new concept trigger...

[Cthulhu]

I was just mulling over paintball today and came up with an idea...

Everyone is trying to walk triggers as fast as they can. A common problem I have always had is that one finger won't release the trigger soon enough to reset it, hence when the next finger hits, it doesn't fire a ball.

Solution?

What if the trigger pivoted in the middle? Like a see-saw. Small enough of a see saw that one finger is above the pivot, the other finger is below, hence by pressing on the upper portion, it naturaly raises the lower trigger portion to reset it. Think of how fast this would be!

Thoughts? Critiques?

Patent Pending? lol

[spantol]

Doc Nickel did one of these a few years back. Unfortunately, I can't seem to find the pic on his site. They were ruled tournament illegal at the time, which is probably why we haven't seen more of them.

[spantol]

Found it:

[athomas]

Unfortunately, this counts as two triggers. That's why you won't see them on many guns, especially tournament guns.

[Wadidiz]

Bill Cookston, former Ultimate Judge of NPPL/PSP, said it wouldn't be allowed about 7 years ago. That was an obvious knee-jerk reaction, probably more to do with the problems with "turbo triggers" going on at the time.

There is no reason to ban triggers that have the pivot-point moved to the middle.

The rules that have bearing on this matter are:

one-pull, one-shot

no enhanced modes that increase the ROF to more than one shot per pull, i.e. no bounce

only one trigger

What's the reason for the rules as written?

Safety. We don't want any gun that is self-activating. If something or someone hits the trigger only one shot should come out.

A center pivot trigger is just like any other "double-trigger", it just has better balance. It is one-pull, one-shot.

It is NOT two triggers. It is one trigger, one piece just like any other trigger. It just has better balance and is therefore smoother and a little faster.

Therefore it should be not be illegal.

I have one I made myself (with the help of a friend) and it works really well. I have had no problem so far playing with it in major tournaments nor should I.

[athomas]

Theoretically and practically, the pivot type trigger can be a two activaltion per trigger pull type trigger. If you control just the bottom edge of the trigger, then it will fire on the pull and fire on the release. The release is when the top part of the trigger is said to be pulled. The bottom part is moving forward when this happens.

[Wadidiz]

Originally posted by athomas
Theoretically and practically, the pivot type trigger can be a two activaltion per trigger pull type trigger. If you control just the bottom edge of the trigger, then it will fire on the pull and fire on the release. The release is when the top part of the trigger is said to be pulled. The bottom part is moving forward when this happens.

My trigger doesn't fire another shot on release. It requires a conscious activation for every shot. It is true that a shot could be fired when pushing the bottom or top of the trigger forward. It is still one-activation, one-shot and therefore just as safe as any other type of tourney-legal trigger.

In the sense that a shot can be fired by pushing forward, my trigger has a pump-gun-like characteristic.

[billmi]

Originally posted by Wadidiz
Bill Cookston, former Ultimate Judge of NPPL/PSP, said it wouldn't be allowed about 7 years ago. That was an obvious knee-jerk reaction, probably more to do with the problems with "turbo triggers" going on at the time.

Bill's reasoning was sound.

He didn't count it as two triggers.

The issue was not that it pivoted in the middle, but the way it was set up inside the gun.

Doc's setup fired when the top half was pulled back, and when the bottom half was pulled back.

Don't be distracted by the top half of the trigger, and just look at the tip on the bottom. Pull it to the back, and it fires, when it moves forward on the release (when the top half is pulled back) it fires again. That's 2 shots per pull and release of the trigger, also known as an Auto Response trigger (these were made for the 'mag and VM in the mid 90s and quickly banned by all tournaments and most fields, and presently most insurance programs.)

You could alternatively say that it's two triggers, and that the shot when the lower trigger is released isn't a shot on the release, but a shot on the pull of the top trigger, but then there's that pesky rule in NPPL and PSP that says you can have only one trigger.

