Question: S&W Revolver Transfer Bar?
- Thread starter Mad Man
- Start date
- Status
P95Carry
Moderator Emeritus
Someone else more expert on Smiths than I will bring the goods here i expect.
But, IIRC ... when Smith dropped the integral hammer firing pin, they did go to something of a transfer bar system, tho not quite like Bill Rugers I think.
I am interested myself to know the chronology and details actually.
But, IIRC ... when Smith dropped the integral hammer firing pin, they did go to something of a transfer bar system, tho not quite like Bill Rugers I think.
I am interested myself to know the chronology and details actually.
The systems are mechanically similar, but work differently. Both employ a vertical bar that moves up and down. In the Smith & Wesson the bar is attached to the rebound slide, and as the slide moves the bar is raised and lowered. In the Ruger the bar is attached to the back of the trigger, and trigger movement moves the bar up and down.
Smith & Wesson’s bar is a Hammer Block. When the bar is raised it come between the hammer and frame and prevents the hammer from going forward far enough so the firing pin can hit the primer. When the trigger is pulled and held backwards the bar is lowered and the hammer can travel far enough to fire the cartridge.
In the Ruger the bar is a Transfer Bar. Pulling the trigger raised the bar so that the hammer can hit the bar, which in turn hits the firing pin. When the trigger is released and moves forward the bar drops below the firing pin and the hammer can no longer transfer its impact to the firing pin.
In both cases the revolver’s hammer cannot transfer a blow to the firing pin and/or the primer so long as the trigger is in the forward position. To fire, the trigger must be pulled fully to the rear and held there while the hammer falls.
While they go about it in different ways both makes are equally safe, and because they are worked by the revolver’s mechanism the user doesn’t need too do anything to put the safety on or take it off.
Smith & Wesson’s bar is a Hammer Block. When the bar is raised it come between the hammer and frame and prevents the hammer from going forward far enough so the firing pin can hit the primer. When the trigger is pulled and held backwards the bar is lowered and the hammer can travel far enough to fire the cartridge.
In the Ruger the bar is a Transfer Bar. Pulling the trigger raised the bar so that the hammer can hit the bar, which in turn hits the firing pin. When the trigger is released and moves forward the bar drops below the firing pin and the hammer can no longer transfer its impact to the firing pin.
In both cases the revolver’s hammer cannot transfer a blow to the firing pin and/or the primer so long as the trigger is in the forward position. To fire, the trigger must be pulled fully to the rear and held there while the hammer falls.
While they go about it in different ways both makes are equally safe, and because they are worked by the revolver’s mechanism the user doesn’t need too do anything to put the safety on or take it off.
Thank you all .....
The Old Fuff's ego is only exceeded by his good looks .....
One thing I didn't mention. If you remove the transfer bar from a Ruger it won't fire .... period. However, if you remove the hammer block from a Smith & Wesson it will still work, even though the safety is gone. This isn't likely to happen in a new gun, but used ones should be checked to be sure the safety is in place and working as it should.
S&W introduced the present day hammer block in late 1944 or early 1945. Before that date some S&W guns had a hammer block in one form or another, or in other cases none at all. Therefore it is advisable to carry pre-World War Two Smith's with the hammer resting on an empty chamber. On later guns this precaution is not necessary.
The Old Fuff's ego is only exceeded by his good looks .....
One thing I didn't mention. If you remove the transfer bar from a Ruger it won't fire .... period. However, if you remove the hammer block from a Smith & Wesson it will still work, even though the safety is gone. This isn't likely to happen in a new gun, but used ones should be checked to be sure the safety is in place and working as it should.
S&W introduced the present day hammer block in late 1944 or early 1945. Before that date some S&W guns had a hammer block in one form or another, or in other cases none at all. Therefore it is advisable to carry pre-World War Two Smith's with the hammer resting on an empty chamber. On later guns this precaution is not necessary.
Mike Irwin
Member
What about the new sell-out guns with the frame-mounted firing pins?
I've not really looked at any.
I wonder why...
I've not really looked at any.
I wonder why...
Tamara
Senior Member
Why, Mike! A veritable walking Smith & Wesson encyclopedia like yourself should know that the frame-mounted firing pins began in 1998, two years before the HUD fiasco.
