Why is there a pin hole in early model 39-2 hammer

[ispcapt]

The hole for a lanyard idea was imagined by the same guys who think the hollow grip in a Glock is to drain water.
Think about it. If you're instructing someone dry firing why are you standing behind them? You can stand next to them and manually cock the hammer if that's what you're wanting to do. You aren't instructing anyone standing behind them.
Also, has anyone ever seen any training manual anywhere by anyone where they're advocating the string in the hole? Nope.
The string in the hole was thought up by somebody who has never trained anyone in anything related to firearms while sitting in his parent's basement. It's one of those stories where "I don't know what it's for therefore that's sounds plausible." No, it doesn't sound plausible if anyone has done any actual instructing.
Why does the Colt Commander series have a hole in the hammer? Or the Walther PP and variants have a hole in the hammer? None of those are for the lanyard in the hammer either. My Colt Jr, Erma Excam, Iver Johnson TP-22 all have hammers with holes. Does anyone seriously think any of those guns were made that way for a lanyard training purpose?
There is some merit to lightening the hammer to get a quicker lock time. Such is desirable for bullseye guns. For a combat gun not so much which is probably why you don't see it on later versions of the 39. There is something to be said for a lighter hammer and quicker lock time. There's also a lot more chance it's just a design feature of gilding the lilly.

 

[GerSan69]

All these many years, I've wondered what mathematicians were talking about when they mentioned "String Theory." Now I know......

 

[gmborkovic]

Is String Theory the same as String Cheese?

 

[raljr1]

Might be something as simple as a locating pin for a fixture to machine the hammer....and someone figure out how to machine it without the locating pin and thereby reduced manufacturing cost.

Robert

 

[gmborkovic]

Hello Robert, good reasoning, sounds logical. Why did they go to a solid hammer in the 39-2 series?

 

[Piwo]

The most off beat reason I remember from long ago was that early semi auto pistol designers thought the hole would reduce the vibration harmonics generated from the high speed slamming of the action parts during firing. Thus the hammer was less likely to shatter. I am in no way an engineer, but maybe they were thinking too hard or maybe metallurgy of late 1800s was different. Didn't Smith and Wesson put a little piece of leather in the trigger spring of the Sigma pistol to dampen vibration, thus lengthen the service life of a part known to break?

 

[JohnHL]

For those who were so vehemently opposed to the notion that the hole in the hammer could be for anything so ludicrous as a training aid, please allow me to quote from the U.S. Army Basic Field Manual FM 23-35:

(5) To simulate the self-loading action of the automatic
pistol take a strong cord about 4 feet long and tie one end to
the thumbpiece of the hammer, the knot on top. Take a few
turns of the other end of the cord around the thumb or
fingers of the left hand. The cord should be long enough to
permit the left hand to hang naturally at the side while aim
ing the pistol with the right hand, right arm fully extended.

(6) Each time the hammer falls a quick, backward jerk of
the left hand recocks the pistol and at the same time jerks
the sights out of alinement with the bull's-eye. This derange
ment of the alinement corresponds very closely to the jump of
the pistol when actually firing.

(7) If the knot is underneath the hammer or if a very
thick cord is used the hammer will not remain cocked when
jerked back."

I didn't need to search very hard to find this information.

It is right down at the bottom of this thread in the "Similar Threads" box.


Here's a link: model 39: why the hole in the hammer spur?

John

 

[kwill1911]

John,
You're my new hero!

 

[Warren Sear]

It's a peep sight

It's a range finder... Definitely a range finder...

 

[JohnHL]

I also know the reason for the hole in the .40 caliber hammers...

But now I'm just braggin'

John

 

[Warren Sear]

"OIL HERE"

 

[ispcapt]

For those who were so vehemently opposed to the notion that the hole in the hammer could be for anything so ludicrous as a training aid, please allow me to quote from the U.S. Army Basic Field Manual FM 23-35:

Here's a problem with your theory on the S&W 39. And a problem the basement computer commandos don't think about.
When the Model 39 was developed in 1954 the US military pistol was the 1911. The 1911 and variants did not have a hole in the hammer. So therefore this method would not have been possible at the time the 39 was developed. The S&W 39 was developed in the hope of replacing the 1911 which it did not therefore FM23-35 would not have been written to include such training.
The S&W 39-2 which was developed in the mid 1970s did not have a hole in the hammer. This was still at a time when the Army issue was the 1911 and the S&W 39-2 was not adopted by the military. And there still was no hole in the 1911 hammer.
It was not until 1988 when the Beretta M9 was adopted by the military was a service pistol with a hole in the hammer. This was 35 years after the S&W 39 was developed and almost 20 years after the no-hole 39-2 went production.
So this FM 23-35 as 'proof' is not proof of anything. Just more keyboard commando trying to make their theory fit.
I was in command of the small arms training for several years and taught small arms training, both Army and USAF during my 26 years. I also shot on the state National Guard combat rifle and pistol team for several years.
The "string" was never used and I would have removed any instructor who attempted it. Too great of a risk of jerking the gun out of the trainee's hand.
I don't doubt some knucklehead 'instructor' uses the string method. But then there are instructors in the US who think it smart to do live fire training while walking between the shooter and the target to instill "stress while firing". Dummies with a go-pro, firing range, and a youtube connection are still dummies.