See you on the field,
-Bill Mills

[Wadidiz]

Originally posted by billmi


Bill's reasoning was sound.

He didn't count it as two triggers.

The issue was not that it pivoted in the middle, but the way it was set up inside the gun.

Doc's setup fired when the top half was pulled back, and when the bottom half was pulled back.

Don't be distracted by the top half of the trigger, and just look at the tip on the bottom. Pull it to the back, and it fires, when it moves forward on the release (when the top half is pulled back) it fires again. That's 2 shots per pull and release of the trigger, also known as an Auto Response trigger (these were made for the 'mag and VM in the mid 90s and quickly banned by all tournaments and most fields, and presently most insurance programs.)

You could alternatively say that it's two triggers, and that the shot when the lower trigger is released isn't a shot on the release, but a shot on the pull of the top trigger, but then there's that pesky rule in NPPL and PSP that says you can have only one trigger.

See you on the field,
-Bill Mills

Hey Bill,

That was a good tidbit of information there. Thanks.

So I guess my trigger is o.k. since it doesn't in any way function like the Auto Response or Double Trouble triggers of yore. Like I said in my last post, it takes a conscious pull to get a PB shot. No matter which way you pull it, it always resets to the middle, just like the standard double triggers on most tourney guns these day. Never more than one shot per activation.

Concerning the last part you wrote about two triggers: I think it's a stretch to say that it is two triggers just because the pivot pin is in the middle, and, as you wrote, that wasn't the issue with Bill Cookston. The trigger I have on my gun is one piece that simply has better balance than the standard one with pivot pin at the top.

And, again, the main thing is that it fulfills the spirit of the rule, which I understand is all about safety (or?). It is every bit as safe as the standard triggers. In fact, it is much safer than those that have switch bounce, have electronics behind them to add more shots than the user pulls and/or ramps up velocity after a certain number of shots.

Steve

[athomas]

Originally posted by Wadidiz


My trigger doesn't fire another shot on release. It requires a conscious activation for every shot. It is true that a shot could be fired when pushing the bottom or top of the trigger forward. It is still one-activation, one-shot and therefore just as safe as any other type of tourney-legal trigger.

In the sense that a shot can be fired by pushing forward, my trigger has a pump-gun-like characteristic.

Hold the bottom of the trigger completely forward. Now pull it completely back. It will fire a shot. Now push it completely forward again. It will fire another shot. For every complete cycle of your trigger, you will get two shots fired, Therefore, it is illegal.

[Wadidiz]

Originally posted by athomas
Hold the bottom of the trigger completely forward. Now pull it completely back. It will fire a shot. Now push it completely forward again. It will fire another shot. For every complete cycle of your trigger, you will get two shots fired, Therefore, it is illegal.

With all respect, it seems we're having a communication problem here.

Originally posted by athomas
Hold the bottom of the trigger completely forward.

It doesn't make SENSE to hold the bottom of the trigger completely forward. That is contrived. Does anybody ever do that with top-pivot triggers?

With standard, top-pivot, double triggers one activates the trigger by squeezing, pulling or tapping the top part of the trigger with the index finger (for example) and a shot is fired. Then one activates the bottom part of the trigger in the same way with the middle finger, and a shot is fired. To repeat, the top part is pulled, a shot is fired, the finger is released and the trigger returns to the neutral position; one cycle. Then the bottom part is pulled and ditto; another cycle.

My trigger works exactly the same way. The only difference is that mine is better balanced between the top and the bottom.

IT DOES NOT SHOOT TWO SHOTS PER CYCLE. Only one per cycle.

Again, it is true that if enough room is allowed for someone to grab the trigger and fan it, then you can cycle the top or bottom forward and get one shot, and then cycle it backward and then get another shot. That is still only one shot per cycle because you're conciously pulling or pushing one side of the trigger forward to fire a shot and then conciously pulling or pushing the trigger backward to fire another shot, passing the neutral position on the way between all the way forward and all the way back.

