical advantage trades less force for more travel. Raising the entire graph evenly would be done with a striker spring with more pre-load. Increasing striker spring rate would increase the overall slope of the graph.
-
So, if I'm understanding your argument correctly, the longer 3.5" spring that comes with the HBI kit is desirable?
-
The striker spring in our 10320 is the Wolff 4.5# version. We have been discussing with our customers the use of the 4.5# Wolff spring with our 10300 and the reports have been very positive for reliable ignition.
We also did a custom radii at the primer end of the 10300 and 10320 strikers to give the striker an improved depth of primer "hit" to ensure improved reliability with lighter striker springs.
-
So, how would one get the blue curve shape at 3 lb 8 oz?
Any chance you got the curves labelled backwards? The blue curve should match the 39 degree? Less force, more travel? Or did I miss which direction the angle is cut? Is the modified disconnector steeper or flatter? I have to go look at your original post. Right now, it is too early for me to think well.
I'm beginning to think that it is easier, mechanically, to tune/modify the P-10 internals than it is to modify sears/hammers. At least it is for competent engineering minds like yours and David's.
Joe
39 degrees from horizontal so flatter. Mechanical advantage trades less force for more travel. Raising the entire graph evenly would be done with a striker spring with more pre-load. Increasing striker spring rate would increase the overall slope of the graph.
Understood, thanks. Only springs I have are 4.0# Wolff for Glocks, and I am using the same spring in 3 pistols right now. I have 10300 strikers in all 3 as well, and stock polished disconnectors and trigger bars in the C an d F.
-
Tested the CGW 10320 Striker today. I shot about 100 rounds re-zeroing my optic and testing recoil springs for my competition ammo. Shot a few B8's to warm up. Then did a "burndown" to test my trigger springs. Unfortunately, somehow I didn't record the first attempt so I had to reload all 200 rounds and do it again. My hands were pretty smoked and I started cramping up about 4 mags in. All in all, nearly 500 rounds in under 20 minutes. CCI primers, zero light strikes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQCEl3ukstU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQCEl3ukstU)
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-U6ruw6O7yk8/XYhIxpyMkeI/AAAAAAAADhM/YD7k2F_IFHYTKmORCKBRlDe4pxWKrYNGgCLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/IMG_3131.JPG)
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-kFYInEnJ4Zk/XYhIxkFHUTI/AAAAAAAADhU/H3G8gSLpIJYderRwtJX2Hn77AQpMknJ0ACLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/IMG_3134.JPG)
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-BHL-9MErQjE/XYhIxqMxd6I/AAAAAAAADhQ/fUOeOqoBKOAkqZsp9S1nqGjl7Nwc63aEgCLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/IMG_3136.JPG)
-
Great test. Combination looks reliable to me.
You will slow down just a little when you are older. And you will forget to hit the record button more often. :) :)
Joe
-
This is a really good thread. I have not done any mods to my P10S yet but am thinking that since it’s approaching the 500 round mark, it’s time to bring it up to par with my other P10s. I like what I’m hearing about the new striker profile.
-
Back to the 10300 vs 10320...
I went to the range this morning to shoot the Kadet and struggled, I think because I have spent the last few range visits with the P-10S and 10300 striker and 4# striker spring. I may try the 10320 striker just to get the trigger feel closer to the Kadet feel. I have struggled with this for years with the polymer guns, that is, adapting to the P triggers without loosing my touch on the steel gun triggers (75B and 97B"E"). Switching back and forth is also more difficult the older I get! I'm going to have to dry fire the P-10S tonight a bunch in preparation for rifle range session with the P-10S on Friday. If that goes well, then I'll be able to put the S aside and go back to bullseye with the steel gun on Sat/Sun. Maybe.
More tomorrow afternoon.
Joe
-
My range session with the P-10S got postponed until Sunday, but the 10300 versus 10320 striker performance characteristics came to light to me. I ordered two of the 10320's today, one for the P-10F, and one for the P-10S first, then it goes in to the P-10C. I struggled with the trigger control when shooting the P-10S at 200 yards. This isn't all due to the striker by any means, but earlan357's results are interesting enough to make me want to try one in both range guns. Whatever I carry -- 90% sure it will be the P-10S -- will have a 10300 striker in it. But, after the 200 yard session with the P-10S on Sunday, I want to shoot some concistent sub 6" groups at 100 yards and sub 3" at 50 yards with the subcompact before I return it to carry service.
Note that the results I got at 200 yards were not all good. I struggled with the grip fit and technique for 30 rounds before I finally settled down and shot the gun well. And, after struggling with the P-10S, I could't hit anything with the P-10F due to the differences in the two guns.
This is fun.
