P53 Trigger pull question

[johan_steele]

In the last year I have handled almost a dozen original P53's, a P56 and P58 Sgt Fusil by Enfield. Something I've noticed is that ALL of the p53's have had an absolutely atrocious trigger pull. Now these are originals that have had more than 150 years of usage. I spoke with another collector that shoots originals and he agreed that the typical Tower P53 had an poor off the shelf trigger pull issue alhough he insisted there was a significant difference between hose made at Enfield/LA Co & Windsor vs "Tower" arms. I readily admit this is observation born from my own experience with originals and I would like to ask others who own originals in shootable condition to take a look at the trigger pull on their own arms.

If an original in firing condition do you believe there has been work done on the trigger, if it is stiff or an overly long pull do you believe that such is due to repair/modification/usage etc.

If you have an M1861 series, Lorenz M1854 or French model of similar vintage how does the trigger pull compare? My own experience with both the Springfield and French assorted French models is that they are quite nice trigger pulls with the Lorenz having the best of the batch of those I have handled.

From my own looking at mine and others in my immediate circle I would rate the Lorenz as consistently the best with the M1861 being good and French arms comparable. With the worst of those I have handled being Belgian or British. Is this consistent with what others have experienced from ORIGINAL period arms?

That said I have handled numerous British made civilian arms with superb trigger pulls. I would prefer to keep this discussion to military arms of the patterns used in the ACW. If you have reason to believe a stiff trigger pull, or as my father puts it "A trigger pull like a fence post" was/is intentional please put such forth.

 

[7th Texas Mounted Rifles]

Your description brings to mind the India Pattern examples of British arms, haha.

I'm of the mindset that arms marketed for the military - throughout history - have a less honed trigger pull.

While I am not claiming some early intention of 'combat trigger' vs 'match trigger' in any way… i would perhaps give credence to the chance that it is a byproduct of fulfilling government orders and the end product being furnished, as opposed to a scrutinizing individual/small batch buyer as the end user.

My personal experiences with era examples also tends to suggest that those made in times of peace are typically better in fit/finish/function, as opposed to wartime/high demand production, pieces for export/etc.

There are outliers and exceptions to every rule, of course.

For me, its the same as the trigger pull between a 91/30 vs a 1903-A3. One has been dubbed garbage by the masses - and the other is still a respectable bolt action.

And some QC guys just care more than others.

 

[John Winn]

I can't address your specific questions but a guess would be that, given that marksmanship wasn't really expected of volunteers and that line tactics and mass firing were the common practices (e.g. some regiments preferring buck and ball), trigger pull wouldn't have really been a consideration; just manufacture and sell as quick as possible. In the end very few would need to be real marksmen; just point and shoot at the opposite line through the smoke screen.

Now, given that there were many makers and providers some may have just been better at QC than others so some pieces may have had acceptable triggers.

 

[Old Soldier]

The military arms produced by Enfield and LACo are the best and are interchangeable. Forget Windsor as they only produced 10,000 Type 2s which are quite expensive collectors items. Many of the Type 3 and Type 4 were converted to Sniders so that just leaves the 'Tower' Enfields (Federal and Confederate) and the various private purchase P53s - Type 3 and 4. There are a number of Belgian Type3s available but the quality is variable (Belgian proofed barrels). All the others were made to pattern but were often 'just' to pattern and hand-fitted ie not interchangable. The trigger pull is detemined not just by the sear spring but also the sear/bent face.
(Diagram for those new to locks - the bridle has been removed)

Note - this is an early lock, made under contract by Barnett (London) before 1858 after which contracts were few and far between. it was accepted by Enfield hence the WD arrow)

The spring can be replaced or re-tempered (if you are brave - or know what you are doing!), but the best option is the sear/bent interface. This should be full contact, smooth surface and both polished as the best 'target' quality ones were (Safety bent is not a problem unless it marks the sear). Be careful filing the bent as this can affect the throw - and the operation of the whole lock. The release is governed by the sharpness of both bent and sear. Official advice is to get a gunsmith to do it! Alternatively, like the spring, you can buy in tumbers and sears and sort out the best combination. Another factor MAY be the smooth contact between the arm of the sear and the top of the trigger. The production trigger pull is 6-8lb. Online AI will tell you it is a two-stage trigger. IT isn't. The 'slack' is the trigger contacting the sear arm. Some don't!

