Why a two-stage trigger?

[DonovanM]

Is there any reason one would choose a two-stage trigger over a single-stage, beyond that of personal preference?

It seems most "combat/tactical" oriented triggers are two-stage, and the more competition oriented variants are single stage in the case of offerings from Geissele for instance.

Pardon my ignorance, I am very new to rifles. Thanks.

[midget]

It is completely preference... The only thing I can liken it to on a pistol is the difference between a 1911 and a glock trigger... 1911=single stage, glock/m&p/xd/etc= two stage...

Also, some claim that two stage are better for distance shooting as you can prep the trigger and work on your hold and breathing before the trigger breaks...

Edited January 9, 2013 by midget

[rvb]

It is completely preference...

yup. Helps to try both if you can, even just dryfire...

The only thing I can liken it to on a pistol is the difference between a 1911 and a glock trigger... 1911=single stage, glock/m&p/xd/etc= two stage...

I prefer a 2-stage, and part of that is because it feels most like a good pistol trigger to me. Just like a 1911, there is some pre-travel that accounts for part of the pull weight, a stop on the sear, and some overtravel. I can shoot the rifle similar to how I shoot a pistol. To shoot fast I can pull fully through, just like I would a pistol (I'm a 'slapper' vs a reset-rider), but slow I can take up the slack, make final adjustments, and release the sear...

A glock is like a really crappy/stacky Geissele 3G trigger...

I don't know what equates to a single-stage... a cocked revo perhaps.

-rvb

Edited January 9, 2013 by rvb

[co-exprs]

Same, same. It's preference. I can run my single stage JP trigger slightly faster than my two stage AR Gold, but I am better at distance with the AR Gold. AR Gold also feels more like my 1911. In general, you will loose more points missing precision shots than you will gain from a trigger you can run a fraction of a second faster. I like the speed, but I'll take the hits. I've never been much of a speed freak anyways, so I'll usually choose a trigger which makes it easier to make my hits. Try em both and see which works best for you. My buddy Geoff has best of both worlds. He runs a two stage, which gives him better hits and he can run that trigger like a demon. Both styles have advantages. Just gotta figure out which you connect with.

[Ssanders224]

It is completely preference...

yup. Helps to try both if you can, even just dryfire...

The only thing I can liken it to on a pistol is the difference between a 1911 and a glock trigger... 1911=single stage, glock/m&p/xd/etc= two stage...

I prefer a 2-stage, and part of that is because it feels most like a good pistol trigger to me. Just like a 1911, there is some pre-travel that accounts for part of the pull weight, a stop on the sear, and some overtravel. I can shoot the rifle similar to how I shoot a pistol. To shoot fast I can pull fully through, just like I would a pistol (I'm a 'slapper' vs a reset-rider), but slow I can take up the slack, make final adjustments, and release the sear...

A glock is like a really crappy/stacky Geissele 3G trigger...

I don't know what equates to a single-stage... a cocked revo perhaps.

-rvb

I think the main difference for me is the fact that on Geissele or RRA type two stage, you have to let the trigger return well into the first stage before the dissconnector lets go of the hammer and "resets". This is why a two stage is slower.

I disagree that this function is similiar to a good 1911 trigger, because if you ride the reset on the 1911, the sear is ready to be tripped again as soon as the disco resets. If you let the trigger pass that point, and return into the "pretravel", that is the users choice, but not necessary. On the two stage, you will have to take up some of the first stage, or the glorified "creep" before you break the hammer engagement.

That being said, I love a GOOD two stage trigger... especially for precision work. However, a nice, light, crisp single stage is hard to beat IMO.

[bagdrag]

I prefer the 1911-like feel of my AR Gold but the JP is a very close 2nd. You can be pretty precise with either, just need practice.

[co-exprs]

It is completely preference...

yup. Helps to try both if you can, even just dryfire...

The only thing I can liken it to on a pistol is the difference between a 1911 and a glock trigger... 1911=single stage, glock/m&p/xd/etc= two stage...

