"bushmaster1313"
There are probably a number of reasons for the unshrouded, conventional guns.
But before I start making lists of what could be some of them, let me make a few statements.
1) Because there are so many model number variations, I will speak of Conventional Hammer/Open Frame Guns, Shrouded Hammer/Bodyguard Guns, and Internal Hammer/Centennial Guns instead of a Model Number such-and-such or a Model Number this-and-that.
2) I will also assume that your mention of a "shrouded trigger" is just a typo and what you meant to say was "shrouded hammer"
First, let's consider things from the point of view of the consumer/end user:
1) I think a lot of people just have a fixed idea in their mind's eye as to what a revolver is supposed to look like.
a. That's why some people like Smith's and some like Colt's.
b. It's probably also why back in the 70's. Ruger and Dan Wesson appeared to have some problems in regard to the public's acceptance regarding the looks of there then new DA revolvers.
c. The Conventional Hammer/Open Frame Guns might simply possess the "look" that people either like or have come to expect from S&W.
2) Then there is the matter of holsters.
a. Granted there are all kinds of holsters made today that will accept and properly hold on to some portion of each of the three categories of the guns I have mentioned.
b. But if you have to have a conventional (and therefore over-the-hammer) safety strap or a thumb break on it, the only category of the three that readily accepts them is the Conventional Hammer/Open Frame style.
3) Along with the matter of holsters, there is also a matter of versatility
a. A gun with an "exposed" or unshrouded hammer (those in the Conventional Hammer/Open Frame family) will obviously work with a holster that uses a conventional safety strap or thumb break BUT they will also work in pretty much anything else that is out there too.
i. A Shrouded Hammer/Bodyguard Gun (and, for the record, an Internal Hammer/Centennial Gun) will only work with holsters designed to accommodate their unique "rear" ("upper" when holstered) frame configuration
ii. So if someone is looking for greater versatility (flexibility) in regard to future or overall holster selection, the Conventional Hammer/Open Frame Gun is the way to go
1. Remember, many (most) of the mainstream buyers cannot or don't want to buy a different gun for every application and need to have something that will be as versatile as possible in regard to interfacing with the holsters that allow them to carry it.
4) Your opening remark ("Since so many of the J frames go in pockets it would seem that the shroud is a big advantage.") is an example that relates to both items 2 & 3 in this section.
a. You are absolutely correct in that many J-Frames (probably more all the time) go into a pocket but more and more people today:
i. See the disadvantages to shooting from inside a pocket and will most likely draw the gun from it before attempting to fire
ii. Use a holster when carrying in a pocket for reasons of orientation and keeping the gun from becoming fouled by other things that might be in the pocket
iii. Use a holster that makes allowances for the hammer spur (if there is one) so that the chances today of it snagging on the draw, while not eliminated, are far less than they used to be in years past
1. So again, with holsters being available to accommodate the Conventional Hammer/Open Frame Guns when they are carried in the pocket, the need for a Shrouded Hammer/Bodyguard Gun or even an Internal Hammer/Centennial Gun to be used in this role is not what it used to be.
Then let's look at things from a manufacturing standpoint:
1) The market often decides things and the possibility that maybe the consumer simply likes the looks of the Conventional Hammer/Open Frame Guns over the Shrouded Hammer/Bodyguard Guns must be considered.
a. Obviously, if there is more of a market demand because of how the gun looks, the factory will make more of those it demands.
2) The holster issue could be a consideration from this side of things too if the Smith end sellers find it easier, more profitable, or more necessary to sell conventional holster with straps or thumb breaks.
a. If a condition like this does exist, it would obviously drive the factory in the direction of making more guns of the type that would work with (fit into) those holsters
3) Looking at "4) a. iii. 1." in the preceding section on consumers, it is obvious that the "need" for a Shrouded Hammer/Bodyguard Gun is probably less than it used to be.
