460V - Removal of Single-Action Feature

[DrDoctor]

I was perusing another topic herein pertaining to "trigger jobs". I didn't want to appear to be hijacking the originator's topic, but I had a similar question, and tho't it best to ask it outside of his.
I've fired a 460V (but not mine – mine's never been fired, other than the factory test shots), and I found the 460V rounds to be brutal. However, the .45 Colt rounds were quite manageable – the heavy gun with the light (comparatively speaking) loads were comparable to a .38 revolver that I was allowed to test-fire. I've dry-fired my gun many times. The single-action pull is light, but the double-action pull is anything but. I read in the other topic a comment, from W R Moore, something to the effect of having the single-action notch on the hammer removed. He also recommended that such a modification be performed by Smith & Wesson, rather than an independent gunsmith (for liability concerns).
I have a 460V magnum revolver, 5" barrel with the shorter compensator in place. I don't know what single-action, or the double-action, pulls should be in weight. I'm now considering having the single-action feature removed, and the remaining action (double-action) set at something in between the original single-action and double-action pull weights.
QUESTION – is that feasible/reasonable, and if so – is it a good idea??? Any and all constructive suggestions/comments are appreciated, and Thank You in advance to those who choose to participate in this.

 

[fredj338]

It is certainly feasible. Whether it is a good idea or not will depend on your gunsmith. Reliability with any SD weapon needs to be 100%. Many will say do nothing to a gun used for SD purposes, but you would be making the gun less likely to go off under a stressful situation by making it a DA only. I have the hammer bobbed off my M625. I use it for competition but would certainly not hesitate to use it as a defensive tool if needed. Removing the hammer spur still allows a SA pull if one wanted it, but much harder to achieve. It is possible either way to get a better DA trigger pull. You do not want light you want smooth & predictable.

 

[texmex]

I don't really see any reason to remove the single action function. It doesn't have anything to do with the double action pull weight or smoothness. You certainly don't have to use it if you want to shoot double action. Why eliminate the option? On a revolver designed for hunting, I would think you would want all the accuracy you could get which would certainly be shooting it single action at common handgun hunting distances. It would also lower the resale value. As Jeff Cooper would say, it is a solution for a non-existent problem.

 

[WR Moore]

OK, I don't know what the X frame single action trigger spec is, some of the armorers can chip on on the exact spec for the K,L & N frames. IIRC, it's somewhere around 4-4 1/2 lbs. There is no exact (SFAIK) spec for the double action pull.

Now, back in the mid 1980's it was standard procedure for major PDs with revolvers to specify double action only (no single action notch on the hammer) for all service firearms. This avoided several problems: people inappropriately cocking their service firearms, negligent/unintentional discharge of said firearm as a result and tort attorney's claiming the events happened even if the didn't. The attorney's are, of course, claiming it creates a "hair trigger"/unsafe condition/violation of policy/avoidable injury; and this is with all stock parts. It's not a solution to a non-existent problem. Lawsuits are what drove the DAO systems in places like LA, Miami, NYPD etc.

With that in mind, virtually any work that reduces the double action trigger pull will reduce the single action trigger pull. If it drops below factory spec, you have created a condition that may be deemed unsafe as it does not meet factory spec.

The size/weight of the operating parts of an X frame are going to affect what can be safely done. I'd go with the factory Performance Center as anything they turn out is, de facto, within factory spec. However, that still leaves you open to some scum sucker claiming you cocked the revolver when you didn't. If you want to be able to retain single action capability for resale, have another, unaltered hammer fitted while it's back at the factory.

I had to learn to live with issued, stock revolvers. You can learn to be effective, but it takes work.

BTW, removing the hammer spur doesn't eliminate double action capability. It does make it virtually impossible to rapidly clear several relatively common malfunctions where the trigger doesn't fully return or the cylinder binds.

 

[Wise_A]

(1) I don't see the point of a DAO 460, unless you accidentally shoot somebody. Which is a software problem.

