There is no doubt that it took Browning several years to make the transition for most of their production from Belgium to Japan. Most folks don't realize that Browning never ceased all of their SA-22 production from Belgium. The custom Grade II, and III (real hand engraved grade II and III) SA-22 rifles are still made in Belgium. Most of Brownings hand engraved high end firearms are still made in the FN Custom Shop in Liege.

I agree....lot's of confusion about the Belgian/non-Belgian made guns. My brother is a nut for shotguns and has more than a few of the old A-5 humpback shotguns. But he was unaware until I mentioned it the other day that some were actually made here in the United States.

The Remington model 11 was made here along with the Winchester 11 (?). The Winchester is an odd one with no charging (bolt) handle. The barrel is knurled.

I think Savage made some also on that same patent....

Here's the data to date. The sample is VERY small and not well distributed over time. I wouldn't jump to any conclusions ...

http://www.buffingtonassociates.com/...tos/DataV1.jpg

Bottom line? We need more data!

Thanks!
Dave

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

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

Cool. Keep 'em coming. Thanks!

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

Lubrication and break in
 

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

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.

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.

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

kixon, that is a fine looking rifle.

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.

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

I'm working on the same project and facing the same problem :D

Thanks!
Dave

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

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

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.

Pictures!

Maybe in a few weeks.

The BL-22 is in one of my safes. In front of that safe is a large table with untold amounts of fabric, sewing machines, cutting mats etc. My daughters do Christian Youth Theater, and my wife is the costume committee chair. She works about 8 hours a day (volunteer) for three or four weeks prior to a play getting all the costumes produced, altered, repaired ... it's unbelievable what all is involved in this. The play opens in two weeks.

I'm not about to disturb that workspace for ANY reason whatsoever! LOL

Can you guess why? She would "sew me up" if I were to increase her workload even one bit.

So I can photo the gun later, but there really is nothing to see ... it's a plain Jane, bone stock Grade-1 in very good condition considering it was my first real rifle and I used it a TON for many many years.

Here's mine:
BL-22 Grade II Full Line Dealer, (FLD) Octagon, (24")
2013 , SN# 03491ZX24X Trigger=4.85 Lbs.
Unfired so far.
Thanks!

Wise man :bthumb:

I'm wondering if it was a pre-production gun sent from Miroku to Browning for approval of production. I stumbled into an A-Bolt with an odd serial number, and Browning's historian confirmed that it was a prototype.

However, in that case, it was obviously not a full production gun. The stock appears to have just one or two coats of oil finish. The magazine looks like it was made by hand.

Enjoy!
Dave

Interesting, a lighter pull in a very new BL. Thanks!

Yes, I had one of those Field Grade II octagons, and the trigger pull was about that amount.....not bad at all. The operative word here is "had", as the gun had very poor accuracy with anything I tried in it. I'm a stickler for decent accuracy, so the gun now resides elsewhere.....unfortunately. I sure liked the looks of it. :(