I prefer a 2-stage, and part of that is because it feels most like a good pistol trigger to me. Just like a 1911, there is some pre-travel that accounts for part of the pull weight, a stop on the sear, and some overtravel. I can shoot the rifle similar to how I shoot a pistol. To shoot fast I can pull fully through, just like I would a pistol (I'm a 'slapper' vs a reset-rider), but slow I can take up the slack, make final adjustments, and release the sear...

A glock is like a really crappy/stacky Geissele 3G trigger...

I don't know what equates to a single-stage... a cocked revo perhaps.

-rvb

I think the main difference for me is the fact that on Geissele or RRA type two stage, you have to let the trigger return well into the first stage before the dissconnector lets go of the hammer and "resets". This is why a two stage is slower.

I disagree that this function is similiar to a good 1911 trigger, because if you ride the reset on the 1911, the sear is ready to be tripped again as soon as the disco resets. If you let the trigger pass that point, and return into the "pretravel", that is the users choice, but not necessary. On the two stage, you will have to take up some of the first stage, or the glorified "creep" before you break the hammer engagement.

That being said, I love a GOOD two stage trigger... especially for precision work. However, a nice, light, crisp single stage is hard to beat IMO.

You must not have ever run an AR-Gold. Reset is next to nothing.

[Ssanders224]

It is completely preference...

yup. Helps to try both if you can, even just dryfire...

The only thing I can liken it to on a pistol is the difference between a 1911 and a glock trigger... 1911=single stage, glock/m&p/xd/etc= two stage...

I prefer a 2-stage, and part of that is because it feels most like a good pistol trigger to me. Just like a 1911, there is some pre-travel that accounts for part of the pull weight, a stop on the sear, and some overtravel. I can shoot the rifle similar to how I shoot a pistol. To shoot fast I can pull fully through, just like I would a pistol (I'm a 'slapper' vs a reset-rider), but slow I can take up the slack, make final adjustments, and release the sear...

A glock is like a really crappy/stacky Geissele 3G trigger...

I don't know what equates to a single-stage... a cocked revo perhaps.

-rvb

I think the main difference for me is the fact that on Geissele or RRA type two stage, you have to let the trigger return well into the first stage before the dissconnector lets go of the hammer and "resets". This is why a two stage is slower.

I disagree that this function is similiar to a good 1911 trigger, because if you ride the reset on the 1911, the sear is ready to be tripped again as soon as the disco resets. If you let the trigger pass that point, and return into the "pretravel", that is the users choice, but not necessary. On the two stage, you will have to take up some of the first stage, or the glorified "creep" before you break the hammer engagement.

That being said, I love a GOOD two stage trigger... especially for precision work. However, a nice, light, crisp single stage is hard to beat IMO.

You must not have ever run an AR-Gold. Reset is next to nothing.

I have not. Hence I did not comment on the AR-Gold.

[Alaskapopo]

Is there any reason one would choose a two-stage trigger over a single-stage, beyond that of personal preference?

It seems most "combat/tactical" oriented triggers are two-stage, and the more competition oriented variants are single stage in the case of offerings from Geissele for instance.

Pardon my ignorance, I am very new to rifles. Thanks.

A two stage trigger is a bit more forgiving on a duty rifle when the stress level is high to prevent firing a round before you planned. Not an AD but it gives you more control when your fine motor skills are somewhat reduced.

Pat

[rvb]

I think the main difference for me is the fact that on Geissele or RRA type two stage, you have to let the trigger return well into the first stage before the dissconnector lets go of the hammer and "resets". This is why a two stage is slower.

I disagree that this function is similiar to a good 1911 trigger, because if you ride the reset on the 1911, the sear is ready to be tripped again as soon as the disco resets. If you let the trigger pass that point, and return into the "pretravel", that is the users choice, but not necessary. On the two stage, you will have to take up some of the first stage, or the glorified "creep" before you break the hammer engagement.

That being said, I love a GOOD two stage trigger... especially for precision work. However, a nice, light, crisp single stage is hard to beat IMO.

A good example of why it comes down to personal preference. I couldn't have told you where the reset point is on either my RRA or Geisselle SSA triggers. I simply don't care, and that's why I pointed out I'm not a reset rider... I just pulled them out of the safe. The RRA reset point is about 1mm in front of the sear, the SSA is about 2mm.

I wouldn't call it creep, I would call it pretravel, again sim to a 1911.

