Trigger "break in" on new rifle?

[shoot2eat]

Recently picked up a new LA101.
After the first few rounds, I have to say I was quite disappointed with the feel of trigger! It is fairly heavy, but I'm OK with that.
However, it had more creep than P Diddy, and was a smooth as a pair hession jocks.
Cut to about 150 rounds later, and it feels like a completely different trigger....
Hardly any noticeable creep, and breaks cleanly.

What's going on here?
Just out of curiosity, has anyone else ever experienced this? I didn't know that a trigger would "break in". The only other gun I've owned from brand new is my Tikka, and the trigger on it was perfect from day 1. I immediately decided that the crappy trigger needed attention, but now I think I'll wait and see how it goes...

[deye243]

Do what I did piss it off and get a cz 457 best trigger ever put on a Rimfire.
It's adjustable for weight sear engagement and backlash and if you can't get what you want there it's a quick ten minute job to put a spring in of your choice anything from expensive one online to a bic biro spring which is what I use trigger sits at 11 to 12 ounces very reliably.
I had 2 la101 now none and I'm happy.

[Wapiti]

Generally when something is "broken in" as you describe, it is because either the surface finish of the components was of an unacceptable nature in the first place (read, rough), and the ongoing sliding surfaces under the spring pressure pushing them together has smoothed them, and/or the sliding surfaces of the material is relatively soft.
This allows it to self-smooth quickly, but doesn't give much confidence as to its longevity.
A big reason for this would be burrs on the break surfaces of the sear contact points dislodging or wearing off. That's a good thing.

Compare this experience with a high quality aftermarket big-name trigger that uses glass-hard/smooth parts that allow the trigger to break sharply with hardly any effort, despite the weight of trigger springs.

Replacing springs and getting a better result immediately just shows marginal quality surface finish and poor design angles.
Sure, better results on the cheap, but there isn't anything to use to claim any kind of build quality and attention to detail. That's all that shows and is no reason to claim something is better than another brand.

If your triggers broken in now, and you are happy with it, there's no need to bugger about with it, other than cleaning the mechanism out now and lubricating with a very high pressure, non-gumming grease. A tiny dot on the sear contact faces is perfect, and don't forget a drop of good light gun oil on the pivoting pins.
I think you'll see even better results after that, and also avoid any further wear on the trigger surfaces.

[Fester]

Sounds like a bit of a clean with something like silicon spray or WD40 and a light air gun to remove crap and excess lube.

Then the same with the good stuff like G96, Rem oil, Inox if that's all you have.

I have some great stock factory rifle triggers that have never been touched.
Also got a few not-so-good triggers.

My Howa was a shocker, very heavy with more creep than the Adams family.
Even after the trigger guy worked it, it can still feel gritty on follow through if I don't keep it cleaned and lubed.
Should have just bought a Timney as they cost about double or more now compared to back then.

[Larry]

I dont think you ever look back after getting a good quality trigger. I paid through the roof for a two stage Huber trigger. It is amazing. Then it halved in price about a year later still no regrets. It was worth twice the price I cant believe I said that.

[straightshooter]

Generally when something is "broken in" as you describe, it is because either the surface finish of the components was of an unacceptable nature in the first place (read, rough), and the ongoing sliding surfaces under the spring pressure pushing them together has smoothed them, and/or the sliding surfaces of the material is relatively soft.
This allows it to self-smooth quickly, but doesn't give much confidence as to its longevity.
A big reason for this would be burrs on the break surfaces of the sear contact points dislodging or wearing off. That's a good thing.

Compare this experience with a high quality aftermarket big-name trigger that uses glass-hard/smooth parts that allow the trigger to break sharply with hardly any effort, despite the weight of trigger springs.

Replacing springs and getting a better result immediately just shows marginal quality surface finish and poor design angles.
Sure, better results on the cheap, but there isn't anything to use to claim any kind of build quality and attention to detail. That's all that shows and is no reason to claim something is better than another brand.

If your triggers broken in now, and you are happy with it, there's no need to bugger about with it, other than cleaning the mechanism out now and lubricating with a very high pressure, non-gumming grease. A tiny dot on the sear contact faces is perfect, and don't forget a drop of good light gun oil on the pivoting pins.
I think you'll see even better results after that, and also avoid any further wear on the trigger surfaces.

Wapiti
I commend you on your accurate description.
It reminds me of where all this "break in" malarkey originated from.
30 + years ago in the era of dial up bulletin boards there was a post from one of the McMillan brothers on how it all started. If one searches hard enough on the internet it still might be findable.
He blamed it on Maddco. Apparently when a customer of theirs brought back a barrel complaining of unacceptable accuracy the diagnosis inevitably would be "incorrect break in procedure" and no warranty.
This diffused into the accuracy community and from this arose the myriads of expert advice, often contradictory. on how to perform a proper break in of a barrel.
These days any discussion by average shooters of break in is usually preceded with "everybody knows".