>>64104629
dawg if you're curious about how any of this stuff works just google the patent artwork. There are tons of diagrams and rbt has all their patents listed on their website. I have a buddy with a first gen frt , I myself just own SS of which I have a few kits in different materials and from different vendors.
FRT first gen is a robust design as the hammer itself forces the trigger to reset and the lever is really just acting like a sear to prevent OOBD. Apart from that and the selector are the only moving parts. The 3 position is a lot more complex with more springs and moving parts. The hammer is still forcing reset but it's a bit thinner to accommodate the disconnector for regular semi.
With SS's the safety itself forces the trigger to reset via the lever rotating, so in that way it's the same design as the atrius. The atrius design sacrifices too much material at the lever for it to be durable. So you are correct in that squeezing the trigger too hard
would exacerbate the wear, the normal SS is designed to accommodate that extra wear while the atrius is not.
As far as squeezing to hard -
On first gen frt it's somewhat easy to do and ends with a dead trigger, though I don't think really damages anything.
With an SS it's a bit harder to do since the lever adds so much torque to the safety but is possible. If you squeeze hard enough it will fail to fully cycle though you will have a live trigger (since the hammer is reset early in the bcg travel). I assume this puts extra stress on the lever of you full jam it up this way, though the lever hasn't shown any visible bending/cracking from the couple times I did it.