Airsoft Canada - View Single Post - .:::RA-Tech Versus CWI WE M4/M16 Steel Trigger Kits- Which To Buy?:::.

turok_t · November 13th, 2011, 14:10

RA-Tech Versus CWI WE M4/M16 Steel Trigger Kits

INTRODUCTION

After some experience with using both the RA-Tech and CWI Airsoft, I just had to write-up my initial impressions regarding the functionality and fitment of both trigger sets. This will be a quick summary of my thoughts and ideas, and by no means an exhaustive comparison. Please use this summary with a grain of salt, as I do not hold any responsibility for your decision in purchasing either trigger sets. It would be critical to possess a basic understanding of the functions and mechanics of the trigger components before proceeding to read this summary.

While inspecting both trigger sets, the RA-Tech is more aesthetically pleasing and has the steel finish/gun metal grey tone. The CWI trigger set is also steel, but has more of a tinted brown/purple color with a smoother finish. The cut on the RA-Tech parts seem to be more curved and rounded, as opposed to the CWI counterparts which have more sharp and straight cuts. Overall, the design and specifications of the CWI trigger set seems to be closed to the stock WE design.

Furthermore, the RA-Tech trigger set comes with the roller bearing on the hammer, while the CWI trigger does not. As such, you need to remove the pin and roller from your stock hammer. However, to make up for this loss, CWI includes a pair of cylinder thingies (not the pin) that holds the hammer and trigger/disconnector in the trigger box.

TRIGGER

On the left, we have the RA-Tech trigger, and on the right we have the CWI trigger. Both hammers appear the same with minor differences. First, the CWI trigger is slightly more sharp and may be irritating for some individuals. If you are wearing gloves during games, it shouldn’t be a problem. Also, if you look on the RA-Tech trigger, the top edge is completely straight, but on the CWI trigger, there is a slight step about ¼ at the end of the trigger. This doesn’t really affect the functionality of the gun, just the amount of pull on the trigger when the gun is switched to safe. Overall, both look very similar.

DISCONNECTOR

Again, on the left, we have the RA-Tech disconnector, and on the right we have the CWI disconnector. The most noticeable difference when comparing the two is the hook/notch that engages the hammer. Based on my reasoning and experience, I’m guessing that the hook design employed by RA-Tech is to assist the disconnector “catch” the hammer notch when the fire selector is at semi. However, there are times that the hook slips right off the hammer causing the gun to fire in full auto if the trigger. I noticed that when the trigger wasn’t pulled hard enough, the disconnector hook didn’t engage the hammer (i.e. slipped right off the hammer hook). However, pulling the trigger all the way back increases the surface contact/overlap between the two hooks on the hammer and disconnector, and they begin to engage each other with greater tension. Thus, full auto does not occur on semi when the trigger is pulled all the way back.

On the other hand, this problem was non-existing with the CWI disconnector. Regardless of how hard I depressed the trigger, the disconnector hook always engaged the hammer. When trying to determine the reason why the CWI was more successful than the RA-Tech in catching the hammer on semi, I came to the conclusion that the 90 degree angled notch is more reliable, as it exerts more downward pressure due to greater contact with the hammer notch. On the RA-Tech counterpart, since the disconnector and hammer hooks are both curved, the overlap is less, and hence, the engagement is reduced. Just imagine the ends of two hooks clinging on to each other at its thinnest section.

Before I discuss the hammer, one more point needs to be discussed. When the fire selector is on semi and when the trigger is pulled, the bolt cycles backwards and cocks the hammer (trigger still depressed). As the hammer begins to be pulled back, it will be caught by the disconnector (you will hear the first click). As soon as the trigger is released, the hammer rotates slightly forward and will then be caught by the sear on the trigger (you will hear a second click) in preparation for the next shot. This leads me to an important point. On older versions of RA-Tech trigger kits, the hammer DOES NOT rotate slightly forward even after the trigger is released. This is because the hooks on the hammer and disconnector or soo curved that they can not be released unless the trigger is manually pushed forward. This has happened on 3 consecutive trigger sets I have tried, and I have even expressed this issue to other ASC members. For these trigger sets, they need to be gradually worked in so parts and worn out to perform normally.

