Hammer or Hammerless
 

I do love my revolvers. The question is: It is better to go hammer or hammerless or does it really make that much difference. It has been a long time that I carried a concealed revolver. Times have changed. Small and compact is my goal. I have also read about no lock on your handguns. Any input would be most appreciated. Thanks

Well, I'm just a newbie on CCW but to me, hammerless has advantages over an exposed hammer revolver but in I know from reading so many posts that many gentlemen on this forum carry exposed hammer revolvers with no issues.

To me, the hammerless slips easily in and out of your pocket with no snagging.

IWB or OWB? Probably no difference.

Others here can give a more seasoned reply.

For concealed carry, I definitely prefer hammerless, or else a shrouded hammer like the 638 has. I think cocking the hammer is for target practice only. In a life-threatening situation you don't want that hammer snagging your clothing, and you don't want to manually cock it because you could very easily shoot someone unintentionally.

For non-concealed uses, I like having the exposed hammer for non-defensive purposes (targets and hunting). I'm in the market for a 4" revolver... still waiting for just the right thing to come along.

As for the internal lock, personally I don't have very strong feelings about it, but I'd rather not have one if given the choice. There have been very few cases of a lock malfunctioning and preventing a gun from firing. But simpler is better and less things to go wrong, plus it will have better resale value (although I've never sold a gun).

Hammerless. That way it can be fired from a coat pocket with no worries. No fabric blocking the hammer.

Oh, and the lock is very, very easily removed.

I'm probably crazy, but I just don't like the look of a bobbed hammer. Looks "broken" or something.
Anyway, I've pocket-carried a J-frame off and on over 30+ years and never had a problem with snagging the hammer. Uniform pants, jeans, etc. I've always drawn with my thumb on the hammer; I push off on the pocket holster that way and pull 'er out. No problems so far...

I carry a J-frame .38 Special +P in a pocket holster, and have for years. For pocket carry I chose the 640--not hammerless, the hammer is internal and the gun is DAO. I picked it primarily because I definitely don't want the very risky option of single-action fire in a self-defense situation. But also because it's virtually snag-proof on the draw, and the enclosed-hammer design keeps lint and crud out of the action much more effectively. If I want to shoot paper in single action, I'll take my four-inch 10-5.

I don't think hammerless vs. hammer is nearly as important as fixed sights vs. adjustable. I see a lot of revolver guys carrying guns with higher-profile adjustable sights better suited for the range. If something is going to snag, it is that.

The scope on my carry gun covers the hammer nicely...so it doesn't snag.

I bet the scope also lets you see the target better so it serves a dual purpose.:D Larry

Any gun that might go in a pocket of mine is going be either the 642 or 649. I know how to draw from concealment with my thumb over the hammer/sights on guns that have them, but every problem you can solve before it happens is worth pursuing.

I carry a concealed hammer 442 in a homemade holster either in my pocket or on my hip.
To me a gun for ccw is something that you're going to be shooting in double action. There's no need for an external hammer.
It's a designated self defense ccw gun, not just for playtime at the range.
I do practice with it quite a bit, both dry fire and live fire and being dao I'm not tempted to cock back the hammer for an easier single action shot and that forces me to learn proper trigger control.
That's not to say it's not also a fun gun at the range. I shoot it a lot and almost exclusively, It's feels very familiar in my hand and I'm very comfortable with it.

In general for CCW, how is a .38 for field and home. I have had both way back when. My .38 was a S&W and my field gun was .357. but it was in a 6" barrel. It it worth it to carry that much punch in .357 for a CCW.

My M&P 360 has an exposed hammer and it hasn't hindered me. There are many arguments for whatever you want to do. I prefer a hammer as I have control issues..........Seek advice, test theories, and utilize pratical application. Make your choice and make it work for you.

Isn't an external hammer safer in a way? I know it could snag, but with an external hammer you have the option of using a thumb break and can put your thumb on the hammer when you draw/reholster. To me this would reduce the chance of an AD. I am new to this so am interested in everyone's opinions. I currently carry a snub with an external hammer and feel very safe with a good holster and thumb break. I carry it at 4 o'clock. RR

By hammer-less we are referring to the internal hammers, so yes, the 640 is hammer-less.

A thumb break works on enclosed hammers as well. As far as keeping your thumb on the hammer, in my opinion it's a false sense of security. Just keep your finger off the trigger. That's the best safety. Always has been, always will be. Another benefit of hammer-less is you can carry IWB more comfortably. I've tried to carry J Frames with the hammer, and eventually the hammer wore against the holster enough that it began to cut into my big fat gut!

There is a reason Smith & Wesson makes both.

I carry appendix and I really haven't noticed a difference. The proper holster is what is most important. Now for pocket carry, yes it makes a huge difference.

My CCW's are bobbed since I pocket carry them the most. I just bought my wife a 642 for the same reason.

I'd like to see a picture of your holster for appendix carry. I use a Remora and it works for all my guns appendix carry.

.

I started a new thread regarding appendix carry and holsters as to not derail this thread due to the fact I have such a large carry rotation:


http://smith-wessonforum.com/conceal...#post137051742

We all know to keep your finger off the trigger until you are ready to pull it, but I am talking about clothing or anything else for this matter accidentially discharging the gun. My finger is always off the trigger (thanks to my husband's drilling this into me as an ex-LEO), but I still have my thumb on the hammer when holstering/unholstering. For me, there is no such thing as "too safe" around firearms. RR

To bob, or not to bob, that is the question... I prefer hammerless or bobbed hammers due to the advantage of being able to draw from a pocket. In general, a bobbed hammer requires you to shoot double action only, and my 65 is set up from the factory with a bobbed hammer / dao. My model 10 has the hammer bobbed, but is not dao and requires a gentle pull of the trigger in order to get the hammer back enough to get a thumb on it to cock it. Needless to say, it would never be cocked in a threat situation. Some people who have trouble shooting double action, such as those who are getting up there in years or with a physical disability may need to cock a hammer in order to shoot. Generally speaking though, cocking a revolver when faced with a threat has some drawbacks. It takes time, it makes it much easier to discharge the gun unintentionally, and it requires lowering the hammer on a loaded cylinder to make the gun safe.. If you are in a stress (fight or flight) situation, the adrenaline dump will have sent your fine motor controls out to lunch for awhile, and trying to drop that hammer without hearing a loud noise can be problematic with some folks.
It comes down to personal preference and safe practice with whatever gun you decide to use.

I prefer less hammer than hammerless...So I go with the Model 49.

I just switched my regular
 

carry from a 396 to a 296, because of my activities over the next few days. My cover garment appears to have a good chance of catching on he adjustable sights on the 396, so why take the chance.

Jer, I didn't see anyone address this, so I'll put in my .02. For SD, good .38 is probably as effective, and maybe even a better choice than .357. A lot of people say that .357 is a waste in a short barrel, but I don't agree; generally, it is going to be moving faster and carrying more energy than .38 ammo in the same weight. However, I don't know of anyone who can shoot .357 as well as .38 from a J-frame gun. More bang usually means more recoil, and slower follow up. This is doubly true for air-weight guns.

Here's a look at Speer Gold Dot Short Bbl. ammo in .38 and .357:
http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d1...ps4dcfefe1.jpg

This is by far the most widely recommended ammo for small frame revolvers. Nothing wrong with many other choices, but you should do some research to determine what would best fit your needs. HTH

Fixed sight, hammer less 640, 357 cal. Smith-Wesson

I prefer to leave the hammer as is and do like the fast easy single action cocking option should the need ever arise. I have discovered that when I pocket carry I simply place my thumb over the hammer spur and there is never an issue with it snagging. It has become second nature and I never even think about it anymore. While OWB carrying it, it is not an issue at all.

Over the years I have purchased 3 guns with bobbed hammers and have changed them all for traditional hammers. YMMV.

I only have 2 exposed hammer J-frames in my modest collection - a Model 34-1 and a Model 60-7. As you can see from the enclosed photos, I prefer either the concealed hammer Centennials, or the humpbacks (Model 38-0 and Model 638-1). I've substituted a hammer from a Model 38 on my Model 60-7 which is about as close as I want to get to a bobbed hammer.

Best of luck,

Dave