by Ancient Order » Wed Jul 27, 2022 7:02 pm
I can't believe ANOTHER build with the same issue: not getting 2/3 coverage on the seer/striker lug. Every build I've done except one comes in at only about 1/3 coverage. OEM parts, non-OEM, doesn't seem to matter. The one build that was good has full coverage. Go figure. I should tear that one down, but I can't remember which one it was! This current build has ZP Slide/barrel, OEM trigger housing, LW 3.5 connector, Rook rails/locking block, ZP striker assy, OEM trigger bar, RP Hybrid Ranger shoe. Pin holes are perfect, pins slip right in. Very little slop in the slide. Swapped in OEM striker - same deal. I can't believe that I should have to bend the seer on every build, and can't figure out if I'm doing something wrong. I always strive for FTQ. At this point, all I can think of is the connector. It might be the geometry of the 3.5 (-) connector, which is what I always use because I don't like the feel of the standard connector. So I guess I'll swap in an OEM std connector and see if there's a difference. If anybody's run across this issue and knows why, PLEASE tell me!!
by RAMjetta » Mon Aug 01, 2022 8:15 pm
Glad you fixed the issue. I too would want to know what caused the problem.
JettaMan OUT!
by Hawkeye » Mon Aug 01, 2022 6:11 pm
Great!! You got seer coverage problem solved and I learned something new. Looks like the reason I don't seem to have this problem is I use Orenge county or Serpico trigger bars and trigger shoes.
by Ancient Order » Mon Aug 01, 2022 4:19 pm
Well, I went ahead and bent the seer kickup enough to get 80-90% coverage. So far, this is the only solution I've found that solves the problem in several builds. I read in Patriotgunbuilders that the Pre-EH OEM trigger bar solves this problem in P80's, but they're nowhere to be found at the moment. Also, that some aftermarket trigger bars don't have this problem - KM Tactical was specifically mentioned. I'll have to try those out to see what's different. After getting good coverage, with the stock connector I got 4 to 5.5 lb trigger pull and not great reset. Typical stock connector. Dropped in the LW 3.5 connector and got it down to 3 to 4 lb pull and nice quick reset. Happy with that. She passed all safety checks and drop tests - with a caveat: I had another instance of ejecting a round when dropped on the rear. This bothers me. I understand why it's happening - the inertia of the slide continues when the back or heel of the frame hits, enough to rack the slide and eject a round. When I pick it up, there's a round in the chamber and the trigger is set. No indication that it "fired". But, did it? I may have to try filming it to see exactly what happens. Anyway...here's a couple of pics. I haven't decided on sights yet. Probably not going with an optic on this one, at least not yet. It came with the usual 80P builder FO sights, so I might just go with that. Also, I was gonna add more bling, but I'm kinda liking the understated look. Maybe just add a silver TD mag release
by Ancient Order » Mon Aug 01, 2022 3:24 pm
RAMjetta wrote: ↑Fri Jul 29, 2022 1:24 pmAgain, have you tried using a P80 rear rail? Rook is good but even some of them could be part of a bad batch. They're not infallible. No. Not in this build. I'll have to work the stock rear rails, as usual. But I agree. I usually fit the stock rear rails and then swap in Rook rails, which has sometimes introduced new problems. Usually a tight slide, or hangups on the ejector (usually with aftermarket 30274 clones). The one thing I didn't try was installing the stock front locking block. I'm not really happy with the latest batch of Rook locking blocks. Got 6 of them and they're all really, really tight. Some won't go in at all.
by Ancient Order » Mon Aug 01, 2022 3:15 pm
Hawkeye wrote: ↑Fri Jul 29, 2022 12:44 pmIf all the parts swap doesn't help makes me think drilled holes are too low for the trigger housing. This is not your first build, so I don't think this is it. What trigger housing did you use, I read it is and OME but it is a gen 3 or a modified gen 4. What I am thinking is what would let the slide set higher or what might let the trigger housing set lower. If a gen 4 trigger housing is trimmed to much I wonder if it can sit lower? The only thing that can make the slide sit higher is pin holes drilled too high, but I don't think this is it. I would have to check my builds, but I have most of them with half to three quarter coverage. Yours look all most half coverage. If it passes a drop test, I say good to go. Yeah, this is where I'm scratching my head. Not to brag, but my pin holes are pretty damn near perfect. I'm using an OEM Gen 3 housing. Haven't started using the Gen 4 housing with the Rook rails yet, but might give that a try. After finishing the pin holes, I drop in the Rook rails and trigger housing and the pins slip right in. So I know that part is "good". Also, the top of the rear rails is flush with polymer at the rear of the frame, so the slide can't go any lower at the rear.
by RAMjetta » Fri Jul 29, 2022 1:24 pm
Again, have you tried using a P80 rear rail? Rook is good but even some of them could be part of a bad batch. They're not infallible.
