Author Topic: Extended Firing Pin for FP Block Differences  (Read 506 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline dbarn

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 405
Extended Firing Pin for FP Block Differences
« on: January 28, 2019, 04:02:37 PM »
Did a search and could not find the differences regarding CGW vs CZC extended FP for FP Block models. I currently have the CGW version, however I have a friend that has the CZC version and he swears by it. He was showing me the differences of the longer slot cut that engages the FP retaining pin on the CZC version.

He performed a pencil eraser test showing that the CZC version makes the pencil fly about 6 ft verses the CGW version that flies about 3 ft. I know there has to be more reasons to consider one over the other. From what I read the CGW version is made from tool steel and the slot is less likely to damage the FP retaining pin with the slot having more of a radius although shorter in length.

What are your reasons to consider one over the other?

Offline Tok36

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4675
Re: Extended Firing Pin for FP Block Differences
« Reply #1 on: January 28, 2019, 04:27:48 PM »
The CGW Extended FP is designed to work with their Short Reset System. So it has a lower shelf for the FPB engagement. Lower shelf equals less trigger travel for the function of the FPB. The CGW Extended FP also works without the other SRS parts if you just want a longer FP for use with lighter hammer springs.

I am unclear on the CZC Extended FP for FPB models. I know that CZC has a short reach set up but am not sure if they have a short reset system. For clarity the CZC Short Reach set up (Disconector) moves the at rest Single Action trigger position rearward while the CGW Short Reset System (FP & Lifter Arm) moves the actual SA reset point rearward.

I am sure they are both good Firing Pins function wise. I have found the pencil test to be an inconsistent representation of proper function.

I am also interested to hear other forum members input on your question.
Will work for CZ pics! (including but not limited to all CZ clones)

Offline dbarn

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 405
Re: Extended Firing Pin for FP Block Differences
« Reply #2 on: January 28, 2019, 05:20:43 PM »
One other question that comes to mind is that if the pencil test is inconclusive, would one design be less likely to cause light primer strikes with a lower poundage hammer spring over the other? All other things being equal.

And even thought the CGW pin is longer, would this not be offset by the longer shelf that engages the FP retaining pin on the CZC version?
« Last Edit: January 28, 2019, 06:11:22 PM by dbarn »

Offline SI VIS PACEM PARRABELLUM

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3377
Re: Extended Firing Pin for FP Block Differences
« Reply #3 on: January 29, 2019, 05:02:44 AM »
I don't even waste my time with the pencil test anymore as I find it inconclusive as to how the pistol will perform My P-07 has many CGW upgrades including the short reset system and barely jumps the pencil out of the barrel with the CGW 18lb defensive hammer spring but in MANY thousands of rounds if has never a single time fail to function and fire with perfection.

Offline M1A4ME

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5131
  • I've shot the rest, I now own the best - CZ
Re: Extended Firing Pin for FP Block Differences
« Reply #4 on: January 29, 2019, 07:25:28 AM »
I had a case where the pencil test would have been very helpful. 

Converted that railed CZ75 Compact to SAO.  Didn't do the pencil test.  Everything looked good at the table.  Headed to the range.  Click, click, click.  Put it back in the bag, shot something else, came home and tore it apart.

It worked perfect - at the table.  However, the firing pin block lifting arm was not resetting because the trigger couldn't quite go far enough forward.  The trigger would go far enough to reset everything else, but the bottom of the lifting arm wouldn't quite drop off the back of the trigger bar.  The pencil test would have shown me that the firing pin was absolutely not protruding through the breech face when the hammer hit it.

A little metal removed from the inside of the frame up front to allow more trigger forward travel and it worked great.

I agree that (like any test) if you don't understand the conditions/issues you get different results.  Sort of like some of the reloading threads.  I'm doing this and it doesn't work.  Then people start asking for the details and sometimes it's clear the OP didn't really know how his actions were affecting his results.

All the pencil test will tell you (assuming the pencil moves) is a difference between the force/firing pin protrusion from one pistol to another.  It doesn't guarantee the one that moves the pencil the least won't still fire.  It will tell you if the pistol won't fire at all (forgot about the Browning BDM I have that had a broken firing pin when I bought it.  I didn't have any 9MM ammo to test it with and I was cleaning/lubing/dry firing it and had no idea the firing pin was broken till I got to taking it apart and a "pin" fell out.  Scratched my head for a bit trying to figure out where that pin went till I got that sinking feeling and did the pencil test.  That one is a pain because it's hard to tell what's going on with it (decocker position moves the fiing pin so the hammer will, or won't, strike the firing pin rather than moving a firing pin block like the CZ's.)

I've used a few (3 or 4??) CGW extended firing pin and they worked great.  No issues.  I have one that I decided not to install because it would actually protrude through the breech face when you push on the back of the firing pin.  I don't know if it was the slot in the firing pin or the firing pin block that was a little different, I just decided not to use it.  There's a good reason why the guys that sell you parts usually caution you to get a gunsmith to install the parts.  Guns are machines.  Similar machines are similar, not identical to the last thousandth of an inch (or a lot more sometimes) and a combination of parts, build, manufacturing specifications, etc. can result is issues those guys have a lot more experience diagnosing and correcting.

