• You are using the old Black Responsive theme. We have installed a new dark theme for you, called UI.X. This will work better with the new upgrade of our software. You can select it at the bottom of any page.

Enclosed Hammer or Open?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Dangit, Guillermo - you just cost me a Benjamin. :fire: I had a bet that we'd never see another "Guillermo post" that didn't somehow become an MIM or lock issue. :cuss:


:D
 
I had a S&W Model 38 when I was a cop and scored 97.2% with it on the 50 yd course.

I liked it well enough but that hump was in the wrong place for smooth pocket draws. Also, lint and dirt would quickly accumulate in the hammer slot. Not a deal breaker but something to address routinely. The fully enclosed guns avoid both problems.

My assertion that a high grip on a 442/642 results in faster hits is true....but only when the shot to shot time gets to 1/3 of a second or faster. I did find accuracy is somewhat better with a 642 at virtually the same high speed than with a gun with traditional grip shape like the M-37. (I have pics and times if anyone cares)
 
Having the shrouded hammer, aside from not liking the looks of it, is I probably would cheat at the range and fire it in single-action, maybe too much, and not be good with the DA pull. That and as was mentioned: I don't want gunk getting in there. So a fully enclosed hammer probably would be best for me. Not that I've fully decided on this or anything. A week ago I was thinking Makarov, and that's still in mind. But the 637 was what I had originally planned, so it wouldn't surprise me if I ended up picking the similar 442. I just love revolvers. :D
 
David E,

Please understand that I was trying to state your position...not challenge it.

I respect your opinion even when we differ.

And as far as pics and times...I do care. Please post them or pm me with them.

Thank you,

Guillermo
 
I bought a 637. I'm something of a traditionalist, and I wanted the exposed hammer. I have no intent to cock it during a defensive draw, however: In SA mode, if you sneeze, twitch, pant, or even think too hard, that sucker's going off.

I carry it in a pocket no problem. I just put my thumb on the hammer spur, and that stops it from snagging. I don't carry it terribly often, but I rather like the little guy. :)
 
Well, I agree the 649 isn’t easy on the eyes, especially with the pithy stock grips. Still, it makes for an easy draw from the appendix or pocket carry.
 
Guillermo said:
David E,

Please understand that I was trying to state your position...not challenge it.

I respect your opinion even when we differ.

And as far as pics and times...I do care. Please post them or pm me with them.

Thank you,

Guillermo
Click to expand...

Guillermo, I was simply amplifying and clarifying my position, since it's been fine tuned a bit since last time this was brought up.

For example, I was a bit surprised that I was able to almost equal my trigger times between the two grip styles. I was only a few 100ths of a second faster with the high grip of the 642. But I was more accurate with it. Still, all shots hit a sheet of typing paper no matter what the gun was.....at least for me....that day.

I started a thread about it last March but I don't know how to access it with this evil iPhone.
 
For those of you whom carry snubbies, how many carry an open hammer design and how many an enclosed, and why?
Click to expand...

I actually like the shrouded hammers, like on the S&W 649 as you avoid the problem of hammer-snag, while still retaining the option to thumb-cock your piece.

649.jpg

Sure its ugly as sin, but it works. After that, I'd go with the hammerless version. IMO, snubbies are pocket guns, so I want something I can deploy from a pocket easily and cleanly. To me thats more important than the probably seldom to never used ability to thumb cock my shot.

Now, if I was carrying a J-Frame in a holster the open hammer gun would work fine, but I would probably think about another firearms choice if I was doing that.
 
The 442 gets my vote. I think it's the perfect size/weight, and I really think it's a handsome little gun. I really prefer the finish on the 442 over the 642, and mine still looks as good as the day I bought it (once I blow and wipe all the pocket lint off it). I think it's probably hard for you to go wrong with any of the j-frames. Just be aware some configurations may require more frequent attention to remove the lint build up. It accumulates very quickly, even in a pocket holster. This may or may not be an issue for you since most of us here probably service our firearms fairly regularly.
 
