TL hammer

[Skizzer]

Got a 5" TL a couple of months ago that has been refinished, but mechanically sound and seems to be a good shooter. The hammer has been replaced with one that does not match any SW that I've seen, or any other make for that matter. Wondering if anyone can tell me what it is? I would like to replace it with an SW hammer and assume that original TL hammers are extremely hard to find, so can a later model hammer of the same lines as a TL be used? If so, any suggestions as to a source?

 

[.357magger]

There will be folks along who are waaaaay more knowledgeable than myself regarding TLs but...it's certainly not unknown for vintage revolvers to have had hammer mods to facilitate faster/more secure SA cocking. Two handed supported shooting wasn't in vogue pre WW1/WW2.

The "Cockeyed Hammer " offered aftermarket by King and Pachmayr come to mind.

While this doesn't appear to me to be either of those gunsmiths work, it does appear well executed in the pics.

Thanks for sharing it. I'll be interested too in seeing what the resident experts say.

 

[Muley Gil]

It looks to me like a TL hammer that has a modified spur. How is the trigger pull? My 5" .44 Special is a very accurate shooter.

 

[Skizzer]

Looks like the photos I tried to attach didn't upload, so just in case, here they are again:

 

[Skizzer]

Thanks, Magger, it does seem to be pretty good work. No problem w/function, just doesn't look very "TL" to me!

 

[Skizzer]

Well, I guess that's possible, altho I hadn't thot of anyone making that extreme a mod on an original TL hammer.

Both single and dbl action are on the stiff side, don't feel like they've had much of a trigger job, if any, on them, but very acceptible to me. Haven't wrung it out, yet, so can't comment on accuracy, but I would expect it to be good, as you say.

Thanks.

 

[Muley Gil]

Well, I guess that's possible, altho I hadn't thot of anyone making that extreme a mod on an original TL hammer.

Both single and dbl action are on the stiff side, don't feel like they've had much of a trigger job, if any, on them, but very acceptible to me. Haven't wrung it out, yet, so can't comment on accuracy, but I would expect it to be good, as you say.

Thanks.

Folks have been modifying firearms to meet their own need since the history of gunpowder. I actually prefer the grooved hammer spur shown, as the checkering that comes on pre WW II S&Ws is little too fine for my tastes.

Have you seen examples of the King's cock-eyed hammers? These were the predecessors of the target hammers of modern S&W revolvers.

The pre WW II Magnas shown are VERY nice.

 

[Modified]

I've seen maybe a dozen TLs with modified hammers (in some way or another) at this point.

In the case of your gun (as has already been noted) it looks like someone modified the original hammer to have an easier to cock hammer. These days we tend to call them a target hammer. I have seen at least one example of the specific job done to your gun, I want to say it was on an M&P. I don't know who actually did it however.

It's always a bit hard to tell over pictures, but your gun appears to have an unusually good reblue. After pondering your statement about the hammer not really looking right, I have to say I agreed with you, but I think it actually has less to do with the shape of the hammer, and more to do with the fact that the hammer/trigger aren't case colored.

I may suggest stripping the blue off of the hammer/trigger and case coloring them. I think this would actually clear up much, if not most, of your notion that the gun looks wrong. With the excellent pre-war magnas on there I think if the case color were put back you would have a good example of a Triple Lock that was upgraded in a couple ways, and be about as satisfying a shooter as you are ever likely to find.

 

[SS336]

Very nice TL. I agree with Modified, if you have money, get the hammer and trigger color case hardened.
That being said, i would be proud to own and shoot it like it is.
I like the hammer a lot, the revolver looks great.

 

[rct269]

"The hammer has been replaced----------------."

