Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
1/22/2020 12:12:56 PM
Posted: 9/15/2009 7:00:47 PM EST
I like the idea of doing SA or DA, but I can see that fish hook hammer getting caught on everything. Is it doable or should I be looking at a shrouded hammer/hammerless?
Link Posted: 9/15/2009 7:02:38 PM EST
I have a 637 with an exposed hammer. It's fine for carry and it's nice at the range to have the option to shoot SA/DA.
Link Posted: 9/15/2009 7:05:56 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/15/2009 7:11:10 PM EST by ALPHAGHOST]
PERSONALLY, i prefer shrouded, b/c i pocket carry a lot, and the hammer could snag...but, you can easily adapt your draw on a hammered J-frame by simply placing your thumb/web over the hammer during the draw and then dropping it to the side after it clears your pocket, so there is nothing wrong w/ an exposed hammer as long as you practice your draw (from wherever you carry)

moreover, i have no use for DA/SA as i do not fire any wheelgun in SA mode––its all DA/DAO for me––draw and press the trigger

––no cocking, etc, whether you are in a real fight, nor if you are going to practice for it as you should practice w/ your DA trigger press moreso––YMMV

now, some folks do prefer DA/SA, many claiming that its easier to make "harder" shots in SA (and to an extent it is, esp for some shooters, but then one can make similar shots in DA by simply learning the trigger on those), but like i said, in a fight, its very unlikely that you will ever get the chance to use cock the hammer back into SA.

ETA: i pocket carry J-frames, 642s
Link Posted: 9/15/2009 10:58:08 PM EST
If you really want a J frame smith, but the hammer is what's concerning you, a couple of options exist.

First, the model 40 smith has been reintroduced, the hammer is shrouded, no lock, and has a grip safety.

The other option is to bob the hammer of the gun yourself, or have a gunsmith do it. There are numerous google topics on bobbing a hammer, most involve simply a dremel, a file, some sandpaper, and flintz.
Link Posted: 9/15/2009 11:17:32 PM EST
Originally Posted By 50-140:
First, the model 40 smith has been reintroduced, the hammer is shrouded, no lock, and has a grip safety.


I was excited to see that, but all of the ones I've handled required an exceptionally firm grip to disengage the safety, to the point that my hand was practically shaking. Everyone else I was with at the time made similar comments.

I just don't see the point of an exposed hammer, bobbed or not, on a pocket type gun.
Link Posted: 9/16/2009 12:22:40 AM EST
I've got a 360 with exposed hammer. I ankle carry it with no problems. With pocket carry, you've got to put your thumb on the hammer or use some other method to get it out without snagging. If I did a lot of pocket carry, I would probably prefer to have the 340 hammerless instead.
Link Posted: 9/16/2009 1:28:21 AM EST
S&W Bodyguard can't be beat for J frame pocket carry.
Model 49 (steel), Model 38 (lightweight), or the newer 438 and 638.

The Bodyguard series has the shrouded hammer that still allows single action.

My second choice would be the Centennial series.
Link Posted: 9/16/2009 4:17:02 AM EST
My carry peice is the 638, the shrouded hammer model. Allows for SA at the range, DA other times, and has nothing to snag. Best of both worlds.
Link Posted: 9/16/2009 4:40:42 AM EST
Originally Posted By Ameshawki:
My carry peice is the 638, the shrouded hammer model. Allows for SA at the range, DA other times, and has nothing to snag. Best of both worlds.


I have one, too, and love it. It's just as snag-free as a totally internal hammer but allows you to cock it for single action shooting.

Link Posted: 9/16/2009 8:22:33 AM EST
I'd rather not have the "whatever" in my pants pockets get in that opening.
Link Posted: 9/16/2009 8:41:41 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/16/2009 9:22:53 AM EST by 50-140]

Originally Posted By 87GN:
Originally Posted By 50-140:
First, the model 40 smith has been reintroduced, the hammer is shrouded, no lock, and has a grip safety.


I was excited to see that, but all of the ones I've handled required an exceptionally firm grip to disengage the safety, to the point that my hand was practically shaking. Everyone else I was with at the time made similar comments.

I just don't see the point of an exposed hammer, bobbed or not, on a pocket type gun.

I agree with you on the necessity for a 'grip of iron' to activate the safety and fire.

A model 40 needs either a Tyler 'T' grip adapter or a new set of grips.

I went with the Eagle "Secret Service" grips on mine. Now I have no difficulty with the grip and presentation of the little pistol. My next step is to get someone to reduce the lawyer trigger to something a little more realistic.




edit for sp
Link Posted: 9/16/2009 8:42:47 AM EST
I chose a 442 (enclosed hammer) because I knew that for the purpose intended, it would always be used DA. I wanted to sort those skills out at the range rather than shoot it like I shoot my other S&W's. What I learned was that I need laser grips (yet to acquire) and that shooting a small revolver DA is hard and requires practice. I like that it goes in and out of the pocket easily and that I don't have to think about if I'm going to shoot SA or not. Simple and effective tool that requires a little skill. I wouldn't muck with that formula.
Link Posted: 9/16/2009 10:09:20 AM EST
Link Posted: 9/16/2009 3:54:43 PM EST
The Bodyguard is sweet.

My J Frame has an exposed hammer. But I OC it on my farm and enjoy plinking with it. SA/DA for me.


