Full Cylinder Carry On Certain Models

[StrawHat]

Howdy

Over the years there have been various changes regarding hammer blocks in Smith and Wesson double action revolvers with side swinging cylinders...






In 1944 (not 1945) a sailor was killed when a Victory Model Smith and Wesson fell to the deck of a warship. I have heard several versions of this story, but the most believable one I heard is that a pilot was climbing out of the cockpit of his plane on an aircraft carrier, and his revolver fell to the deck. If this version is true, the revolver would have fallen quite a distance as he climbed off the wing of his plane, and when it landed on its hammer it discharged, killing the sailor. An investigation found that hardened cosmoline had probably prevented the spring steel hammer block from moving forward to the 'safe' position, and the force had been enough to break enough parts and the revolver discharged. …

DJ,

Once again a great photo-journalistic explanation of the topic! The images explain what the words suggest.

The Navy story with which I am familiar is the revolver dropped at least one deck to land on the steel deck and discharge. But the fact that the hardened cosmoline had rendered the safety inactive was downplayed. The US Government can never be seen to be wrong, no matter what the policy was that caused the error. Regardless, the new safety was designed and adopted and the contract was saved!

I often wonder what the reaction was to the new “Government mandated safety”? Did all the minions boycott buying S&W revolvers because of it? Or, was it the great non-issue, like the internal storage lock?

Kevin

 

[dfariswheel]

In the pre-internet, pre-gun magazine days, most people never heard of any changes and wouldn't have cared since they couldn't see it defacing the side plate like new S&W revolvers.

 

[bangswitch]

This is a photo of a style of hammer block that Uberti was using on their imported revolvers a bunch of years ago. The part below the firing pin actuated a hammer block at the bottom of the hammer that prevented the hammer from falling all the way unless the trigger was pulled.

I have very little experience with the new Uberits, the ones with the floating hammer. The idea is they should be safe to carry fully loaded. However I was shooting one a few years ago and it did not fire every time I pulled the trigger. Probably a burr or something inside was preventing the firing pin from moving forward all the way.

Great post on the hammer blocks and all the supporting pictures.

On Uberti SA clones, their previous safety involved the cylinder retention pin, which had a second groove at the forward end. To activate the safety, you pressed the retention pin at the front of the frame and pushed the cylinder rod back, allowing the retention pin to engage the forward groove . The cylinder pin would push the hammer back far enough to disengage the firing pin from the primer, basically putting it in the "first click" position. To disengage the safety, you had to press the cylinder rod retention pin again and move the rod forward, engaging the rearmost groove, allowing the hammer to rest fully down. I can see that as a real PITA.

The current floating firing pin system has a rod inside the hammer that travels up from the sear area to a spot behind the firing pin in its "hole". A small arm on the trigger engages the rod inside the hammer and pushes it up when the trigger is pulled, and that rod forces the firing pin outward. I've read reports from owners that in the right circumstances, the pressure on the trigger is relaxed before the hammer can fall and crush the primer. The firing pin falls back and doesn't contact the primer. I've not had it happen to me yet, but I can see how it could happen when doing rapid fire. The way the safety is designed, you have to hold the trigger all the way back until the gun fires. Somebody fast enough could pull the trigger enough for it to drop the hammer and by that time have relaxed the pressure on the trigger while they reach up with their thumb to cock the gun again.

Sam Colt is probably laughing his ass off.

 

[Jim Watson]

The double groove base pin, first seen as “Swiss Safe” was designed purely to gain import points, not much use in a working revolver.

Uberti had a hammer block operated by a pushrod in the quarter cock notch. Seems like it would have been effective but there was little said about it.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

Uberti had a hammer block operated by a pushrod in the quarter cock notch. Seems like it would have been effective but there was little said about it.

I had an Uberti with that system years ago. It worked fine, but I sold it years ago to help pay for my first Colt.

 

[halfmoonclip]

with a cylinder pin safety safety.

This really isn't too big a deal; if it truly troubles you, grind off the basepin until the second groove fits the spring loaded retaining pin. Or just ignore it.

Over the years there have been various changes regarding hammer blocks in Smith and Wesson double action revolvers with side swinging cylinders.

Driftwood, after reviewing your pictures, plus another poster's explanation elsewhere, I finally understand the earlier hammer block. I've got to give my '30s vintage pre- Model 10 a closer look; assume it uses the original system.
Moon

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

Driftwood, after reviewing your pictures, plus another poster's explanation elsewhere, I finally understand the earlier hammer block. I've got to give my '30s vintage pre- Model 10 a closer look; assume it uses the original system.
Moon

I suggest you look at my photos again. This is the first type of hammer block, with the spring loaded pin. It is from a 38 M&P that shipped in 1920.

This 38 M&P shipped in 1939, it has the second style of hammer block, without the spring loaded pin.

This is a Victory Model that shipped sometime between 1942 and 1944. This is the same style of hammer block as posted above. This is the type of hammer block that failed in the ship board incident in 1944, leading to the modern style hammer block.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

This really isn't too big a deal; if it truly troubles you, grind off the basepin until the second groove fits the spring loaded retaining pin. Or just ignore it.

Every once in a while at a CAS match a cowboy will try to fire his revolvers, but just get click, click, click, click, click. Because he has one of those stupid two position cylinder pins and he forgot to pull the pin forward so his revolvers would fire. So ignoring it is not always the best choice. I bought a used Uberti colt replica years ago that came with the stupid two position pins. I replaced it with a conventional pin and never had a problem. Much easier than grinding off the rear of the pin.

