Springs???

[rckendall]

Hi,
I'm pretty new to CZs but getting my feet wet in a couple different ways. With my first one, an SP-01 manual safety, I installed CGW Ultra-lite (?) kit, SS recoil rod and played with recoil springs a little. I also polished internals per the tutorials. It is better now in both DA and SA, but my brass is way outside the recommended 6-8 ft ejection distance even with the 14# recoil spring, which is the heaviest in the tuners pack.

From a theoretical standpoint, I understand why a lighter hammer spring helps with DA trigger pull, but with a lighter recoil spring too, doesn't this cause quicker/faster recoil? Is that hard on the gun? It seems that things get out of balance if we reduce the spring pressure on both the hammer and recoil.

I have read a great deal on CGW site regarding springs, and one comment mentioned reduced power target loads. Is a USPSA minor power factor considered a reduced target load? I realize that these questions can get many different opinions and examples, and I appreciate any that you care to offer.

Thanks,
Richard

[M1A4ME]

Going back to the factory recoil spring shouldn't affect your trigger pulls in DA or SA.

See where/how far the brass goes.

I would think a lower power recoil spring with more powerful ammo would result in accelerated wear/tear/stress on your pistol's slide stop shaft and the "peanut" under the barrel where the slide stop shaft makes contact with the barrel.

[tdogg]

You are correct in that both the recoil and hammer spring will effect the ejection distance.  Only the hammer spring alters the DA trigger pull and firing pin ignition.  You should be able to run a lighter spring when running minor PF loads in your SP01.

Tuning the recoil spring is more than just measuring the ejection distance.  If your shooting USPSA then you need to look at splits and watch the sights too.  I shoot a TSO 40 in Limited and I can't run a heavy recoil spring to handle the major PF load as it disrupts my sights when the slide returns to battery.  When I jumped to an 18lb recoil spring the front dips and I cannot fire as soon as when running a 16lb recoil spring (OEM on TSO).

I've found that running the CZ factory vinyl/clear rubber recoil buffers has reduced the ejection distance on my TSO.  I assume it does so my shortening the overall slide travel (by the ~1/8 inch of buffer thickness).  They come in thick and thin variants (I run the thick).  It also alters the feel of the recoil as it dampens the slide end of travel impact to the frame (softer).  Many (including CGW) do not advocate running any buffer and I'm sure the all metal CZ can handle not running any buffer (or a lighter recoil spring).  I've found it helps with recoil control and ejection distance so I run them.

Running a lighter recoil spring should extend the life of your slide stop as it will not return to battery with as much gusto.  The rearward slide travel is controlled by the recoil spring housing and frame (hence the buffer's effect).  The slides forward travel is controlled by the slide stop.

Cheers,
Toby

[rckendall]

You are correct in that both the recoil and hammer spring will effect the ejection distance.  Only the hammer spring alters the DA trigger pull and firing pin ignition.  You should be able to run a lighter spring when running minor PF loads in your SP01.

Tuning the recoil spring is more than just measuring the ejection distance.  If your shooting USPSA then you need to look at splits and watch the sights too.  I shoot a TSO 40 in Limited and I can't run a heavy recoil spring to handle the major PF load as it disrupts my sights when the slide returns to battery.  When I jumped to an 18lb recoil spring the front dips and I cannot fire as soon as when running a 16lb recoil spring (OEM on TSO).

I've found that running the CZ factory vinyl/clear rubber recoil buffers has reduced the ejection distance on my TSO.  I assume it does so my shortening the overall slide travel (by the ~1/8 inch of buffer thickness).  They come in thick and thin variants (I run the thick).  It also alters the feel of the recoil as it dampens the slide end of travel impact to the frame (softer).  Many (including CGW) do not advocate running any buffer and I'm sure the all metal CZ can handle not running any buffer (or a lighter recoil spring).  I've found it helps with recoil control and ejection distance so I run them.

Running a lighter recoil spring should extend the life of your slide stop as it will not return to battery with as much gusto.  The rearward slide travel is controlled by the recoil spring housing and frame (hence the buffer's effect).  The slides forward travel is controlled by the slide stop.

Cheers,
Toby

q

Toby,
Thanks for the info and I understand why you have settled on that combination. I am new to CZs and just getting my feet wet, so am struggling with the buffer. I have used a one in my 1911 if I remember correctly, but my SP-01 doesn’t come with one. I find them on the parts diagram for the Target model and also see a sleeve, which mine doesn’t have.

Is it possible for me to convert to that system and do I need the sleeve too?

Thanks again,
Richard

[Walt Sherrill]

Running a lighter recoil spring should extend the life of your slide stop as it will not return to battery with as much gusto.  The rearward slide travel is controlled by the recoil spring housing and frame (hence the buffer's effect).  The slides forward travel is controlled by the slide stop.

Rearwards slide movement is also slowed by the hammer spring (with hammer-fired) guns, so that spring also attenuates the force of rearward movement.   

I agree: a heavier recoil spring SLAMS the slide forward with greater force than a lighter recoil spring-- and when NOTHING else in the gun using a heavier recoil spring has changed the slide top must take a greater beating.  Using a heavier spring more is likely to harm the slide stop than protect the it.

I also think that concern about damage to a gun's frame or the barrel lug (the bean) is misplaced.  I think I've heard of ONE failure of that lug in almost 20 years of following CZs closely, and many, many CZ owners run heavier recoil springs.