When would one need to cock a .38 snubby in a defensive situation?
Click to expand...

well you would not ever need to cock a snubby since you shoot double action so well.

some of us shoot single action better at long distance.
 
i have never had a problem with the hammer snagging clothing during drawing from the pocket. also it kind of defeats the purpose of getting a revolver if you are going to get one with a bobbed hammer, a hammerless, or double action only. might as well get an auto if that's what your going for, the only reason to get one like the 3 mentioned is just for looks (which is a poor reason to do so). as one person mentioned you can practice until you can shoot double action as good as single action, well with much much less practice you can pull things out of your pocket succesfully, even guns with hammers :eek:, it's not very hard.

i find a revolver with a non-messed with hammer to be best, you can go to the range and have fun with it in single action or just shoot it in double action if you ever need to draw and fire quickly.

also cocking back the hammer to make it a single action pull takes fractions of a second and does make sense to do in a self defense situation, you can easily have that hammer pulled back before your gun is even in the raised position. way back before there were double action revolvers everywhere people used to draw, cock back the hammer and shoot just fine.
 
HelterSkelter said:
cocking back the hammer to make it a single action pull takes fractions of a second and does make sense to do in a self defense situation, you can easily have that hammer pulled back before your gun is even in the raised position.
Click to expand...

You can't do it and maintain a firing grip. It is smarter simply to put in the modicum of practice needed to have sufficient DA skill for 99% of SD situations. It's silly to ignore the probable 99% in pursuit of the improbable 1%

way back before there were double action revolvers everywhere people used to draw, cock back the hammer and shoot just fine.
Click to expand...

Until reliable double actions came on the scene.....back in the 1880's......
 
surely no one disputes shrouded/DAO for pocket carry, what's to dispute ??
but for OWB, choose whatever suits you, including your manner of dress, option or no option

hitting fast and accurate doesn't come free, it comes with practice
pro competition shooters in both SA and DA disciplines ought be proof enough that skill is not packaged with the hardware

much is oft repeated about "accidental discharge" in SA mode
(otherwise known as operator error, not hardware error)
if you are not ready to kill, don't point it at anybody you are real real serious about killing, much less cock the hammer
if you must do either or both, do your very best to kill, "thinking time" has already elapsed, and warning shots belong in hollywood scripts

not a real good notion to put your finger on the trigger if not real sure of what the target really really is, and what your irreversible intentions are, much less cock a hammer

"When would one need to cock a .38 snubby in a defensive situation?"
depends on how long they stand still, maybe

some nutjob with a hi cap mag Glock slips off the edge of the flat earth, be it Lubbock, Texas. or elsewhere, and starts dumping rounds into anybody/everybody in a crowd standing within easy sight...
if he is pointing in my direction, DA as fast (?) as I can go
if he is pointing it away from me at some little kid surrounded by 47 other bystanders, my 1st round out of OWB is going to be SA, and DA after (if the kid is not in line-of-fire) until I am empty or dead or he is, nothing accidental about it, either way.. may god and others forgive me if I miss the 1st shot, off target on next shots, or just too slow
If he is John Wesley Hardin, I am a dead man either way, SA and/or DA

we all would be happier people today if somebody in Arizona had a snubbie, and had enough practice time to hit with it, SA or DA, fast or slow... even the very best of speed comp shooters are not that fast dumping 15-31 rounds

only part of this repetitive debate that never made any sense to me, is owning a SA/DA and not seriously practicing both
if it swings both ways, shoot it a lot, both ways
if unwilling to put similar round counts downrange both ways, you don't need both ways, pick one, and double up on your round count "that" way

I like options, but hope I never have to choose just one
 
I have several J Frames and the only one that really has a passable double action pull is my only one with an internal hammer, the 640-1; my 49, 63 and 36 are very stiff.

I am interested, does the centennial internal hammer configuration generally have a better double action trigger pull in your opinion?
 
I have to say, if I had to pick one out of any modern-produced snub, I'd go with the S&W Classics Model 36, but with an MSRP of $730... yeah, no thanks. I really love the look of them, but not that much.

I wish there was an open-hammer version of the Airweight in the black finish. Still thinking about this...
 
DA pulls can be smoothed and improved, making that point moot in comparing the two actions.

