Do you need a hammer block in a modern S&W?

[500 Magnum Nut]

You have 3 safeties on a modern S&W revolver. The top circle is showing the bolt as it blocks the hammer as the cylinder is open. The 2ND safety is on the bottom where the rebound block is. The hammer can't go forward if the trigger is not pulled. But as mentioned already, this failed once and got a sailor killed, so they added another safety called a hammer block.
This is a little bar that floats in front of the hammer, shown in the bottom picture.

 

[Big Cholla]

Wrong!

Pistol smiths were notorius for throwing them away while doing an action job. Just one more piece that needed polishing and didn't do anything.

Now that I do my own work I keep it in and polish and grease it. Smith must have put it in there for a reason.

If you drop a Smith without the hammer block it still on't go off because of the design of the rebound block.[/QUOTE]

IMHO, All generalities are wrong and the one above is really wrong. I can't believe the above statement about "Pistol smiths". Any Gunsmith that specialized in pistols and was therefore a "Pistol smith" knows full well the liability one assumes just working on other peoples' guns let alone removing safety devices from them. No "Pistol smith" I have ever known would give a thought to removal of a S&W hammer block. I was a professional pistol smith for many years. I associated with and talked with other pistol smiths all across the USA. I never ever heard of one of those professionals advocating the removal of a S&W hammer block. To a professional pistol smith the hammer block is easily dealt with when performing an action job. I knew two men personally that chose to remove the hammer block from their own S&Ws. One was killed when he dropped his Model 27 on a wood floor. The other had a left arm severely injured when his dropped on a rock. Both were 'do-it-yourselfers' and thought they knew it all about pistols. ......... Big Cholla

 

[nicky4968]

When I get ahold of a smith & wesson with the strain screw backed out a half turn or two, the next thing I check for is the hammer block. Very common with the lethal "do-it-yourselfers" mentioned above.
Often the two go together.

 

[martyg]

I have a 686-4 with the firing pin mounted to the hammer.
Given all the discussion on this thread - does it mean that can I safely carry a round in the chamber under the hammer of this gun?

Thanks
Marty

 

[Dpris]

Yes.
Where the firing pin is makes no difference on modern Smith revolvers.
ALL designed for safe carry with a loaded chamber in front of the hammer.
Denis

 

[VictorLouis]

Hey guys, AZS says leaves them in. Now, it appears he may only be ambivalent about their function. I think we can probably lighten up a wee bit.

 

[chp]

I think we can probably lighten up a wee bit.

+1. Since S&W doesn't put them in Centenials, I wonder if the decision point for the hammer block is (i) exposed hammer, (ii) DA/SA hammer/trigger, or (iii) both . . .

 

[TacticalReload]

I think we can probably lighten up a wee bit.

Seriously. Look closely at the first pic posted by 500 Magnum Nut. in order to get a gun to go off, it needs to be dropped HARD... hard enough to snap off the part of the hammer with the single action sear (the whole part resting on the rebound slide)... and even then, chances are that the hammer won't move forward because the double action sear rests on the top of the trigger. This kind of "perfect storm" of events probably would only occur on a gun with some defective imperfections in just the wrong spots in the metal of the hammer, trigger, etc.

You know what else might happen? Maybe you get a piece of debris that finds its way between the hammer and the firing pin and the tap on the back of the hammer is enough to set the gun off even if the hammer block is in there. Is that likely? Hells no. Could it happen? Maybe. Maybe another piece of debris makes it behind the primer on a live round and there is enough endshake in your cylinder that a round gets set off if you drop the gun. Likely? No way. But I suppose it's *possible*.

As has been mentioned, back in ye-oldie-time days, the SAA would just have firing pins resting on live primers if you weren't careful. Because of this, the myth persists that modern revolvers have similar issues.

Would I stand in front of one while you dropped it from holster height onto its hammer over a loaded chamber? No. Would I bet a sizeable sum of money that it wouldn't go off? Most definitely.

Leave the block in there if you want. You'll probably never notice it other than a rattle in the gun at times. However, the SKY IS NOT FALLING. Sheesh.

And for God's sake... stop dropping your guns on their hammers. What's wrong with you!

