Smith & Wesson Forum

Go Back   Smith & Wesson Forum > Ammunition-Gunsmithing > S&W-Smithing

Notices

S&W-Smithing Maintenance, Repair, and Enhancement of Smith & Wesson and Other Firearms.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-04-2017, 10:40 PM
Sailormilan2 Sailormilan2 is offline
Member
I'm at a loss I'm at a loss I'm at a loss I'm at a loss I'm at a loss  
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Central California
Posts: 44
Likes: 3
Liked 14 Times in 6 Posts
Default I'm at a loss

I decided to do some routine maintainance of a 629 I've had for several years. I get the sideplate off, and there's no hammer block. Nothing. With all the Smiths I've owned through the years, this is the first time I've even found one without a hammer block.
Since I bought this thing 2nd hand, I have no clue if it came from the factory this way, or if someone took it out. I really am at a loss as to why someone would remove the hammer block.
Oh well, I have one on the way.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-04-2017, 10:51 PM
Pef's Avatar
Pef Pef is offline
Member
I'm at a loss I'm at a loss I'm at a loss I'm at a loss I'm at a loss  
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 956
Likes: 536
Liked 1,511 Times in 446 Posts
Default

Whenever I purchase a used SW revolver, I check for the hammer block. Over the years I have purchased two used Smith's without hammer blocks. I don't know why people remove them - I can guess, and none of the reasons are flattering.

Consider your post a PSA - like you, I learned that the used revolver check-out should include a hammer block check. Good news is they are cheap and almost always in stock.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-05-2017, 12:48 AM
OKFC05 OKFC05 is offline
Member
I'm at a loss I'm at a loss  
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 8,160
Likes: 3,620
Liked 5,205 Times in 2,173 Posts
Default

I had a gunsmith "help" me by removing the hammer block from a 66 when checking for worn parts in my much-used IDPA gun. I noticed it gone and said "you have now made this gun illegal for IDPA by removing a factory safety device. I need it back."
He put it back and said he just thought anybody shooting any competition would want it gone, so he always took it out.
Beware.
__________________
Science plus Art
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-05-2017, 01:07 AM
STCM(SW)'s Avatar
STCM(SW) STCM(SW) is offline
US Veteran
I'm at a loss I'm at a loss I'm at a loss I'm at a loss I'm at a loss  
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: E. Washington State
Posts: 5,492
Likes: 1,325
Liked 10,594 Times in 3,225 Posts
Default

So, let me see. That's means all of my S&W revolvers made before WW II are unsafe?
__________________
Only difference Fool/Mule-ears
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #5  
Old 04-05-2017, 05:22 AM
BruceM's Avatar
BruceM BruceM is offline
Member
I'm at a loss I'm at a loss I'm at a loss I'm at a loss I'm at a loss  
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Southeast Wisconsin
Posts: 1,750
Likes: 7
Liked 657 Times in 369 Posts
Default

Quote:
That's means all of my S&W revolvers made before WW II are unsafe?
Actually, there was a problem with them firing when dropped so the firing pin block was added. You may or may not want to accept that fact but the key word here is that is a fact!

Bruce
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-05-2017, 06:31 AM
AlHunt AlHunt is offline
Member
I'm at a loss I'm at a loss I'm at a loss I'm at a loss I'm at a loss  
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 2,349
Likes: 5,455
Liked 2,773 Times in 1,260 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by STCM(SW) View Post
So, let me see. That's means all of my S&W revolvers made before WW II are unsafe?
Basically, yes. I can't find the story on here right now, but the hammer block was added after some navy sailor was killed. A revolver was dropped on the hammer, it fired and got him. Maybe there were multiple instances of ADs.

Now I'm way out on a limb here and I need to go find that post ...

ETA: Here's one reference: Victory Model Safety Issues
__________________
Just Say No - To Social Media

Last edited by AlHunt; 04-05-2017 at 06:34 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 04-05-2017, 07:16 AM
Bullet Bob's Avatar
Bullet Bob Bullet Bob is offline
US Veteran
I'm at a loss I'm at a loss I'm at a loss I'm at a loss I'm at a loss  
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Western NC
Posts: 3,704
Likes: 2,980
Liked 6,577 Times in 1,830 Posts
Default

"Actually, there was a problem with them firing when dropped so the firing pin block was added. You may or may not want to accept that fact but the key word here is that is a fact!"