A 2stage in no way slows my trigger speed any. Could it for someone such as yourself who rides the reset? Maybe. But a 2stage itself is in no way inherently slower.

-rvb

Edited January 10, 2013 by rvb

[Ssanders224]

I agree. Our views perfectly illustrate why trigger selection is 99% personal preference.

For me, the further my finger has to travel, the slower my splits will be.... Or rather, the harder I will have to work to keep them as fast. Again, for ME, the RRA and Geisselle two stages I have tried required my trigger finger to move a further distance than the comparable single stages. They are great triggers, and definitely have their place.... But for me, that place is not a field course.

The RRA I have the most experience with definitely reset further than a mm in front of the second stage... How did you measure it? At what point of the trigger?

To clarify, there is no "sear" in either configuration, and the first stage of a RRA or SSA is most certainly "creep", not "pre-travel".

During the first stage, you are actively decreasing the amount hammer/trigger engagement area. That is by definition "creep".

"Pre travel" is most commonly defined as the distance fire control components must travel before they begin affecting or altering the sear/hammer (or in an ARs case) the hammer/trigger engagement relationship.

[bagdrag]

Most 2-stage triggers feel nothing like a 1911 trigger (except the AR Gold).

To me 2-stage triggers are closer in approximation to a light DA/SA pistol trigger. You prep your shot by pulling in the trigger just before the breaking point and then follow through when you are ready to break the shot.

[rvb]

The RRA I have the most experience with definitely reset further than a mm in front of the second stage... How did you measure it? At what point of the trigger?

"Measured" (estimated) at the bottom of the trigger. Pulled trigger, charged it, slowly released, marked the point w/ a pencil, pulled back till it stopped and marked again. Nothing scientific.

To clarify, there is no "sear" in either configuration, and the first stage of a RRA or SSA is most certainly "creep", not "pre-travel".

Well I guess I don't know what RRA or Geissele calls it, but certainly in an M1/M14 they call the piece that the hammer contacts to create the second stage a sear. It also acts as the disconnect. I even pulled out my Kuhnhausen .30 cal manual to make sure my memory wasn't playing tricks on me.

During the first stage, you are actively decreasing the amount hammer/trigger engagement area. That is by definition "creep".

"Pre travel" is most commonly defined as the distance fire control components must travel before they begin affecting or altering the sear/hammer (or in an ARs case) the hammer/trigger engagement relationship.

You're trying to make my point too technical (usually that's.my thing!). Im just talking about the user/trigger interaction, not the internal compnent interaction. Forget the mechanics. On both a 1911 (or SA in most DA/SA) and a 2-stage, there is some trigger movement with some slight resistance, then you hit the weight of the sear/2nd-stage, a crisp release, then some over travel.

You're right the reset is slightly different due to the handoff of the hammer from the sear to the trigger lugs on the 2-stage. For ME I've found trying to find/feel the reset point slower and more likely to result in trigger freeze than just getting off the trigger letting it reset fully, then focusing on my next shot....

-rvb

[Doc Hunter]

A 2 stage trigger allows a "safe" light trigger pull. A very light single stage may "bump fire". The requirment of the disconnect of a 2 stage removes much of the danger of a "bump fire" allowing a "safer" very light trigger pull.

[dhill]

Personally i prefer a single stage. I dont like all the take-up of a 2 stage trigger, but then again i grew up shooting silohuette and am accustomed to a light,, crisp breaking trigger. Just my personal preference.

[Sleepswithdogs]

Personally i prefer a single stage. I dont like all the take-up of a 2 stage trigger, but then again i grew up shooting silohuette and am accustomed to a light,, crisp breaking trigger. Just my personal preference.

Same here, don't care for a 2 stage at all. Grew up shooting light, single stage triggers and it's all that for me. I find taking up the first stage distracting in a 2 stage. though I do recognize the increased safety possibilities, but I come from the, "don't ever touch the trigger until your on target and ready to shoot," school.

Tar

Edited January 10, 2013 by Sleepswithdogs

[rvb]

... though I do recognize the increased safety possibilities, but I come from the, "don't ever touch the trigger until your on target and ready to shoot," school.

