Carmonized hammers under the IDPA microscope

[Carmoney]

Has everybody noticed that I have made no derogatory comments about IDPA in this thread?

Does everybody understand how difficult that is for me?

[Jaxshooter]

You are a gentleman Mike. I would have had plenty to say.

[Bill Nesbitt]

Has everybody noticed that I have made no derogatory comments about IDPA in this thread?

Does everybody understand how difficult that is for me?

Way to go Mike.

[MattYvip]

Has everybody noticed that I have made no derogatory comments about IDPA in this thread?

Does everybody understand how difficult that is for me?

HAHA!

[Brian Gonsalves]

Has everybody noticed that I have made no derogatory comments about IDPA in this thread?

Does everybody understand how difficult that is for me?

Good Boy!

[Cd662]

Mike's shown great restraint yes, but I have to give myself a pat on the back for making it through that entire match without flipping out.

[johnmac]

FYI, here's what Mr. Kuhnhausen had to say about this issue (reference The S&W Revolver, Book 1, page 12, Operating Sequence and Safety Features):

"4. A safety feature many people are unaware of is the hammer stop [rear leg of the cylinder bolt] not to be confused with the hammer block. The idea here is that with the cylinder out for loading, the gun cannot be normally cocked. Times past, a habit amongst the foolish was to leave a revolver cocked, slam a loader cylinder into it, then be surprised when it went off. So a modern S&W revolver cannot be cocked with the cylinder open without overriding this feature."

The interesting thing is, my S&W 640's (DAO, with hammer totally enclosed inside the frame) also possess this feature, yet there is absolutely no way to cock them.

Edited March 15, 2013 by johnmac

[Cd662]

Regarding your 640, do you think this is simply because of the way the NIM hammers are made en-masse? I have the Kuhnhausen book too, but my concern is solely with IDPA's appraisal of the situation when I am shooting IDPA. I could be wrong, but I see nothing in the current IDPA rulebook regarding this. The rulebook gives examples of action work on page 25

"Smoothing the trigger face, removing the hammer spur, use of over travel stop, conversion to DA only and addition of ball detent are permitted." It does not say that these are the ONLY permitted modifications. It does not say that the revolver "safety feature" CANNOT be removed, and I would argue that the "Carmonization" is a conversion to DA only even if you can sit there and try to bring the gun into single action. As per the example you posted from Kuhnhausen's book, john, I could see a problem if starting a stage with the hammer back in single action and with the cylinder swung out (why would you ever do that?) was permitted. All pistols must begin the course of fire with the hammer down before the load and make ready command (Page 8, S8). The problem here is the interpretation of what is a "safe" gun to address the stipulation that "Pistols used in competition will be servicable and safe. The MD will require the shooter to withdraw any pistol observed to be unservicable or unsafe." Again, as with many IDPA things, there is no mention in the rulebook of what meets that criteria, no rules specifically saying that "Carmonization" is NOT allowed, and no formal equipment handling procedure. I'm not really worried about this because again, the vast majority of the IDPA sanctioned events I attend have no gun check, the box is not used, and there is no chronograph. If I start having this problem at other places down the road, then we can all get upset about it. Until then, we should probably wait on a ruling from a more official source. Until then, I'm going to go prepare for Sunday's ICORE match.

[sbcman]

Mike's shown great restraint yes, but I have to give myself a pat on the back for making it through that entire match without flipping out.

Agreed- I think the most of us might have a DQ Conduct type moment- sheesh!!

If I'm counting right, at least two revolvers were coonfingered into breakage at the eq check.

[blind bat]

Anyone know if Jerry's revolvers maintain this vestigial feature?

[MrBorland]

They do, but so what?

[Round_Gun_Shooter]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BU_HJM5Kqz4

I will add one more as taught at S&W 3# SA trigger pull

[COF]

Seems like we're taking what happened at the S&W match and painting it to the entire sport. While this match is billed as the "Indoor Nationals", it seemed like it had it's share of hinky stages and SNAFU's. Shooting this match is a great experience and the opportunity to tour the plant priceless, but it was still a match designed by folks who put their pants on one leg at a time and are susceptible to the same blind spots everyone else is when designing stages.