Bruce
_____________________________________________

There was that one incident with a sailor, but if you read old American Rifleman's and Gun Digests from the 1940's and 50's, there is some doubt as to the actual occurrence - i.e., did he drop it and it went off, or did he have an accidental discharge and blame it on the design of the gun. Ages pass, but people don't really change.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 04-05-2017, 08:31 AM
Pisgah Pisgah is offline
Member
I'm at a loss  
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Upstate SC
Posts: 3,447
Likes: 37
Liked 5,430 Times in 1,761 Posts
Default

For decades, removing the hammer block has been something done by so-called "gunsmiths" tuning up S&W triggers, the completely erroneous theory being that it improves the trigger pull.

Never forget, the #1 source of gun fallacies is gun shops, followed closely by so-called gunsmiths and forums like this one.
__________________
Pisgah
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Like Post:
  #9  
Old 04-05-2017, 09:50 AM
bipe215 bipe215 is offline
Member
I'm at a loss I'm at a loss I'm at a loss I'm at a loss I'm at a loss  
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 124
Likes: 44
Liked 77 Times in 38 Posts
Default

From RKG on The Firing Line Forum:

The notion that the hammer block is necessary to prevent firing if a cocked hammer is somehow dropped without a finger on the trigger can be readily demonstrated to be false.

Take a S&W revolver and remove the hammer block. Reassemble the revolver. With it completely unloaded, cock the revolver, point it toward the ceiling, and drop a pencil with a fairly new eraser down the barrel, eraser end down. Pull the trigger, and the pencil will jump (sometimes all the way out the barrel), signifying that the pin hit the eraser just as it would have hit a primer.

Now cock it again and drop the pencil again. This time, start tapping on the trigger with something (I use a teaspoon). After a couple of taps, the hammer drops, but the pencil doesn't move.

Still skeptical? OK, cock the revover with the cylinder open (if you know how), put your pinky over the firing pin hole in the recoil shield, and pull the trigger. After putting a bandaid on your bleeding finger, do it again (use the other pinky) this time tapping the trigger with the spoon. Hammer will fall and your second pinky won't feel a thing.

The pencil-and-spoon test simulates a push-off, a jar-off, a sear failure, or even a twig brushing the trigger of some moron's gun as he walks through the wood with it cocked. What happens is that as the trigger falls, the rebound slide moves forward, and it will always get home before the hammer does.

The Navy event was borne of the notion that sufficient force could be applied to the hammer of an uncocked revolver to cause it to fire. This is theoretically possible if (a) the rebound slide fails, (b) the internal hammer spur (the part that rides on the rebound slide) fails, or (c) the hammer pivot pin fails. I seriously doubt that it has ever happened in real life. I happened to witness experiments at Smith & Wesson, and after a lot of pounding on the hammer, all that ever broke was the external hammer spur (the thing you put your thumb on to cock the hammer). Not once could a revolver be made to fire this way.

To take it one step further. Examine the post-Navy hammer block. With the hammer cocked, the hammer block is retracted (i.e., out of the way of the falling hammer). If somehow you hypothesized that the hammer could pushed or jarred off and the trigger did not move forward (e.g., rebound slide spring missing; rebound slide frozen in place), so that the rebound slide did not move forward, the hammer block would remain retracted, since its action is dependent on the movement of the rebound slide (off of which the hammer block cams). If this were to happen, the revolver would fire, notwithstanding the hammer block. (By the way, I am unaware of my hypothetical scenario ever happening in real life.)

I cannot prove this, and no one at Smith & Wesson has ever admitted it (and the folks there at the time are all dead), but I am convinced that Smith added the hammer block simply to placate the Navy and prevent cancellation of a contract.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #10  
Old 04-05-2017, 10:36 AM
ontargetagain ontargetagain is offline
Member
I'm at a loss I'm at a loss I'm at a loss I'm at a loss I'm at a loss  
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: North Central Ohio
Posts: 921
Likes: 862
Liked 597 Times in 332 Posts
Default

I purchased a used S&W model 14 off Gunbroker. As part of my routine maintenance and check outs I removed the side plate, and just as you have found there was no hammer block in it, quickly ordered one and got it back to safe specs.
I would make good habit of any used revolver purchased to check this out. Probably could easily be done without removing the sideplate by doing a 'rattle test'.
Karl
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 04-05-2017, 10:36 AM
Protocall_Design Protocall_Design is offline
Vendor
I'm at a loss I'm at a loss I'm at a loss I'm at a loss I'm at a loss  
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Kansas City area
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 54,163
Liked 13,563 Times in 4,276 Posts
Default

I have seen one time where the hammer block was removed on a "target" gun. The gun was dropped, unloaded at the time, the hammer spur struck a concrete floor. The gun would have fired because the hammer hit the top of the rebound slide and the bottom part of the hammer broke off. This is the only situation that I've seen in many decades where the gun could have injured someone because of the hammer block being gone.

Still, I have the hammer block in all my guns, and all the match ones have very light and smooth trigger pulls with the block in there. It's simply a matter of knowing what to do during the trigger job to make it work right.

If you look in the top of the action with the hammer back, you can see the top flag of the hammer block.

Last edited by Protocall_Design; 04-05-2017 at 10:43 AM.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
  #12  
Old 04-05-2017, 10:49 AM
ImprovedModel56Fan ImprovedModel56Fan is offline
US Veteran
I'm at a loss I'm at a loss I'm at a loss I'm at a loss I'm at a loss  
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: MA
Posts: 7,345
Likes: 7,534
Liked 5,585 Times in 2,559 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Toolguy View Post
I have seen one time where the hammer block was removed on a "target" gun. The gun was dropped, unloaded at the time, the hammer spur struck a concrete floor. The gun would have fired because the hammer hit the top of the rebound slide and the bottom part of the hammer broke off. This is the only situation that I've seen in many decades where the gun could have injured someone because of the hammer block being gone.

Still, I have the hammer block in all my guns, and all the match ones have very light and smooth trigger pulls with the block in there. It's simply a matter of knowing what to do during the trigger job to make it work right.
This is sort of like the ONE shipboard incident that killed a person and caused the hammer block. In the shipboard case, the gun was dropped on a steel deck, and apparently the hammer broke. The incident was formally investigated. While this is not necessarily a rock-solid proof, it is a strong hint that the conclusion was correct. I know that all negligent discharges are accidental, and 99% of them occur while cleaning the gun, which somehow just went off. However negligent that shipboard discharge may have been, it does appear that the hammer broke when it hit the deck, and that contributed to the fatality. Obviously, playing with/dropping a loaded gun had some effect on the outcome.

Anyway, the hammer block DOES serve as a protection against one kind of an AD that apparently DID happen at least once.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 04-05-2017, 10:54 AM
steelslaver's Avatar
steelslaver steelslaver is online now
US Veteran
I'm at a loss I'm at a loss I'm at a loss I'm at a loss I'm at a loss  
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Central Montana
Posts: 13,701
Likes: 12,847
Liked 39,431 Times in 10,034 Posts
Default

I have hammer blocks in all my modern guns that came with them. But, I agree that unless a hammer part or the rebound slide fails they will not fire without the trigger held to the rear. Yes, I could happen if it was dropped from a decent height and landed just right on a very hard surface. I try really hard not to drop guns especially loaded ones. I think your as likely to break a rifle safety or even a 1911, dropping one as a S&W hammer/slide deal. I still don't take out the hammer block. I didn't defeat the grip safety on my 1911 either

Last edited by steelslaver; 04-05-2017 at 11:13 AM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Looking to help someone out...my loss your gain. Boogsawaste Accessories/Misc - For Sale or Trade 6 12-13-2014 06:29 AM
No loss to me Jessie The Lounge 50 12-05-2014 12:10 PM
Sorry about your loss Lee A10 The Lounge 18 08-24-2012 05:55 AM

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3
smith-wessonforum.com tested by Norton Internet Security smith-wessonforum.com tested by McAfee Internet Security

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:53 PM.


Smith-WessonForum.com is not affiliated with Smith & Wesson Holding Corporation (NASDAQ Global Select: SWHC)