On newer versions of RA-Tech trigger kit, this issue is absent. The hooks are less curved and the operate normally. How do you tell the difference between both versions? The newer ones are usually darker in color, and the roller on the hammer is black. The older one is usually a lighter grey and the roller on the hammer is aluminum. However, even for the newer RA-Tech trigger kits, there are times when full auto occurs on semi. This is again, the hook design that RA-Tech implemented.

HAMMER

Again, RA-Tech on the left, CWI on the right. Similar to the disconnector, the RA-Tech hammer uses the same hook design leading to the same problem I discussed above. Four other issues I want to discuss. First, looking at the notch at the bottom of the RA-Tech hammer reveals that it is much deeper than the CWI hammer. What are the implications? First it is important to understand the purpose of this notch. This is the notch that the sear on the trigger engages to cock the hammer. When the notch is cut deeper, it means that the trigger needs to be pulled back more in order for the sear to slide out of the notch for the hammer to strike.

Second, I compared two newer version RA-Tech hammers side by side. To my surprise, one of the notches had a cut that was less tilted/angled. After installing this hammer in the trigger box, it caused the trigger to be “sticky.” Let me explain. When the fire selector was on safe and the hammer was cocked, the trigger can be pulled slightly, but would not reset/return to its normal position. Why does this happen? My guess is that since the notch angle on the hammer is less, it applied a lot more pressure on the sear of the trigger. When opposing tensions between two parts occur, they simply get stuck and get stuck. As a result, a simple tap on the hammer resetted the trigger with ease. I was quite surprised to find such variance between hammers from RA-Tech. The CWI hammer conforms more with the stock WE hammer.

Third, as previously mentioned, when the selector is set to semi, the hammer is first caught by the disconnector (first click), followed by the sear on the trigger (second click). Based on my experience, the timing for the CWI trigger set is much quicker and more reliable. This means that the time between the first and second click you hear is much faster.

Last and most important. This was the deal breaker for me. A side by side comparison of the hammers inside the trigger box reveals that the RA-Tech hammer is slightly higher. This slight difference has major implications especially for players who want or own the RA-Tech steel bolts. Because the hammer height is higher, it pushes upward on the bottom of the steel bolt. As such, many users experience difficulty when pulling the bolt (via the charging handle) to cock the hammer. In order to solve this issue, the underside of the RA-Tech bolt needs to be grinded to accommodate the increase height of the hammer (refer to my modding guide), or the hammer needs to be truncated. If you are modding the bolt, the bottom surface is very thin. If too much material is removed, you will create a hole straight down where the nozzle is housed and your $100 RA-Tech bolt becomes a paper weight. I ill advised anyone to dremel this area.

Since the CWI hammer is shorter, it works flawlessly with the RA-Tech steel bolt with no modifications required. It doesn’t push upwards on the bolt, and as such, no added strength is needed to rack the bolt via the charging handle.

CONCLUSION

So what does all this jumbo mumbo mean? Well, given my experiences with both trigger sets, I would use CWI in a heartbeat (I’m using a steel bolt). In fact, all my guns have been changed to CWI trigger kits. The trigger set seems to be much more reliable and more stable, and also, compatible with RA-Tech’s fire pin delay (Part 66) and fire pin. The price is slightly more expensive, but in my opinion, it is much worth it. You may be asking, how reliable is the trigger set down the road? Will it continue to be as stable and reliable? Honestly, I haven’t put enough rounds in my gun to answer this question, but currently, I haven’t experienced any issues to date, even with my real steel fire selector installed. However, as with all mechanical/moving parts, wear and tear is inevitable. Although both RA-Tech and CWI trigger kits are steel, they will probably wear out over time, just not as quickly as the stock WE parts.

Hope this summary is informative for players who are contemplating in upgrading their trigger boxes. I decided to write this summary as many individuals have approached me in person or by messaging me inquiring about steel internals. If you have any questions, or would like to acquire a set of the CWI trigger kit, send me a pm.

If you have any problems with your RA-Tech trigger set, please post it in this thread.