Tar

The "increased safety" bit Doc Hunter is referring to has nothing to do with trigger finger discipline, it has to do w/ how easy or hard it is to accidently bump fire a second round. Some people tend to have this happen easily, some never at all ... depends on how they shoulder the gun and manipulate the trigger. The additional reset length of a 2-stage may allow a person who sometimes "doubles" the trigger to not have that problem.

-rvb

[Ssanders224]

... though I do recognize the increased safety possibilities, but I come from the, "don't ever touch the trigger until your on target and ready to shoot," school.

Tar

The "increased safety" bit Doc Hunter is referring to has nothing to do with trigger finger discipline, it has to do w/ how easy or hard it is to accidently bump fire a second round. Some people tend to have this happen easily, some never at all ... depends on how they shoulder the gun and manipulate the trigger. The additional reset length of a 2-stage may allow a person who sometimes "doubles" the trigger to not have that problem.

-rvb

I dont understand the "Bump fire" thing.

How many of us shoot super light single action pistols? No one ever complains of bump firingthose? The shotguns I compete with all have very crisp light triggers, and recoil much more than any AR. Never bump fired one, nor have I witnessed anyone bump firirng one on a skeet/trap/sporting clays field. Never bump fired my AR. Rattled off VERY fast splits somewhat accidentally during rapid fire? Yes, but I do not consider that bump firing. I entended to pull the trigger.

However, I do agree that the original reason for a two stage trigger had alot to do with safety, much like the set trigger on a Kentucky rifle.

Precision shooters needed a trigger that broke extremely crisp and light, but still had enough engagement when cocked to be safe to carry around. That is hard to achieve with a lot of single stage fire control systems.

[rvb]

... though I do recognize the increased safety possibilities, but I come from the, "don't ever touch the trigger until your on target and ready to shoot," school.

Tar

The "increased safety" bit Doc Hunter is referring to has nothing to do with trigger finger discipline, it has to do w/ how easy or hard it is to accidently bump fire a second round. Some people tend to have this happen easily, some never at all ... depends on how they shoulder the gun and manipulate the trigger. The additional reset length of a 2-stage may allow a person who sometimes "doubles" the trigger to not have that problem.

-rvb

I dont understand the "Bump fire" thing.

How many of us shoot super light single action pistols? No one ever complains of bump firingthose? The shotguns I compete with all have very crisp light triggers, and recoil much more than any AR. Never bump fired one, nor have I witnessed anyone bump firirng one on a skeet/trap/sporting clays field. Never bump fired my AR. Rattled off VERY fast splits somewhat accidentally during rapid fire? Yes, but I do not consider that bump firing. I entended to pull the trigger.

However, I do agree that the original reason for a two stage trigger had alot to do with safety, much like the set trigger on a Kentucky rifle.

Precision shooters needed a trigger that broke extremely crisp and light, but still had enough engagement when cocked to be safe to carry around. That is hard to achieve with a lot of single stage fire control systems.

It all comes down to the shooter, or if the stage puts you in an awkward position. It happens... you can see some examples in this sub-forum. I think the most recent discussion was on the G-3G triggers.... (http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=162870). I've only had it happen w/ an M1A (which was loosing it's second stage).

-rvb

Edited January 11, 2013 by rvb

[Alaskapopo]

... though I do recognize the increased safety possibilities, but I come from the, "don't ever touch the trigger until your on target and ready to shoot," school.

Tar

The "increased safety" bit Doc Hunter is referring to has nothing to do with trigger finger discipline, it has to do w/ how easy or hard it is to accidently bump fire a second round. Some people tend to have this happen easily, some never at all ... depends on how they shoulder the gun and manipulate the trigger. The additional reset length of a 2-stage may allow a person who sometimes "doubles" the trigger to not have that problem.

-rvb

I dont understand the "Bump fire" thing.

How many of us shoot super light single action pistols? No one ever complains of bump firingthose? The shotguns I compete with all have very crisp light triggers, and recoil much more than any AR. Never bump fired one, nor have I witnessed anyone bump firirng one on a skeet/trap/sporting clays field. Never bump fired my AR. Rattled off VERY fast splits somewhat accidentally during rapid fire? Yes, but I do not consider that bump firing. I entended to pull the trigger.