 

[halfmoonclip]

Much easier than grinding off the rear of the pin.

Assuming you have inexpensive, ready access to extra pins.
It's a one minute walk to my bench grinder, and a 3 minute job to grind it down. But your point is taken, if anyone actually uses that silly safety detent.
Now, on some reflection, the two position cylinder pin remains the simplest, least intrusive way to satisfy requirements, real or imagined, for a manual safety on traditional SAAs.
Just sayin'
Moon

 

[halfmoonclip]

I suggest you look at my photos again. This is the first type of hammer block, with the spring loaded pin. It is from a 38 M&P that shipped in 1920.

Uhh, I said I did understand how it works. The principle remains the same in all three versions; the block is cammed out of engagement, by the hand, when the hammer goes back, and it isn't failsafe if the mechanism gets gummed up.
Relax, Driftwood, your point is both clear, and understood. Thanks.
Moon

 

[Dr. Dingus]

Wow this thread is still going, huh? You guys sure know quite a bit on these topics. I always assumed the floating hammer had to serve a point, otherwise they would just make them with the static hammers.

Edit: I did not have time to read every reply, but I did peruse quite a bit of them.

 

[Dr. Dingus]

I will be out at my friends place this weekend, and we are going to see how much force it takes to fire the Cimarron SAA with the hammer down on a loaded chamber. Using a rubber mallet or something close to the human hand or elbow, which would be the only way it would be smacked at all in a holster on the hip. I have a friend who CCs the same model as me, and he always carries six shots. He keeps telling me the floating hammer is enough to avoid a discharge from anything but dropping the gun, or hitting the hammer really hard.

 

[BobWright]

I'm entering late to this discussion, so what I offer may be redundant. But the early Ubertis, ca.1975, had a half-cock safety. This was a T-shaped bar on the hammer that was activated when the hammer was in the "Safety" position, the first notch. When loaded this way the bar rotated down and impinged betwee the frame and hammer face, thus blocking the hammer.



This is the safety bar, just below the firing pin, and the small pin in the hammer is the pin on which it rotates. I believe Skeeter Skelton once tested it, striking the hammer hard with a wooden tool handle, and was unable to get the gu to fire. And I believe it passed the Hammer Drop Test required for importation. Well, I know it did as I had the gun.

There was some question of what might happen had the sear tip been broken, but that seems to me very unlikely as the sear tip never felt the brunt of the blow, and the bar kept the blow from being transferred to the sear tip.

Nut, except for my daily Ruger carrying, I custommarily load only five rounds in my revolvers any way. Five rounds in a row in a box thing, you know.


Bob Wright

 

[BobWright]

AS to the two position base pin, the "Swiss Safe" tyoe of safety, it did pass the Hammer Drop test. But not the Intelligence Test...............

I've long had this mental image of a hold-up victim saying to his would-be hold-up thug: "Hold it a minute while I reposition my base pin!"

Think that would get him a sudden case of lead poisoning.

Bob Wrght

 

[Barmcd]

Assuming you have inexpensive, ready access to extra pins.
It's a one minute walk to my bench grinder, and a 3 minute job to grind it down. But your point is taken, if anyone actually uses that silly safety detent.
Now, on some reflection, the two position cylinder pin remains the simplest, least intrusive way to satisfy requirements, real or imagined, for a manual safety on traditional SAAs.
Just sayin'
Moon

Its not like you have to use it.

 

[StrawHat]

I will be out at my friends place this weekend, and we are going to see how much force it takes to fire the Cimarron SAA with the hammer down on a loaded chamber. Using a rubber mallet or something close to the human hand or elbow, which would be the only way it would be smacked at all in a holster on the hip. I have a friend who CCs the same model as me, and he always carries six shots. He keeps telling me the floating hammer is enough to avoid a discharge from anything but dropping the gun, or hitting the hammer really hard.

Elmer wrote about cowboys saddling up and having the stirrup slip of the saddle horn and strike the hammer. I can imagine a few other circumstances, even some modern ones. Your friend CC’s a SAA? With 6? Must be expecting problems. 5 is still the smart way to carry.

Kevin

 

[Dr. Dingus]

Elmer wrote about cowboys saddling up and having the stirrup slip of the saddle horn and strike the hammer. I can imagine a few other circumstances, even some modern ones. Your friend CC’s a SAA? With 6? Must be expecting problems. 5 is still the smart way to carry.

Kevin

He is strange like that. I always load 5 and leave the hammer down on an empty, I just think it is interesting he never had an issue.

 

[gnappi]

There's reasonably safe, and fool proof. I believe in the former and NOT the latter.

I carry my SAA clones with six on half cock. I wear a snapped holster, I don't shimmy down mountains, Don't hang upside down in a tree stand and I don't drop it. I consider them safe.

BTW, even IF you carried a SAA with one empty chamber, who's to say you CANNOT drop it after you cock it? Or... fall with it cocked?

 

[halfmoonclip]

I simply stay in the habit with old-style single actions the load one, skip one, load the rest, cock and ease down the hammer on the empty.
Oddly, I've a '71-'72 Open Top which works like a Colt, but lacks the so called 'safety' notch, just to make sure no one tries to use it as such.
It does have the doofus thing in the hammer face that can be engaged, to make it drop safe. Another one of those safeties that can simply be ignored in ordinary use. The open top does make it easy to judge that the empty is under the hammer.
Moon