(2) I think you'd be wasting money better-spent on acquiring a more suitable defensive revolver. There are a number of fine .38 K-frames that I'd prefer to use, and a great many automatics. Frankly, I think you'd be better-armed with a 5-shot 640 Pro than a 5-shot X-frame.

(3) If you absolutely must do this (ugh), then a hammer swap, as Moore suggests, is the correct answer. The double-action pull, if you find it objectionable, cannot be made much lighter without compromising reliability.

(prepare for rageposts)

There's a reason Glock-alikes are popular--they're inexpensive, easy for post people to use, and very capable. Just sayin'.

 

[Black Sunshine]

For reference, the SA trigger pull on my unmodified 500 is 3lbs 4oz on a 10 pull average. I would expect the 460 to be similar since they're both x-frames. I can measure the DA pull if you're interested.

 

[ken158]

Terrible idea on a 460 and doubt S&W would do that for you anyway. Making the SA a harder pull is easy for an armorer. If you don't want SA, then don't cock the gun.

 

[DrDoctor]

The reason I'm inquiring about deleting the single-action feature on this gun is for the liability issues in the event it's used in a self-defense/home defense situation. Without that feature, no lawyer can claim that it was used in single-action mode (which is typically with a lighter trigger pull). The resale value of the gun with that modification is unimportant, as I'm not interested in selling it. and, I'm not at all interested in purchasing any auto-loader.
ASSUMPTION –the single-action trigger pull's approximately 4 lbs, and the double-action pull's 10 lbs, then I'm probably looking at NO single-action function whatsoever, and a double-action pull in the 6-7 lb range.

Black Sunshine,
Yes, I'd be very interested in the double-action pull weight of the X-Frame revolver, if it wouldn't be too much trouble. Thank you in advance.

 

[reddog81]

Deleting the single action capabilities will not change the double action pull. A 6 lbs double action pull is not going to work. That's just not feasible.

I have no idea why you'd want to eliminate the single action because of some once in a million liability concern, but then severely alter the double action pull. If you're worried about liability keep the gun stock!

If you want to knock the double action pull down a couple pounds and drop the single action pull down a couple ounces go with a 12 lbs trigger rebound spring.

 

[Imissedagain]

Based on post #8..... get a stock Colt Python.

... and the lawyer shouts..... so you modified the gun to slick up the trigger and make it easy for you to kill faster?

 

[WR Moore]

Doc, for reliability, you're probably looking at 8 ish lbs double action, might be more. 6 lbs is often problematical for K frames except as a item to play games with. You get alibis for misfires/malfunctions in many gun games.

And the defendant/expert witness points out that it's still a 7-8 lb pull over 7/8 (+/-) of an inch. That's a very favorable comparison to 4-7 lbs over less (sometimes much less) than 1/4 inch on a semi. The trigger return is actually slower than with a stock action, so the rate of fire is down and it minimizes the probabilities of hitting an innocent. Yes, it may or may not fly. OTOH, the choice of such a monster firearm might well get cited as an aggravating factor.

Guys, there'a a mega thread where several of us suggested that perhaps the X frame isn't the optimal choice as a self defense firearm-absent large bears as a threat. Borrowing a quote from a noted trainer: Everyone has to find their own salvation.

 

[DrDoctor]

Secondary question posed to those who know more than I do re: the inner workings of revolvers (which is most everyone on this site . . .) – is it possible/feasible to have the inner workings "massaged" so that the single-action and the double-action function at/near the same pull weight?
Thx . . .

 

[Black Sunshine]

I measured the DA trigger pull on my 500 using a Lyman digital gauge.

1st 10-pull average: 11lbs 10 oz
2nd 10-pull average: 11lbs 14 oz

 

[reddog81]

Secondary question posed to those who know more than I do re: the inner workings of revolvers (which is most everyone on this site . . .) – is it possible/feasible to have the inner workings "massaged" so that the single-action and the double-action function at/near the same pull weight?
Thx . . .