If you have time to cock the hammer (like a Luby's scenario where the shooter isn't focused on you but is shooting others) then you have time to stage the trigger for a precise shot.

The advantage to single action is it allows you avoid the DA learning curve so you can make accurate hits faster than learning how to make the same hits DA. However, once the DA pull is mastered, there is no accuracy advantage to SA
 
David E; I believe it is relevant. For the vast majority of people the trigger is what it is when it comes out of the box....they don't send their firearms off to be modified.

I have no problem with it and have a 36 at S&W and a 1911 at a smith getting work done now. The point is out of the box my 640-1 has a significantly better trigger pull than may external hammer J-Frames; is that the norm?
 
The 638 is perfect for pocket carry. I have never had a snag and you don't even realize that the hammer is there. I like the versatility of being able to cock it if I want to. As posted above, SA may not be practical in a self defense emergency. However, it could be the right thing some times. If you are accuracy at the range, I feel better with using the hammer than I do with a half pull. Just keep your booger picker off the trigger until you are ready to fire. You normally don't think of a pocket gun as accurate but my 638 is impressive when using SA. I don't think there is a price difference in any version.
 
I have no problem with it and have a 36 at S&W and a 1911 at a smith getting work done now. The point is out of the box my 640-1 has a significantly better trigger pull than may external hammer J-Frames; is that the norm?
Click to expand...

All of Smith & Wesson's J-frame revolvers use the same trigger (which is important because it's the trigger that levers the hammer backwards when the fingerpiece is pulled) and the location of the hammer and trigger studs (pins those parts rotate on) are the same. The only difference is that the upper part of the respective hammers are changed to work in a particular frame or model. As a consequence a double-action trigger pull should be identical throughout the entire product line regardless if they are conventional spurred hammer, shrouded hammer or inclosed hammer.

But for various reasons it's doesn't work out that way. Some hammer and rebound slide springs can be heavier or lighter then others. Tolerance stacks and fitting are often different. Well used lockwork gets burnished and smoother, and frictional resistance within the cylinder assembly (yes, when you pull the trigger you are also rotating the cylinder) and associated lockwork can add to the weight of the trigger pull, as well as how it feels in terms of "smoothness."

I suppose some who believe the optimal solution is to "polish the lockwork and install lighter springs," as is generally recommended on the 'Net and elsewhere will be surprised at the above, but the best professional 'smiths who specialize in working on S&W revolvers, as well as the folks at the factory have known it for years.

In passing, I will note that the company recently introduced a new "Bodyguard" revolver, which is entirely different from the ground up, then those models based on the older J-frame. I have no experience with it, but the double-action trigger pull may be another story.
 
I carry a 640 centennial...I also own an M36..I like em' both,but prefer the 640 for carry..i do however see a 638 in the future..
 
I have listened to David's position on this for quite some time.

As I reflect on my own shooting I do not remember the last time that I shot a snubby single action. My thought theory is that under stress the simpler the better. That is why I have no self defense weapons with any external safeties (unless you consider the squeeze-cocking mechanism of the HK P7 an external safety).

So if I am not ever planning on using double action why should it be a feature on my sidearm?

And if removing a feature than I am not going to use is going to get me an advantage, higher grip for faster follow up shots...why not?

Are not the fastest follow up shots more important than the off chance of needing to hit a target at long range?

Since I never practice single action would I be better at double action at long range?

If I were contemplating a j-frame I have changed my mind. I would go "hammerless".

You have convinced me David.

You win.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

F
  • Locked
Backup gun - Enclosed hammer or Bobbed hammer?
Replies
21
Views
2K
Erik
E
H
  • Locked
Question About Smith & Wesson Model Numbers
Replies
7
Views
508
halfmoonclip
H
Q
  • Locked
Exposed hammer IWB with no thumb break
Replies
6
Views
446
The Lone Haranguer
T
S
  • Locked
Airweight J frame with longer barrel and better sights?
Replies
4
Views
597
Carne Frio
C
H
  • Locked
DeSantis Nemesis Holster for S&W 37-2 with exposed bobbed hammer
Replies
1
Views
382
heavyshooter
H
Back
Top