Single vs Double Triggers?

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I've shot them both on BP and like them both. For target shooting you can't beat doubles. For live targets I prefer a single trigger.
I've a single t on my flinter and it prints fine.

BTW..."Strength and Honor" is the unofficial motto of 5th Special Forces Group that has been known as 'The Legion' long before any Hollywood movie.
 
I don't know for sure but I suspect they go back as far as the crossbow.

Several people on a crossbow site say set triggers existed on crossbows in 1540.

The wheellock goes back to around 1500 and I have no doubts that some of the early ones used some sort of set trigger.
 
Thanks for the reply. So I suppose that double set triggers would be PC for a long rifle of the entire 18th century.
 
LongrifleDoc said:
Does anyone know when double set triggers began to appear?

Some of the Jaegers from the early 1700s had them...As a generalization, most early Lancasters from Pennsylvania (pre-1770) would have single triggers...But NC rifles after that time did...
 
LongrifleDoc said:
Does anyone know when double set triggers began to appear?

Although they had been known about for a while it seems that they sort of became fashionable somewhere just prior to 1800. RCA 42 which has now been attributed to Valentine Beck looks to be an early rifle (maybe 1770ish)that was first built with a single trigger then later backfit with a double trigger. The original guard has a rather awkward looking modification to fit which does not go well with the rest of the rifle's styling so I would think that it was not done by the original builder.

On the other hand, almost all of what we now call Tennessee rifles which are generally post 1800, were fit with double triggers, but some of them were placed very far forward in the bow. Apparently the idea was to just tickle the side of the front trigger instead of pulling in order to prevent jreking the trigger.
 
They seemed to have worked the mechanism out pretty well by the early 1770s.

"Christiansbrunn, the 9th September, 1773
[Christian’s Spring Moravian settlement, PA]

At your request I have prepared a good rifle and sent it over to Mr. John Hopson together with 4 pounds of Powder. The rifle is decorated with silver wire and well made, as well as tested and she shoots right well. It has a double trigger, so that you can fire with the triggers either unset or set. Between the triggers there is a screw with which you can make it lighter or harder to fire."

Spence
 
nchawkeye said:
As I said, you don't have to use the set trigger...

We have thick forests here in NC as well, if a deer is close, just use the front trigger, no need to set... :thumbsup:
Not all double set triggers will let you fire unset. On those, the front trigger does not have a blade which can contact the sear, it is only used to "fire" the back trigger, which does have a blade long enough.

Spence
 
I’m dredging up this jurassic aged conversation because it is exactly the question i am wrestling with after missing deer twice today. The double set trigger is a pita for hunting, no matter how well tuned. Any advice, folks?
 
1. Just use the front trigger. It should be able to fire the gun if unset. How is the trigger pull if the triggers are unset?

If the unset trigger pull is too hard, then other changes may have to be made.

2. Replace the double set trigger with the Davis Deer Slayer trigger set if that will fit.
 
1. Just use the front trigger. It should be able to fire the gun if unset. How is the trigger pull if the triggers are unset?

If the unset trigger pull is too hard, then other changes may have to be made.

2. Replace the double set trigger with the Davis Deer Slayer trigger set if that will fit.
Thank you, excellent advice. My front trigger is very heavy. I purchased this double set trigger because the front trigger can be used exclusive of the set trigger, but the front trigger pull was never properly set. I suspect the cost of having the trigger work would be comparable to just having a good single trigger installed. One of the other challenges is the trigger guard is very narrow, leaving barely enough room to slide a finger tip onto the front trigger. The gun was built around a spectacular piece of curly maple by a guy new to building muzzleloaders, who underestimated the difficulty and who oversold his abilities. It wouldn’t even hold at half or full cock when it was presented to me. He so badly damaged the brand new Siler lock mechanism that Bill Slusser had to TIG weld pieces back on and rebuild it. Anyhow. I’ve been struggling with this rifle since 2014 and after missing the same deer twice yesterday, mostly due to the extreme hair trigger (or alternatively a front trigger that requires a backhoe to move when not set), I’ve decided to do what must be done.
 