Absent some major modifications to the internals there's no way to increase the SA pull that much and there's no way to get the DA pull that low.

Keep in mind that S&W manufactures close to a quarter million revolvers every year and the vast majority of then have SA and DA capabilities. The few guns sold as double action only are done so because the hammer is seen as a nuisance for people who pocket carry, or something similar, where the hammer can get snagged.

You state in post #1 that you haven't even shot the gun... Go shoot it and stop worrying about the fact that it has a single action capabilities. After putting a couple boxes of ammo down range any normal person will be grateful it has both SA and DA capabilities. Each mode has it's benefits.

 

[DrDoctor]

Black Sunshine,
Thank You Very Much!!! That's precisely what I need.

 

[delcrossv]

The reason I'm inquiring about deleting the single-action feature on this gun is for the liability issues in the event it's used in a self-defense/home defense situation. Without that feature, no lawyer can claim that it was used in single-action mode (which is typically with a lighter trigger pull). The resale value of the gun with that modification is unimportant, as I'm not interested in selling it. and, I'm not at all interested in purchasing any auto-loader.
ASSUMPTION –the single-action trigger pull's approximately 4 lbs, and the double-action pull's 10 lbs, then I'm probably looking at NO single-action function whatsoever, and a double-action pull in the 6-7 lb range.

that's a much lower probability scenario than a lawyer complaining that you reduced the DA trigger pull. I don't recall a single self defense case where SA trigger pull came up.

You may want to read this thread:
Facts About "Light Trigger Pull Liability"

 

[Wise_A]

Secondary question posed to those who know more than I do re: the inner workings of revolvers (which is most everyone on this site . . .) – is it possible/feasible to have the inner workings "massaged" so that the single-action and the double-action function at/near the same pull weight?
Thx . . .

No. Single action simply releases the hammer. Double action must compress the mainspring. About the lightest double-action revolvers commonly seen are PPC .38s, which have DA pulls in the 5#-6# range. And it's not uncommon for them to be finicky to the point that they're only reliable with one or two brands of primer.

Shoot this thing a whole bunch, then return to the idea of whether you really want a 460 for self-defense. If you want an easy to shoot gun in the same vein and refuse to try a Glock-alike, they make this thing called the 1911, and they make it in 9mm.

 

[DrDoctor]

I've fired an "ol' slab sides" while in the Navy. I didn't like it. That's why I purchased revolvers, as I'm not a fan of auto-loaders. I've had other negative experiences with auto-loaders – stove-pipes, failure to eject, failure to feed . . . I don't want a piece of equipment with a significant (in my mind – 1 out of 200 is too high) failure rate. With a revolver, if there's a failure, just pull the trigger again. The main advantage (again, in my mind) is ammunition capacity, and speed of reloading. But, that's not enough for me to want one. I want something I can rely on, and for me, and my wife, it's not an auto-loader.
As for the single-action not being an issue in court, to quote Mr. Ayoob, "[sic] Florida v Alvarez, NY v Magliato, Michigan v Chase, Georgia v Crumbley, and Crown v Gossett, among others". The legal precedent for such an argument's already established.
I'll follow-up with S&W, and see where that leads . . . Thx . . .

 

[hardluk1]

First off using a revolver as large as the s&w 460 as a home defense weapon is not practical even with light 45colt loads . I would never remove the sa notch on the hammer ether . You have seen or had 1 out of 200 failure rate ?? Really . That's seems sort of funny . I have pistols with thousands of rounds fired that run 100% reliable and IF YOU ever have a primer back out on your revolver it will be nothing more that a rock . You are not simply going to pull the trigger again . Your revolver will be locked up . I know I have experienced just that .

I carried a da sa snubby for 13 years and never fired it as a single action until I retired it .