JettaMan OUT!
by Hawkeye » Fri Jul 29, 2022 12:44 pm
If all the parts swap doesn't help makes me think drilled holes are too low for the trigger housing. This is not your first build, so I don't think this is it. What trigger housing did you use, I read it is and OME but it is a gen 3 or a modified gen 4. What I am thinking is what would let the slide set higher or what might let the trigger housing set lower. If a gen 4 trigger housing is trimmed to much I wonder if it can sit lower? The only thing that can make the slide sit higher is pin holes drilled too high, but I don't think this is it. I would have to check my builds, but I have most of them with half to three quarter coverage. Yours look all most half coverage. If it passes a drop test, I say good to go.
by Ancient Order » Thu Jul 28, 2022 11:13 pm
OEM trigger bar with OEM shoe - no change. Still around 50-60% Going in for the big bend. At least I have a spare in case I snap off the seer.
by Ancient Order » Thu Jul 28, 2022 8:30 pm
RAMjetta wrote: ↑Thu Jul 28, 2022 7:35 pmThe ghost backplate is fine. No need for an OEM. I thought you had an OEM bar with an RP shoe. Try a full OEM bar with shoe if you have one. Yeah, It's an OEM bar and RP shoe. I've got one more OEM trigger bar and shoe that isn't dedicated. I'll throw it in for shits and giggles. I just re-did the trigger bar and put a little bend on the cruciform, but it wasn't enough. I'll try the stock trigger before going back for more bend.
by RAMjetta » Thu Jul 28, 2022 7:35 pm
The ghost backplate is fine. No need for an OEM. I thought you had an OEM bar with an RP shoe. Try a full OEM bar with shoe if you have one.
JettaMan OUT!
by Ancient Order » Thu Jul 28, 2022 5:08 pm
No, haven't drop tested it yet. No point until I figure out why I'm not getting better coverage on my builds. It passes all the safety checks so that's a plus, but I'm fixated on finding an answer. I have a sneaking suspicion that there's a LOT of P80's out there with the same issue, just not being talked about. First thing I'm going to do, since it's an aftermarket trigger, is file a bit off the end of the trigger bar where it fits into the shoe. This will lengthen the pull slightly, but "should" "maybe" let the cruciform slide up a little more on the shelf. Right now, it's on the shelf, but just barely. Next is to get an OEM armorer's backplate. The one I have is a ghost. Last resort will be to bend the cruciform to get coverage. Shouldn't have to do that, but I think it may just be a P80 anomaly.
by RAMjetta » Thu Jul 28, 2022 10:29 am
Hawkeye wrote: ↑Thu Jul 28, 2022 9:54 am...It looks like it is border line go-no go. Yeah I meant to say that also.
JettaMan OUT!
by Hawkeye » Thu Jul 28, 2022 9:54 am
Have you droped tested it yet? It looks like it is border line go-no go. Yes, I too hate that long pre-travel, I use a trigger housing that I put a set screw in or bought one with one already in to shorten the pre-travel. Do you have a OME striker?
by Ancient Order » Wed Jul 27, 2022 9:20 pm
RAMjetta wrote: ↑Wed Jul 27, 2022 8:55 pmAncient Order wrote: ↑Wed Jul 27, 2022 8:48 pmOk. It looks like the connector made a tiny bit of difference. The hard thing is that everything is polished so it's hard to see through the reflection. You'll have to zoom way in on the photos to see, but it looks like I have abouuuut 2/3 coverage, at least at the tip of the striker lug. Thoughts? Looks like maybe ½ from the pics and that will be a very light pull. I wish. It's got a typical 5 lb pull with the std connector. Hell of a lot of pre-travel too.
by Ancient Order » Wed Jul 27, 2022 9:16 pm
RAMjetta wrote: ↑Wed Jul 27, 2022 8:51 pmAncient Order wrote: ↑Wed Jul 27, 2022 7:33 pmRAMjetta wrote: ↑Wed Jul 27, 2022 7:15 pmUmmmmmm I hate to say it but see what using standard rear rails get you. It probably shouldn't make a difference but between that and the connector one might be the issue. But, but, but...They're Rook rear rails! And front locking block. Same as all the others. Same as the others you say? Didn't you say that all but one of the others also have something in common? I'm just sayin. Yes, all the others have Rook rails. Not all have Rook front locking blocks. I have 'em, just haven't retrofitted yet. The common thing is the 3.5 connector. Gotta go back and watch Johnny Glocks connector geometry videos again.
by RAMjetta » Wed Jul 27, 2022 8:55 pm
Ancient Order wrote: ↑Wed Jul 27, 2022 8:48 pmOk. It looks like the connector made a tiny bit of difference. The hard thing is that everything is polished so it's hard to see through the reflection. You'll have to zoom way in on the photos to see, but it looks like I have abouuuut 2/3 coverage, at least at the tip of the striker lug. Thoughts? Looks like maybe ½ from the pics and that will be a very light pull.
JettaMan OUT!
by RAMjetta » Wed Jul 27, 2022 8:51 pm
Ancient Order wrote: ↑Wed Jul 27, 2022 7:33 pmRAMjetta wrote: ↑Wed Jul 27, 2022 7:15 pmUmmmmmm I hate to say it but see what using standard rear rails get you. It probably shouldn't make a difference but between that and the connector one might be the issue. But, but, but...They're Rook rear rails! And front locking block. Same as all the others. Same as the others you say? Didn't you say that all but one of the others also have something in common? I'm just sayin.
JettaMan OUT!
by Ancient Order » Wed Jul 27, 2022 8:48 pm
Ok. It looks like the connector made a tiny bit of difference. The hard thing is that everything is polished so it's hard to see through the reflection. You'll have to zoom way in on the photos to see, but it looks like I have abouuuut 2/3 coverage, at least at the tip of the striker lug. Thoughts?
by Ancient Order » Wed Jul 27, 2022 7:33 pm
RAMjetta wrote: ↑Wed Jul 27, 2022 7:15 pmUmmmmmm I hate to say it but see what using standard rear rails get you. It probably shouldn't make a difference but between that and the connector one might be the issue. But, but, but...They're Rook rear rails! And front locking block. Same as all the others.
by RAMjetta » Wed Jul 27, 2022 7:15 pm
Ummmmmm I hate to say it but see what using standard rear rails get you. It probably shouldn't make a difference but between that and the connector one might be the issue.
JettaMan OUT!