Link Posted: 9/16/2009 6:32:38 PM EST
Personally, I MUCH prefer an internal hammer type system, ala S&W 642, etc. for a J-frame type revolver. My Taurus 650 is this way. Perfect for pocket carry. I think it's a more "evolved" system when the hammer on these little things is internal.

As others have said, no hammer to snag, ever, no opening for debris to enter, and with a "hammerless" you can actually get a slightly higher grip on the thing. I like that alot.

I won't ever be firing one in SA. They are purely defensive guns, and I see them that way and train as such. No need to be doing something with it I won't be doing on "the street", as it were.

I like 'em alot better that way, anyway.
Link Posted: 9/17/2009 8:17:46 AM EST
I'm happy with my 642. I know that if I ever really needed it I would be shooting in double action anyway. So there is no reason to practice any other way.
Link Posted: 9/17/2009 9:27:45 AM EST
I like hammerless revolvers, but right now I carry a S&W 37-2.

Link Posted: 9/17/2009 10:34:30 AM EST
Go Hammerless or Shrouded if it's for self defense.

Mike

Link Posted: 9/17/2009 6:07:25 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/17/2009 6:09:57 PM EST by John_Wayne777]
Link Posted: 9/17/2009 6:25:26 PM EST
I went with the 642 hammerless and have no regrets. I practice double-action, and I hit double-action. I'm not a fan of SA/DA guns for self defense, and revolvers are no exception. I tried a 637 (exposed hammer) and had a hell of a time employing the hammer in any useful way on such a small gun without screwing up my grip.
Link Posted: 9/17/2009 6:43:09 PM EST
Originally Posted By John_Wayne777:
3. Whatever J frame you buy, try and get one without the idiot lock and put Crimson Trace grips on it.


I didn't get the laser grips... expensive, yet I have never needed one on any of my other pistols.

I bought one of those new 642s that were made without the lock. Love the gun. The only thing I had to do was swap the black trigger out with a stainless trigger (gun completely matches). But to be honest, running the no-locks was S&W's only way to get me back as a revolver buyer. I love my 629, but with the J-frame, if it is going to be needed, I NEED IT! Having a chance the gun could lock up, I'll pass... even if it is 0.000001% of it happening. I'd definitely would buy a(nother) pre-lock gun, but I wanted something never used prior.

I did want a 625, but most I looked at (used) had the lock. If they run them without the lock, I'd consider it.
Link Posted: 9/17/2009 6:57:13 PM EST
carrying with a hammer is not a big deal......I carry the 360PD and love it.....the choice between SA/DA is awesome......just get one you wont regret it
Link Posted: 9/18/2009 10:55:53 AM EST
Used to carry a Bodyguard (649) shrouded hammer.

Hammerslot was a lint trap for pocket carry and I rarely ever actually fired SA. After a while I was a better shot DA at 15 yards than SA. I would replace it, if I did, with a 642.
Link Posted: 9/18/2009 11:32:35 AM EST
Originally Posted By survivorman:
carrying with a hammer is not a big deal......I carry the 360PD and love it.....the choice between SA/DA is awesome......just get one you wont regret it


+1 once you learn the proper method of drawing from a pocket with a hammer gun it is a non-issue. I like having the option to go single action in the event a precise shot is required. I've pocket carried a Model 36 Chiefs Special and currently pocket carry a pre-lock Model 60 in .357 Mag. Crimson Trace laser grips are a very nice addition. A good pocket holster is also a must.
Link Posted: 9/18/2009 6:19:25 PM EST
I've only carried my J Frame OWB or IWB about 10 times since I got it way back when. Everything else has been pocket carry so I'm glad it doesn't have an exposed hammer. YMMV
Link Posted: 9/18/2009 10:16:09 PM EST
I prefer having the DA/SA capability. The long range SA shooting is part of it, but far more important to me is the ability to pull the hammer back slightly and make sure the loaded cylinder will rotate smoothly.

And I always carry a 5-shot in a holster of some sort, so I have no problem with the exposed hammer.

But if I planned on loose pocket carry, I would definitely want a concealed or bobbed hammer. I have real doubts about my ability to shield an exposed hammer with my thumb as the revolver is drawn from a pocket in a high stress situation.

In fact, when I’ve tried placing a revolver with an exposed hammer loose in a pocket, I’ve actually had the hammer spur get stuck in the pocket lining as the revolver simply shifted in the pocket.

Also, while no doubt more of an issue in “movie” shootouts than real life, the concealed hammer does give you the ability to reliably fire the revolver while contained in something like a jacket pocket.

Link Posted: 9/19/2009 6:34:02 AM EST
Originally Posted By kzx87:
I like the idea of doing SA or DA, but I can see that fish hook hammer getting caught on everything. Is it doable or should I be looking at a shrouded hammer/hammerless?


It's all personal preference. All my J-frames have been concealed hammer. Mine are for duty BUG and off duty primary. J frames are for up close contact shots 0-10 ft. I feel no need for SA at those ranges. I carry ankle or BDU pocket while on duty and AIWB off duty and I think the hammer would get in my way. For a rare occasion where I would need a long precision shot, my M&P 340 trigger can easily be staged and it's very accurate at 50 yds (furthest I've shot for qualification).

Top Top