Think about how many SA only 1911 there are out there being used daily as home defense , concealed carry and by law enforcement . Or da/sa pistol that once you fire that first round your single action only !!

You should use the same handgun or at least the same design for home defense as you would carry daily some thing you know well so being woke up in your sleep your not fumbling around for a 4.4lb lard butt revolver assuming you shoot 6 rounds well enough .

Maybe you can work your way up to shooting 460 ammo buy stepping up to 45colt ruger only loads over the slow SA colt loads . Buy & use a proper handgun or shotgun for home defensive needs and if you think you need to keep a handgun never to live up to its design then buy a more practical use weapon maybe a s&w 625 45acp JM model and a 1000 rounds of ammo since you feel a pistol not reliable , hehehehe .

 

[WR Moore]

. With a revolver, if there's a failure, just pull the trigger again. . . .

I've seen that spiel for decades. However, as someone who had to tote the issue revolver and train with it a lot, it ain't necessarily so. Pull the trigger works if the round fails to fire. Whatcha gonna do if the trigger won't move?

Possible causes: operator error, trigger not returned fully; material caught between trigger & frame, preventing full trigger return; cylinder binding; debris under the extractor, high primer (not fully seated); crated primer extruded into firing pin hole, burrs on the breech catching in the firing pin indent are just a few.

Immediate action drill: give hammer spur a hearty yank and hope the cylinder rotates.

 

[DrDoctor]

WR Moore,
Yes, I'm aware that the old adage of "in the event of failure with a revolver, just pull the trigger", is an overstatement. I was being facetious. However, you have to admit that a revolver's easier to deal with than an auto-loader – with a revolver, there's no safety to engage/disengage, no racking required, no potential of discharge with the magazine removed, no potential of there being no round in battery with the magazine inserted, it's quite easy to see if it's loaded . . . And, let's face it, an auto-loader's a higher maintenance piece of equipment. I'd rather put my trust in a revolver that's been sitting in a drawer for a protracted period of time than an auto-loader that's been sitting in that drawer for that same protracted period of time. (THAT comment will probably generate its share of heated contradictory relies . . .)
Hardluk1's comment about the 1911 being in single-action mode after the 1st shot's got me thinking . . . I'm still keeping the 460V, and I'm still going to limit the ammunition to .45Colt (gun weight helping to control recoil/muzzle flip) . . . but I'm going to re-evaluate my tho't about the single-action/double-action that I initiated this topic with.
Anyway, regards to you . . .

 

[RoyM52]

Just curious, why did you buy that 460? ..for what purpose? It's a very large game hunting gun. {requires hearing protection to use} Otherwise it could be a large gun for defense from large bear . For a range gun, single action would be the ticket. Or was this gun bequeathed to you? {BTW any altercation from stock is a probable litigation}{and , either a shoot is justifiable ,or, it isn't {animal or otherwise}}

 

[DrDoctor]