I the OP was doing a pencil test on two different pistols (one with a CGW firing pin and one with a CZ Custom firing pin) then what other factors affected the results vs. just the different firing pins?  Several.  If you don't understand the conditions/the effects then what do the results really mean?
I stopped carrying the SIG 556R.  SIG changed models and couple/three times and stopped supporting it with parts.  So, I stopped supporting SIG.  Back to the tried/true AR15 Carbine.

Offline dbarn

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 405
Re: Extended Firing Pin for FP Block Differences
« Reply #5 on: January 29, 2019, 08:10:42 AM »
After all is said and done I borrowed a CZC extended FP 75B and tested it my SP-01 along with the existing CGW extended version using the pencil test. The FP was the only change I made to the pistol that already had the RP FP spring. The hammer spring is 13 lbs.

While the test may be inconclusive and does not indicate one will function better than the other, it would have to have some bearing on the force used to strike a given primer. My results were very similar to my friends. While the CGW version went approximately 2-3 ft, the CZC version went an amazing 8ft or more. It literally sent the pencil flying across the room.

I'm not here to put one company over the other. I have a healthy respect for both companies and their products. Just trying to understand the mechanics as to how both are made and the advantages/disadvantages. Thanks for the discussion.

Offline SI VIS PACEM PARRABELLUM

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3377
Re: Extended Firing Pin for FP Block Differences
« Reply #6 on: January 29, 2019, 08:26:30 AM »
I don't see any disadvantages with either company.They both make quality parts and when properly installed they perform as intended. Shooting a pencil 3 feet or 8 feet proves only that one setup shoots a pencil farther which in the grand scheme of things means nothing. As long as the cap is struck with sufficient force to detonate it all is as it should be. Smacking a primer twice as hard as it needs to be impacted doesn't make it or the round or the gun perform any better.

Offline dbarn

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 405
Re: Extended Firing Pin for FP Block Differences
« Reply #7 on: January 29, 2019, 09:08:03 AM »
I don't see any disadvantages with either company.They both make quality parts and when properly installed they perform as intended. Shooting a pencil 3 feet or 8 feet proves only that one setup shoots a pencil farther which in the grand scheme of things means nothing. As long as the cap is struck with sufficient force to detonate it all is as it should be. Smacking a primer twice as hard as it needs to be impacted doesn't make it or the round or the gun perform any better.

Agreed no argument here. However it does make me wonder if there would be a greater effect on hard primers or lower poundage hammer springs. Look forward to testing both.  :)

Offline SI VIS PACEM PARRABELLUM

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3377
Re: Extended Firing Pin for FP Block Differences
« Reply #8 on: January 29, 2019, 01:02:04 PM »
I don't see any disadvantages with either company.They both make quality parts and when properly installed they perform as intended. Shooting a pencil 3 feet or 8 feet proves only that one setup shoots a pencil farther which in the grand scheme of things means nothing. As long as the cap is struck with sufficient force to detonate it all is as it should be. Smacking a primer twice as hard as it needs to be impacted doesn't make it or the round or the gun perform any better.

Agreed no argument here. However it does make me wonder if there would be a greater effect on hard primers or lower poundage hammer springs. Look forward to testing both.  :)

I do know there are some very light hammer springs,under 13lb maybe? where they recommend federal primers only since they are about the softest type out there.
Heck yeah test both and see what works out for you.

Offline M1A4ME

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5131
  • I've shot the rest, I now own the best - CZ
Re: Extended Firing Pin for FP Block Differences
« Reply #9 on: January 29, 2019, 01:06:07 PM »
Some things to look at.
1) does one protrude through the breech face farther than the other?
2) is one more/less pointed than the other (force associated with the size/area of the firing pin tip?)
3) is one lighter than the other one (lots of companies sell lighter firing pins and advertise that = higher firing pin speed = higher impact force
4) if one protrudes through the breech face farther, is it due to being longer?  or the slot for the firing in retaining pin being "longer" towards the rear of the slot, allowing the firing pin to move forward farther?

If I missed some, surely others will add to it, if they feel my questions are worth answering.
I stopped carrying the SIG 556R.  SIG changed models and couple/three times and stopped supporting it with parts.  So, I stopped supporting SIG.  Back to the tried/true AR15 Carbine.

Offline SoCal

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 289
Re: Extended Firing Pin for FP Block Differences
« Reply #10 on: January 30, 2019, 08:25:07 AM »

I do know there are some very light hammer springs,under 13lb maybe? where they recommend federal primers only since they are about the softest type out there.

CGW recommends Federal primers with their 8.5# hammer springs, the 13# work with all primers when used with their extended FP and FP spring.
If I had known how much better being retired is than working I would have done it FIRST.