kwbikr
Member
I had a friend show me his newly acquired (and much used) 625 Model of 1989...I gave it a look and found it was unrelaible in single action hold and the pushoff was VERY light, just a thumb touch away. I asked if he was aware of these issues and he said the seller observed "you'll be using it in double action anyway" so no big deal. I offered to take a swing at repair and he agreed...
The gun was really tired and roughly handled at closer inspection. The sideplate screws were buggered, inside was very dirty and oily, it had a Wolff mainspring with a non-stock strain screw about three turns out from seated. When I got it fully apart I also noticed it had a bent and cut trigger return spring, and what looked (under an optical comparator) like very worn and maybe poorly done trigger and hammer cuts...the surfaces that should have been flat were really crooked and rough looking. In order to get the surfaces back to shape and function I used a jig and a Dremel with a 1000 grit disc sparingly.
When finished the surfaces looked uniform, shiny, and more importantly, squared. I radiused the hammer/trigger mating surfaces and arrived at a really sweet double action with 100% single action reliability. The push-off was fixed by the combination of replacing the trigger return spring and the resurfacing as well.
My question: After removing maybe .003-.005" to get the trigger/hammer engagement right, how much did I compromise the hardening on the parts? Truth be told I had a proper case-hardened old-school target hammer and .400 trigger set I could have donated...but I chose to use his parts instead...Any advice welcomed and thanks...
The gun was really tired and roughly handled at closer inspection. The sideplate screws were buggered, inside was very dirty and oily, it had a Wolff mainspring with a non-stock strain screw about three turns out from seated. When I got it fully apart I also noticed it had a bent and cut trigger return spring, and what looked (under an optical comparator) like very worn and maybe poorly done trigger and hammer cuts...the surfaces that should have been flat were really crooked and rough looking. In order to get the surfaces back to shape and function I used a jig and a Dremel with a 1000 grit disc sparingly.
When finished the surfaces looked uniform, shiny, and more importantly, squared. I radiused the hammer/trigger mating surfaces and arrived at a really sweet double action with 100% single action reliability. The push-off was fixed by the combination of replacing the trigger return spring and the resurfacing as well.
My question: After removing maybe .003-.005" to get the trigger/hammer engagement right, how much did I compromise the hardening on the parts? Truth be told I had a proper case-hardened old-school target hammer and .400 trigger set I could have donated...but I chose to use his parts instead...Any advice welcomed and thanks...