Prior to the purchase of the 460V revolver, my wife and I had already decided on revolvers. I then did research (which was one of the prime activities of being a doctor in my eventual field . . .). I visited with the state police, from senior personnel, to watch commanders, to the officers in the cars. I went to several gun stores in the state. I then did a review of literature, including, but not limited to, the following titles: Survival Operations, Handguns For Home Defense, In Praise Of The Home Defense Revolver, Big-bore Revolvers For Home Protection, Modern Combat And Survival, Home Invasion Defense, Home Invasion Guns And Ammunition, Big Guns For Defense Against Home Invasion, Weapons For Protection And Survival.
The "common denominators" running thru these interviews, and the articles, were – in no particular priority order: 1) revolvers are easier to use than auto-loaders. An auto-loader's best left to one experienced with it; 2) barrel length should be no shorter than 3" to maintain control upon usage, and no longer than 6" to prevent it from being grabbed and used to deflect it away from the assailant; 3) caliber should be no smaller than .38; and 4) if using a shotgun shell in a pistol designed for such, it should be .410, and shouldn't be used in distances greater than 10', and if using specially designed self-defense shot-shells, that distance can go up to 20'.
As for which revolver's preferred for protection against home invasion – the answer to that's as varied as people with opinions. There's no right, or wrong, answer with regard to size, and/or weight. The reason I selected the large gun's because my being above-average in size – a larger gun feels comfortable in my hand.
Because big-bore revolvers are large-framed revolvers, they're built stronger, and heavier, than medium-, and/or small-framed revolvers, and as such, firing less-powerful ammunition in a large gun results in much less felt recoil due to the larger gun's weight in relation to the power of the ammunition used. Also, firing less-powerful ammunition in a large gun results in much less muzzle flip, muzzle flash, and noise, also due to the larger gun's weight in relation to the power of the ammunition used, which also allows for quicker successive shots. Considering the heft of the 460V revolver, one should be able to fire .45 Colt ammunition in semi-rapid, double-action succession with fairly good accuracy, due to the low recoil of the heavier gun. Not to be overlooked is the intimidation factor of an intruder looking at a large gun (460V revolver) vs a small one (.22 caliber revolver).
Further, many large-framed revolvers provide the benefits of chambering different loads in the same cylinder. Firing .38 Special, .44 Special, or .45 Colt, ammunition from a large-frame .357 Magnum, .44 Magnum, .454 Casull, or .460 Magnum, revolver, respectively, will produce far less recoil than firing the same rounds from standard .38, .44, or .45, caliber revolvers. So, by using a big revolver, it's possible to have the option of a powerful round chambered 1st, with all subsequent rounds in the cylinder loaded with the more controllable .38 Special, .44 Special, or .45 Colt, ammunition.
Thx . . .

 

[Ziggy2525]

Doc,

You're an analytical guy, but I think you're way over thinking this. You're talking about making mods without having any time shooting your revolver. You might want to see if you can find a "defensive revolver" course where you shoot at least a couple hundred rounds through your 460 before you make any mods. If you can't find a defensive revolver course, you can probably find private instruction to accomplish similar.

After you get a couple hundred rounds through the revolver, you may decide any mods you need are totally different. You also might decide a true DAO semi might be a better choice (or not).

[Just a side suggestion, in your posts, if you put an extra "return" when you start a new paragraph, it creates a little extra white space and would make your posts much easier to read]

 

[Wise_A]

Doc--Suffice to say, I disagree with virtually every point. I'm not going to argue with you, because I really don't think you're going to listen to me anyway. Although I'd point out that I took a look at some of the resources you looked at, and they're questionable at best. And the last place I'd go for useful firearms information is gun shops (their goal is to sell you a gun, and by golly, they sold you the biggest, most expensive one) and random police officers.

I will point out the following:

All this was spurred on by two incidents you experienced.

You have a shotgun.

In both instances, you would have had to go and retrieve your shotgun, because you did not have it on you.

You don't carry your shotgun around with you, because it is large and heavy.

You studied the situation, and decided on a S&W 460 in (I'm guessing) about a 5" barrel--a gun which weighs, according to S&W, about 3.75 pounds, and is a little over 11" long.

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that you're probably planning on leaving it in a drawer somewhere.

You haven't improved your situation in the slightest, because you are planning on dealing with a sudden, unexpected threat, by going to retrieve a firearm from storage. And if none of the books and magazines you read, or people you talked to, pointed this out, then they don't have the foggiest notion of what they're talking about.

A pocket .380 you actually have on you is going beat the hell out of "Excuse me, sir, while I go get something to shoot you with."

 

[WR Moore]

Doc,

You do have some points on the simplicity of a revolver. I'm aware of a ~70 year old obsolete revolver loaded with ~25 year old ammunition that handily took care of a situation. However, that's not recommended practice.

That said, while you have reviewed literature, you didn't review relevant literature. This not being your field, understandable. As an example, I'm sure you've noticed some ......ah, less than rigorous "studies" published in what are supposed to scientific journals that you may be more familiar with.