Even with the above capability the gun still NEVER self-activates or fires more than one shot per movement, so therefore it complies with the one-pull, one-shot rule. It is therefore just as safe as the standard design. You can never (assumimg normal, legal adjustments) get the gun to fire more than one shot due to an accidental discharge.

Or, let me ask you this: What do you see the purpose of the one-pull, one-shot rule?

With respect for your feedback and opinions.:)

[athomas]

I'm just looking at the design from the standpoint of what a judge sees. If I can grab the bottom of the trigger and push it from all the way forward to all the way back and then back forward again and it fires more than one shot, then I am determining that this gun is illegal in the tournament that I am reffing. That is like having a regular trigger that sits in the ready position in the grip frame. If you pull it it shoots. If you push it it shoots. It takes an effort to push it. It takes an effort to pull it. Just pulling and releasing will only fire one shot. Just pushing and releasing only fires one shot. Is it legal. No, for reasons the same as the pivoting trigger.

On one hand, it takes an effort to activate the trigger in either direction. On the other hand it can be exploited by people to achieve an unfair shot advantage which could be dangerous in the wrong hands.

There are lots on neat trigger ideas out there that could be used, but unfortunately there will be people that will want to exploit every opportunity to gain an unfair advantage. So, rules are imposed that limit the use certain designs.

I personally like the idea of a pivoting trigger. I just don't like that it can be exploited so very easily.

[billmi]

Originally posted by Wadidiz

Or, let me ask you this: What do you see the purpose of the one-pull, one-shot rule?
[

To limit rate of fire.

With respect for your feedback and opinions.:)

I'll bet a Crispy Creme donut that Dave Zinkham the NPPL scrutineer would declare a trigger as described in this thread to be a double-acting trigger, and as such disallow it at an NPPL event under rule 6.32. This trigger would be double acting, as it is capable of firing in two positions.

One could arguably interpret this to mean than the double acting trigger of the Autococker (it performs two actions, firing, and recock) is not permitted, though I do not believe the scrutineer would agree with that interpretation. There are number of little loophole rules that get glossed over like that. In previous years the only goggles allowed were those from manufacturers who had submitted proof of ASTM standards on file with the league, but the league had no such file, and they were allowed. Staining paint is not allowed. Up until Miami no NPPL evenet ever stopped the use/sale of paint for reasons of staining. At Miami, sales of one brand were stopped for a short time, but when several brands were shown to stain by the test described in the rules, they were all allowed on site. NPPL rule 6.36 states "Only one barrel will be allowed on the field." That's not one barrel per player, but just one barrel. I think, if a game were ever played by the rules, the team which has the barrel would have a decided advantage over their competition.

See you on the field,
-Bill Mills

[Wadidiz]

So let me ask you, Bill and Athomas (or anyone else), if the trigger I mentioned were built into a custom trigger frame in such a way that it was virtually impossible for someone to grab and activate by pushing all the way forward and then all the way back (fanning) then would the trigger be o.k. (according to YOUR intepretations)?

In other words, if the back sides of the trigger were shrouded so that you couldn't grip it and if you could only fire it through finger tapping just like a standard top-pivot trigger with positions for two fingers, would it then fit YOUR definition of a tourney-legal trigger system?

(You both raised serious issues of the intentions of the rules that I want to address later.)

Steve

[paintballfrk13]

ok after reading all those post i have come to a conclusion that most people are thinking of a dual micro swith trigger with a switch behind each side of the center pivot or a centered switch behind the pivot being acted upon by both side of the trigger. i believe what Cthulhu ment was a single micro switch mounted behind one of the side of the central pivot meaning the only one side of the trigger could contact the switch meaning that you could activate the switch by pulling the side that the switch is under or pushing the opposite side but, the finger opposite the switch is just acting as the trigger return instead of spring pressure which would let the trigger out so you can pull it as soon as the opposite finger lets go of the trigger. in my eyes this would be a legal trigger one pull/push = one shot
later
Clinton Bettner