a. In fact
i. It is probably only the fact that some people want or actually believe (rightly or wrongly) that they need to be able to cock a gun like this into Single Action; or
ii. The possibility of an antiquated requirement that a gun if used for "work" must be capable of being cocked into Single Action
that keeps the Shrouded Hammer/Bodyguard Guns from being replaced by a combination of
iii. Internal Hammer/Centennial Guns
1. For people who want a slick, no snag rear end to the frame; and
iv. Conventional Hammer/Open Frame Guns
1. For people who want to be able to manually cock the gun before firing and don't care how the frame is shaped
b. So once again, the factory will make more of what they see will fit into/sell into the largest set (or subset) of defined users
4) There could also be a possible (minor?) scrap/rework issue involved for the more metal included on the sides of the gun, the more machining, the more polishing, the more finishing involved.
a. Not only might this additional work affect profitability up front (depending on how the distributor pricing is set and how much it is believed can be obtained for the guns at that level) but each additional amount of work means that there is more room for error, meaning that some frames might have to be reworked or scrapped out; driving the manufacturing costs up even more
So it all boils down to the numbers
1) Internal Hammer/Centennial Guns are capable of Double-Action Only operation
a. While I personally do not see this as drawback, many people still want to be able to cock the gun into Single Action and will not buy a gun that does not allow them to do so.
2) Internal Hammer/Centennial Guns only work in holsters designed for guns with this type of enclosed rear end or the side-slabbed rear section as seen in the Shrouded Hammer/Bodyguard designs.
a. This too, is a limiting factor for many people
3) Internal Hammer/Centennial Guns will allow firing from inside a pocket
a. But this is a technique that is not as popular as it once was and will not contribute greatly to the sales volume.
4) Shrouded Hammer/Bodyguard Guns are capable of both Double-Action and Single-Action firing
a. While this allows for a broader market base or share (because it includes all of the people who want or need Single Action capability), as a "model" or "type of gun", a Shrouded Hammer/Bodyguard Gun is not as attractive or popular a style as the Internal Hammer/Centennial Guns seem to be.
i. So the Single Action capability might be a wash when compared to how people sometimes buy things because of how they look or because of how much they see them in the magazines.
ii. In fact, when considering appearance, I do not believe that this gun has ever been as popular as either the Conventional Hammer/Open Frame Guns or the reintroduced Internal Hammer/Centennial Guns.
5) Shrouded Hammer/Bodyguard Guns only work in holsters designed for guns with this type of side-slabbed rear end or the enclosed rear section as seen in the Internal Hammer/Centennial Guns.
a. Once again, this too, is a limiting factor for many people.
6) Shrouded Hammer/Bodyguard Guns will allow firing from inside a pocket
a. But once more, this is a technique that is not as popular as it once was and I doubt that it will contribute greatly to the sales volume.
7) Conventional Hammer/Open Frame Guns are capable of both Double-Action and Single-Action firing
a. The dual modes are a plus as described in the Shrouded/Bodyguard gun section above but these guns have the benefit of (possibly) not being handicapped by their looks as those guns might be
8) Conventional Hammer/Open Frame Guns do have the look that many people think of when they think of "a revolver"
a. Conventional Hammer/Open Frame Guns obviously have of the look that many people associate with "a Smith & Wesson revolver"
b. And I really believe that both of these things can be a factor in positively influencing sales.
9) Conventional Hammer/Open Frame Guns will work with a holster that uses a conventional safety strap or thumb break and generally, they will work in those designed for Internal Hammer/Centennial Guns and Shrouded Hammer/Bodyguard Guns.
a. This versatility will help sales too.
10) Conventional Hammer/Open Frame Guns will generally not allow unencumbered firing from inside a pocket
a. But this is a technique that is not as popular as it once was so I do not believe it will detract much from the potential sales volume.
11) And for those people that carry a gun in their pocket, most of today's Pocket Holsters are designed to accommodate and make allowances for the hammer profile of Conventional Hammer/Open Frame Guns
a. So the presence of a hammer spur shouldn't be a drawback in these applications.
It should be obvious that if we look at the sales potential of each group, the Conventional Hammer/Open Frame Guns would appear to allow for the largest potential sales volume. I think that is why (quoting your original statement) "most J frames are Model 36 or 60 instead of the Model 49".
Hope this helps.
??
