Gen 3 DAOs...is the trigger that bad?
- Thread starter BrianXIX
- Start date
Arik
Member
Good luck hope you like it
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk 2
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk 2
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2005
- Messages
- 8,005
- Reaction score
- 7,073
Trigger pull on a 3rd Gen DAO is better than SIGMA, not as light M&P or Glock. It is not as light as SIG Sauer DAK or HK LEM.
Badkarma 1
US Veteran
I like to describe the DAO pull on my 5946 as a cross between a J and K frame Smith. Starts out kinda stiff like a J frame, but once you get it moving its as smooth as a K frame.
I pent a lot of time behind a TDA SIG P226, and the transition never really bothered me. Same for the S&W, Beretta, HK, etc. I guess my fooling around with the Glock system made me want a consistent trigger from start to finish, so the 5946 came into the good here. Thing is though it does outshoot the Glorp, and for a semi-beat up old police piece it gives the new wonders out there a real run for their money! Dale
I pent a lot of time behind a TDA SIG P226, and the transition never really bothered me. Same for the S&W, Beretta, HK, etc. I guess my fooling around with the Glock system made me want a consistent trigger from start to finish, so the 5946 came into the good here. Thing is though it does outshoot the Glorp, and for a semi-beat up old police piece it gives the new wonders out there a real run for their money! Dale
photoman
Member
I guess it's blasphemy to say around here... but if you want to try a really nice DAO trigger, try a SIG P250. The gun is a cheesy feeling piece but the trigger is unreal.
Arik
Member
That gun failed miserably partially due to the trigger. You must have gotten a good one
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk 2
smithscott
Member
In my limited experience, there are two very different S&W DAO trigger feels.
1) The original 3rd Generation DAO guns with the extended (at the rear) slide.
2) The newer (including TSW) guns that use the standard slide.
The original guns partially cock the DAO hammer (think of a hammer-fired version of the Glock action or the HK LEM), so the trigger pull is shorter and not as heavy. The newer guns have a true DAO trigger (like a revolver) and the trigger finger fully cocks and releases the hammer. The newer action requires more work from the shooter and, to me, is like the HK LEM when in the uncocked (second-strike) mode. It is not a particularly nice trigger feel.
The older DAO action has better geometry from a leverage view, allowing for the shorter and smoother trigger pull. This is important for shooters with short fingers as the older guns have a shorter trigger reach. I have found that shooters, including me, who can shoot the older DAO guns very well often struggle with the trigger reach on the newer DAO guns. My personal belief is that the older DAO action was well ahead of its time, especially with today's emphasis on SIG's DAK and HK's LEM.
The older gun's action feels (to me) like a very nice revolver action. The pull is very smooth and not very long. It is longer than the Glock trigger, but is much smoother, lacking the annoying "sprong" break. It lends itself to a rolling trigger pull. The reset is noticeably longer than the SA reset on the S&W TDA. It really feels like the revolver's reset.
A functional difference is that the older DAO, like the Glock SFA, does not have a second-strike capability as the cycling of the slide is needed to pre-cock the hammer and put the action in position to move the hammer. If the hammer falls and the cartridge in the chamber does not go bang, a "tap-rack" immediate action is required to get the gun running. The newer DAO guns have a true second-strike capability, but my training has me do the "tap-rack" immediate action. That training, combined with the fact that modern ammo is very reliable, make this difference insignificant, especially when the advantages of the older DAO action are considered.
1) The original 3rd Generation DAO guns with the extended (at the rear) slide.
2) The newer (including TSW) guns that use the standard slide.
The original guns partially cock the DAO hammer (think of a hammer-fired version of the Glock action or the HK LEM), so the trigger pull is shorter and not as heavy. The newer guns have a true DAO trigger (like a revolver) and the trigger finger fully cocks and releases the hammer. The newer action requires more work from the shooter and, to me, is like the HK LEM when in the uncocked (second-strike) mode. It is not a particularly nice trigger feel.
The older DAO action has better geometry from a leverage view, allowing for the shorter and smoother trigger pull. This is important for shooters with short fingers as the older guns have a shorter trigger reach. I have found that shooters, including me, who can shoot the older DAO guns very well often struggle with the trigger reach on the newer DAO guns. My personal belief is that the older DAO action was well ahead of its time, especially with today's emphasis on SIG's DAK and HK's LEM.
The older gun's action feels (to me) like a very nice revolver action. The pull is very smooth and not very long. It is longer than the Glock trigger, but is much smoother, lacking the annoying "sprong" break. It lends itself to a rolling trigger pull. The reset is noticeably longer than the SA reset on the S&W TDA. It really feels like the revolver's reset.
A functional difference is that the older DAO, like the Glock SFA, does not have a second-strike capability as the cycling of the slide is needed to pre-cock the hammer and put the action in position to move the hammer. If the hammer falls and the cartridge in the chamber does not go bang, a "tap-rack" immediate action is required to get the gun running. The newer DAO guns have a true second-strike capability, but my training has me do the "tap-rack" immediate action. That training, combined with the fact that modern ammo is very reliable, make this difference insignificant, especially when the advantages of the older DAO action are considered.
One of my first gun purchases was a former CBP 5946 many years ago. I liked that gun, the trigger was decent and it shot well. Frankly, it was a better trigger than a ton of the DAO stuff out there today (Ruger etc). If I were to carry one I'd go DAO since I really dislike the slide mounted safety on S&W's, that said I'd rather carry a number of other guns before a 3rd gen.
photoman
Member
Gotta love the internet... The P250 didn't "fail miserably". It's a good gun that has a very cheesy plastic feel and everyone complains about the long trigger because they don't know how to shoot it.
red feather
Member
I put a wolfe spring in my 3953 (hammer/trigger spring) and now its just about perfect..
Just like no two airplanes fly the same way, so you have to get checked out in both, no two different model guns shoot the same way so you should become familiar with each model you shoot.
I don't mind the DAO a bit, but then I started out with revolvers first.
I still maintain to this day that nothing keeps your trigger pull honest like a double action revolver.
Get good with double action and your trigger pull will work with little modification on any gun you pick up, including rifles LOL.
I don't mind the DAO a bit, but then I started out with revolvers first.
I still maintain to this day that nothing keeps your trigger pull honest like a double action revolver.
Get good with double action and your trigger pull will work with little modification on any gun you pick up, including rifles LOL.
RUN2424
Member
I picked a 4044 at a gun,being my first smith and hearing good things about them could not pass it up $320 OTD. But the DAO was to much for me,not say any thing bad about it. Just not my cup of tea. I have now
the 6906,469,4006 and 915.Yes once bit by the smith bug there is no cure.
the 6906,469,4006 and 915.Yes once bit by the smith bug there is no cure.
Similar threads