 

[kwill1911]

I don't understand all the hostility and "computer commando" BS. The pistol that Colt was submitting for the mid-1950s trails was the Commander with a hole in the hammer. Perhaps it was there to facilitate the training methodology specified in FM23-35. I really don't have any emotional equity in this but the manual is pretty clear.

 

[BC38]

Here's a problem with your theory on the S&W 39. And a problem the basement computer commandos don't think about.
When the Model 39 was developed in 1954 the US military pistol was the 1911. The 1911 and variants did not have a hole in the hammer. So therefore this method would not have been possible at the time the 39 was developed. The S&W 39 was developed in the hope of replacing the 1911 which it did not therefore FM23-35 would not have been written to include such training.
The S&W 39-2 which was developed in the mid 1970s did not have a hole in the hammer. This was still at a time when the Army issue was the 1911 and the S&W 39-2 was not adopted by the military. And there still was no hole in the 1911 hammer.
It was not until 1988 when the Beretta M9 was adopted by the military was a service pistol with a hole in the hammer. This was 35 years after the S&W 39 was developed and almost 20 years after the no-hole 39-2 went production.
So this FM 23-35 as 'proof' is not proof of anything. Just more keyboard commando trying to make their theory fit.
I was in command of the small arms training for several years and taught small arms training, both Army and USAF during my 26 years. I also shot on the state National Guard combat rifle and pistol team for several years.
The "string" was never used and I would have removed any instructor who attempted it. Too great of a risk of jerking the gun out of the trainee's hand.
I don't doubt some knucklehead 'instructor' uses the string method. But then there are instructors in the US who think it smart to do live fire training while walking between the shooter and the target to instill "stress while firing". Dummies with a go-pro, firing range, and a youtube connection are still dummies.

There may be a problem with his theory about the hole in the 39 hammer, relative to timelines, but there also appears to be a problem with your statements that it was never included in any training - since his quote is directly from an Army Field Training Manual. Apparently YOU never saw anyone use a string for dry fire training, but that doesn't mean the Army never specified, approved, or used the method.

If the Army went to the trouble to specify it as a training method in one of their field training manuals I think it is pretty safe to say some people must have used that method somewhere at some point in time.

Never say never - 'cause never is a long time.

All the kerfluffle about the string theory of dry fire training aside, I want to see a picture of the hole the OP describes. Because he calls it a PIN hole, I'm thinking he is talking about something other than a hammer with a round spur that has a hole through it.

 

[Chubbs103]

Here's a problem with your theory on the S&W 39. And a problem the basement computer commandos don't think about.
When the Model 39 was developed in 1954 the US military pistol was the 1911. The 1911 and variants did not have a hole in the hammer.

I'll be honest I have never seen this method used. That being said, I first heard of the string being used with 1911s long before there was an internet. A string could be tied around the spur of a standard 1911 hammer. A hole is required in a rounded hammer (e.g. commander style).

I have no idea if this is the origin of the hole in a commander style hammer. I have no idea if this carried over to the Model 39.

 

[dsf]

That the hole was used to facilitate manufacturing and later found useful for the "string method" of training aren't mutually exclusive. After all, the cans my C rats came in made a pretty useful stove in the field. Nothing wrong with multi-purposing, officially or otherwise.

 

[Ibmikey]

A hole in a round hammer has been used since the late 1800's European semi auto pistols first gained acceptance, most round hammers thereafter have had the hole, I doubt seriously it was included to hang a rope from.

 

[CAR]

I think the hole was there simply because it looks good.

 

[ispcapt]

I'll be honest I have never seen this method used. That being said, I first heard of the string being used with 1911s long before there was an internet. A string could be tied around the spur of a standard 1911 hammer. A hole is required in a rounded hammer (e.g. commander style).

I have no idea if this is the origin of the hole in a commander style hammer. I have no idea if this carried over to the Model 39.

Since you probably didn't know it but the Colt Commander was not adopted by the US military either. So much for your theory.
There's a lot of other autos manufactured, I named a few, that had/have holes in the hammer that were never US military issued firearms.
Just because someone adopted some method does not mean that was the purpose of the hole.

 

[ispcapt]

I don't understand all the hostility and "computer commando" BS. The pistol that Colt was submitting for the mid-1950s trails was the Commander with a hole in the hammer. Perhaps it was there to facilitate the training methodology specified in FM23-35. I really don't have any emotional equity in this but the manual is pretty clear.

Because there's too many internet commandos who come up with this kind of stuff and then push themselves off as some kind of expert. When they've never been in the military, never done any serious training, and never trained a single person. They sit in their basement and imagine something as fact then go around spouting it off until they get some other unknowing person to believe them. Then the myth is continued until to unknowing masses accept it as fact without ever knowing a thing about it. And those are the internet commandos. Gun shows and gun magazines are full of them. They become 'experts' not because they actually have done anything or know anything but because they claim themselves to be 'experts'.