[orygunmike]

I may have my terminology wrong here, but I'm hoping you folks get the point of the question.

I'm a autoloader guy, but considering the purchase of a J frame revolver for pocket carry.

I am wondering about the pros and cons of a revolver with an extermal hammer versus one without.

Aside from not being able to pull the hammer back for single-action shots, tell me about the good, the bad, and the ugly.

thanks!

[News Shooter]

There isn't much difference except as you point out, that you can't shoot SA.
The hammerless is primarily for carry to avoid snagging the hammer and also
safety.
However, I have a S & W Model 38 with a shrouded hammer. I can still shoot SA so it is the best of both worlds. It ain't beautiful though

[Old Fuff]

Pocket carry is the main reason they make internal hammer revolvers. If you have a gun with a conventional hammer with a cocking spur it's likely to snag and catch in the pocket when the gun's drawn. Also the insides are less likely to collect dirt and lint if the internals are sealed as is the case with a "hammerless" revolver. There is a weak argument that the gun is safer because it has to be fired double-action.

Under circumstance other then ankle or pocket carry the regular hammer allows both single-action and double-action firing, which some people prefer.

[Jorg]

Don't forget the the "Bodyguard" frame from S&W and similar shrouded hammer revolvers, if you want a bit of a compromise.

[double0757]

I think that if you're going to carry inside pocket, you would be better served with a hammerless design. The Body Guard still collects lint inside the crack of the shroud and is one more thing to clean and inspect on a frequent basis. Besides self defense guns are almost never shot single action. The only time I would see a need would be for a head shot under hostage situation. I wouldn't want to be the hostage if you going to try it from a snob nose at a distance, single action or not.
Double O

[Deanimator]

Concealed hammer (S&W Centennial) and shrouded hammer (S&W Bodyguard) revolvers have two advantages.

The first is that they have no exposed hammer to catch on the inside of pockets, etc.

The second is that at contact range, they can be fired right through the pocket, purse, etc.

The advantage that the shrouded hammer has over the concealed hammer is that the hammer can still be cocked single action like a conventional revolver.

[miko]

I join the advice to go with the "hammerless" type.
If you have open or shrouded hammer you will just be tempted to waste range time and ammo shooting in single action mode.

Personaly, I've got two J-frames - a hammerless 12 oz 340 for pocket carry and an all-steel Model 60 with regular hammer, adjustable sights and 3-inch barrel for IWB/underarm/purse carry - and the range.
This way I can target practice without need for painkillers and play with hammer and sights to my heart's content.
Not that I find myself practicing single-action, but cockable hammer is often usefull while introducing new people to shooting.

miko

[cortez kid]

Love my mod 60, but I like to carry it in my pocket. The hammer does snag. I'm thinking of replacing it. I will never get rid of it, but I'm trying to decide between a shrouded or hammerless. I like to shoot both single and double. Stainlees steel for me.
kid

[MikeJ]

I prefer the internal hammer models for a J frame. I have the S&W 640 .357 and the 442 .38. Another reason I really like the Centennial style is that I can get a much higher grip on the gun and I shoot it much better than the exposed hammer J frames.

[weregunner]

1 vote for the inside hammer version.If a outside hammer snubbie is pocket carried ,as it is drawn put the thumb over the top of the hammer to keep the hammer spur from snagging on the material of the clothing.Have a enclosed hammer snub myself.