However, I do agree that the original reason for a two stage trigger had alot to do with safety, much like the set trigger on a Kentucky rifle.

Precision shooters needed a trigger that broke extremely crisp and light, but still had enough engagement when cocked to be safe to carry around. That is hard to achieve with a lot of single stage fire control systems.

The triggers on shotguns are generally heavier and your generally braced for recoil when you shoot them and your not in an awkward position so bump firing does not generally happen with shotguns. With handguns if your in an awkward position you generally get a limp wristing type failure to eject instead of a bump fire. With the rifle it will cycle reliably generally no mater what position your in and if your off balance there is an opportunity for the gun to move back and forth against your trigger finger every so slightly causing the gun to discharge.

Pat

[Ssanders224]

... though I do recognize the increased safety possibilities, but I come from the, "don't ever touch the trigger until your on target and ready to shoot," school.

Tar

The "increased safety" bit Doc Hunter is referring to has nothing to do with trigger finger discipline, it has to do w/ how easy or hard it is to accidently bump fire a second round. Some people tend to have this happen easily, some never at all ... depends on how they shoulder the gun and manipulate the trigger. The additional reset length of a 2-stage may allow a person who sometimes "doubles" the trigger to not have that problem.

-rvb

I dont understand the "Bump fire" thing.

How many of us shoot super light single action pistols? No one ever complains of bump firingthose? The shotguns I compete with all have very crisp light triggers, and recoil much more than any AR. Never bump fired one, nor have I witnessed anyone bump firirng one on a skeet/trap/sporting clays field. Never bump fired my AR. Rattled off VERY fast splits somewhat accidentally during rapid fire? Yes, but I do not consider that bump firing. I entended to pull the trigger.

However, I do agree that the original reason for a two stage trigger had alot to do with safety, much like the set trigger on a Kentucky rifle.

Precision shooters needed a trigger that broke extremely crisp and light, but still had enough engagement when cocked to be safe to carry around. That is hard to achieve with a lot of single stage fire control systems.

The triggers on shotguns are generally heavier and your generally braced for recoil when you shoot them and your not in an awkward position so bump firing does not generally happen with shotguns. With handguns if your in an awkward position you generally get a limp wristing type failure to eject instead of a bump fire. With the rifle it will cycle reliably generally no mater what position your in and if your off balance there is an opportunity for the gun to move back and forth against your trigger finger every so slightly causing the gun to discharge.

Pat

Gotcha.

So the real problem is that shooters are getting into positions that impede their ability to reliably control their weapons????????? I'd hardly blame that on the trigger.

And I wasnt talking about the trigger on grandpas Model 12, or your HD 870. All the shotguns I compete with have light crisp triggers. Ive shot them from the hip, over my head, sitting in chairs, one handed, and never bump fired one.

As far as the thread on the G-3G, originally I believe that thread was concerning triggers that were doubling? Not being bump fired. I could be wrong though, havent read it in a while.

[Alaskapopo]

Well as for blame its simply a matter of over a variety of different shooters if trigger A has more troubles with doubling then there is something to be said that maybe the design is flawed. Triggers working reliably regardless of the shooters position or technique should be the ultimate goal. As for the 3G its usually bump firing from my experience not an actual double.

Pat

[Sleepswithdogs]

I have a slightly different take on this issue. Shooting skeet from the high ready my finger goes on the trigger just a second before I call "pull". I ride the trigger all the way until the zone the bird is best broken in. What I found was that with a trigger under 3#, I'd fire the shotgun before my intended zone. Now, most always I broke the bird, as I shoot a sustained lead. (OK, I confess.. it made me feel like Wayne Mayes for one single shot!!!) But it was only a matter of time before I was a fraction behind and let one get away. (Occasionally one has to shoot swing through.) I know from experience, 3# is my lower limit for a shotgun trigger. Shooting 3 position rifle, my favorite trigger was right around 1#, maybe a little less. This said to illustrate that, IMO, different trigger types and weights are needed for different sports.