 

[Big Cholla]

Tactical: I couldn't disagree with you more.......... The man I knew personally that dropped his S&W M 27 had not modified any part of the other internals on that handgun after he removed the hammer block. After a day out in the desert, he was putting it away up on a shelf at about head height. The gun fell from the holster and landed on a wooden floor of pine. The gun fired and the bullet entered just above his belt and centered his heart. He was dead before the EMS guys got there. The fellow that only got his left arm ruined dropped his Model 28 from the upper bunk of a hunting cabin onto a concrete floor. That handgun was not altered in anyway except for the removal of the hammer block. The manufacturing tolerances of S&W might allow a little 'sponginess' in the trigger/hammer/sear relationship that contributed to the hammer overriding the sear block. There may be other contributing factors, but to flat out advocate that the hammer block is useless is IMHO irresponsible.

One time when I was still a practicing pistol smith a man brought me his S&W revolver for an 'action job'. I opened it up while he was standing there and I found the hammer block missing. I asked him if he knew it was missing. He quickly owned up to having removed it as "everyone knew they were not needed". I put his pistol back together, handed it back to him and told him I didn't think my work on his pistol would ever be satisfactory to him. I sent him out the door talking to himself. ....... Big Cholla

 

[Skeeziks]

I would bet everything I have that No one has ever been shot from a handgun that went off from it striking the ground.
I would say that in about 99% of all the accidental discharge shootings, the trigger was pulled (whether by a finger or by some other object.)

The hammer-block "safety" is one of the worst abominations that has ever been put on a firearm.

 

[SWID]

The interesting thing about all this to me is that the hammer block does not in any way affect trigger pull. In or out, the gun functions the same. So why take it out? What do you gain? I don't even understand this "polish and grease" thing. What does not polishing keep the gun from doing as well?

 

[ImprovedModel56Fan]

Pistol smiths were notorius for throwing them away while doing an action job. Just one more piece that needed polishing and didn't do anything.

Now that I do my own work I keep it in and polish and grease it. Smith must have put it in there for a reason.

If you drop a Smith without the hammer block it still on't go off because of the design of the rebound block.

IMHO, All generalities are wrong and the one above is really wrong. I can't believe the above statement about "Pistol smiths". Any Gunsmith that specialized in pistols and was therefore a "Pistol smith" knows full well the liability one assumes just working on other peoples' guns let alone removing safety devices from them. No "Pistol smith" I have ever known would give a thought to removal of a S&W hammer block. I was a professional pistol smith for many years. I associated with and talked with other pistol smiths all across the USA. I never ever heard of one of those professionals advocating the removal of a S&W hammer block. To a professional pistol smith the hammer block is easily dealt with when performing an action job. I knew two men personally that chose to remove the hammer block from their own S&Ws. One was killed when he dropped his Model 27 on a wood floor. The other had a left arm severely injured when his dropped on a rock. Both were 'do-it-yourselfers' and thought they knew it all about pistols. ......... Big Cholla

Austin Behlert did it without even being asked to. Smiths and Colts, both. I asked him politely for the hammer block back on at least one Colt (just bought them myself for the S&Ws), and he sent it right out, but people who tell you about older gunsmiths tossing hammer blocks aren't making anything up.

 

[TacticalReload]

Tactical: I couldn't disagree with you more.......... The man I knew personally that dropped his S&W M 27 had not modified any part of the other internals on that handgun after he removed the hammer block. After a day out in the desert, he was putting it away up on a shelf at about head height. The gun fell from the holster and landed on a wooden floor of pine. The gun fired and the bullet entered just above his belt and centered his heart. He was dead before the EMS guys got there. The fellow that only got his left arm ruined dropped his Model 28 from the upper bunk of a hunting cabin onto a concrete floor. That handgun was not altered in anyway except for the removal of the hammer block. The manufacturing tolerances of S&W might allow a little 'sponginess' in the trigger/hammer/sear relationship that contributed to the hammer overriding the sear block. There may be other contributing factors, but to flat out advocate that the hammer block is useless is IMHO irresponsible.

One time when I was still a practicing pistol smith a man brought me his S&W revolver for an 'action job'. I opened it up while he was standing there and I found the hammer block missing. I asked him if he knew it was missing. He quickly owned up to having removed it as "everyone knew they were not needed". I put his pistol back together, handed it back to him and told him I didn't think my work on his pistol would ever be satisfactory to him. I sent him out the door talking to himself. ....... Big Cholla

Fair enough. I'm certianly not calling you a liar or advocating the removal of any "safety device"... hear that people who are "plugging" the IL? ;-)

I've been on the inside of enough Smith wheelguns to convince myself that it just mechanically looks damn difficult to imagine it happening. Even someone who doesn't know how things are supposed to work can look at that photo and say, "Hmmm... that doesn't look like it would be likely to happen." However, I'm just one guy and I could very well be wrong. Like I said, keep the hammer block in there... I keep them in there when I work on guns... even my own. I don't find them particularly troubling to polish, even though they are pretty cheaply made by twisting the piece.

 

[TacticalReload]

The interesting thing about all this to me is that the hammer block does not in any way affect trigger pull. In or out, the gun functions the same. So why take it out? What do you gain? I don't even understand this "polish and grease" thing. What does not polishing keep the gun from doing as well?

Polishing is the whole point of an "action job". I don't mean to seem rude, but that's 99% of what you're doing when doing a so-called trigger job. You stone the rough machining or high spots out of the parts that mate during the trigger pull. You of course need to know what your doing and where to do it, but every little bit of friction adds to the overall pull. If you don't slick up the moving parts to reduce the friction and increase smoothness, then you can do a poor man's trigger job... cut the strain screw down or back it out. Then you can have a gun with a light trigger pull that never successfully sets off a primer or fires a round. ;-)

While the hammer block doesn't affect the trigger pull *that much*, it does a little bit.

 

[Dragon88]

I would bet everything I have that No one has ever been shot from a handgun that went off from it striking the ground.

You lose everything then. During WWII a sailor was killed after his revolver fell to the deck, leading S&W to implement the hammer block safety at the request of the US Government. I'm sure there are other incidents but this is the most relevant to this thread.

 

[AzShooter]

Skeeziks you lose.
My friend's daughter was shot and killed when she dropped her Colt 1911. She had disengaged the grip safety. Something that never should be done.

I still know a lot of people that do it. But it's in the rules for USPSA that all safeties must be working.

Why people subject themselves to this I have no idea.

 

[chp]

During WWII a sailor was killed after his revolver fell to the deck, leading S&W to implement the hammer block safety at the request of the US Government.

That revolver had a hammer-mounted firing pin. Does the new design without the hammer-mounted firing pin change the need for the hammer block?

 

[5-Shot]

Year ago, I was told by a police armor that the block was added after a pre-hammer block Smith broke its hammer and fired when a motorcycle patrolman crashed his bike. That sounds possible.

 

[David Sinko]

I also had an action job done by Austin Behlert. It was many years ago and it was the first time I ever had an action job done to what I believe was one of my first revolvers. I didn't know much about S&W revolvers but shortly after getting the gun back I disassembled it. Per my Kuhnhausen book, that thing called the hammer block was indeed missing. I called Austin and asked him about it, and he told me that the hammer block was not necessary and he removes them when he does an action job. He said he would return it to me if I really want it, but I declined, figuring he should really know his stuff.

That revolver also had the hammer spur removed. Does the revolver need to land on its hammer spur to fire without that hammer block? Or does it not make a difference?

Dave Sinko

 

[TacticalReload]

That revolver had a hammer-mounted firing pin. Does the new design without the hammer-mounted firing pin change the need for the hammer block?

It should make much of a difference. The new models have a floating firing pin that is under rearward spring pressure and held in place with a pin that sits in a groove in the firing pin. While, in theory, it takes a slightly harder strike to set off the primer with the new setup (overcome the firing pin's spring pressure / inertia / friction), it shouldn't make much of a difference where the firing pin is mounted if it drops unintentionally.

I also had an action job done by Austin Behlert. It was many years ago and it was the first time I ever had an action job done to what I believe was one of my first revolvers. I didn't know much about S&W revolvers but shortly after getting the gun back I disassembled it. Per my Kuhnhausen book, that thing called the hammer block was indeed missing. I called Austin and asked him about it, and he told me that the hammer block was not necessary and he removes them when he does an action job. He said he would return it to me if I really want it, but I declined, figuring he should really know his stuff.

That revolver also had the hammer spur removed. Does the revolver need to land on its hammer spur to fire without that hammer block? Or does it not make a difference?

Dave Sinko

Hmmm... you know, that's a good question. I would imagine that it's a lot harder for a revolver without a spur to have the hammer struck hard enough and just right to transfer force forward (assuming that you can get it to break/move). Without a spur, there is very little of the hammer exposed that is at the correct angle to hit.