The 'target quality' private purchase rifles are pretty good, in general and hold a high price. They were made to have acceptable triggerpulls. The rest are questionable. Most of the original P53s available today in Britain are the 'Tower' type. Do not try any Indian or Khyber weapons. The first 'Indian' locks were made by Enfield and would fit, but quality was not as guaranteed. Any P53 with a British proofmark (London or Birmingham) are private purchase and vary from excellent to apalling!

 

[Rhea Cole]

I too have wondered about the hard trigger pull of the original Enfields I have fired. I asked the gunsmith / collector that owned it, "Is this supposed to be like this?"

"Are you familiar with the 300% rule?" Was his reply. "Look at the hammer."

I had never thought about it. My old pot metal cap gun could ignite a cap…

As he explained it, think about who the Enfield was intended for: illiterate peasants that had never so much as wound a clock. The Brown Bess weighs 12 pounds for a reason.

The only tool that the typical British recruit had ever wielded was a grubbing hoe. Everything on the musket is 300% of what is required. That includes the trigger mechanism.

He speculated that the hard trigger pull was deliberate. It acted as a safety device. You don't accidentally fire one of those things… 300% was about right.

His was the only original matchlock I have ever handled. I am sure that he knew what he was talking about.

But n contrast, an acquaintance here in town inherited the notorious Jack Hinson's rifle. It is a competition rifle with a set trigger. Compared with the military hammers I was familiar with and Hinson's looks ridiculously small. It is that of a small caliber pistol.the typical hammer would have pulled the rifle a bit off line.

The 300% rule & your dad's fence post are two sides of the same coin. Johan, that is how it was explained to me.

 

[Old Soldier]

The 300% rule. It was why they have lasted so long - they were meant to last. They were not M16s! As for weight, the old Brown Bess weighed the same as most European and American long smoothbore muskets. (The No4 rifle weighed 9lbs loaded and the M1 Garand weighed just short of 12lbs loaded.)

BTW - the British solder was not an 'illiterate peasant' in 1850 nor was he considered as such by the designers. They had not been 'peasants' since some centuries before the Industrial Revolution. They were quite literate and trained to shoot accurately and needed a rifle that could stand the rigors of campagn - and still hit the target. We followed US practice with the L85 - no one will be firing them after 10 years, never mind 160 years!

 

[Don Dixon]

One reason System Lorenz weapons might have had a better trigger despite being the product of artisanal production by machine and hand work to standard gauges was the fact that Austrian Army battalions each had a Vienna arsenal trained armorer who had to pass a civil service examination before he could be assigned to the field.

 

[bayonet]

The 300% rule. It was why they have lasted so long - they were meant to last. They were not M16s! As for weight, the old Brown Bess weighed the same as most European and American long smoothbore muskets. (The No4 rifle weighed 9lbs loaded and the M1 Garand weighed just short of 12lbs loaded.)

BTW - the British solder was not an 'illiterate peasant' in 1850 nor was he considered as such by the designers. They had not been 'peasants' since some centuries before the Industrial Revolution. They were quite literate and trained to shoot accurately and needed a rifle that could stand the rigors of campagn - and still hit the target. We followed US practice with the L85 - no one will be firing them after 10 years, never mind 160 years!

Actually I own several Rev War period muskets and the Brown Bess does weigh the most. Bigger buttstock, thicker stock most notable the neck between the butt & lock. But hey gunpowder costs $ so best use the bayonet or use that heavy butt of the weapon to bash in the skull of a wounded or sleeping (Paoli, Old Tappan Massacre) Yankee.

 

[Old Soldier]

Actually I own several Rev War period muskets and the Brown Bess does weigh the most. Bigger buttstock, thicker stock most notable the neck between the butt & lock. But hey gunpowder costs $ so best use the bayonet or use that heavy butt of the weapon to bash in the skull of a wounded or sleeping (Paoli, Old Tappan Massacre) Yankee.

In battle you only get one shot. Thank God for the bayonet and butt.

 

[Old Soldier]

One reason System Lorenz weapons might have had a better trigger despite being the product of artisanal production by machine and hand work to standard gauges was the fact that Austrian Army battalions each had a Vienna arsenal trained armorer who had to pass a civil service examination before he could be assigned to the field.

The Lorenz, the Charleville, the M1855/61/63 and all the other issue muskets used exactly the same system as the Enfield, only the proportions and screw positions were different.

