locktime is faster better?

gslinger

gslinger

New member
Rating - 100%
89   0   0
Location
Winnipeg
Which guns benefits more from faster locktime custom built precision or factory guns?

What are the benefits if there are any to getting faster locktime on a factory action.

Who does faster locktime benefit the most (prone/benchrest/offhand) and why?

Thank you.
 
any gun can benifit from a fast lock time, it will decrease the time between the pull of the trigger and ignition of the primer less time, less movement more accuracy. theres a good section in hatcher notebook about palma shooters cutting off rear end of the springfield 1903 bot assemby to decreade the time from .00059 to .00049 but the they started getting light primer strikes. seams to me any advantage that is gained can only be taken advantage of if fine tuned and the shooter is of a level to take advantage of it
 
Mostly when positional shooting.

Accuracy would be improved more effectively in the bench/ bipod world with better trigger discipline before a millisecond of faster lock time would help.
 
Mr. Mauser decided super fast lock time was not for his new toy.

But then he had other needs in mind.

In a modern action, "faster" lock time is really in the mind of the marketer.

When you can see a difference faster then a millisecond, they will likely call you SUPER...

Jerry
 
It depends on the type of shooting: David Tubbs always always favored extremely fast lock time (top US positional shooter) while Tony Boyer (top US benchrest shooter) favored more consistent ignition of a longer lock time (heavier firing pin).
I shoot prone more than 90% of the time and standard Remington 700 4ms locktime is good enough for me.

Alex
 
I have Jewel, RPA, Rifle Basix, Barnard, Savage Accutrigger, Military and, yes, even good old Soviet Union SKS and I will be honest and say once the trigger is pulled I cannot, simply cannot, tell the difference. So, for me, locktime is about the last thing I'd concern myself with.
 
The British tubular NRA receivers went through several variations of springs to get fast locktime. There is a Brit' living in France who was somewher in the Angel, Swing, Paramount, CG, Millenium cycle. He ended up using Belleville disc springs to drive the striker. If memory services, it was considered a big deal to get a fast lock time. Once the technicians had wrung out that part of the equation, they thought they had things licked. But one of those in an aluminum chassis and go win matches. Then some clever Kiwis came up with bedding the rifles on gobs of polymer cushion washers. And the Barnards started kicking everyone's backsides.
 
AlexF said:
It depends on the type of shooting: David Tubbs always always favored extremely fast lock time (top US positional shooter) while Tony Boyer (top US benchrest shooter) favored more consistent ignition of a longer lock time (heavier firing pin).
I shoot prone more than 90% of the time and standard Remington 700 4ms locktime is good enough for me.

Alex
Click to expand...

Bang on. Striving for faster lock time by using lighter firing pins can lead to inconsistent ignition. There is a balance that must be met. For the average person/hunter it may be a non issue. For the competitor conistent igniton is an issue.
 
Faster lock time, should in theory lessen the effects of a flinch. Meaning from the time the trigger sear breaks, to the time the firing pin is struck is minimized, thus leaving less time to move the rifle in that amount of time. Minimal really.
I would be willing to bet, that at least 9/10 if not 99/100 shooters could not tell the difference between 2 modern rifles. It is milliseconds we are talking about, and unless you spent your life behind a rifle as your day job, you probably could not feel a difference.

Like Ganderite says, there is a multitude of different, more important, things to worry about in your setup than lock time.
 
If its something you can make a significant improvement to with little effort then by all means do it. Should it be your primary concern? likely not.
 
For most people it probably doesn't matter much. If you are a top off-hand shooter it's likely quite important. In the Schuetzen world it's something that is considered important by many.

Chris.
 
gslinger said:
Which guns benefits more from faster locktime custom built precision or factory guns?

What are the benefits if there are any to getting faster locktime on a factory action.

Who does faster locktime benefit the most (prone/benchrest/offhand) and why?

Thank you.
Click to expand...

Prone and BR will benefit little if any from faster locktime.

Offhand shooting, at the very highest levels, probably benefit from faster locktime.


pei precision said:
...hatcher notebook ... the time from .00059 to .00049
Click to expand...

FYI you're out by a zero. .0059s to .0049s (or, 5.9ms to 4.9ms) is probably what's there.

maple_leaf_eh said:
The British tubular NRA receivers went through several variations of springs to get fast locktime. There is a Brit' living in France who was somewher in the Angel, Swing, Paramount, CG, Millenium cycle. He ended up using Belleville disc springs to drive the striker. If memory services, it was considered a big deal to get a fast lock time. Once the technicians had wrung out that part of the equation, they thought they had things licked. But one of those in an aluminum chassis and go win matches. Then some clever Kiwis came up with bedding the rifles on gobs of polymer cushion washers. And the Barnards started kicking everyone's backsides.
Click to expand...

The "Brit living in France" is now deceased. His name was Laurie Ingram and though I never did get a chance to meet him in person he seemed like a wonderful fellow. The "Swing" rifle was a joint design by George SWenson and Laurie INGram.

There are a couple of more rifles in the family you mention; approximately in time order they are, Swing, Paramount, RPA, Millennium and INCH.

Other people involved in that rifle family are:
- Robert Chombart of Normandy, France (still alive). He was involved with several of the rifles. "INCH" was "INgram"-"CHombart" and is the newest of the line. Have not yet seen one in person but am looking forward to it.

- John Hastie (alive) and Tonly Halberg (deceased) of New Zealand were "H&H Enterprises" and they made the "CG Millennium". This had the "Flexi-bed" system you mention

- RPA was made by a couple of guys in England (Ron and Pete, I forget their surnames)

I don't know the story behind Barnards and I think that they don't have too much relation to the above line of rifles but I am open to correction (and BTW the Barnards are wonderful actions)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom