S&W 469 Trigger Pull

[ruddy]

I have a great little 469 and a recently acquired 4513TSW. Both are double action for the first shot and single action thereafter. The 469 has a combination safety/decocker lever which stays down after dropping the hammer, while the 4513's lever drops the hammer and returns to the fire position. The 469 also has a half-cock notch, and the 4513 does not. The other difference is what I'm mainly concerned about: In double action mode, the 469's trigger "stacks" (gets heavier) just before releasing the hammer, while the 4513's trigger pull is smooth all the way through.

I would like the 469 to have the same smooth trigger pull. Is this a matter of tuning the trigger, or just a fundamental difference between the 2nd and 3rd generation pistols? Also, I see no benefit in having a half-cock "safety" notch in a DA pistol with a bobbed hammer. Apparently S&W agrees, since it's missing on the later 3rd generation gun. I'm thinking seriously about removing it if I do any trigger work.

Any advice?

 

[Unclenick]

I wouldn't defeat any safety device that's not actually interfering with operation in some way. You'd be trading a potential liability downside for no upside.

The stacking may simply be how the mechanical advantage is arranged in the mechanism. You could try the old S&W armorer's trick of mixing some well-shaken BreakFree CLP into a slurry with JB Bore Compound and putting it in the action and dry firing it to smooth it. The JB polishes and works the Teflon in the BreakFree into the surface. There are variants on this. I've mixed a little Mil-comm 25b into JB as the Teflon source, then thinned it to a slurry with light oil. It seems to work, too. You get more Teflon that way.

As to changing springs or doing any stoning or actual engagement angle work, since I've not had occasion to work on either of those pistols, I can't comment usefully on it.