Canadian Airgun Forum

For decades, shooters of the Crosman Mark I and II series pistols have become accustomed to the misconception of a “two stage cocking” of the hammer.
While there can be two distinct positions at which the hammer is held back in a “cocked” position, the trigger was never intended to operate that way.
The “power adjust” screw on the hammer spring was meant to control any desired changes in velocity. This adjustment was later done away with as redundant, because everyone ran them “wide open” anyway.

In the “low power” position, the hammer is actually held by the forward nose of the trigger itself, the actual sear plays no part in firing the gun. This tiny projection was meant only as a pivot point between the trigger and the sear.
Since no provision was ever made to control the over travel of the trigger, if the adjustment screw is not adjusted “just right”, the forward nose of the trigger is allowed to contact the hammer, acting as a low power position.


When the trigger adjusting screw is properly adjusted, there will only be a single point of contact with the hammer, and that is by the actual sear, not the trigger nose. This also allows for very fine adjustment of the sear engagement depth, and a resulting light trigger pull.


None of my Mark I or II pistols has a “two stage cocking”. They are all adjusted for a very light, crisp single position.

This post was made in response to an earlier thread in order to provide some additional info.
topic89169.html

Thanks for the history and the details Len! The Mk1 trigger really is amazing for the price it sold for when new. Too bad a company wouldn't start making them again... with aluminum frames, long barrel options, grip options, scope rail, hangy tank option, etc. The pressurized, vertical CO2 reservoir helps make this a great pistol.

They really are quite a nicely built pistol.
I'm surprised more people don't make aftermarket parts for them. It's not like they take much to improve though. Usually a bit of cleaning and new seals makes them great shooters.
I wish there were some nice carbine stocks, maybe some wood or micarta handle scales... Hmm...
Over the last couple years I have been collecting them, found some pretty interesting custom mods along the way. One being a tapered extended barrel. I'm guessing they used golf club shafts or something of the sort.
Anyway, it's good to see some of the older members of the forum popping up here. Hi guys.

I would love them to make re-issues of the tried and true guns. But they seem to cater now to BB replicas, and poorly made ones. Hell even the 2240 hasn't had any improvements......they just keep churning out more garbage.

_________________
Jonathan

Moderator

The 2240 is so easy to work on though, and I'm willing to bet crosman sold a lot to people who already planned to modify them.
They made the higher end PCP pistols.. silhouette shooters. I don't remember the names. 1740?
Anyway they seemed way too expensive for a fancy 2240 as far as I was concerned.

With the mk1, if someone had the time and the technology to CNC one and build it proper... Regulated PCP... Without a big ugly tank hanging from it... That would be very nice. Maybe disguise an air vessel as a mock extended magazine. just random thoughts. I have no means of doing it. I did think of adapting the frame to receive a cylinder from the rear. But the pistol aesthetics would be void at that point.

Thanks Leonard for that post in response to my original question. You make things pretty clear!
JD