M 1861....................................................................................Lorenz

Maintain Your Lockplate | 13thvirginia

www.13thva.com

 

[yulzari]

Their service life for the land Musket and Pattern 1851 and 1853 was 12 years at which point regiments could return them to stores in exchange for a new one merely on the age.

 

[Rhea Cole]

Their service life for the land Musket and Pattern 1851 and 1853 was 12 years at which point regiments could return them to stores in exchange for a new one merely on the age.

I hadn't thought about it before, but given the metallurgy, that makes sense. The barrels would have been out of true & iron lock mechanisms worn.

 

[JackADriscoll]

This is a fun one. I went into the gun room and compared my Belgian 1857 lock dated Enfield and it has a great trigger slightly better than 1859 lock dated Springfield. On comparison of all I have my 1842 Springfield is my worst trigger

 

[Old Soldier]

Their service life for the land Musket and Pattern 1851 and 1853 was 12 years at which point regiments could return them to stores in exchange for a new one merely on the age.

Considering that the service life of the issue P53 was less than 12 years - more like 8 years - that seems to be an old carried-over regulation Type 2s were disposed of from 1858 when the Type 3 was introduced. The servicable Type 3s and 4s were converted into Sniders from 1866-68 when Enfield started production of Sniders from new. The P51's life was less than 5 years, being retired after the Crimean War (1855) as was the P53 Type 1. However, it was not uncommon to find Snider-Enfields that are dated 1860 still in service in volunteer, militia and colonial units in the 1880s. (Snider artilliery carbine still on issue to Canadian garrison artillery until 1901)

** Many older ones were found in Volunteer Force units but these will have disappeared by 1871 when they came under War Office control and became more integrated with the Regular Army.

In reality, the regimental armorers returned any rifle they deemed 'unserviceable' - unable to meet the requirements of the issue weapon - in return for a new one. Many would have been 'junk assemblies' - made up from unserviceable components. Worn barrels or broken stocks were not uncommon. Any returned ones went to Pimlico - the main repair depot - who decided which ones could be repaired and reissued, which ones were to be marked as 'sold out of service' (opposing arrows over the barrel proof), those 'unserviceable' (mirrored R on the barrel and stock) and sold on to civilian gunsmiths and those which were destined for scrap - same as every other army. (Metal parts for melting down and stocks for firewood)

 

[ConfederateCanuck]

I have an 1853 Enfield TOWER made in Birmingham. It had a trigger pull heavier than I wanted (too heavy for target shooting or deer hunting), so I reduced the trigger pull. Ditto for an 1853 produced for the British Military. Ditto for an 1841 Mississippi (which had an even heavier trigger pull which I believe was in the 16-22 pound range of trigger pull). Even my 1863 Sharps and Burnside Carbine was a bit heavy for my personal liking.

They were all 12 or more pounds of trigger pull. I personally believe that was deliberate to avoid accidental discharge. With adrenaline pumping in a battle situation, that seems to make sense.

 

[Old Soldier]

The official pull was 6 - 8 lbs when it was in service, but those darn sear springs get old.

 

[ConfederateCanuck]

The official pull was 6 - 8 lbs when it was in service, but those darn sear springs get old.

6-8 lbs is what I try to achieve when I lighten the trigger. I file the notch in the tumbler. Do other folks have success filing the sear spring?

 

[ConfederateCanuck]

In battle you only get one shot. Thank God for the bayonet and butt.

That one shot is a problem when you walk to your deer hunting tree stand in the dark, when bears known to inhabit same area. Considered mounting the bayonet but decided a Remington New Model Army was a better option to carry (can't carry a modern handgun in Canad-istan).

 

[Old Soldier]

That one shot is a problem when you walk to your deer hunting tree stand in the dark, when bears known to inhabit same area. Considered mounting the bayonet but decided a Remington New Model Army was a better option to carry (can't carry a modern handgun in Canad-istan).

Try a SMLE - you got 10 rounds then - if it is allowed in Canadistan.

 

[Old Soldier]

6-8 lbs is what I try to achieve when I lighten the trigger. I file the notch in the tumbler. Do other folks have success filing the sear spring?

You replace or re-temper the spring. The sear spring is the best option since it is easily removeable - and easily replaced - even with a reproduction spring. Keep the original for selling on. Saves on files too!