That said, I don't know of any way to mitigate potential damage to the slide stop or frame -- if it is a a possibility -- as a recoil buffer isn't going to help the slide stop, and I don't think it does much to protect the frame (if for no other reason that the hammer spring is also protecting the frame as the slide pushes the hammer back).

One pro shooter I know uses lighter recoil springs and buffers to accelerate the slide's cycing speed -- the lighter spring lets the slide move faster, and the buffer helps protect the frame; I think he uses a buffer on the other end of the recoil spring, too.

[George16]

The use of the buffer short strokes the slide in addition to dampening the effect of the recoil.

Tuning the recoil and hammer springs is a delicate balance along with the power factor of the ammo your going to use in the gun. In my shadow 2, I’m using an 11.5# hammer spring along with an 11# recoil spring with my 128-130 PF USPSA minor loads.

 I don’t use the 6-8’ or any other casing ejection distance measurement crap to determine what recoil spring to use in my gun. I look at how my slide returns to battery along at how my sights return as quickly as possible with the minimal muzzle flip or dip in order for me to get the second shot as soon as I can.

[tdogg]

You are correct in that both the recoil and hammer spring will effect the ejection distance.  Only the hammer spring alters the DA trigger pull and firing pin ignition.  You should be able to run a lighter spring when running minor PF loads in your SP01.

Tuning the recoil spring is more than just measuring the ejection distance.  If your shooting USPSA then you need to look at splits and watch the sights too.  I shoot a TSO 40 in Limited and I can't run a heavy recoil spring to handle the major PF load as it disrupts my sights when the slide returns to battery.  When I jumped to an 18lb recoil spring the front dips and I cannot fire as soon as when running a 16lb recoil spring (OEM on TSO).

I've found that running the CZ factory vinyl/clear rubber recoil buffers has reduced the ejection distance on my TSO.  I assume it does so my shortening the overall slide travel (by the ~1/8 inch of buffer thickness).  They come in thick and thin variants (I run the thick).  It also alters the feel of the recoil as it dampens the slide end of travel impact to the frame (softer).  Many (including CGW) do not advocate running any buffer and I'm sure the all metal CZ can handle not running any buffer (or a lighter recoil spring).  I've found it helps with recoil control and ejection distance so I run them.

Running a lighter recoil spring should extend the life of your slide stop as it will not return to battery with as much gusto.  The rearward slide travel is controlled by the recoil spring housing and frame (hence the buffer's effect).  The slides forward travel is controlled by the slide stop.

Cheers,
Toby

q

Toby,
Thanks for the info and I understand why you have settled on that combination. I am new to CZs and just getting my feet wet, so am struggling with the buffer. I have used a one in my 1911 if I remember correctly, but my SP-01 doesn’t come with one. I find them on the parts diagram for the Target model and also see a sleeve, which mine doesn’t have.

Is it possible for me to convert to that system and do I need the sleeve too?

Thanks again,
Richard

My TSO in 40 doesn't have the sleeve.  I don't see why you couldn't try a buffer in your SP01.  I'd test it extensively before running it anywhere important.

Cheers,
Toby

[dbarn]

You are correct in that both the recoil and hammer spring will effect the ejection distance.  Only the hammer spring alters the DA trigger pull and firing pin ignition.  You should be able to run a lighter spring when running minor PF loads in your SP01.

Tuning the recoil spring is more than just measuring the ejection distance.  If your shooting USPSA then you need to look at splits and watch the sights too.  I shoot a TSO 40 in Limited and I can't run a heavy recoil spring to handle the major PF load as it disrupts my sights when the slide returns to battery.  When I jumped to an 18lb recoil spring the front dips and I cannot fire as soon as when running a 16lb recoil spring (OEM on TSO).

I've found that running the CZ factory vinyl/clear rubber recoil buffers has reduced the ejection distance on my TSO.  I assume it does so my shortening the overall slide travel (by the ~1/8 inch of buffer thickness).  They come in thick and thin variants (I run the thick).  It also alters the feel of the recoil as it dampens the slide end of travel impact to the frame (softer).  Many (including CGW) do not advocate running any buffer and I'm sure the all metal CZ can handle not running any buffer (or a lighter recoil spring).  I've found it helps with recoil control and ejection distance so I run them.

Running a lighter recoil spring should extend the life of your slide stop as it will not return to battery with as much gusto.  The rearward slide travel is controlled by the recoil spring housing and frame (hence the buffer's effect).  The slides forward travel is controlled by the slide stop.

Cheers,
Toby

q

Toby,
Thanks for the info and I understand why you have settled on that combination. I am new to CZs and just getting my feet wet, so am struggling with the buffer. I have used a one in my 1911 if I remember correctly, but my SP-01 doesn’t come with one. I find them on the parts diagram for the Target model and also see a sleeve, which mine doesn’t have.

Is it possible for me to convert to that system and do I need the sleeve too?

Thanks again,
Richard

My TSO in 40 doesn't have the sleeve.  I don't see why you couldn't try a buffer in your SP01.  I'd test it extensively before running it anywhere important.

Cheers,
Toby

Question? Did you notice a POI change when you installed you're buffer? Thanks!

[tdogg]

Dbarn,

I never really ran without it aside from short testing sessions.  I did change from the thin to the thick buffer.   That gave a softer feel and altered the ejection distance.

I never noticed a poi change in my testing.

Cheers,
Toby

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

[dbarn]

Dbarn,

I never really ran without it aside from short testing sessions.  I did change from the thin to the thick buffer.   That gave a softer feel and altered the ejection distance.

I never noticed a poi change in my testing.

Cheers,
Toby

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Thank you sir.