I have no way of knowing if you meant that to be taken literally or not, but I'm going to take issue with it. It is inconceivable to me that anyone would take on the task of replacing a hammer. I had a completely redone Colt Officers Model---redone by Walter Roper and his lads----grips, sights, and action job--including the hammer. The most telling comment on the action job came from my gunsmith----old school type-----a very tasteful beard, leather apron, sat on a three legged stool----and smoked a pipe. I'd taken this masterpiece to him for show and tell---showing off under the guise of seeking wisdom. He oohed and awed with great respect, and said, "You know, I hate these *#><ing Colts, but whoever did that action job really knew what they were doing!!"---adding that the hammer was a work of art.The hammer followed the conventional practice of the time, cut off the spur and weld on a replacement worthy of a place in the Louvre Museum in Paris. That's what you saw on the outside. On the inside the most impressive thing is what you didn't see. You didn't see anything resembling any Colt hammer ever made-----and you were pretty sure what you did see would float-----it's that light (comparatively speaking anyway). The big mystery was who made that hammer---------and it's a made hammer, not a modified hammer. The answers offered up to that question followed the usual----none of which made a whole lot of sense when you really think about how you'd go about making a hammer----all except for one. That came from one of THE students in this hive---you know him as Hondo44. He suggested Colt made it----in accord with the design done by Roper. And the more you tried to find fault with that, the less fault was to be found.

So it figures your Triple Lock hammer started life as a Triple Lock hammer----and the parts that fit over the stud, and hook up with the spring, and play nice with the trigger, and hit the primer are exactly like S&W made them. Why would anybody even think about reinventing that wheel?

Ralph Tremaine

 

[delta-419]

Hammer Mod

I owned a S&W second model .44special from the 1920s that had a very different hammer much like the hammer on your TL. The gun was from the Texas/Oklahoma border. As you can see it has a lot of gold treatment. Gun show friend talked me out of it as he liked modified "different" guns. Here are a few photos to compare. The work done on my second model was top drawer. Enjoy!

 

[Modified]

"The hammer has been replaced----------------."

I have no way of knowing if you meant that to be taken literally or not, but I'm going to take issue with it. It is inconceivable to me that anyone would take on the task of replacing a hammer. I had a completely redone Colt Officers Model---redone by Walter Roper and his lads----grips, sights, and action job--including the hammer. The most telling comment on the action job came from my gunsmith----old school type-----a very tasteful beard, leather apron, sat on a three legged stool----and smoked a pipe. I'd taken this masterpiece to him for show and tell---showing off under the guise of seeking wisdom. He oohed and awed with great respect, and said, "You know, I hate these *#><ing Colts, but whoever did that action job really knew what they were doing!!"---adding that the hammer was a work of art.The hammer followed the conventional practice of the time, cut off the spur and weld on a replacement worthy of a place in the Louvre Museum in Paris. That's what you saw on the outside. On the inside the most impressive thing is what you didn't see. You didn't see anything resembling any Colt hammer ever made-----and you were pretty sure what you did see would float-----it's that light (comparatively speaking anyway). The big mystery was who made that hammer---------and it's a made hammer, not a modified hammer. The answers offered up to that question followed the usual----none of which made a whole lot of sense when you really think about how you'd go about making a hammer----all except for one. That came from one of THE students in this hive---you know him as Hondo44. He suggested Colt made it----in accord with the design done by Roper. And the more you tried to find fault with that, the less fault was to be found.

So it figures your Triple Lock hammer started life as a Triple Lock hammer----and the parts that fit over the stud, and hook up with the spring, and play nice with the trigger, and hit the primer are exactly like S&W made them. Why would anybody even think about reinventing that wheel?

Ralph Tremaine

Have you posted this gun anywhere? I'd love to see it. I have a Colt Bisley model that was extensively modified by Colt (I have the receipt for all the mods), and I would love to see another possible example of their service department work. Particularly to see if there are any little ampersands stamped on there.

Also, since you broached the subject, the main thing about the Triple Lock which is the focus of this thread that makes me suspect that the S&W service department wasn't the one that did the modification is the blued hammer/trigger. One thing that SWHF has taught me is never say never when it comes to the service department.

Any chance this gun has a star, diamonds, or dates on it? With guns this old it's entirely probable that multiple people have repaired and modified it over the years, and its well worth checking to see if some of those people worked at the service department.

 

[rct269]

Have you posted this gun anywhere? I'd love to see it. I have a Colt Bisley model that was extensively modified by Colt (I have the receipt for all the mods), and I would love to see another possible example of their service department work. Particularly to see if there are any little ampersands stamped on there.

Also, since you broached the subject, the main thing about the Triple Lock which is the focus of this thread that makes me suspect that the S&W service department wasn't the one that did the modification is the blued hammer/trigger. One thing that SWHF has taught me is never say never when it comes to the service department.

Any chance this gun has a star, diamonds, or dates on it? With guns this old it's entirely probable that multiple people have repaired and modified it over the years, and its well worth checking to see if some of those people worked at the service department.

Just so there's no misunderstanding, it never was, nor will it ever be my contention S&W had anything to with modifying any part of this gun------only that its hammer started life as a stock, S&W product. That said, I have a letter from Jinks speaking to questions I'd raised about a King Cockeyed Hammer on an Outdoorsman I had. It reads as follows: "The records indicate that this revolver was shipped with a 6 inch barrel, standard hammer and blue finish. The cock-eyed hammer must have been added at a later date. Smith & Wesson did ship a few handguns with this style of hammer at an extra charge of $1.00." Now note he says "this style of hammer"--with no mention of King. I suspect S&W modified the few hammers of "this style" simply because of the price-----$1.00. King charged $5.00. I also suspect the $5.00 charge contemplated receipt of a customer's gun, removal, modification, and re-installation of the hammer (whereas S&W needed only to modify the hammer---remove the stock spur, and replace it with the custom spur). Is that the case, as I suspect? I don't know. Nor do I much care one way or the other. The one thing Roy's told me time and time again when I was pestering him about odd-ball occurrences is "S&W would do anything anybody would pay them to do.".------------------sounds pretty much like a business, doesn't it?

Ralph Tremaine

 

[Skizzer]

TO ALL THE KNOWLEDGEABLE GENTLEMEN THAT REPLIED TODAY:
THANK YOU VERY MUCH!
You've brought-up some great points, but very different than I expected! I thought everybody would agree that the hammer and grips needed to get back to original, so I am kind of stunned here, and will have to consider all that's been said. Will take me a bit of time. Anyway, thanks a ton for the info and advice - much appreciated!

 

[Muley Gil]

TO ALL THE KNOWLEDGEABLE GENTLEMEN THAT REPLIED TODAY:
THANK YOU VERY MUCH!
You've brought-up some great points, but very different than I expected! I thought everybody would agree that the hammer and grips needed to get back to original, so I am kind of stunned here, and will have to consider all that's been said. Will take me a bit of time. Anyway, thanks a ton for the info and advice - much appreciated!

I collect shooters. The modifications that have been made to your TL make it a better shooter, though I would try not to put any wear on those pre war Magnas.

 

[Skizzer]

Folks have been modifying firearms to meet their own need since the history of gunpowder. I actually prefer the grooved hammer spur shown, as the checkering that comes on pre WW II S&Ws is little too fine for my tastes.

Have you seen examples of the King's cock-eyed hammers? These were the predecessors of the target hammers of modern S&W revolvers.

The pre WW II Magnas shown are VERY nice.

I hadn't appreciated that cutting-off and rebuilding hammer spurs was that common in the days before commercial target hammers were available. Seems like it would have been a tough job, but as you point-out there were obvious a bunch of smiths capable and willing to do it. Before you wised me up my assumption was, and I hadn't thought about it much before this revolver came along, that a guy might have been able to find some after-market hammer to have installed and that was what this was. You've convinced me otherwise.

No, was not familiar w/the King cock-eyed, but did look-up a photo of one on this forum from 2013. Fairly amazing modification.

Thanks, I didn't realize the age of these magna's and didn't fully appreciate them, looking at the gun from the standpt of needing to reestablish as much originality as possible. I've got a different viewpt of them now, thanks to you!

 

[Skizzer]

I've seen maybe a dozen TLs with modified hammers (in some way or another) at this point.

In the case of your gun (as has already been noted) it looks like someone modified the original hammer to have an easier to cock hammer. These days we tend to call them a target hammer. I have seen at least one example of the specific job done to your gun, I want to say it was on an M&P. I don't know who actually did it however.