November 13th, 2011, 14:10	#1
turok_t Trader rating Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada	.:::RA-Tech Versus CWI WE M4/M16 Steel Trigger Kits- Which To Buy?:::. RA-Tech Versus CWI WE M4/M16 Steel Trigger Kits INTRODUCTION After some experience with using both the RA-Tech and CWI Airsoft, I just had to write-up my initial impressions regarding the functionality and fitment of both trigger sets. This will be a quick summary of my thoughts and ideas, and by no means an exhaustive comparison. Please use this summary with a grain of salt, as I do not hold any responsibility for your decision in purchasing either trigger sets. It would be critical to possess a basic understanding of the functions and mechanics of the trigger components before proceeding to read this summary. While inspecting both trigger sets, the RA-Tech is more aesthetically pleasing and has the steel finish/gun metal grey tone. The CWI trigger set is also steel, but has more of a tinted brown/purple color with a smoother finish. The cut on the RA-Tech parts seem to be more curved and rounded, as opposed to the CWI counterparts which have more sharp and straight cuts. Overall, the design and specifications of the CWI trigger set seems to be closed to the stock WE design. Furthermore, the RA-Tech trigger set comes with the roller bearing on the hammer, while the CWI trigger does not. As such, you need to remove the pin and roller from your stock hammer. However, to make up for this loss, CWI includes a pair of cylinder thingies (not the pin) that holds the hammer and trigger/disconnector in the trigger box. TRIGGER On the left, we have the RA-Tech trigger, and on the right we have the CWI trigger. Both hammers appear the same with minor differences. First, the CWI trigger is slightly more sharp and may be irritating for some individuals. If you are wearing gloves during games, it shouldn’t be a problem. Also, if you look on the RA-Tech trigger, the top edge is completely straight, but on the CWI trigger, there is a slight step about ¼ at the end of the trigger. This doesn’t really affect the functionality of the gun, just the amount of pull on the trigger when the gun is switched to safe. Overall, both look very similar. DISCONNECTOR Again, on the left, we have the RA-Tech disconnector, and on the right we have the CWI disconnector. The most noticeable difference when comparing the two is the hook/notch that engages the hammer. Based on my reasoning and experience, I’m guessing that the hook design employed by RA-Tech is to assist the disconnector “catch” the hammer notch when the fire selector is at semi. However, there are times that the hook slips right off the hammer causing the gun to fire in full auto if the trigger. I noticed that when the trigger wasn’t pulled hard enough, the disconnector hook didn’t engage the hammer (i.e. slipped right off the hammer hook). However, pulling the trigger all the way back increases the surface contact/overlap between the two hooks on the hammer and disconnector, and they begin to engage each other with greater tension. Thus, full auto does not occur on semi when the trigger is pulled all the way back. On the other hand, this problem was non-existing with the CWI disconnector. Regardless of how hard I depressed the trigger, the disconnector hook always engaged the hammer. When trying to determine the reason why the CWI was more successful than the RA-Tech in catching the hammer on semi, I came to the conclusion that the 90 degree angled notch is more reliable, as it exerts more downward pressure due to greater contact with the hammer notch. On the RA-Tech counterpart, since the disconnector and hammer hooks are both curved, the overlap is less, and hence, the engagement is reduced. Just imagine the ends of two hooks clinging on to each other at its thinnest section. Before I discuss the hammer, one more point needs to be discussed. When the fire selector is on semi and when the trigger is pulled, the bolt cycles backwards and cocks the hammer (trigger still depressed). As the hammer begins to be pulled back, it will be caught by the disconnector (you will hear the first click). As soon as the trigger is released, the hammer rotates slightly forward and will then be caught by the sear on the trigger (you will hear a second click) in preparation for the next shot. This leads me to an important point. On older versions of RA-Tech trigger kits, the hammer DOES NOT rotate slightly forward even after the trigger is released. This is because the hooks on the hammer and disconnector or soo curved that they can not be released unless the trigger is manually pushed forward. This has happened on 3 consecutive trigger sets I have tried, and I have even expressed this issue to other ASC members. For these trigger sets, they need to be gradually worked in so parts and worn out to perform normally. On