Now on to rifles/pistols, some people are prone to putting their finger on a trigger before they are ready to shoot. Unconsciously as they size up a situation, their finger is on the trigger. If one has a very light trigger, it can, and has been accidentally fired, with ofttimes a very, very sad conclusion. While a very light trigger may be much better for distance shooting, a heavier trigger, especially in novice hands, can be a safer option.

The way I see it, the 2 stage trigger is a compromise between safety and accuracy. It gives you the longer pull, the heavier weight first stage, as if to say, "are you SURE this is what you want to do." Then the shooter encounters the lighter 2nd stage, and they now have the benefit of a light pull trigger.

That is the long winded explanation of what I meant before when I wrote, "I do recognize the increased safety possibilities."

Tar

Edited January 11, 2013 by Sleepswithdogs

[Ssanders224]

I have a slightly different take on this issue. Shooting skeet from the high ready my finger goes on the trigger just a second before I call "pull". I ride the trigger all the way until the zone the bird is best broken in. What I found was that with a trigger under 3#, I'd fire the shotgun before my intended zone. Now, most always I broke the bird, as I shoot a sustained lead. (OK, I confess.. it made me feel like Wayne Mayes for one single shot!!!) But it was only a matter of time before I was a fraction behind and let one get away. (Occasionally one has to shoot swing through.) I know from experience, 3# is my lower limit for a shotgun trigger. Shooting 3 position rifle, my favorite trigger was right around 1#, maybe a little less. This said to illustrate that, IMO, different trigger types and weights are needed for different sports.

Now on to rifles/pistols, some people are prone to putting their finger on a trigger before they are ready to shoot. Unconsciously as they size up a situation, their finger is on the trigger. If one has a very light trigger, it can, and has been accidentally fired, with ofttimes a very, very sad conclusion. While a very light trigger may be much better for distance shooting, a heavier trigger, especially in novice hands, can be a safer option.

The way I see it, the 2 stage trigger is a compromise between safety and accuracy. It gives you the longer pull, the heavier weight first stage, as if to say, "are you SURE this is what you want to do." Then the shooter encounters the lighter 2nd stage, and they now have the benefit of a light pull trigger.

That is the long winded explanation of what I meant before when I wrote, "I do recognize the increased safety possibilities."

Tar

I think you actually understand, but just said it wrong...

The first stage of a 2 stage trigger is in fact "lighter" than the second stage. The second stage increases in weight, in this case, because it meets the disconnect and must move it out of the way.

[Sleepswithdogs]

I have a slightly different take on this issue. Shooting skeet from the high ready my finger goes on the trigger just a second before I call "pull". I ride the trigger all the way until the zone the bird is best broken in. What I found was that with a trigger under 3#, I'd fire the shotgun before my intended zone. Now, most always I broke the bird, as I shoot a sustained lead. (OK, I confess.. it made me feel like Wayne Mayes for one single shot!!!) But it was only a matter of time before I was a fraction behind and let one get away. (Occasionally one has to shoot swing through.) I know from experience, 3# is my lower limit for a shotgun trigger. Shooting 3 position rifle, my favorite trigger was right around 1#, maybe a little less. This said to illustrate that, IMO, different trigger types and weights are needed for different sports.

Now on to rifles/pistols, some people are prone to putting their finger on a trigger before they are ready to shoot. Unconsciously as they size up a situation, their finger is on the trigger. If one has a very light trigger, it can, and has been accidentally fired, with ofttimes a very, very sad conclusion. While a very light trigger may be much better for distance shooting, a heavier trigger, especially in novice hands, can be a safer option.

The way I see it, the 2 stage trigger is a compromise between safety and accuracy. It gives you the longer pull, the heavier weight first stage, as if to say, "are you SURE this is what you want to do." Then the shooter encounters the lighter 2nd stage, and they now have the benefit of a light pull trigger.

That is the long winded explanation of what I meant before when I wrote, "I do recognize the increased safety possibilities."

Tar

I think you actually understand, but just said it wrong...

The first stage of a 2 stage trigger is in fact "lighter" than the second stage. The second stage increases in weight, in this case, because it meets the disconnect and must move it out of the way.

Thanks, yes you are correct of course, the first stage is long, and lighter, (I think of it as mushy). I seldom shoot a 2 stage, I just don't like them and thanks for the reminder.

Tar