Joe
-
I installed the 10320 strikers and 4.5# springs in my P-10F and P-10S today, and added some grip tape and large insert on the P-10S. I like the new striker just fine. Trigger pull is not too light or too unpredictable for me at all. It will take some getting used to after so many rounds with the 10300 strikers. Everything is coming together on my trio of P-10 9mm pistols.
Joe
-
After literally two months, I am so looking forward to getting my slide back from CGW along with the new competition striker and spring. Joe, thank you sharing your observations.
-
Can the 10320 striker be used with the OEM spring for a smoother but not so light trigger?
Or maybe better way to ask: is there any benefit to using the 10320 striker with the OEM spring over the 10300 striker?
-
Can the 10320 striker be used with the OEM spring for a smoother but not so light trigger?
Or maybe better way to ask: is there any benefit to using the 10320 striker with the OEM spring over the 10300 striker?
Yup. The 10320 with the OEM trigger spring will just reduce the break weight by about a pound. Everything else (pre-travel, wall, reset, etc) should be about the same.
-
Awesome. Thanks for the reply and the interesting thread! 8)
-
Would either of these strikers eliminate creep? I've got a P-10S that I'd like to eliminate the small amount of creep from. I'm not concerned with pull weight so much as I'd like a trigger without creep.
-
Would either of these strikers eliminate creep? I've got a P-10S that I'd like to eliminate the small amount of creep from. I'm not concerned with pull weight so much as I'd like a trigger without creep.
The 10320 reduced the creep in my P10C, but a small amount remains. It definitely feels better than the 10300. I don't think you can eliminate it completely
-
Update: I was testing recoil springs when I my P-10F doubled. This is after about 1500 rounds, two matches, and a lot of dryfire with this setup. At first I thought I had inadvertently bump-fired the light trigger, but it started happening even after pinning the trigger to the rear. This was with my heavily modified trigger group and the CGW 10320 striker and one of the heavier recoil springs I was testing. I think the slight radius/angle cut at the tip of the striker leg, coupled with the extra forward slide velocity and my light striker/trigger springs, was bumping the trigger bar down instead of catching it and pulling it forward. The tip was still sharp, as was the sear, and I had a full 0.050" of sear engagement. I think the problem is my rear insert. The holes in the polymer frame are elongated and allow the insert to move vertically a few thousandths of an inch. Hard reloads were pushing the rounds up into the ejector. (which has broken twice now) I've since cut my replacement ejector to prevent future contact, but the movement is still there. I'm going to re-drill the insert and frame holes for 2.5mm roll pins to remove the slop, but I decided to go ahead and modify the striker. I mounted the striker in the endmill and recut the leg to 92 degrees, just enough to remove the radius and flatten the leg. Then a full stone/polish taking care to keep the tip sharp and even. I didn't cut it to 90 degrees since that's already the OEM angle, I just wanted to land conservatively between OEM and what looked to me like a 5-6 degree angle on the 10320. The break increased from 2lb 14oz to 3lb 2oz. The oem profiled 10300 originally broke at 3lbs 5oz.
This is not an indictment of CGW's striker. Obviously my trigger setup is way outside the normal operating tolerances so I'm not surprised the striker started misbehaving.
Not sure if related, but I modified a rear slide plate with a screw to prevent the striker from travelling far back enough to release from the trigger bar. It lets my dry-fire 95% of the trigger stroke without the break so I don't have to keep cycling the slide on multiple target drills. Unlike holding the slide slightly out of battery, it doesn't reduce the trigger weight. But unlike traditional dry-fire where the sear surface only slides down the striker leg, I wonder if the down and then up motion of the trigger bar wore the striker leg in some weird way.
-
Earlan357--I've read through your update. All I can conclude is that you have gone too far. :) :)
But that isn't a bad thing, now you know the current limitations and can proceed to overcome them. Keep it up. Even if no one really understands but you.
Joe
-
Earlan357--I've read through your update. All I can conclude is that you have gone too far. :) :)
But that isn't a bad thing, now you know the current limitations and can proceed to overcome them. Keep it up. Even if no one really understands but you.
Joe
He's just pushing the envelope like Chuck Yeager.
-
He's just pushing the envelope like Chuck Yeager.
Except in this case, the envelope has a gun in it !! ;D
-
Anyone having trouble with their P-10 failing to reset with the 103200 striker? Mine failed twice yesterday at a USPSA match yesterday. Up until then, I had not had an issue
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
As of 12/16, the 10320 is currently on backorder.
-
As of 12/16, the 10320 is currently on backorder.
I spoke with CGW today and was told they stopped selling this striker.
-
Reasoning given?
Don’t leave us guessing.
-
As of 12/16, the 10320 is currently on backorder.
I spoke with CGW today and was told they stopped selling this striker.
Interesting...Let us know why. I have one now and I am considering purchasing another. I think I will hold off until I find out why they have stopped selling them,