Hello,

I apologize in advance if this has already been asked and answered, but I was curious why S&W abandoned stainless hammers and triggers for flash chromed carbon steel ones. Was it done as a cost-cutting measure, or was the stainless too soft to stand up to extended use in the lockwork?

Also, can one confirm the presence of these stainless parts by checking the back of the serrated trigger for an "S" stamp?

I appreciate any information you folks can provide.

Mu understanding was the early metallurgy in stainless rubbing against stainless resulted in galling. Flash chroming the parts gave smoother trigger pulls and eliminated the galling problems at the source.

Sure someone my knowledgeable will kick in soon.

__________________
The American dream is alive

CoNF,

I had both a 60 and 64 back in the day, the 60 (an "R"series S/N) already had the flash chromed hammer and trigger when I bought it, but my 64 (pencil barrel) had the stainless hammer and trigger.

My experience w/ the stainless hammer and trigger was that they were not heat treated sufficiently, my hammer started to "push off" and was sent back, they replaced w/ the flash chromed and solved that problem.

This was around 1976; sorry, can't help w/ the "s" stamp question.

When the stainless guns first came out, they tried to make everything stainless. The original 66s even had stainless rear sight assembly's. Pretty soon, they realized that the stainless was not hard enough to maintain proper hammer/ sear engagement. To try to maintain the look of stainless, they used flash chromed hardened carbon steel.

So far, that's two for two confirming my metallurgy theory. I think I can lay that one to rest. Thanks, guys.

Still, what of the mystery of the "S" stamp behind the trigger? Allow me to illustrate what I'm talking about:

Related to the metallurgy theory is the fact that stainless steel (SS) is much more difficult to machine than carbon steel. The machine cutters for carbon steel can be made from "High Speed Steel", a type of tool steel while the cutters for SS are usually carbide cutters. Also, the cutting speeds of carbon steel are higher than those of SS so it takes longer to make an identical part from SS than it does from carbon steel. Combined with the fact that carbide cutters are more expensive and it takes longer to make the cuts, working with SS is just a more expensive process than using carbon steel. Any way to reduce the cost to manufacture would be looked at by the manufacturer.

__________________
Bill