Which model of the 14 is SA only...is it the 3?

I think pretty much any of the early ones could be ordered SAO.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

The Model numbers did not change. They could be ordered with the SA option. The K-38 was very popular with bullseye competitors where the DA was not needed.

Another option was to purchase the SA conversion kit. Target triggers and hammers were also sold and installed as aftermarket options in this manner.

Single action only was an optional feature that could be ordered with the gun, or a kit was available as an accessory.

The standard cataloged model 14 was DA.

__________________
Conrad
SWCA #1830 SWHF #222

The SAO K-38's came along in the late '50's-early '60's, if memory serves. I know my first one was homemade----with the kit shown above.

My next (and last) last came as a 14-3, shipped November 6, 1972; and came to live here in the spring of 1998---still brand new in the box.

Ralph Tremaine

No dumb questions. We all had / have to learn somehow.
You have found a good group and I would be surprised to see any snark at any question no matter how basic it may be.
Welcome, we are happy to have you join us.

Others have answered correctly; all K-38s were normally shipped as DA revolvers. The SAO was an option, but only a small percentage of the total number came in that configuration.

To be specific in answering your query, the SAO option was available from 1961 until 1978 (the Standard Catalog incorrectly says until 1982). So, the option was available on the 14-2 and 14-3 throughout their production period, and on the 14-4 for a short period of time (roughly the first year). In my experience, the largest number produced was in the 14-3 range, but there are no available statistics to prove it.

__________________
Jack
SWCA #2475, SWHF #318

Is there any way of determining if you have a Smith & Wesson factory SAO model 14 or if it's just a gunsmithed SAO modification?

I recently picked up this 14-3 SAO.

Attached Images

IMG_4968.jpg (192.0 KB, 56 views)

I would imagine that information would be available in a letter from Roy. Not sure of anyway else to find out.

Kevin

__________________
Unshared knowledge is wasted.

I appreciate that sincerely sir...thank you.

MIR, my father always told me that the only dumb question was the question you never asked.

Stu

You are so welcome to the group. I have found this to be THE best group anywhere. I have no idea why but S&W enthusiasts seems to be all highly intelligent ladies and gentlemen of the first order. I strive to be worthy of their company.

You have surely noted that your question has launched a productive discussion?

One of the many things I appreciate about this forum is there are no dumb questions. The moderators keep things civil and everyone’s here to learn.

__________________
Old Cop
LEO (Ret.)

Yes. Even we who are old fogies learn something here regularly. It is a great place to hang out.

Even better, if you are an SWCA member, you can attend the annual symposium and jaw with these great guys and gals in person. Except, of course, for 2020, when the symposium was cancelled due to the panic. Looking forward eagerly to Tulsa in 2021!

__________________
Jack
SWCA #2475, SWHF #318

The SAO option is an interesting option and appealed to some B/E shooters. One hand grip!

I spent a few years shooting the "other" precision pistol game, PPC. Two hand grip!
I can't recall any top PPC shooters shooting SAO! Most had their revolvers modified to DAO! (double action only) The smooth double action allows steering that front sight!

Thank you for asking the question. I have been messing around with Smiths since at least the late 70's, and I did not know enough about a single action option to even ask the question. I have always assumed they were all double action and that was the end of that. I have always shot single action (Even in pistol shoots with the East Arkansas Peace Officers Association); so I have several Smith & Wessons that I have never even tried in double action. No matter how old one gets, there's always something new to learn.

This is a topic that's intriguing. I never knew S&W made SAO model 14s.

Since the trigger is in the usual position when the hammer isn't cocked, what happens when you just pull the trigger as if in double action mode? Does it not move, or does it move but the hammer doesn't come back? Lastly, are the factory guns marked in a certain way to distinguish them as SAO?

It seems that someone not knowing about this SAO feature might pick one up and think the gun doesn't work because the double action doesn't work.

ANY S&W revolver can be made SAO by removing the DA sear! A factory SAO hammer is not cut for the DA sear(Note the picture above). There is no "slot" on the front face of the hammer below the firing pin. The only way to tell if your gun was sent from the factory is by a Factory Letter. Anyone with a little mechanical ability can install a SAO kit!
jcelect

Here's the detail. I inherited a S&W model 586 357 Magnum with a 4" Barrel. It holds 6 rounds & has an adjustable rear sight. The finish is glossy black or blue. The following are etched near the crane: TI3; AUN 50 34; and, 34552. Is there anyone who can decode this data?

jcelect wrote:
"ANY S&W revolver can be made SAO by removing the DA sear! A factory SAO hammer is not cut for the DA sear(Note the picture above). There is no "slot" on the front face of the hammer below the firing pin."
In the kit pictured above the trigger is also different so that when used together the hammer cocks sooner resulting in a shorter throw rearward. If you just remove the DA sear the hammer would still have to move all the way back to cock the single action. This is why the bullseye shooters preferred the SAO kit. The same is true of the Colt revolvers built SAO. I have, and use, examples of both.
Mike

__________________
Mike
S&WCA #2470

ryesun,

Your request will get more answers and details if you start your own thread and include photographs.

To IDENTIFY your Gun >

The above link will provide additional information.

Kevin

__________________
Unshared knowledge is wasted.

The 14-2 engineering change was initiated in 1961, so what Jack has stated about the SAO being available on the 14-2 through early 14-4 is correct. However, there is some overlap during this period that would also include some later shipped 14-1 models.

I know this to be true because I have a 14-1 that was shipped from the factory on June 28, 1961. Two units were shipped, both with the single action only option. When I first obtained this gun, it was double action, and I was unaware it was a factory single action only until I received the letter from Roy.

Attached Images

	DSC07532a.jpg (51.9 KB, 21 views)
	Letter Model 14-1 Info.jpg (63.4 KB, 19 views)

__________________
SWCA 3297 SWHF 583

Cool, Charlie! Thanks for this info. It is the first I've heard of an SAO 14-1. Just goes to show . . .

__________________
Jack
SWCA #2475, SWHF #318

My observations of SAO and DA Hammers of similar vintage:

I have a 14-3 which letters as SAO. And I've read elsewhere about what was called a "short-action" SAO. However, comparing the hammer stroke of my 14-3 (1976) to a 17-3 DA (1977), and 48-3 DA (1977), all of which are 3Ts, I cannot discern any difference whatsoever in the cocked position of the hammer spur relative to the Main Frame - all three are equally close, with very little room to spare. If the SAO hammer/trigger combination provided earlier engagement for a shorter throw, there should be a larger gap between the hammer spur and frame. No larger gap is present on my SAO, indicating to me that it's just as far back as the others. What I DO see, is the front face of the SAO hammer is forward of the others, by virtue of the hammer body being deeper, fore/aft. Same effect, different cause. On my gun, the SAO firing pin is hammer-mounted, instead of frame-mounted as are the other two. If that factors into the relative timing of firing, the "shortness" of action, I haven't deciphered that yet.

Thank you to both mmande and jcelect for causing me to go look!

When the hammer is at rest, prior to initiating a DA pull, it's slightly retracted to clear the tip of the firing pin (maybe 1/16 in.), in order to allow the cylinder to turn. As you drag the trigger rearward through the "normal" DA pull, the cylinder rotates normally, but the hammer does not move rearward. When the bolt locks into the cylinder notch, and the sear releases, the hammer snaps forward that small amount to contact the frame in the "fired" position.

Thanks much. So you can cycle the cylinder with the trigger, but then have to still pull the hammer back. It would be pretty awkward to do it that way. But this is good to know as I run into old 14s (as infrequently as that happens).

In fact, this is exactly how I came to own mine. The gun shop offered it at a reduced price because it needed repairs. At that time, I was just as ignorant, but figured it couldn't take much to fix it, so it was worth a try. My internet search quickly lead to this forum, where I found a comment about looking down the face of the hammer, and if was solid and flat, i.e. there wasn't a vertical slot cut in it, occupied by a flat lever (the DA sear), it was a SAO model. I also learned that it may or may not be a factory installed option. So I sent off a request for a "letter", and learned that mine was shipped from S&W as SAO.

There is an incredible amount of info around here, if you take the time to look. I highly recommend it!

My explanation above was the series of events if you attempt a standard DA trigger pull, in response to your question. In SA, there's nothing awkward, or non-standard, about it. As you pull back the hammer, the cylinder rotates to the next chamber, ending with the bolt dropping into the cylinder notch just as the sear is set at full cock. You're ready to fire - just like any SA cycle.

So, based on my earlier visual observations, I decided to quantify the difference between the DA and SAO hammer positions, at full cock, and full forward. I started by "overlaying" the two guns, with hammers forward, looking for contour differences, and found none of any consequence. Next, using a millimeter scale, I measured both hammers at their forward positions, from the top, rear-most point to the frame directly forward of it, immediately below the rear sight. Result: 6mm +/-. Then, I measured the cocked hammers from the same top, rear-most point to the same point on the frame directly forward of it. Result: 29mm +/-. In both cases, the differences between the two configurations are so minute as to be meaningless in terms of improved lock-time.
I'm now humbled to admit to "visual delusions" which resulted in an inaccurate conclusion in my prior post (#24). At least in the case of my three guns, the SAO has absolutely no advantage in "shortness" over the two DA's. As they say, "YMMV".

The one advantage is: if your cocked and ready to shoot but decide not to and put the hammer down. When you resume shooting, you just pull the trigger and advance the cyl safely back to the next live round where you left off.

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

Edited to delete duplicate of Post #29.

I'm a bit gray on the efficacy of this process when you can't see the location of the next live round. Help me out, please. It would seem much more positive to swing open the cylinder and index visually. No guess-work.

