Bobing your hammer

[JAB]

So whats the Pro's and Con's of bobing your hammer

[Matt Griffin]

Bobbing, two Bs. Well, three technically.

Two Pros for competition: High grip doesn't interfere with the hammer and better ignition from faster, lighter mass with a trigger job. For concealment, less snag.

Cons: Warranty issues and loss of easy single action. Crap can get into the gun a bit easier.

That's about it.

H.

[JAB]

Bobbing, two Bs. Well, three technically.

Two Pros for competition: High grip doesn't interfere with the hammer and better ignition from faster, lighter mass with a trigger job. For concealment, less snag.

Cons: Warranty issues and loss of easy single action. Crap can get into the gun a bit easier.

That's about it.

H.

thanks for the info and i'll PM you when i make any more post so you can do a spellcheck on it for me

Edited April 9, 2010 by JAB

[MrBorland]

2 pros not mentioned is that the lighter bobbed hammer has a shorter lock time and lighter hammer strike. Also, Carmoney claims lightening hammer mass actually increases the primer ignition reliability too.

Not that this represents something to go under the pro column, but here's a demonstration of the lightened hammer strike with a bobbed hammer:

[Carmoney]

The video depicts a fully Carmonized hammer, which goes way beyond simply bobbing off the spur. In order to get the full benefit of a lightened hammer, you need to remove roughly half of its mass. There are several ways to do this--the video (and my avatar to the left) shows my particular version.

[usmc1974]

Well hell, I don't know what I can add to the good stuff already said, execpt for it looks really cool.

[doc540]

When done right there are no negatives.

Well, unless it devalues a rare, collectible pistol.

I have mine done because I carry them concealed. And they totally retain single action function and safety.

Cobra

Agent

I can put you in touch with the guy that did these. He charges $50-$60 shipped.

Edited April 9, 2010 by doc540

[Carmoney]

Looks like nice work, but frankly I'm not a big fan of retaining single-action capability on a carry/defensive gun with a bobbed hammer. There is no defensive scenario I can envision in which I would ever want to cock a double-action revolver. Even with the checkering along the top of the hammer, I see safety issues with attempting to cock--or more likely, de-cock--one of those guns in a high-stress situation. I always recommend to people that if they really think they need to retain the gun's single-action cocking capability, they should just leave the hammer alone. On a Colt D-frame, the bolt-on shroud would be a much better alternative, in my opinion.

[usmc1974]

If carry them concealed you don't want to use the single action anyway. Because, if you do you may need to decock it safely, and under stress this could be a problem. Just a thought.

[Cherryriver]

Mike, the bolt-on hammer shrouds don't work well on Colts because the visual mass of the shroud blots out a lot of the shape of the rear sight resulting in visual confusion during fast shooting.

I tried it on one and gave it up. Bobbing is better.

I don't checker my hammers but the D-frame is easy to thumbcock even without it.

No, I've never thumbcocked one of my Detective Specials. Like Jeff Cooper used to insist, if you have a choice, you'll have a chance at indecision under pressure.

I see it all the time with occasional revo shooters (as opposed to full-time revo shooters) at matches fumbling to decide whether to thumbcock or triggercock on long shots. Nothing good happens.

[Bob DuBois]

Cut the hammer back a few weeks ago on my 625. Was able to get the double action down to six pounds. Held off for some time, I guess I liked looking at the spur. Now it's more fun to shoot, smoother, lighter. I hate it took me so long to remove it.

Everyone I've showed it to is impressed with the action.

Don't hold back, jump in and get rid of the hammer spur!