It must have a 2" barrel
2" to 3" barrels are okay
It must have a 3"+ barrel
It must have adjustable/replaceable sights
It must have a capacity of 6+ rounds
It must be a caliber of 38spl or larger
It must be alloy or polymer framed
It must be steel framed
My best understanding from gaming revolver world is lightening the hammer actually DECREASES the chance of light strikes because the lighter hammer accelerates more quickly and since KE=1/2mv^2 you get more bang for your buck with a faster hammer strike than a heavier hammer.Originally Posted by TheNewbie
@jetfire
If at some point you’re dead set on making it DAO I have a couple of LCRx that I can open up and look through.
Thanks. If I go this route I’ll let you know.
Your point about cloth interference with the gun is well taken. For me, the trade off of a hammer to thumb is worth the risk. Still, I get someone choosing differently.
I completely get the concern. There are a few things that can mitigate this in my mind, some I need to find out more about.
1. That might ignite the primer anyway.
2. The cylinder being bound up is probably at least as likely.
3. Firing may move material away from weapon.
4. We have the ability to choose our jackets without similar material.
5. Pocket guns may be holstered in pants instead of jackets, negating firing from the pocket. This is a variation of use on the same overall need for a weapon.
So far, my 637 has been for use AIWB with plans for pants pocket. The other stuff I'd have to check.
I think an exposed (preferably bobbed) hammer carry revolver is completely reasonable and would have zero concern about carrying one AIWB or pants pocket like that. I don’t think clothing interference with the hammer is likely, but one of the super niche roles of a revolver for me is a sweatshirt pocket or jacket pocket ability to fire without removing the firearm from the pocket. Like elevator kind of situation.
Also- When carried in a pocket the gun is pointing at least somewhat downward. To fire at an attacker you have to pivot it upwards. If you push the gun foreword as you do this, it tightens the jacket material to the point that it doesn't have any slack. Years ago my pocket snubby was an unaltered Detective Special. I did some dry fire experimenting and pushing forward while firing I never had anything catch. If the material is taut, it doesn't get between the hammer and frame. And recoil occurs with the hammer down, so nothing can catch on the front end of the hammer during recoil. And pushing forward again following recoil tightens things up again and creates space behind the hammer. I was satisfied enough that I never sacrificed a coat to live fire. Your pocket lining may vary.
I have only heard that colt detective specials sometimes have light strikes with bobbed hammers.
Cory, are you sure you have a 642 that has a hammer spur exposed? 638s and other Bodyguard frame guns have shrouded hammers that the tip can be touched where it rises from the humpback frame, and of course the 60, 36, 37, and 637s have fully exposed hammer spurs, but every 640, 340, and 642 I’ve seen (including the one I’ve owned since 2004) has a completely enclosed hammer you can’t see or access without popping the sideplate.
Balance of mass and velocity. The 1970 DS I had did not have a bobbed hammer, and never had trouble with light strikes, either. I think I would rather have put a shroud on it than bob the hammer.
If I had it to over again, that is probably the one gun I wouldn’t have sold. No real regrets, but I liked it. It was worth more as a collector than as a shooter/working gun (got over two times what I paid for it when sold), so selling didn’t bother me, but I still just liked it.
I regret selling the S&W Model 36 I bought in 1983, which a partner bobbed the hammer on sometime in the early 90's. (Did a great job.)
Sold it in 1995 and often regret it, especially since it was one I carried on and off the job back then. Live and learn. I didn't feel the sentimental attachment back then...but I do now.
(All I have left of it now is an old holster, Tyler T-Grips and the original wood grips.)
There's nothing civil about this war.
I've seen that before in 1911 forum discussions. Look at the power source. Stored PE = 1/2 kx^2. When the trigger breaks, the potential energy stored in the hammer spring is converted to KE of the moving parts (hammer assembly, ~1/3 of the spring, and hammer spring strut, if present). The KE should end up equaling the PE released from the hammer spring minus friction losses (another reason that eliminating friction is a good thing). Hammer inertia doesn't come into it.
It's likely that a higher velocity strike on the primer tends to promote activation of the primer due to the dynamic aspects of thermodynamics and chemistry in the primer.
I don't have a good explanation for why lightening the hammer on a Ruger SA is widely reported to reduce reliability.
.
-----------------------------------------
Not another dime.
Reply With Quote