besley?

Hi, I got a couple bisley triggers (blued) and installed one with a blued bisley take off grip frame on one of my large frame blackhawks. The trigger is a bad fit in the trigger guard, the top of trigger protrudes from the top of the grip frame with hammer down, and really bad when hammer is cocked! I also see this on new production bisley models, is this look the new normal for ruger? I ask this here so those interested can scroll thru other posts of bisleys, because I can't post a picture, to stupid. Thanks---bedrockfred

bedrockfred said:

... the top of trigger protrudes from the top of the grip frame with hammer down...

Click to expand...

Can you describe that better?

Yes, it should be a smooth transition where trigger meets frame, but there is a ledge of metal that hangs down and should be recessed in to the frame? Look at a few pictures of the newest model bisleys.--bedrockfred

Don't know about new ones, but I have an older one and when the hammer is down the top of the trigger transitions smoothly into the bottom of the frame. When cocked there is about a 3/32" "ledge" where the front of the top of the trigger transitions to the frame.

After just looking at some of Lipsey's newer models I can see what you are referring to. There is a noticeable ledge with the hammer down on them.

Ruger's parts finishing tends to go in trends depending on who is performing the procedure for that month. That's the most likely reason. I wouldn't call it a design change, just a finishing variation as in sloppy work.

Someone different could be finishing grip frames and polished the top of the trigger guard hole higher up than normal, sometimes to remove a casting pit. Also if the trigger slot in the trigger guard is not long enough to the front, the trigger will contact there and rotate forward enough.

And/or someone finishing the triggers didn't polish off enough of the front top of the trigger half circle. If the casting seam is still showing, that's the problem for sure. I've had to correct these triggers on occasion. And hammers, loading gates, grip frame ears, etc., to look right.

Yep, don't like it! I removed the one I have and put my blackhawk back to stock plow frame and trigger! The large bore rugers are painfull enough to shoot. Sure can imagine these triggers drawing blood!--bedrockfred

It actually is a design change. For example, the 1st runs of the 5.5" stainless 45, 41 and the one run of 44 Bisleys have the old-style Bisley trigger with the "smooth" transition you refer to. All the 5.5" SS Bisleys runs made after have the new ledge, including the 357, 44 special, 480 and 454 models. I DON'T like it at all. Cramps my trigger finger as there's less room for it and the ledge, even with the hammer at rest, is just plain ugly. 2006 or so change, blue Bisleys too.

Here's my OM Vaq 44mag Bisely that has a pretty darn smooth transition. I think this is what we were hoping for when bedrock's parts all came together....





And with it cocked.

And here's bedrock's situation before swapping back....



And cocked.

Thanks for adding the pictures sturminator, as they say,"A picture is worth a thousand words"---bedrockfred

Well I don't see that as a deal breaker, just something else to fine tune.

Like the fit behind the Bisley trigger, I take that up flush with the inside of the trigger guard.

When I install the Bisley trigger in a standard trigger guard I don't extend the slot as far forward as the slot in the Bisley guard; so it acts as a forward trigger stop and fat fingers fit in better before cocking.

Vaquero Hammers need the ugly top flat blended into the top strap more gracefully. Sometimes even extended with tig welding. Shown here with a super hammer fit to an OM windage-adjustable only model:



And the ugly web behind the standard trigger also need removal and flush fit to the inside of the trigger guard:

Older model Bisley

Much better fit.

Never noticed it but yea.

I just checked my 6 Bisley Ruger's and they all have that same ledge hanging down from the frame.
Looks worse when the gun is cocked.

On three of them I noticed that if you pull the trigger with the hammer down, there's no rearward movement in the trigger. It's rock solid.
But on the other three there's about a 1/4 inch rearward movement in the trigger with the hammer down.

Why is there that difference?

Transfer bar. Has nothing to do with being a Bisely or not.

For the trigger to come back, the transfer bar must rise. Three of your Bisleys' transfer bars clear the firing pin when the trigger is pulled with the hammer down, and three do not. Simple fact of variations in transfer bar fitting and calibers. What calibers are the Bisleys blocking the trigger and which do not?

Hondo44 said:

...Three of your Bisleys' transfer bars clear the firing pin when the trigger is pulled with the hammer down, and three do not. Simple fact of variations in transfer bar fitting and calibers....

Click to expand...

I thought it was just trigger creep, all of my Ruger Blackhawk/SBHs do that (creep ~1/4" before releasing the hammer). Is this how to detect if the transfer bar is being pinched?

P89DC,

Hondo44 said:

What calibers are the Bisleys blocking the trigger and which do not?

Click to expand...

P89DC said:

I thought it was just trigger creep, all of my Ruger Blackhawk/SBHs do that (creep ~1/4" before releasing the hammer). Is this how to detect if the transfer bar is being pinched?

Click to expand...

Once the hammer is cocked, a 1/4" of creep is unheard of in a Ruger single action.


IF TRIGGER DOESN"T RETURN, Transfer bar is pinched:
If the transfer bar is hanging up under the hammer face, since it's connected to the trigger, it prevents the trigger from returning. The transfer bar is slightly too thick. If both ends of the trigger return spring are connected (under the grips), or even if you have only one leg of the spring connected it should pull down the transfer bar if it's the correct thickness. When this happens, the transfer bar safety function will not work. If the gun were dropped, a live round in the chamber under the hammer will fire.

TO TEST HAMMER/TRANSFER BAR FOR MISS-FIRES:
With hammer fully cocked, press on the transfer bar to extend the firing pin and observe how far thru the recoil shield it protrudes. Now keep the trigger pulled back, drop the hammer and observe the firing pin again. If firing pin protrudes the same amount, you're good to go. If it doesn't protrude the same amount, you need to remove just enough metal from the top face of the hammer nose so the transfer bar is pushed tight against the firing pin and the frame. If you remove too much, the transfer bar will not perform its safety function and will be pinched. Also make sure hammer has no friction or contact with grip frame ears around its base to slow its fall and you may have miss-fires; another potential issue when making hammer changes.

This is not uncommon however, and it's a very simple fix. File the second step of the hammer face, counting from the top, just a bit until the bar no longer hangs up. Don't take too much off or you'll have miss-fires. If that happens file a little more off the top step of the hammer.

TO TEST AT THE RANGE:
Double check the safety function by loading a live round in the next chamber to cycle under the hammer, point down range, cock the hammer, hold with thumb, release the trigger to uncock the hammer, take finger off trigger and release your thumb to let the hammer fall. The round will not fire if safety transfer bar is functioning correctly.

Hondo44 said:

Transfer bar. Has nothing to do with being a Bisely or not.

For the trigger to come back, the transfer bar must rise. Three of your Bisleys' transfer bars clear the firing pin when the trigger is pulled with the hammer down, and three do not. Simple fact of variations in transfer bar fitting and calibers. What calibers are the Bisleys blocking the trigger and which do not?

Click to expand...

Thanks,

I see what you're talking about now.
Two of the 44 Magnums and one of the 45 Colts clear the firing pin, while two of the 45 Colts and the 454 SBH do not.