newer versions of RA-Tech trigger kit, this issue is absent. The hooks are less curved and the operate normally. How do you tell the difference between both versions? The newer ones are usually darker in color, and the roller on the hammer is black. The older one is usually a lighter grey and the roller on the hammer is aluminum. However, even for the newer RA-Tech trigger kits, there are times when full auto occurs on semi. This is again, the hook design that RA-Tech implemented. HAMMER Again, RA-Tech on the left, CWI on the right. Similar to the disconnector, the RA-Tech hammer uses the same hook design leading to the same problem I discussed above. Four other issues I want to discuss. First, looking at the notch at the bottom of the RA-Tech hammer reveals that it is much deeper than the CWI hammer. What are the implications? First it is important to understand the purpose of this notch. This is the notch that the sear on the trigger engages to cock the hammer. When the notch is cut deeper, it means that the trigger needs to be pulled back more in order for the sear to slide out of the notch for the hammer to strike. Second, I compared two newer version RA-Tech hammers side by side. To my surprise, one of the notches had a cut that was less tilted/angled. After installing this hammer in the trigger box, it caused the trigger to be “sticky.” Let me explain. When the fire selector was on safe and the hammer was cocked, the trigger can be pulled slightly, but would not reset/return to its normal position. Why does this happen? My guess is that since the notch angle on the hammer is less, it applied a lot more pressure on the sear of the trigger. When opposing tensions between two parts occur, they simply get stuck and get stuck. As a result, a simple tap on the hammer resetted the trigger with ease. I was quite surprised to find such variance between hammers from RA-Tech. The CWI hammer conforms more with the stock WE hammer. Third, as previously mentioned, when the selector is set to semi, the hammer is first caught by the disconnector (first click), followed by the sear on the trigger (second click). Based on my experience, the timing for the CWI trigger set is much quicker and more reliable. This means that the time between the first and second click you hear is much faster. Last and most important. This was the deal breaker for me. A side by side comparison of the hammers inside the trigger box reveals that the RA-Tech hammer is slightly higher. This slight difference has major implications especially for players who want or own the RA-Tech steel bolts. Because the hammer height is higher, it pushes upward on the bottom of the steel bolt. As such, many users experience difficulty when pulling the bolt (via the charging handle) to cock the hammer. In order to solve this issue, the underside of the RA-Tech bolt needs to be grinded to accommodate the increase height of the hammer (refer to my modding guide), or the hammer needs to be truncated. If you are modding the bolt, the bottom surface is very thin. If too much material is removed, you will create a hole straight down where the nozzle is housed and your $100 RA-Tech bolt becomes a paper weight. I ill advised anyone to dremel this area. Since the CWI hammer is shorter, it works flawlessly with the RA-Tech steel bolt with no modifications required. It doesn’t push upwards on the bolt, and as such, no added strength is needed to rack the bolt via the charging handle. CONCLUSION So what does all this jumbo mumbo mean? Well, given my experiences with both trigger sets, I would use CWI in a heartbeat (I’m using a steel bolt). In fact, all my guns have been changed to CWI trigger kits. The trigger set seems to be much more reliable and more stable, and also, compatible with RA-Tech’s fire pin delay (Part 66) and fire pin. The price is slightly more expensive, but in my opinion, it is much worth it. You may be asking, how reliable is the trigger set down the road? Will it continue to be as stable and reliable? Honestly, I haven’t put enough rounds in my gun to answer this question, but currently, I haven’t experienced any issues to date, even with my real steel fire selector installed. However, as with all mechanical/moving parts, wear and tear is inevitable. Although both RA-Tech and CWI trigger kits are steel, they will probably wear out over time, just not as quickly as the stock WE parts. Hope this summary is informative for players who are contemplating in upgrading their trigger boxes. I decided to write this summary as many individuals have approached me in person or by messaging me inquiring about steel internals. If you have any questions, or would like to acquire a set of the CWI trigger kit, send me a pm. If you have any problems with your RA-Tech trigger set, please post it in this thread. Last edited by turok_t; October 4th, 2017 at 16:52..