New to me Walther KKJ-T
- Thread starter savagecanuck
- Start date
Got Juice?
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Peoples Republik of Kanukkistan
Not a set trigger.
Some folks just can't be told otherwise Dave
Some folks just can't be told otherwise Dave
Hey Ryan, does the plunger stay in a certain position all the time (either in, or out) or does it "reset" every time you fire? As in, if you had it in the low pull weight setting then fired, and cocked the bolt, would it still be in the low weight setting, or would you have to manipulate the plunger each time you fire to get the lower pull weight?
the plunger stays in the same position, you either lock it in for the heavier pull, or twist and release it for the lighter pull, it's a one time set where as with a set trigger this would have to be done every time the bolt is cycled, as by means of either a second set trigger or by pushing the trigger blade forward into the set postion
Gentlemen, without anyone trying to have the last word, can we agree on some things about this trigger, regardless whether it can be legitimately called set trigger?
The claim is made that when the set stud is activated the trigger does not reduce the pull weight to ounces, but rather only by half (50%).
This is contradicted by the information from Walther. When the set stud is set the pull weight is reduced from approximately 3 pounds to 5-6 ounces. I have no doubt that someone who has used the trigger can confirm this.
To be clear, it should be quite obvious (by now) that the trigger(s) described in the above is not the same trigger as found on the KKJ-T and as a result the explanation offered is not relevant to the KKJ-T trigger.
It's perfectly fine to say that the KKJ-T trigger with the "set stud" is not a traditional "set trigger" like a DST (double set trigger) or even an SST (single set trigger like the CZ 453 or 527). Some might contend that the latter trigger is not truly a set trigger, either.
But let us not quibble over splitting semantic hairs. The KKJ-T trigger is set with the set stud. It goes down from pounds to ounces. Still not a set trigger? That's fine. As I said earlier, it's OK to be wrong. I appear to be in good company.
The claim is made that when the set stud is activated the trigger does not reduce the pull weight to ounces, but rather only by half (50%).
This is contradicted by the information from Walther. When the set stud is set the pull weight is reduced from approximately 3 pounds to 5-6 ounces. I have no doubt that someone who has used the trigger can confirm this.
Could be just an incorrect application of terminology.
I have 2 factory manuals with my rifles, and one showing Walther's set trigger. my 60's Vintage UIT manual shows a reverse blade in the front of the trigger guard. The Main trigger is in the standard location.
My 80's Manual shows another version where the set trigger is at the rear of the trigger gaurd, and then a knurled post hair trigger in front of it.
When you look at the Pages 12-15 In the link I posted, those pages deal with the Set Trigger. Including naming all the parts.
The Match trigger has a force multiplying spring in it. Pages 10 and 11. detail 14 shows the weight adjustment screw. here is the kicker. The actual weight is adjusted using the tiny screw within the plunger. Then if you wish for a heavier pull, you push the plunger in, and then 1/4 turn, and the weight increases by roughly 45-50%
In Rifle Silhouette, I can only compete with my Walthers when the plunger is OUT and I adjust the pull to the min weight. If I push the plunger in, I get DQ'd
To be clear, it should be quite obvious (by now) that the trigger(s) described in the above is not the same trigger as found on the KKJ-T and as a result the explanation offered is not relevant to the KKJ-T trigger.
Not a set trigger.
Some folks just can't be told otherwise Dave
It's perfectly fine to say that the KKJ-T trigger with the "set stud" is not a traditional "set trigger" like a DST (double set trigger) or even an SST (single set trigger like the CZ 453 or 527). Some might contend that the latter trigger is not truly a set trigger, either.
But let us not quibble over splitting semantic hairs. The KKJ-T trigger is set with the set stud. It goes down from pounds to ounces. Still not a set trigger? That's fine. As I said earlier, it's OK to be wrong. I appear to be in good company.
Got Juice?
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Peoples Republik of Kanukkistan
Lmfao. Regardless, great trigger and fun guns to shoot.
Not trying to have the last word or arguing semantics, but stating specifics for all present and future readers to prevent misconception. The set stud presets a pull weight range and in no manner sets the trigger. If it does, try pulling the trigger with striker uncocked after setting the stud to the desired position. NOT A SET TRIGGER
You flatter yourself with your alignment. I'm done.
Last edited:
Me too (figuratively, of course).
Say what you will, or better still shout it -- Walther's nomenclature be damned! Assertions alone ought to count for something, eh?
I'm afraid your powers of expression have deserted you here. It's a shame as you were doing well before making your remarks personal.
What's left? As Got Juice? says, a great trigger. When the "s_ t stud" is operated it reduces the trigger weight from 3 lbs to 5-6 ounces. As I said earlier, if it's not a set trigger, that's OK with me. I'd like to get a KKJ-T just the same.
Tee-hee! Is this what happens when folks reach retirement age, they have nothing better to do than to squabble over the pedantic definition of a "set" trigger?
