RimfireCentral.com Forums

RimfireCentral.com Forums (https://www.rimfirecentral.com/forums/index.php)
-   Browning (https://www.rimfirecentral.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=17)
-   -   BL-22 Trigger Pull Data (https://www.rimfirecentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=488688)

pump .22s 02-16-2013 09:55 PM

Yep...more data needed. But you are headed in the right direction. :bthumb:

Thanks, and hoping other folks chip in with their results.

dbuffington 02-17-2013 06:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FlysAlot (Post 4427393)
I've got one more to submit tonight.!!!

Cool. Keep 'em coming. Thanks!

dbuffington 02-17-2013 12:16 PM

Eureka?

Earlier, Kix said:

Quote:

There is no doubt that use over time combined with a good lubricant like lithium grease will improve the trigger on BL-22 rifles. The bearing surfaces begin to get smoother with use and certainly there will be less "gritty" feel and eventually a lighter trigger pull.
And in a later message, he added:

Quote:

Put a little dab of grease on the little triangular linkage component on the lever when it is open. Lubricate other moving parts of the trigger with a needle oiler.
So I tried that with 47B40688. I put a bit of Browning “Midas” shotgun grease on the forward face of the “little triangular linkage component” shown in this image:

http://www.buffingtonassociates.com/...earRelease.jpg

If you recall, that gun started -- new, with no evidence of previous firing -- with a 5.38 pound pull.

After putting 50 rounds through it, it dropped to 5.13 pounds.

And with the grease? It started jumping wildly (at least from a statistician’s point of view) with pull weights varying back and forth between 5.13 pounds and 4.44 pounds.

I think what I’m seeing with this gun is the break-in process, a process that may be helped by the lubricant but occasionally hurt as the grease traps ground-off metal particles.

Hypothesis?

There’s little or no production difference between older and newer BL-22s. However, there are use, lubrication and cleaning differences. That would explain the pull weight differences between older and newer BL-22s.

Test?

I’m going to keep playing with 47B40688, using the trigger, lubricating the triangle (which has a very sharp edge), cleaning the triangle and starting the process again. I’ll keep everyone updated.

Thanks!
Dave

kixonrt66 02-17-2013 01:36 PM

Lubrication and break in
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by dbuffington (Post 4427872)
Eureka?

Earlier, Kix said:



And in a later message, he added:



So I tried that with 47B40688. I put a bit of Browning “Midas” shotgun grease on the forward face of the “little triangular linkage component” shown in this image:

http://www.buffingtonassociates.com/...earRelease.jpg

If you recall, that gun started -- new, with no evidence of previous firing -- with a 5.38 pound pull.

After putting 50 rounds through it, it dropped to 5.13 pounds.

And with the grease? It started jumping wildly (at least from a statistician’s point of view) with pull weights varying back and forth between 5.13 pounds and 4.44 pounds.

I think what I’m seeing with this gun is the break-in process, a process that may be helped by the lubricant but occasionally hurt as the grease traps ground-off metal particles.

Hypothesis?

There’s little or no production difference between older and newer BL-22s. However, there are use, lubrication and cleaning differences. That would explain the pull weight differences between older and newer BL-22s.

Test?

I’m going to keep playing with 47B40688, using the trigger, lubricating the triangle (which has a very sharp edge), cleaning the triangle and starting the process again. I’ll keep everyone updated.

Thanks!
Dave

Hello Dave,

I think what you are beginning to see is the linkage getting smoother and variance from this process. Do as you mentioned...lubricate the trigger, put rounds through the rifle, clean the trigger linkage, lubricate again and continue. Eventually the trigger will "settle in" to a nice steady and consistent pull weight and feel. I think these triggers take some time to "settle in" because of the design. I also think that people are sometimes too quick to judge the triggers on brand new rifles or even new, old stock rifles or just rifles that have not been shot much. The triggers do get better with use. There is some truth to the reports of heavier triggers on newer rifles. Some have tested in the 7-8 lb range and I can't remember ever feeling a trigger that heavy on a 1970's or 80's rifle. I have had some first year production rifles and other early BL-22's that had great triggers when brand new, right out of the box. Others were not so good. It's just like any other field rifle, some will inevitably have better triggers than others. Test your rifle's trigger again after five or six bricks of ammo and see what it feels like.:bthumb:

The trigger on this one feels pretty good:

http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s...6/IMG_1403.jpg

http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s...GradeII005.jpg

http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s...GradeII003.jpg

Kix

M2HB 02-17-2013 02:24 PM

Your statistics currently show that the older rifles seem to have a consistantly lower trigger pull. We may never know if that is because of the usage over the years or if they were built differently. I haven't seen any high (7#) trigger weights from the older rifles. Your experiments show that the trigger weight seems to go down significantly with usage. If that is in fact the case, that may explain the lower trigger weights of the older rifles.

NHDaveL 02-19-2013 05:16 PM

Well, I can add a little info here, though I'm not sure whether it will help or hurt the effort.

I have two early BL-22's, one each from '72 and '73. I have owned them for a couple of years. Both are in nearly-new condition, and I have used them very little, basically a few rounds when i bought them to assure that they functioned properly, and perhaps a few rounds from time to time since, but not many at all.

I have no proper trigger pull scale, but I did test them with a scale from my fishing days to get some idea. Each trigger released at about 7 and 1/4 pounds. I was surprised that they gave similar results and that the readings were as high as they were, as I don't recall the triggers being heavy when I have use them. I wouldn't care to bet much on the precision of the scale, but I also wouldn't think likely to be off by more than a pound or so.

I guess my suggestion would be not to include these results in the tabulation, for the obvious reasons, but I thought I would pass them along for whatever interest they may have in the overall investigation.

dbuffington 02-19-2013 07:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NHDaveL (Post 4432660)
Well, I can add a little info here, though I'm not sure whether it will help or hurt the effort.

A help, definitely :)

I suspect your fishing scale is a coil spring scale, like traditional trigger scales. So there's nothing inherently wrong with it. If you are inclined, just check it with a known weight, like a 5 pound bag of flour.

Thanks!
Dave

M2HB 02-19-2013 09:18 PM

kixon, that is a fine looking rifle.

NHDaveL 02-20-2013 11:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dbuffington (Post 4432949)
A help, definitely :)

I suspect your fishing scale is a coil spring scale, like traditional trigger scales. So there's nothing inherently wrong with it. If you are inclined, just check it with a known weight, like a 5 pound bag of flour.

Thanks!
Dave

In the interest of scientific investigation, I did some trials with known weights with my fishing scale. It is accurate and repeatable to within 1/4 pound over the range of interest, 1/4 pound also being the smallest denomination on the scale. I have no way to take digital pictures, but don't mind giving the SN's, which are 72B89786 and 37B02051. My rifles are both Grade I.

I'm not sure when I last used those rifles. I suppose it would be interesting to run a brick through one or both, occasionally checking the trigger, but with 18" of snow on the ground and stuff falling out of the sky at regular intervals, any such test is some time off.

dbuffington 02-20-2013 12:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NHDaveL (Post 4434084)
In the interest of scientific investigation, I did some trials with known weights with my fishing scale. It is accurate and repeatable to within 1/4 pound over the range of interest, 1/4 pound also being the smallest denomination on the scale. I have no way to take digital pictures, but don't mind giving the SN's, which are 72B89786 and 37B02051. My rifles are both Grade I.

Excellent! I'll add them to the database when I get home.

Quote:

I'm not sure when I last used those rifles. I suppose it would be interesting to run a brick through one or both, occasionally checking the trigger, but with 18" of snow on the ground and stuff falling out of the sky at regular intervals, any such test is some time off.
I'm working on the same project and facing the same problem :D

Thanks!
Dave

dbuffington 02-02-2014 04:42 PM

Hi Folks!

I've stumbled onto a new data point :D
http://www.buffingtonassociates.com/...os/BL22_8B.jpg
I picked this 1968 "Patent Pending" BL-22 at an auction yesterday.

The pull weight? 4 pounds, 14 ounces (4.88 pounds).

The gun appeared to be pretty heavily used, and so, I suspect the "break-in" process was complete.

Enjoy!
Dave

chuckles 02-02-2014 05:25 PM

Nice start to the chart. My question is in reference to the "Field Octagon" I think the FLD is meant to refer to a Full Line Dealer model. According to Browning, they restrict those FLD models to full-line dealers hence the FLD designation. (I have one and spoke to Browning CSR about it).
Thanks

dbuffington 02-02-2014 06:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chuckles (Post 4894581)
Nice start to the chart. My question is in reference to the "Field Octagon" I think the FLD is meant to refer to a Full Line Dealer model. According to Browning, they restrict those FLD models to full-line dealers hence the FLD designation. (I have one and spoke to Browning CSR about it).
Thanks

Thanks!
Dave

DLS 02-02-2014 06:19 PM

Here's my data and a question:

Box stock Grade-I purchased new in 1973 or 1974 has a trigger pull of 4lbs 4oz.

Here's the question ... the serial number is 37823777 which does not fit with Browning's numbering system as listed on their site.

My father got it directly from a Browning executive friend of his. Could this be some type of prototype? There is nothing special about this gun compared to other Grade-1's.

dbuffington 02-02-2014 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DLS
Here's the question ... the serial number is 37823777 which does not fit with Browning's numbering system as listed on their site.

My father got it directly from a Browning executive friend of his. Could this be some type of prototype? There is nothing special about this gun compared to other Grade-1's.

Pictures!


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:56 PM.

DMCA Notice

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright ©2000-2018 RimfireCentral.com