S&W hammer block vs. transfer bar confused.

[brutus51]

Recently began a quest to find a S&W model 686. Found an overpriced example at my local gun shop that I took a pass on. What had me confused is that the 686 retains a pinned firing pin on the hammer. As a result I assumed it had no firing pin safety, since then I've discovered it does have a hammer block.
The cause of my confusion is the fact that both my 629 and 625 mountain gun have a flat hammer with a spring loaded firing pin in the frame.
Are all Smith L frame revolvers made this way?
Is the system found on my N frames considered a transfer bar?
Having seen hammer mounted firing pins break I always thought the other system more robust.

 

[4v50 Gary]

I doubt if S&W re-engineered some revolvers to have a transfer bar. You can still have a hammer block with a revolver that has a frame mounted firing pin. The block works the same and the firing pin doesn't know the difference. The N frames I've seen all have a hammer block.

 

[brutus51]

Why are some models frame mounted and others hammer mounted?

 

[5-SHOTS]

I post this pic from http://www.guntalk-online.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=22399&sid=0007c7db198b1270a0826e921f38e8cc of a S&W revolver with the hammer pinned firing pin. The red point indicates the hammer safety bar (not a transfer bar); the red circle indicates how the safety bar prevents the forward movement of the hammer until the trigger is pulled; the red circle below indicates another hammer drop safety that was the only safety features of S&W revolvers for many decades since their market release. The rumor is that in the twenties or in the thirties an accident occurred, when a S&W Model 10 was dropped, something broke (probably in the zone indicated in the red circle below or the little sledge stud on the left, where there is that little spring) and the firing pin ignited the primer killing a US mariner on a US war ship. The safety bar was introduced to prevent that type of accidents because it still works even if the sledge stud breaks; infact the safety bar slides in a recess located in the internal of the side plate and can only slide up-down not left-right. I hope you can undestand what I've written because my english is what it is...

 

[MrBorland]

Why are some models frame mounted and others hammer mounted?

S&W went from hammer- to frame-mounted FPs in the late 90s. All have a hammer block.

 

[5-SHOTS]

Why are some models frame mounted and others hammer mounted?

To cut costs, make the maintenance simpler, and to have an in-line primer hit which is more desiderable.

 

[brutus51]

Thanks for the feedback. What dash number is the frame mount 686?
Also can anyone tell me what a Talo model is?

 

[5-SHOTS]

The entire story is here: http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=593010. In my previous post I made a summary of what I remembered from an italian gun magazine article. This Highroad source is more accurate.

 

[MrBorland]

What dash number is the frame mount 686?

Starts with the 686-5, I believe. It's the only pre-lock variant with a frame-mounted FP, btw.

 

[5-SHOTS]

My 686-6 had the frame mounted firing pin.

 

[Crunchy Frog]

5-Shots, your English and your explanation are excellent! Thanks.

I have a "no dash" 686 L frame with the firing pin on the face of the hammer. As was stated above, S&W later transitioned all the revolvers to frame mounted firing pins.

I'm pretty sure that the rimfire revolvers have always had frame mounted pins. My Model 17 (made in the 70s I think) does.

 

[buck460XVR]

My 686-6 had the frame mounted firing pin.

I have a -4 with the hammer mounted firing pin and a -5 without.

Also can anyone tell me what a Talo model is?

Talo is a major wholesale distributor of firearms and because of that has special "runs'' and limited edition models specific to them with mods not regularly available from the factory. Similar to Lew Horton and Lipsey's. These mods are mostly cosmetic, but can be performance related also. While their models may demand a higher price, most times it's just a slight increase. I have a -8 686+ from Talo that came with a 5'' barrel, unfluted cylinder and wood grips. It was $20 more than a standard 686+.

 

[David E]

You gotta pic of that 5"?

 

[Old Fuff]

A hammer block, such as the design used in post 1945 Smith & Wesson and most Colt hand-ejector revolvers made between 1908 and 1970, is that the block prevents the hammer from going far enough forward so that the firing pin can impact a primer in front of it. Thus it doesn't matter if the firing pin is mounted in the hammer or the frame.