This hasn't been mentioned (I think) so, if you study photographs of original rifles, on the single trigger you'll often see the pin on the "opposite" side of the stock just below the side plate. On some rifles the pin is so high that the side plate covers it. In order to get that high of a position you need to pin the trigger to the stock. Most aftermarket products for sale have a trigger plate with a couple of humps or tabs to which the pin is attached and that position is way too low- the cause of heavy trigger pulls. On the lock side of the stock, a stock pinned trigger has the hole inside the lock's mortise and the lock covers the hole.
If you get a 2 pound pull, a single trigger is pretty much fool proof.
 
This hasn't been mentioned (I think) so, if you study photographs of original rifles, on the single trigger you'll often see the pin on the "opposite" side of the stock just below the side plate. On some rifles the pin is so high that the side plate covers it. In order to get that high of a position you need to pin the trigger to the stock. Most aftermarket products for sale have a trigger plate with a couple of humps or tabs to which the pin is attached and that position is way too low- the cause of heavy trigger pulls. On the lock side of the stock, a stock pinned trigger has the hole inside the lock's mortise and the lock covers the hole.
If you get a 2 pound pull, a single trigger is pretty much fool proof.
Boy would I like a two pound trigger pull! When the front trigger is not set, the pull must be 15 pounds. When it is set, it’s less than an ounce of pull. Really a hair trigger no matter how much I try to adjust it with the screw. Interesting information, thank you.
 
I like a single trigger for cold weather hunting as it allows me to wear gloves and still get my finger inside the trigger guard.
Me too. I wear thin glove liners under heavy mitts, the kind that flip open, and the way my gun is presently set up, even the thin glove liner on my shooting finger creates an obstruction. I take credit for the choice of trigger guard to match the gun’s aesthetics. Looks great, functions poorly under field conditions. We have several other traditional Muzzleloading rifles here with wonderful single triggers, as well as double barrel percussion shotguns with wonderful double triggers, all of which have no issues in the field. It’s just this one gun.
 
Senator John Randolph fought a duel against Secretary of State Henry Clay in 1826.
The pistols were fitted with set triggers, and Randolph didn’t like that
His second, a man named Tatnall, loaded the gun, and set the trigger and then handed Randolph the gun.
“Tan all, although I am one of the best shots in Virginia, with either pistol or gun, yet I never fire with hair triggers. Besides I have a thick buckskin glove on that will destroy the delicacy of my touch and the trigger may fly before I know where I am.
But Tatnall insisted
Sure enough Randolph fired before the command, “Tatnall! I protested the hair trigger
Clays second, a general Jessup, accused Randolph of cowardice, but Clay stopped the argument stating he believed it was an accident and let Randolph reload
Clay then went on to miss his shot, and Randolph fired into the air. The affair was ended.
Before hand Randolph had told friends he would stand clay’s fire, but would not shoot him
I like a hair trigger, for hunt or plinking, but my favorite guns are single trigger. Looking at old guns I think we tend to over use set triggers today
 
Senator John Randolph fought a duel against Secretary of State Henry Clay in 1826.
The pistols were fitted with set triggers, and Randolph didn’t like that
His second, a man named Tatnall, loaded the gun, and set the trigger and then handed Randolph the gun.
“Tan all, although I am one of the best shots in Virginia, with either pistol or gun, yet I never fire with hair triggers. Besides I have a thick buckskin glove on that will destroy the delicacy of my touch and the trigger may fly before I know where I am.
But Tatnall insisted
Sure enough Randolph fired before the command, “Tatnall! I protested the hair trigger
Clays second, a general Jessup, accused Randolph of cowardice, but Clay stopped the argument stating he believed it was an accident and let Randolph reload
Clay then went on to miss his shot, and Randolph fired into the air. The affair was ended.
Before hand Randolph had told friends he would stand clay’s fire, but would not shoot him
I like a hair trigger, for hunt or plinking, but my favorite guns are single trigger. Looking at old guns I think we tend to over use set triggers today
Good rendition! The problem I am experiencing is the set trigger here is over-using itself. It literally goes off when a finger brushes it. There’s no opportunity for actually pulling the trigger exactly when desired, and there’s no sense of when or where the finger has encountered this set trigger. I’m sure more can and will be written about this particular issue, but I’m faced with taking my son’s 45 out tonight if I can’t get this daggone trigger tightened up.
 
Boy, talk about dragging up an aged thread! Flintlocks were considered "state of the art" technology when it first posted!
 
Back
Top