Salient points:
Given modern expanding bullet designs by major manufacturers, there is no significant difference in wound cavity between the various common defense/duty calibers.

The most important factor in incapacitation is shot placement. Therefore, firearm/caliber choice should place an emphasis on your ability to control the firearm in a realistic manner. This is especially true given consideration to the paragraph above.

While there is some validity to your comparison of the life span of large vs medium frame revolvers, you're most unlikely to fire enough ammunition in your lifetime for that to be an issue. That being the case, a slightly smaller, handier and easier to use firearm would seem to be a more prudent choice. There are revolvers available in various calibers/weights (some have full barrel underlugs to place additional weight in the best place)/frame sizes that might better suit your purpose. If there's a facility around where you can rent firearms for comparison, you can try before you buy. I expect you can find something suitable that delivers the same recoil effect as your cannon.

Best of luck.

 

[kthom]

I carried a revolver many years in a duty capacity. I decided very early on to just fire in double action mode. I did not have the single action function removed. I have a few revolvers that are double action only from the factory, and these also have the hammer spur removed. These are primarily J Frames that are sometimes carried in a place where the hammer spur could get caught in pocket material and foul the draw. But for me, double action only is the way for me to go. It took a bit of practice to become as competent as I wanted to be, but trust me it can be done.

The very best double action trigger pull is one that is consistently smooth throughout the complete trigger movement. That can be accomplished by smoothing the action without changing any of the geometry involved, particularly the slide that holds the trigger return spring. I do not mess with any of the springs. I want the gun to fire every time. With this type of trigger action that has no change in effort throughout the trigger pull, it only takes some practice to get used to whatever the trigger pull happens to measure. The trigger can be pulled without anything to disturb the sight picture and that's the goal for a good trigger.

These days, my favorite EDC is a Model 640-1 that is a Centennial style which is factory DAO. Putting it into action is the easiest and simplest method available in my experience. And I have no qualms about sufficient accuracy to get the job done if needed. I have larger framed revolvers that I carry while hunting or hiking, etc and there could be instances where using the single action mode would be appropriate. But unless the distance was long and I have a good rest, it's doubtful even then that I would not fire DAO. Any decent gunsmith that has experience with these revolvers should be able to give you the type of trigger action and pull that i've tried to describe. For the revolver you mention here and others like it, I think what I've described is exactly what you need. Spend the rest of your money on ammo and time for practice!

 

[reddog81]

Hardluk1's comment about the 1911 being in single-action mode after the 1st shot's got me thinking . . . I'm still keeping the 460V, and I'm still going to limit the ammunition to .45Colt (gun weight helping to control recoil/muzzle flip) . . . but I'm going to re-evaluate my tho't about the single-action/double-action that I initiated this topic with.
Anyway, regards to you . . .

Good idea. Get some boxes of ammo down range and then re-evaluate your conceptions.

It sounds like you've done volumes of research which has resulted in some ideas that are questionable at best. Remember that gun writers aren't the same as medical journals and are often times just opinions. These writers have to keep coming up with new ideas in order to sell their wares. Often times these recommendations vacillate back and forth from year to year.

FWIW, Every shot with a 1911 is single action.

 

[The_Truth]

Not to sound like a jerk, but if you're worried about "liability issues" I'd be more concerned about the fact that a 460V is more big and scary looking than its smaller framed counterpart, and I'd be less concerned with DA/SA. Get an N frame 44mag or 44spl, load it with 44spl, and be done. Go with a DAO L frame 44 if you must.

To be frank, that logic is pretty silly IMO, especially for home defense. I could maybe understand for "social work," but even then, a good shoot is a good shoot all other things being equal.

 

[delcrossv]

I have a 460V, a 500mag and a slew of others. So, which is loaded and ready to go at home?
A Sig P232 (380) with a Crimson Trace.

YMMV