The Original CZ Forum
CZ PISTOL CLUBS => CZ Polymer Pistols: P10, P-07, P-09 => Topic started by: RandyMan on December 14, 2019, 03:11:49 PM
-
As the title states my P10c will double or triple fire on one pull of the trigger on occasion. It has the newest CGW striker with a wolfe 4lb spring in it also.
I first noticed this after installing an older HBI trigger I had. I drilled and tapped the HBI trigger and install a set screw trying to make it adjustable. Once I did that I started to get multi firing events. Not every time put often. Assuming that I must have damaged the HBI trigger by drilling it, I installed a 1st gen CGW trigger. Went to the range today much better but still double fired one time.
Unfortunately I dont remember what I change went this first started to happen. I could go back to all stock and start there I guess.
Any ideas on what this could be or what should I check? May just sent it into CGW and have them look at it.
-
Just my 2¢, I would go back to stock and go forward from there.
Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk
-
Do you still have your stock striker? Try re-installing that and see if it still doubles or triples. Sounds like it might be slam firing with the striker stuck in the forward position.
A trick my gunsmith friend told me once when function testing after working on the firing controls is don’t load a full mag. Just load a few rounds. That way if it does go full auto on you, you only have a few rounds to expend as opposed to the entire mag.
-
Get that to a gunsmith ASAP and get it back to stock - you have created a machine gun under law, and unless you are a Class 7 SOT, well, this is called BAD...30 years and $300,000 bad.
-
As others have said. You need to get it back to stock and go from there. You have a mix of aftermarket parts and you need to narrow it down to what is causing it.
-
So I reinstalled factory striker with the HBI trigger today. The HBI trigger in the past seemed to cause the problem the most.
Went to range today with HBI and factory striker and all was good so far.
-
This has happened on my P10F with 10320 striker as well. It only occurs when shooting fast, bot if I pin the trigger to the rear. I have a theory. Like the Glock, the P10s trigger spring serves two purposes. One is to lighten the trigger pull weight by resisting the striker spring. The other is to provided upward force. This is what causes the triggerbar to pop up after the disconnector does its job. The 10320 striker has an angle cut into the leg instead of being 90 degrees to the triggerbar sear/ledge. This lightens the break by slightly deflecting the trigger bar down. The factory trigger springs don’t provide enough upward force to overcome the downward deflection of the striker leg during the fast return stroke of the slide. So when pulling the trigger fast, a timing issue occurs where there’s just enough trigger finger pressure when riding the trigger forward to bump-fire the gun during the release stroke.
CZs tolerances are pretty wide, so I don’t think this effects all P10s. I’ve personally had 2 with dramatically different triggerbars, one with a low cut sear that had tons of overtravel, and one with a high sear that just barely released the striker. I have a feeling the low cut versions are just barely catching the tip of the 10320 striker. Since the sharp corner will wear a slight amount with use, eventually the angle and radius can overcome the upward pressure from the trigger springs.
-
This has happened on my P10F with 10320 striker as well. It only occurs when shooting fast, bot if I pin the trigger to the rear. I have a theory. Like the Glock, the P10s trigger spring serves two purposes. One is to lighten the trigger pull weight by resisting the striker spring. The other is to provided upward force. This is what causes the triggerbar to pop up after the disconnector does its job. The 10320 striker has an angle cut into the leg instead of being 90 degrees to the triggerbar sear/ledge. This lightens the break by slightly deflecting the trigger bar down. The factory trigger springs don’t provide enough upward force to overcome the downward deflection of the striker leg during the fast return stroke of the slide. So when pulling the trigger fast, a timing issue occurs where there’s just enough trigger finger pressure when riding the trigger forward to bump-fire the gun during the release stroke.
CZs tolerances are pretty wide, so I don’t think this effects all P10s. I’ve personally had 2 with dramatically different triggerbars, one with a low cut sear that had tons of overtravel, and one with a high sear that just barely released the striker. I have a feeling the low cut versions are just barely catching the tip of the 10320 striker. Since the sharp corner will wear a slight amount with use, eventually the angle and radius can overcome the upward pressure from the trigger springs.
Do you think CGW will redesign the striker because of this?
-
Do you think CGW will redesign the striker because of this?
Don't know. Comparing the 10300 to the 10320, the 10320 is cut square at the top, probably so it doesn't drag on the triggerbar when it releases, allowing for a lighter striker spring. But the face has a secondary angle of about 10 degrees cut into the last 1/16" of an inch, and the tip has a slight radius. The leg seems to have the same overall height as the 10300, but I suspect the angle and radius are too much for some combinations of frame, slide, parts tolerances. Since I can't stop myself from tinkering, I milled my 10320 striker face to a flat 95 degree angle from tip to stem without any radius. My trigger hasn't doubled yet, but I've only test-fired a few mags through it. It did add 4oz back to trigger pull, which is only 2.5oz lighter than the 10300 with my combination of parts. The juice may not be worth the squeeze to re-design it for max parts compatibility if the benefit is only a few oz. Manufacturer tolerances are a b**ch.
Below is the 10300 (green) compared to the 10320 (red) with rough tracings of the angles overlaid on each other.
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-foXFolAjxPY/Xf0ch1BFIAI/AAAAAAAAD0k/Pi3tfIQzv-cdUL5NspNY0y6-KpcmQN4PgCLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/IMG_3103.JPG)
-
Do you think CGW will redesign the striker because of this?
Don't know. Comparing the 10300 to the 10320, the 10320 is cut square at the top, probably so it doesn't drag on the triggerbar when it releases, allowing for a lighter striker spring. But the face has a secondary angle of about 10 degrees cut into the last 1/16" of an inch, and the tip has a slight radius. The leg seems to have the same overall height as the 10300, but I suspect the angle and radius are too much for some combinations of frame, slide, parts tolerances. Since I can't stop myself from tinkering, I milled my 10320 striker face to a flat 95 degree angle from tip to stem without any radius. My trigger hasn't doubled yet, but I've only test-fired a few mags through it. It did add 4oz back to trigger pull, which is only 2.5oz lighter than the 10300 with my combination of parts. The juice may not be worth the squeeze to re-design it for max parts compatibility if the benefit is only a few oz. Manufacturer tolerances are a b**ch.
Below is the 10300 (green) compared to the 10320 (red) with rough tracings of the angles overlaid on each other.
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-foXFolAjxPY/Xf0ch1BFIAI/AAAAAAAAD0k/Pi3tfIQzv-cdUL5NspNY0y6-KpcmQN4PgCLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/IMG_3103.JPG)
I have the 10320 installed in a P10 c with a HBI trigger shoe that I plan to use for USPSA this winter. So far no issues but only after about 500 rounds to date. I love the reduction in trigger weight with this setup and wanted to get another 10320 for my red dot slide. CGW has been out of stock for some time now leading me to believe they are taking a good hard look at this striker. Hope they decide continue producing them.
-
I’m running the 10320 with the Hbi trigger shoe as well; all OEM springs.
Approaching 1000 rds , including 2 Matches. So far, so good and digging the reduced weight.
I’ll post if any issues surface.