I don't know; why weren't you looking at new Smiths in '98 and '99?
In answer to your question, my '98 625-7 has pretty much the same hammer block arrangement as my '57 34.
Last edited:
Smith & Wesson .22 rim-fire, hand-ejector revolvers have always had frame-mounted firing pins, and use whatever hammer block system was in use at the time. Consequently the revolvers manufactured after World War Two used the hammer block employed in respective center-fire models. When the switch was made to frame-mounted firing pins in center-fire models and/or MIM lockwork S&W still kept the same hammer block.
ceestand
Member
In my M-10 the hammer block bar rattles. Is there a fix for this or just something I have to live with?
P95Carry
Moderator Emeritus
Fuff ... thx from me too .. another ''bravo''!
Well ... where is the pic then?? Hmmm??
P95Carry:
Any good firewall or virus checker should stop a picture of me .......
Ceestand:
The rattle is normal, but if it bugs you the safety block can be bent slightly so that it rubs against the sideplate. Or as an alternative, put a dab of heavy grease in the slot in the sideplate.
Any good firewall or virus checker should stop a picture of me .......
Ceestand:
The rattle is normal, but if it bugs you the safety block can be bent slightly so that it rubs against the sideplate. Or as an alternative, put a dab of heavy grease in the slot in the sideplate.
P95Carry
Moderator Emeritus
OK Fuff ..... touché .....
Now we know tho ..... Old Fuff is actually just a figment ... of less than benign hex code ... stoppable only by firewalls and anti-virus. OK Fuff out with it ... you're bald like me!!
Mike Irwin
Member
"Why, Mike! A veritable walking Smith & Wesson encyclopedia like yourself should know that the frame-mounted firing pins began in 1998, two years before the HUD fiasco."
I do know that. I also know that from those two years, the only guns that I'd be interested in -- blued guns, not the shiny crow-bait baubles they've largely turned to -- were largely phased out.
Then there's the issue of them not making any guns in 1998/1999 that hold much interest for me caliber wise... There's your double whammy.
That said, though, I have a Model 36 that I bought from ArmySon that was made prior to March 2000.
Unfortunately, I don't have it to examine at the moment because it's with my parents. They needed a gun.
Now, had you REALLY been paying attention over the past 3 years, you'd know that I rarely answer questions about S&W's production post 1995-96. Why?
Lack of interest.
I do know that. I also know that from those two years, the only guns that I'd be interested in -- blued guns, not the shiny crow-bait baubles they've largely turned to -- were largely phased out.
Then there's the issue of them not making any guns in 1998/1999 that hold much interest for me caliber wise... There's your double whammy.
That said, though, I have a Model 36 that I bought from ArmySon that was made prior to March 2000.
Unfortunately, I don't have it to examine at the moment because it's with my parents. They needed a gun.
Now, had you REALLY been paying attention over the past 3 years, you'd know that I rarely answer questions about S&W's production post 1995-96. Why?
Lack of interest.
Mike Irwin
Member
"In my M-10 the hammer block bar rattles. Is there a fix for this or just something I have to live with?"
It's supposed to rattle. That means that it's there and free to move.
However, if it really bugs you, you an use a couple of dabs of a heavy-bodied grease to "glue" the block in place. That will provide adequate lubrication and also cushion the block to keep it from rattling.
It's supposed to rattle. That means that it's there and free to move.
However, if it really bugs you, you an use a couple of dabs of a heavy-bodied grease to "glue" the block in place. That will provide adequate lubrication and also cushion the block to keep it from rattling.
P95Carry:
There are two kinds of people. Those who expend energy growing hair ....
And those who use it to expand their brain .....
It is said that the Fuff's dome is so reflective he can take pictures in a dark room without a flash ......
There are two kinds of people. Those who expend energy growing hair ....
And those who use it to expand their brain .....
It is said that the Fuff's dome is so reflective he can take pictures in a dark room without a flash ......
Jim March
Member
I am of the opinion that the failure rate for both the transfer bar and hammer block mechanisms are so astonishingly low (assuming a gun made after S&W's WW2 change) that I wouldn't pick one gun or another based on which internal safety it has.
As long as it has one, cool.
As long as it has one, cool.
- Status
