I have posed this topic as a question because it symbolizes that I still have an open mind about the topic, but the question needed to be asked.
When I go revolver shopping, I see DAO revolvers all of the time, SW 442/642, 640s, Ruger SP-101's with chopped hammers, Tauri of various nomenclature, and larger snubs customized with docked hammer spurs from time to time.
Then I ask myself the question, is the DAO revolver a form of snake oil? After all, one is voluntarily crippling one of the two trigger modes of the normal double action revolver. So it begs the question of what is gained compared to what is given up.
Some DAO revolvers out there, like CAI imported Ruger GP-100s or NYPD Rugers, appear to be DAO due to a police bureaucracy–can’t have our boys in uniform hammering back on a suspect now can we? I view that as the “chicken manure” reason for DAO revolvers in that the primary intention is the avoidance of civil liability. This aspect is not what I intend to discuss.
Other DAO revolvers, most famously the Centennial J-Frames and their Taurus quasi-clones, are purpose built for external hammer elimination from scratch. These, for lack of a better term, I call “concealment DAO,” the idea being that the hammer is an impediment to really deep concealment.
Some people also tout the hammerless system as capable of being “pocket-fired” while in a coat or a vest. I view this as a dubious advantage if it is not in fact an error in judgement to think that pocket firing a weapon at all is a good idea. First of all, pocket firing is like cowboy point shooting, but worse, because a natural pointing angle is far from assured, the firing position using most coats or vests is going to be unnatural, your hollow point might become pre-clogged or prematurely expand--degrading its terminal effectiveness, and finally if the revolver is not removed from the pocket, you have effectively half-hand-cuffed yourself if the bad guy or an accomplice bowls you over or something. All in all, I’d rather have my piece out before firing than rely on the crappy shooting characteristics afforded by remaining totally discreet and surprising via lighting off my revolver in my pocket.
So maybe the fire in the hole aspect is an overblown Hollywood fantasy? Then the hammerless certainly makes more sense as a “concealment DAO” in that it can’t help but outperform fully exposed hammer snubbies and even shrouded traditionally operating revolvers in that role--does it not? Again, I wonder. Perhaps for naked pocket carry, the concealment DAO is better, but I tend to think that again that advantage is overblown and at the cost of the option of going to SA if required.
Some snubbies, like the S&W Bodyguard style, are permanently shrouded. Many snubbies are not shrouded at all but can be with some frame modification. As far as the hammer printing through a pocket, that can be mitigated by a good pocket holster. As far as presentation is concerned, technique can prevent snagging. The modus operandi of the pocket concealed revolver is that one can be discreetly gripping it as things are getting tactically dicey, but not cross the line into brandishing until the last possible moment if desired. What is to prevent one from shrouding the exposed hammer of just such a snub with one’s thumb? My thumb doesn’t snag when presenting my Det. Special so I tend to think that snagging upon presentation is also an overblown problem.
Now I come to the cons of DAO. It is limiting one’s choices for the sake of dubious convenience. The flip side of the “I can fire from my pocket” argument, is the traditional hammered snubbie user’s argument, that, “I can hammer back for a precision shot if required.” I have yet to meet a revolver shooter who thinks a shot at any distance that would reasonably be made using the sights would be easier to execute in DA as opposed to SA if given the choice. Does that mean that hammering back to SA while drawing is a great idea? No, not necessarily, though people are encountered who do just that. What I am talking about is the scenario where one might be called upon to do something that requires accuracy, such as hit a person holding a human shield or who is crouching and reloading behind cover, but still partially exposed to your shot if you can make it. Those two scenarios are no more unlikely than having to shoot someone from the inside of one’s pocket, but a DAO would be a decided disadvantage on such a shot, just as surely as a traditionally spurred hammer would be disadvantaged firing from one’s pocket.
Many people think a snub is of limited accuracy, but it just isn't so. It's two real ballistic limitations are its short sight radius and how much trigger control one has. A properly calibrated laser grip can somewhat mitigate problem one, but only going to SA can really mitigate problem two.
Given that I am of the mind that I would always present before I fired any snubbie, I had no problem passing up the DAO ones I encountered in the case at my dealer’s place or on the tables on the gun show. If I ever get a snubbie smaller than my Detective Special, I am thinking I will be contrarian and go for a Bodyguard. I could still be persuaded about DAO however, because maybe I am missing something?