Ruger and Taurus (as well as some others) use a transfer bar. When the trigger is forward the bar is dropped downward so that the upper tip is below the frame-mounted firing pin. When the trigger is pulled the bar is lifted so that the hammer hits the back it, and in turn the front hits the firing pin.

Both are affective in preventing a discharge if the revolver is dropped, or the hammer spur is otherwise struck a hard blow, so long as the trigger is in its forward position and not held fully backwards while the hammer falls.

 

[9mmepiphany]

As a result I assumed it had no firing pin safety,

Just to be accurate, revolvers don't have a firing pin safety (FPS) as seen on a semi-auto pistol which actually blocks the firing pin/striker from moving forward until the trigger is held to the rear.

Revolvers have either a Hammer Block (moves down), which blocks the hammer from moving forward enough to bring the firing pin and primer into contact, or a Transfer Bar (moves up) safety, which allows the transference of energy from the hammer to the firing pin

Having seen hammer mounted firing pins break I always thought the other system more robust.

That is what Colt said about their Python and S&W aficionados always argued against. Time has proven that S&W might have been mistaken

 

[buck460XVR]

You gotta pic of that 5"?

Just a generic internet pic......

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

I'm pretty sure that the rimfire revolvers have always had frame mounted pins. My Model 17 (made in the 70s I think) does.

Howdy

Be careful when you say 'always'.

The very earliest S&W revolvers from the 1850s and 1860s were all Rimfires. The tiny No.1 which fired what we would today call a 22 short, and the No. 1 1/2 and No. 2, which were both 32 Rimfire revolvers. The firing pins on these revolvers were integral to the hammers. This photo shows a No. 1, Third Issue, and a No. 2 Old Army. The square protrusion on the bottom corners of the hammers are what fired the cartridge.







When S&W started producing the Top Break revolvers around 1869, the firing pins were always integral to the hammer. Not pinned in place, the firing pin was machined from the body of the hammer. There were some American, Russian, and New Model #3 revolvers chambered for the 44 Henry Rimfire cartridge and all of these had the firing pin integral with the hammer, no different than the centerfire versions, just positioned differently.


Now if you want to talk about Hand Ejectors (cylinders swing out to the left) then you are probably correct.

This photo shows a 22/32 Heavy Frame Target Model made in 1923 on the left, and a K-22 made in 1932 on the right. You can see the flat faced hammers and the frame mounted firing pins.



But I dunno about the tiny M frame Ladysmiths. I don't own so I cannot check out the firing pin.

 

[9mmepiphany]

I'm pretty sure that the rimfire revolvers have always had frame mounted pins. My Model 17 (made in the 70s I think) does.

The Colt .22lr Diamondback has a hammer mounted firing pin

 

[Jim K]

All S&W revolvers (that use any such system) use hammer blocks; S&W has never used a transfer bar. S&W, starting about 1915, has put hammer blocks on their swing cylinder revolvers. They have used three systems, the second of which failed in a WWII incident and resulted in the positive system in use today.

The transfer bar system was pioneered by Iver Johnson c. 1909, and was (and is) considered a very safe system. Its drawback is that the transfer bar is struck every time the hammer falls, where the hammer block is struck only if it is needed to prevent the firing pin from striking the primer. (Yes, I know that a properly set up transfer bar will fit into the gap and not actually be hard hit, but it will be struck nevertheless, and the ones in Rugers have been known to break, preventing the revolver from firing at all.)

Jim

 

[gamestalker]

My 66-2 and 66-5 are two different FP types. The -2 is mounted to the hammer which I've heard referred to as a floating pin. And the -5 is in the frame. Both have blocks though.

GS

 

[9mmepiphany]

Actually the one mounted in the frame is usually called the "floating firing pin"; the one mounted on the hammer is considered the 'fixed" one (as in, attached to the hammer)

 

[Crunchy Frog]

I probably should have said that I understood that the "modern" (whatever than means) Smith & Wesson rimfire revolvers had frame mounted firing pins.

 

[Tophernj]

Just a generic internet pic......

I have the 3" version. One of my favorite guns.

C