Oh it has limited use. But I usually only load 5 (one row from the cartridge box) so there's always a space that is especially easy to see from the side on non-recessed chambers. I also shoot a lot of single action Colts and 3 screw Rugers and only load 5 in their old style actions (no transfer bar safety). And re-index by spinning cyl of course.

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

rvolvr;
If I am reading you posts correctly you are comparing the target hammer position of a model 14 SAO (centerfire) to a model 17 DA and a model 48 DA (rimfire). I don't know how those hammer to frame measurements compare for myself but I did compare measurements of my model 14 SAO and my model 19 with a target hammer. At full cock, the model 19 hammer is .120" farther away from the frame at the top edge of the hammer. The hammer spur is .090" closer to the frame at the gap between the frame and hammer. This is the result of a shorter throw comparing K frame, centerfire revolvers.
This is why I am confused by your observation that you saw almost no difference in hammer position on your guns.
Mike

__________________
Mike
S&WCA #2470

"Thanks much. So you can cycle the cylinder with the trigger, but then have to still pull the hammer back. It would be pretty awkward to do it that way. But this is good to know as I run into old 14s (as infrequently as that happens)."

I have a few 14's, and my factory single-action 14-3 is one sweet shooting gun.Pulling back the hammer is a tactile pleasure.

Mike,

As you've very politely pointed out, your observations are based on an "apples to apples" comparison, while I missed the boat, and assumed that a K-frame is a K-frame, while comparing my SAO centerfire to DA rimfires. I'll seek out a DA centerfire within my circle of shooting friends, and do some more measuring. In the meantime, I'm satisfied that there is in fact a shorter travel of the SAO centerfire hammer, based on your observations and reporting. Thank you for the clarification.

Dale

Perhaps the advantage lies in the indexing of the cylinder quickly and easily with the trigger finger while pulling the hammer back with the thumb so easily? I am a bullseye shooter and playing with this technique at least SEEMS to be a little faster and offer a little less shift in one's grip. I will play with this on the range and see.

One handed bullseye shooting -and getting off five accurate shots in ten seconds at 25 yards- is among the most challenging of hand gunning skills to master. A minor advantage cans feel pretty major when the winners' circle is so narrow.

MIR,
Looks like your question has opened up quite a lively discussion. I'm new here too and ask a lot of let's call them rookie questions and the people here always answer very graciously. Thanks to all for that.

This thread does make me wonder:
If I'm buying a Model 14 online how do I make sure I'm not getting one of these SAOs? And are there any other S&W models that I need to be concerned about coming to me as SAO?

I find that a bit humorous.

Most guys seek out the SAO examples because they are relatively uncommon. But to each his own.

The answer is to query the seller and ask if that particular Model 14 is a double action revolver.

None that I can think of at this time - at least not among the hand ejectors.

__________________
Jack
SWCA #2475, SWHF #318

I do have a new N frame SAO hammer

And are there any other S&W models that I need to be concerned about coming to me as SAO?[/QUOTE]

S&W sold a SA conversion kit for years designed, of course, for the Model 14. The kit could, however, be just as easily installed into any other centerfire K-frame.

Except for the K-32 or the 6" Model 19 I cannot think of another K-frame that might be used for target shooting or hunting, thus making the SA kit something someone would actually apply.

Anybody out there ever see a SA kit in something other than a K-38?

Even though I shoot mostly single action, I wouldn't want a single action only revolver regardless of how uncommon they are. I see why that might seem odd but that's just me I guess.

__________________
Bill

Here in Australia, and other parts of the world, SAO Model 14's are sort out so they can be used in ISSF (international Sporting Shooters Federation) Centrefire Match. During the precision and dueling sections of the match, there is no advantage to whether you shoot a revolver in double action over single action. It is not like Bullseye where you might need to shoot 5 rounds in 10 seconds.

ISSF Centrefire consists of 60 rounds broken into 30 precision shots (5 shot sequences in 5 minutes) and 30 dueling shoots (5 shots in 5 turns of the Target facing for 3 seconds and turning away for 7 seconds). So in the 7 seconds the target is turned away, you can cock your single action triggers.

SAO triggers can be worked on to get down to the 1000 gram minimum Trigger weight.

Great info Moo Moo. Thanks. I'm looking at the ISSF website and seeing how advanced the sport of competitive shooting has become. Very impressive.

So you say 1000 grams is the minimum pull in competitive shooting. That's 2.2 pounds here in the US. Most DA revolvers are in the 3.5 to 4 lb range. Can any good gunsmith get a DA revolver down to 2.2 lbs or is the SA trigger kit needed to get a trigger down that low?

I apologize for asking such rudimentary questions but this is all new to me.

__________________
Bill

I'm not exactly sure how close a SAO factory kit will go to the 2.2lbs compared to a gunsmith Trigger job making a typical double action down to this weight. I'm heading into see my gunsmith later this month so I'll be sure to ask.