It's always a bit hard to tell over pictures, but your gun appears to have an unusually good reblue. After pondering your statement about the hammer not really looking right, I have to say I agreed with you, but I think it actually has less to do with the shape of the hammer, and more to do with the fact that the hammer/trigger aren't case colored.

I may suggest stripping the blue off of the hammer/trigger and case coloring them. I think this would actually clear up much, if not most, of your notion that the gun looks wrong. With the excellent pre-war magnas on there I think if the case color were put back you would have a good example of a Triple Lock that was upgraded in a couple ways, and be about as satisfying a shooter as you are ever likely to find.

Thanks for calling my attention to the possible quality of the reblue, something I tend to not appreciate as it of course detracts from the original value of the piece. Since we're talking about "shooters", I probably need to change my frame of reference a bit.

I think your point about the hammer being more acceptable to me if it were re-cased hardened, along w/the trigger, is a good point. I'll look into doing that.

Your comment on the magna's age & quality, which others have also mentioned, is also a help to my understanding and appreciation of the piece. Likewise you statement as to looking at the gun as an upgrade example, and that it is about as good as I'm likely to find, is again very helpful - thanks!

 

[Skizzer]

Very nice TL. I agree with Modified, if you have money, get the hammer and trigger color case hardened.
That being said, i would be proud to own and shoot it like it is.
I like the hammer a lot, the revolver looks great.

Very much appreciate your perspective, and I will look into what the color case hardening will take, both $$ and time.

Thanks for the kind words!

 

[Skizzer]

"The hammer has been replaced----------------."

I have no way of knowing if you meant that to be taken literally or not, but I'm going to take issue with it. It is inconceivable to me that anyone would take on the task of replacing a hammer. I had a completely redone Colt Officers Model---redone by Walter Roper and his lads----grips, sights, and action job--including the hammer. The most telling comment on the action job came from my gunsmith----old school type-----a very tasteful beard, leather apron, sat on a three legged stool----and smoked a pipe. I'd taken this masterpiece to him for show and tell---showing off under the guise of seeking wisdom. He oohed and awed with great respect, and said, "You know, I hate these *#><ing Colts, but whoever did that action job really knew what they were doing!!"---adding that the hammer was a work of art.The hammer followed the conventional practice of the time, cut off the spur and weld on a replacement worthy of a place in the Louvre Museum in Paris. That's what you saw on the outside. On the inside the most impressive thing is what you didn't see. You didn't see anything resembling any Colt hammer ever made-----and you were pretty sure what you did see would float-----it's that light (comparatively speaking anyway). The big mystery was who made that hammer---------and it's a made hammer, not a modified hammer. The answers offered up to that question followed the usual----none of which made a whole lot of sense when you really think about how you'd go about making a hammer----all except for one. That came from one of THE students in this hive---you know him as Hondo44. He suggested Colt made it----in accord with the design done by Roper. And the more you tried to find fault with that, the less fault was to be found.

So it figures your Triple Lock hammer started life as a Triple Lock hammer----and the parts that fit over the stud, and hook up with the spring, and play nice with the trigger, and hit the primer are exactly like S&W made them. Why would anybody even think about reinventing that wheel?

Ralph Tremaine

Yes, I thought the hammer had been replaced as I explained in a previous reply to another post, due to my ignorance on the subject. You and the others have disabused me of this notion, and have added to my previously-existing amazement of what the "practitioners of the metallurgical arts" could accomplish in the old days. I must say that the hammer did not look like an SW to me; it's lines more closely resembled a Python to my eye, altho it clearly was not that either. I accept that it is most likely a modified SW hammer.

Thanks for your help.

 

[Skizzer]

I owned a S&W second model .44special from the 1920s that had a very different hammer much like the hammer on your TL. The gun was from the Texas/Oklahoma border. As you can see it has a lot of gold treatment. Gun show friend talked me out of it as he liked modified "different" guns. Here are a few photos to compare. The work done on my second model was top drawer. Enjoy!

Very helpful to see your fine Second Model - thanks! It's a beautiful piece and gives me more understanding of the type of modifications that were apparently somewhat common for these vintages revolvers. Have learned quite a bit in this thread; much appreciated!