Re. "
Although, the out of the box trigger on the Rami was way better than it was on my 97b. Wonder if the smaller gun allows more leverage, which makes the stock trigger feel nicer."
I've recently acquired both a RAMI and a 97, and the 97 had the clearly nicer trigger of the two but its pull force was just a bit higher. The leverage is the same, the triggers being interchangeable (and both benefitting ergonomically from upgrading to the CGW OEM "Thick" Trigger), but the 97 main spring is, I think, stiffer
.I've done trigger jobs to both and they both drop jaws whenever first experienced -a tiny bit of Anti-Sieze dope on the SA tooth of the hammer makes a clearly feelable difference as well...http://www.czforum.com/forum/index.php?topic=4798.msg20513#msg20513http://www.czforum.com/forum/index.php?topic=5057.msg21330#msg21330
Update: Here are the after-trigger-jobs pull values for comparison b/t my RAMI BD and my 97 BD, taken from trigger tips for more consistency of lever "radius" (than the continuously variable radius obtained by a nylon roller in the mid-trigger concavity): they both got CGW Short Reset Kit main springs, Reduced Power Trigger Return Springs, and in the case of the RAMI, CGW's Firing Pin Block spring. The RAMI values are also "advantaged" by a main spring strut shoulder relocation (~1.5mm) as discussed in the first link above, a tweak which has since been proven plenty conservative by total absence of FTFs.
RAMI DA:4.7 lb.; SA: 2.4 lb. (these compare to mid-trigger readings DA: 6.5 lb.; SA: 3.25 lb.)
97BD DA: 5.4 lb.; SA: 2.5 lb.