When I go revolver shopping, I see DAO revolvers all of the time, SW 442/642, 640s, Ruger SP-101's with chopped hammers, Tauri of various nomenclature, and larger snubs customized with docked hammer spurs from time to time.
Then I ask myself the question, is the DAO revolver a form of snake oil? After all, one is voluntarily crippling one of the two trigger modes of the normal double action revolver. So it begs the question of what is gained compared to what is given up.
Some DAO revolvers out there, like CAI imported Ruger GP-100s or NYPD Rugers, appear to be DAO due to a police bureaucracy–can’t have our boys in uniform hammering back on a suspect now can we? I view that as the “chicken manure” reason for DAO revolvers in that the primary intention is the avoidance of civil liability. This aspect is not what I intend to discuss.
Other DAO revolvers, most famously the Centennial J-Frames and their Taurus quasi-clones, are purpose built for external hammer elimination from scratch. These, for lack of a better term, I call “concealment DAO,” the idea being that the hammer is an impediment to really deep concealment.
Some people also tout the hammerless system as capable of being “pocket-fired” while in a coat or a vest. I view this as a dubious advantage if it is not in fact an error in judgement to think that pocket firing a weapon at all is a good idea. First of all, pocket firing is like cowboy point shooting, but worse, because a natural pointing angle is far from assured, the firing position using most coats or vests is going to be unnatural, your hollow point might become pre-clogged or prematurely expand--degrading its terminal effectiveness, and finally if the revolver is not removed from the pocket, you have effectively half-hand-cuffed yourself if the bad guy or an accomplice bowls you over or something. All in all, I’d rather have my piece out before firing than rely on the crappy shooting characteristics afforded by remaining totally discreet and surprising via lighting off my revolver in my pocket.
So maybe the fire in the hole aspect is an overblown Hollywood fantasy? Then the hammerless certainly makes more sense as a “concealment DAO” in that it can’t help but outperform fully exposed hammer snubbies and even shrouded traditionally operating revolvers in that role--does it not? Again, I wonder. Perhaps for naked pocket carry, the concealment DAO is better, but I tend to think that again that advantage is overblown and at the cost of the option of going to SA if required.
Some snubbies, like the S&W Bodyguard style, are permanently shrouded. Many snubbies are not shrouded at all but can be with some frame modification. As far as the hammer printing through a pocket, that can be mitigated by a good pocket holster. As far as presentation is concerned, technique can prevent snagging. The modus operandi of the pocket concealed revolver is that one can be discreetly gripping it as things are getting tactically dicey, but not cross the line into brandishing until the last possible moment if desired. What is to prevent one from shrouding the exposed hammer of just such a snub with one’s thumb? My thumb doesn’t snag when presenting my Det. Special so I tend to think that snagging upon presentation is also an overblown problem.
Now I come to the cons of DAO. It is limiting one’s choices for the sake of dubious convenience. The flip side of the “I can fire from my pocket” argument, is the traditional hammered snubbie user’s argument, that, “I can hammer back for a precision shot if required.” I have yet to meet a revolver shooter who thinks a shot at any distance that would reasonably be made using the sights would be easier to execute in DA as opposed to SA if given the choice. Does that mean that hammering back to SA while drawing is a great idea? No, not necessarily, though people are encountered who do just that. What I am talking about is the scenario where one might be called upon to do something that requires accuracy, such as hit a person holding a human shield or who is crouching and reloading behind cover, but still partially exposed to your shot if you can make it. Those two scenarios are no more unlikely than having to shoot someone from the inside of one’s pocket, but a DAO would be a decided disadvantage on such a shot, just as surely as a traditionally spurred hammer would be disadvantaged firing from one’s pocket.
Many people think a snub is of limited accuracy, but it just isn't so. It's two real ballistic limitations are its short sight radius and how much trigger control one has. A properly calibrated laser grip can somewhat mitigate problem one, but only going to SA can really mitigate problem two.
Given that I am of the mind that I would always present before I fired any snubbie, I had no problem passing up the DAO ones I encountered in the case at my dealer’s place or on the tables on the gun show. If I ever get a snubbie smaller than my Detective Special, I am thinking I will be contrarian and go for a Bodyguard. I could still be persuaded about DAO however, because maybe I am missing something?
Last edited:
