DeanD
Member
Folks seem to dislike the frame mounted firing pin, why do they think the hammer mounted system is better? Is it because the later system is MIM?
Why is the frame mounted firing pin disliked?
- Thread starter DeanD
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
UncleEd
Member
Probably because it's MIM but also because it's a change from the traditional Smith hammer mounted pin.
I actually think the frame mounted pin is better in avoiding stress, breakage and it's a feature that's been on the Python since that revolver's inception.
I actually think the frame mounted pin is better in avoiding stress, breakage and it's a feature that's been on the Python since that revolver's inception.
You will hear all kind of stories, but neither is better
Both have been in use for a VERY long time by S&W and other companies
MIM vs. Forged is a different topic that is not tied to firing pin location.
Biggest reason for the dislike is, "That's not how they used to do it"
Both have been in use for a VERY long time by S&W and other companies
MIM vs. Forged is a different topic that is not tied to firing pin location.
Biggest reason for the dislike is, "That's not how they used to do it"
CCantu357
Member
I never could figure out what system was better either. Colt and Ruger always used the frame mounted pin to great success, as did Smith with the hammer mounted pin. Now my grandfather, who as lawman carried both Colts and Smiths swore that the hammer mounted pin combined with the hammer block was much safer to carry and dry fire with out caps. While that might just be old cop logic, I tend to carry that bias with me as well.
bigggbbruce
Member
Frame mounted can peen the frame if dry fired to much.
scooter123
Member
I just don't know why the frame mounted pin is so disliked, probably because people don't like change. One thing I do know is that it is much easier to change the firing pin when it's mounted in the frame.
BTW, I have a 1971 vintage 19-3 with misfire problems because of a "short" firing pin when Magnum primered ammunition is used. To fix that problem I have a Powers Customs hammer nose for post 1988 Hammers coming. Not sure if I'll be able to get it to fit but it is the ONLY hammer nose available with an extended length.
BTW, I have a 1971 vintage 19-3 with misfire problems because of a "short" firing pin when Magnum primered ammunition is used. To fix that problem I have a Powers Customs hammer nose for post 1988 Hammers coming. Not sure if I'll be able to get it to fit but it is the ONLY hammer nose available with an extended length.
Pointblank2U
US Veteran
I was an LEO from 1975-2007. When I first started, our range officer was a Sergeant whose father was a longtime gunsmith. We carried Model 28s at the time, but eventually transitioned over to 66s. I talked to him once about the firing pin on the hammer and how it wiggled. He said he had never seen one break. Years later, neither have I, but I am sure there are exceptions. It had to be an economy move by Smith & Wesson to change.
Mule88
Member
I remember reading an article Skeeter Skelton wrote years ago when asked about designing his dream revolver and in the design he preferred a frame mounted firing pin he thought it was a superior design.
OLDSTER
Member
Hammer vs frame mounted firing pin
In a couple of Jerry Mucileks videos, he mentions this topic. He has had virtually no problems with either, and states that he had never had a hammer mounted firing pin break ( he has fired a few rounds over the years)
In a couple of Jerry Mucileks videos, he mentions this topic. He has had virtually no problems with either, and states that he had never had a hammer mounted firing pin break ( he has fired a few rounds over the years)
spad124
Member
Please follow up your post if you can make a post 1988 hammer nose work on your 1971!
I have a 1981 10-8 Aussi trade in that I bought from Buds. It's a great gun. The one problem I had was that the hammer nose broke while dry firing a few months after I bought it. S&W no longer stocks the pre 1988 hammer nose and neither do the usual gun parts subjects. I tried fitting a post 1988 hammer nose- two actually- with no luck. There is a parts dealer in, I believe, Montana that made up a run of old style hammer nose, but they are pricey. I finally snagged the last NOS old style hammer nose Ahlman's in Minnesota had.
Since then I've bought complete otherwise poor condition pre 1988 hammer assemblies from eBay just to have an extra hammer nose. All my K frames are pre 1988.
Nope. It's because people focus on every little thing that's different and use it as a means toward "collectability", and therefore assumed or assigned value.
"Mine is different than yours!" is the battle cry of the collector.
Sure, designs change, and not always for the better, but usually so.
Designs will change to make something less expensive to build (and therefore more affordable), and designs OFTEN change to remedy a flaw that showed up in the original design.
But in the end, it's all good, and it's mostly collectors who drive much of the nonsense talk about pistols that are different.
Here's a test question: How many barrels of revolvers have fallen off once the pinned barrels went away?
Bonus question: Was there any change in functionality of S&W revolvers after the recessed cylinders disappeared?
Bonus-bonus question: Did it REALLY require 5 screws?... and with fewer screws, is it any less reliable or functional, and does it fall apart in your hand upon firing?
As mentioned above, it's mostly another of several divergences in S&W's manufacturing process. A goodly number of Smith aficionados, including me, don't like the changes, even if it's possibly an improvement.
I've never encountered anyone complaining about frame mounted firing pins on Colts. 
It's a guilt by association thing; the frame mounted firing pin as an ubiquitous feature in the S&W line-up arrives around the same time as the change in the frames, switch to MIM, and integral lock -- it get lumped in with those disappointments, but I've never seen an argument against them from a functional standpoint.
Frame mounted firing pins are less apt to break (I've had a hammer mounted pin snap), and are easier to replace with an extended pin if needed; these are improvements.
I've never heard of, much less seen, a frame mounted firing pin cause peening on the frame, but I've sure seen hammer mounted firing pins "turn out" a firing pin hole if alignment wasn't absolutely square.
It's a guilt by association thing; the frame mounted firing pin as an ubiquitous feature in the S&W line-up arrives around the same time as the change in the frames, switch to MIM, and integral lock -- it get lumped in with those disappointments, but I've never seen an argument against them from a functional standpoint.
Frame mounted firing pins are less apt to break (I've had a hammer mounted pin snap), and are easier to replace with an extended pin if needed; these are improvements.
I've never heard of, much less seen, a frame mounted firing pin cause peening on the frame, but I've sure seen hammer mounted firing pins "turn out" a firing pin hole if alignment wasn't absolutely square.
I picked up a Taurus 66 RB, 3" a few years ago for a bargain, it was a fixer upper. Upon disassembly one thing I found wrong was the firing pin hole was peened so the firing pin could not retract and the small coil spring was broken. However, it was obvious someone had abused the gun and the metal was probably not on par with a S&W but it did happen. I think that was an exception.
Upon inspection, I was horrified to find that my pre-war K 22 Outdoorsman has a frame-mounted firing pin. 
I will be offering it for sale, since it is no longer collectible. Offers only in the high 4 figures will be considered.
I will be offering it for sale, since it is no longer collectible. Offers only in the high 4 figures will be considered. 
I don't like it because it's one more moving part to deal with . . .
Inusuit
Member
I am an unreasonable old curmudgeon. As others have speculated, I resist change. New is not always better. My 2009 Xterra was a better vehicle than the 2011 that replaced it. I have ten Smiths dating back to a .32 Double Action 4th Model up through a 15-6 as the most recent. I just don't care for the appearance of the newer models. Some are downright ugly to my old eyes. Yes, I have Colts and Rugers with the frame mounted firing pin, but they are also older models - a Speed Six, a three screw Blackhawk flat top, a 1962 era Single Six. I understand that S&W needs to make changes in order to keep products affordable. But my preference in Smiths will continue to be old models.
Smiths can dry fire.....
S&W say themselves that they are ok to dry fire. It's best not to dry fire a gun if you don't know the setup for sure, but Smiths are "dry fireable".
And I set up a poll and could find no one (except one dubious problem) that had any real problem with MIM parts failing in a S&W. If they are made right, they are the cat's meow. If they don't have good QC, then the problems start.
S&W say themselves that they are ok to dry fire. It's best not to dry fire a gun if you don't know the setup for sure, but Smiths are "dry fireable".
And I set up a poll and could find no one (except one dubious problem) that had any real problem with MIM parts failing in a S&W. If they are made right, they are the cat's meow. If they don't have good QC, then the problems start.
Last edited:
