Spurless hammers. Yes? No?

[18DAI]

I have a preference for spurless hammers on my carry guns. Both my on duty 4566 and off duty 3913 have them. 3rd gen pistols I purchase that don't have them, and are for serious purpose, get them.

I think it makes for a slicker carry gun. One less thing to snag on a draw too. Saves me money on tailoring too. No torn coat liners. Other than checking for function, I can't recall needing to manually cock a pistol.

I do notice some folks taking these off their guns and replacing them with spur hammers. I'm curious as to why. Asthetics? Functional issue?

So, do you gents like the spurless hammers or despise them? Regards 18DAI

 

[Arizona5906]

I have a preference for spurless hammers on my carry guns. Both my on duty 4566 and off duty 3913 have them. 3rd gen pistols I purchase that don't have them, and are for serious purpose, get them.

I think it makes for a slicker carry gun. One less thing to snag on a draw too. Saves me money on tailoring too. No torn coat liners. Other than checking for function, I can't recall needing to manually cock a pistol.

I do notice some folks taking these off their guns and replacing them with spur hammers. I'm curious as to why. Asthetics? Functional issue?

So, do you gents like the spurless hammers or despise them? Regards 18DAI

I have the spurred hammer on my 5906 and spur-less on my 3913. I have never missed having the hammer spur on the 3913 and rarely ever use the hammer spur on the 5906. I'm sure it is partly a personal preference thing but for concealed carry as I use my 3913 the chance of catching the hammer on clothing at the wrong time is reason enough not to have the spur.

 

[k22fan]

We've had this conversation before. If you live where your little auto is occasionally the only thing at hand for shots of opportunity at coyotes and crows a hammer spur is not a bad idea. Your tailoring money would be wasted on me. In a fine suit I still look like myself, so what's the point? I like a spurless hammer inside a Savage model 1899.

 

[snw19_357]

Like the spurless hammers!

 

[grif684]

I have always preferred the spurless hammer, and also have replaced the spur hammer on all the second and third gens I have ever carried concealed, to me it's a no-brainer.....I even have a model 39 that I removed the spur from, as well as the half-cock.....this should answer the question......a 5906 and 639, in addition to some factory spurless S&W's......in a word, yes.....

 

[scatterguy]

I like to dry fire my guns with snap caps frequently. Spurred hammers are a good bit easier than spurless for this purpose. However, I have gotten fairly adept at pulling the trigger back just far enough to get my L thumb on the top hammer serations to finish pulling it back on my 6906. It did cost me a few blood blisters at first

 

[18DAI]

grif684 is the second one from the right a Devel? Very nice collection! Regards 18DAI

 

[SMSgt]

Both of my 3rd gens are spurless. Don't miss the spur at all.

 

[mbliss57]

I prefer spurless as well.

 

[grif684]

18DAI, good eye, but it is actually a Devel slide on a nickel 469, I bought it that way years ago....

 

[RufusG]

If I need to start SA, a little staging gives you enough purchase to cock the spurless hammer.

 

[18DAI]

grif684 That is SWEET! Congrats!

My old partner had a Devel 39-2 back in the day. Great gun. I don't think he ever shot below expert with it. Always got attention at the range too. Regards 18DAI

 

[ugrey]

I have a 5906, 5903, 6906, 3913, and they all have spurless hammers. I have just bought a 3904 and I just happen to have a spare 2cd generation spurless hammer waiting for it. I bought a Sig 229 in the last 2 months and I am looking into gun smiths to slick it's hammer. I have practice drawn it from under a sweat shirt a few times and guess what snagged?

 

[Lost Lake]

My 3913 is spurless, and I'm so new to third gens I didn't even know they came with spurs!!!

 

[kbm6893]

I prefer a spur on the hammer, altough I wouldn't add one to a gun that came without one, like my 3913. As for the "the hammer could snag on my clothes and get me killed" argument, I think it's highly unlikely. 99.999% of us won't be pulling our guns in a self defense situation, and if it matters that much to you, you can always train to put your thumb on the hammer to prevent the snag. Having a hammer gives you the option of a more precise single action shot, and that's never a bad thing. I also think they look better. Spurless revolvers just look wrong to me.

 

[Rogan68]

My 4566TSW is spurred. And to be honest, I've never thought about going spurless until this thread. However, I see pros and cons to both, and they've been mentioned here.

I'm a fat guy, and I my 4566 is my ccw (albeit a brick to carry ). I don't wear that baggy of shirts and/or sweatshirts, and I find that my paddle holster's thumb release poses more of a draw issue for me than the hammer does. That, and my loveless-handles..

 

[vista461]

I'd prefer a spurless on my 4003, but haven't gotten around to getting one yet.

 

[BMCM]

Not a single spur in sight in my little quartet of 45s. I got a couple spurred hammers around here somewhere... In my parts bin perhaps.

Cheers
Bill

 

[J. W.]

Spurless for me as that's the way my trusty old 4566 duty pistol was.

 

[K-framer]

I, too, prefer spurless...at least on pistols that I will use for CC. However, I do make exceptions. My Stoeger Cougar has a spurred hammer, but it is unobtrusive, so I don't see it as a problem.