I have been quite amused at your expense, the lot of you involved
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/set%20trigger
Definition of set trigger
1: a trigger on a rifle that may be adjusted for the amount of pressure required to pull it
According to the fine folks at Merriam-Webster, even the Plain Jane CZ 452 and 455 triggers qualify as "set" triggers, for you may adjust the weight of pull for them. Fill in the blank: When one has adjusted the trigger pull weight mechanism, they have ____ the trigger pull to ____ lbs/oz. Hint: first word starts with an "S" and ends with a "T", three letters 
I have been quite amused at your expense, the lot of you involved
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/set%20triggerDefinition of set trigger
1: a trigger on a rifle that may be adjusted for the amount of pressure required to pull it
According to the fine folks at Merriam-Webster, even the Plain Jane CZ 452 and 455 triggers qualify as "set" triggers, for you may adjust the weight of pull for them. Fill in the blank: When one has adjusted the trigger pull weight mechanism, they have ____ the trigger pull to ____ lbs/oz. Hint: first word starts with an "S" and ends with a "T", three letters
I'm coming very late to this discussion, but, after reading some posts, have a point or two to make. I have one Walther (KK-MS) with the wonderful match trigger that I've teased down to about 3 oz. It is indeed different from the unit with the plunger in front of the trigger guard. I'd be interested in how the latter trigger accomplishes the weight-of-pull change from the 2-3 lb. range down to the 5-6 oz. range. Perhaps it doesn't work like a typical set trigger in which the set feature is a miniature percussion unit in itself, creating a finite delay before the sear is even actuated and thus in effect forming two lock mechanisms in series (I'm cribbing heavily here from Stuart Otteson's excellent The Bolt Action, p. 257). This feature is present on my Canjar single-set trigger that I have mounted on a Sako Vixen in 6 PPC. And it would also apply to setting via two triggers. If letting the plunger out sets up this pre-release mechanism, then it's a true set trigger.
On the other hand, if it operates differently--and still allows the two very-different ranges of weight-of-pull--then it's really superior to a standard set trigger. With the usual set trigger setup, the first stage or, to use Otteson's terms, the first lock mechanism, can take several milliseconds to actuate; Otteson notes that 2-3 ms. is what you'll find in the best, and the delay can be longer. If you add this "set time", as we might term it, to the usual lock time (sear release to firing pin contact with primer), the result is a much longer elapsed time from trigger-piece actuation to firing pin contact with the primer. So all of a sudden what was (with a standard 2- or 3-lever override trigger) a lock time of 2 ms. now becomes an elapsed time of 5 or 6 ms., something like the old Springfield M1903 lock time, and far too slow for target shooting (except, perhaps, benchrest where there is next-to-no movement of the rifle on the bags). If this Walther KKJ-T trigger with the forward plunger can accomplish 5-6 oz. let-off without the added time of a standard set component, thus retaining the fast lock time of the KK action, then it is truly a great trigger.
On the other hand, if it operates differently--and still allows the two very-different ranges of weight-of-pull--then it's really superior to a standard set trigger. With the usual set trigger setup, the first stage or, to use Otteson's terms, the first lock mechanism, can take several milliseconds to actuate; Otteson notes that 2-3 ms. is what you'll find in the best, and the delay can be longer. If you add this "set time", as we might term it, to the usual lock time (sear release to firing pin contact with primer), the result is a much longer elapsed time from trigger-piece actuation to firing pin contact with the primer. So all of a sudden what was (with a standard 2- or 3-lever override trigger) a lock time of 2 ms. now becomes an elapsed time of 5 or 6 ms., something like the old Springfield M1903 lock time, and far too slow for target shooting (except, perhaps, benchrest where there is next-to-no movement of the rifle on the bags). If this Walther KKJ-T trigger with the forward plunger can accomplish 5-6 oz. let-off without the added time of a standard set component, thus retaining the fast lock time of the KK action, then it is truly a great trigger.
Time to get my thread back on track.Not really concerned with the type of trigger more on how it will function.It feels pretty good but nothing like the trigger in my 1813 or the one in the MPR I sold.Non the less its pretty decent for an almost 50 year old sporterI,m more concerned how this old girl shoots and as soon as I can get a few hours to myself I will be trying it out.I love these old 22lr guns.I have no modern ones left after selling my MPR.I have a 1954-58 winchester 69a,1984 ish Anschutz 1813 and now the 1968 Walther.Love these old rimfires!!
Heres a few pics with the velcro cheek riser for benchwork.
Heres a few pics with the velcro cheek riser for benchwork.
Got Juice?
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Peoples Republik of Kanukkistan
Loving the pics, let us know how she shoots!!!!
These old Walthers are a real jewel, and i never tire of seeing them doing what they do best.
These old Walthers are a real jewel, and i never tire of seeing them doing what they do best.
