doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com inertia triggers--good, bad, and why??

Jack, maybe I should have put a after my comment about 2 being the "correct" number of triggers. I thought everyone would realize that such an overstatement was a joke. Maybe your sense of humor is frozen, up there in the Great White North.

Please note that in your exchange with Ted above, you're doing more than a bit of "spinning" about Burrard's preference for ST's. To me, your quote implies that Burrard prefers a ST WHEN HE'S WEARING GLOVES--not that he totally abandoned the DT in favor of the ST for all his shooting. Unless you have further quotes to provide about how he went TOTALLY, UNDER ALL CONDITIONS from DT to ST. And having spent a bit of time in the UK, where it doesn't get nearly as cold, nearly as often as it does in places like the Upper Midwest, my guess would be that an Englishman having to use a ST due to weather factors is a fairly rare thing.

Have you ever had a problem being bruised by a DT gun, Jack? I have not--and I have owned and shot literally hundreds of them. Some people do have that difficulty, which in many cases can be solved by a little device Galazan sells, that fits on the rear of the trigger guard. I have a left-handed friend who does have difficulty with DT's, but of all the people I know and shoot with who use DT guns, he's the only one. Hand geometry, trigger guard and trigger spacing, all come into play. Just not for all that many people. And the same goes for gloves and DT's in cold weather. Some DT's don't leave enough space for HEAVILY gloved fingers. Depends on how cold your hands get, how much space there is, etc.

Those who say DT's continue to find favor because of "tradition"--as if they couldn't possibly find favor simply because they WORK for most people, and offer some advantages in the field that ST's (especially inertia ones) do not--seem to imply those hidebound Brits were so resistant to change that they wouldn't know a better idea if it hit them between the eyes. Unfortunately, that contention runs smack into the fact that the Brits changed, without much resistance in most cases, from hammerguns to hammerless. If they were so tradition-bound, why didn't they stick with the hammerguns, just like most of them did with the traditional DT's? And even though ST's have improved significantly, it's interesting to note that DT's still find considerable favor with sxs shooters--even those who, given the small share of sxs in the overall shotgun market these days--are much more likely to have "grown up" with a gun that only had one trigger. Seems to me it's because DT's work as well as they ever have, and provide the same advantages they always have. So much so that unlike hammerguns--few of which are made these days--they continue to hold down significant market share in currently manufactured sxs.

A whole lot of chest-beating about DTs, Larry. What little you've said about inertia triggers has been somewhat misinformed. Burrard's statement speaks for itself, and I specifically applied it to cold-weather hunting, not a universal claim.

This thread was begun by someone who wanted to know the pros and cons of inertia triggers. But if it makes you and Ted feel good to jump in OT and tell us that your DTs are better, and that ST users are learning disabled, there's no stopping you. Obviously.

Jack, it ought to be obvious that a thread entitled "inertia triggers--good, bad, and why??" is eventually going to lead to a discussion of the alternatives: mechanical ST's or DT's. And with the exception of your quote from Burrard about the involuntary 2nd pull, NOTHING I've said about inertia triggers is either misinformed or inaccurate. That is, unless you can dispute any of the following:

1. Very light loads may fail to reset inertia triggers.
2. A poor gun mount, in which good contact between stock and shoulder are established, can fail to reset inertia triggers.
3. If you fire the first barrel of an inertia trigger, break it open to reload, close it again to fire before you've reloaded that barrel (in response to another bird flushing), the gun will not fire.
Those are the cons, the first two of which are NOT cons with mechanical triggers; none are cons with DT's. Obviously, whether those cons offset an individual's choice of a gun with an inertia trigger vs a mechanical ST or a DT will depend partially on the purpose of the gun (field or target shooting), and whether the potential user has a problem with DT's, relative either to cold weather or hand/grip/trigger geometry.

I have an SKB 100 in my gun cabinet, equipped with--as you should know--an inertia trigger. I like the gun, in spite of that deficiency. (Please note the smiley face, Jack.)

Involuntary second pull is a fact. All ST gun systems - inertia and mechanical - have to deal with it.

An understanding of inertia trigger design would give you the answer. The system has a built-in time lag as inertia moves the trigger blade between the sears. The involuntary pull occurs immediately after tripping the first sear, and before the blade can move to the second sear.

The same way a thermos "knows" whether to keep your drink hot or cold, Larry. Inanimate objects don't have to "know" anything - they just have to obey the rules of physics.

I never claimed Burrard "totally abandoned" DTs for STs. Whether he switched back to DT guns in warmer weather is an open question. But these two statements might suggest an answer:

Jack,
I am reminded of Eddy Murphy's "Delirious" comedy tape from more than a few grouse seasons past. He told the audience he teased homosexuals because, well, they were homosexuals.

I pull on the chain simply because I will get a rise out of you.
Next time don't take the bait quite so quickly...
Best,
Ted

PS Mr. Murphy displayed a rather limited vocabulary in the above show, if you get my drift, and if you are easily offended, I suggest you avoid it.

Ted: Sometimes this old Irishman is too slow to understand whether an asinine statement is meant in jest, or whether it's just asinine. Help an old guy out by using when you're jerking my chain, and I won't be so quick to flush the tank.

Hope you had a good grouse season - the next few should take us through the peak!

Dave:

I have had inertia triggers on a Beretta O/U and a Browning Superposed. The Beretta triggers have worked flawlessly even with 3/4 oz. 20 bore loads. The Superposed gave me continual problems and it is currently being shipped back from Midwest Gun Works where I had it converted to mechanical. In fairness, I think that my Browning was more about an individual gun than about a flawed trigger design. Given my choice I would prefer a mechanical trigger on a single trigger gun.

"Originally Posted By: Burrard"??? Jack, I hope that's something the system did . . . unless maybe you're channeling Burrard. And I've never thought of you as a medium . . . maybe more like a rare.

I got the involuntary pull thing the first time, thanks. And of course it's not either a pro or a con, comparing one ST to another, since they all work that way. And that still leaves the inertia triggers with the same disadvantages, whether you compare them to mechanical ST's or to DT's.

As for the "advantage" of a ST in cold weather . . . not necessarily. I have a Parker Repro, single mechanical trigger, through which I've run a few flats of shells. It has functioned flawlessly for me when I'm either shooting barehanded or with a thin leather shooting glove. However, it has doubled twice on me when I've worn a heavier, insulated glove (cold weather skeet, not hunting). Maybe the reduced "feel" from that heavier glove caused me to give it an extra involuntary pull, but for whatever reason, it certainly hasn't been an advantage over DT's in cold weather. And I've had the same thing happen with other ST's while wearing insulated gloves.