Seems like some over enthusiastic individuals took it upon themselves to arbitrarily decide what was or was not allowed because they didn't like the way it looked. Of all the equipment checks I've under gone, no one has ever opened the cylinder on my revolver and tried to pull the trigger. "Get it fixed." sounds like personal prejudice since A. they couldn't provide the rule backing up there statement and B. they let you shoot the match .

[sbcman]

Seems like some over enthusiastic individuals took it upon themselves to arbitrarily decide what was or was not allowed because they didn't like the way it looked. Of all the equipment checks I've under gone, no one has ever opened the cylinder on my revolver and tried to pull the trigger. "Get it fixed." sounds like personal prejudice since A. they couldn't provide the rule backing up there statement and B. they let you shoot the match .

Agreed. And it does shed light on the need for standardized equipment checks- written in the rulebook- for ALL divisions and weapons. That way we would know what's coming up and could check it ourselves and not end up with a broken gun due to excessive and unneeded coonfingering somewhere like Springfield.

[SauconValley Shooter]

Good Morning,

I too shot this match, SSR EX 1st place, and had my revolver inspected. I usually shoot a 686-5 that I sent to Mike. My Carmonized 686-5 has a Dawson fiber optic 0.100" front sight and a plain black rear sight. For S&W, I shot my 686-6 that I worked on. The 686-6 has night sights installed front and rear. The hammer on the -6 has been skeletonized. I cut off the spur and smooth everything up top and I drill and grind everywhere possible down below so that the hammer looks like a skeleton. Actually, both guns have about a six pound trigger pull, but it is a lot more work to make the skeleton version.

So it was lucky for me that I took the -6. I was told that the reasoning behind the function test with the cylinder open, is that Smith & Wesson engineers were consulted before the match, and it was their decision that removing the part of the hammer that interacts with the tab on the back of the bolt is disabling a safety device. IDPA rules specifically prohibit disabling a safety device.

So, now I have some swapping to do. I have a couple of IDPA guns with Carmoney style hammers and I am going to put those on guns for USPSA, ICORE and steel. I will use the skeleton type hammers for IDPA.

[MrBorland]

I was told that the reasoning behind the function test with the cylinder open, is that Smith & Wesson engineers were consulted before the match, and it was their decision that removing the part of the hammer that interacts with the tab on the back of the bolt is disabling a safety device. IDPA rules specifically prohibit disabling a safety device.

Yes, I was told the same thing. There are a couple issues with this, though: First, AFAIK, S&W's decision wasn't made public ahead of time, so there was no way to know that anything might've needed fixing ahead of time. Remember, this has never before been an issue at any major match.

Second, and more importantly, although S&W suddenly (and covertly) said the hammer tang is a safety device at their match, it's unclear whether IDPA itself now generally feels the same - hence the request for a ruling, and all the discussion.

Congrats on your fine finish, Ken!

Tom

[Griz]

I was told that the reasoning behind the function test with the cylinder open, is that Smith & Wesson engineers were consulted before the match, and it was their decision that removing the part of the hammer that interacts with the tab on the back of the bolt is disabling a safety device. IDPA rules specifically prohibit disabling a safety device.

If the hammer spur or SA notch has also been removed, this "safety device" has no reason to exist... That's like being written up by OSHA for not having belt guard in place on a machine with the motor and belt removed.

[SauconValley Shooter]

Good Morning,

Thank you Tom! Yes, I agree that the new test should have been announced. I was lucky in using my low light gun, as my outdoor gun and my indoor backup gun both have Carmoney style hammers.

Griz, with a Carmoney style hammer, one can cock the hammer and open the cylinder, or one can open the cylinder and then pull the trigger and cycle the hammer. The problem with this is that there is the potential for the hammer to fall and strike a primer while a chamber is not aligned with the barrel.

[Carmoney]

Seems like some over enthusiastic individuals took it upon themselves to arbitrarily decide what was or was not allowed because they didn't like the way it looked. Of all the equipment checks I've under gone, no one has ever opened the cylinder on my revolver and tried to pull the trigger. "Get it fixed." sounds like personal prejudice since A. they couldn't provide the rule backing up there statement and B. they let you shoot the match .

Agreed. And it does shed light on the need for standardized equipment checks- written in the rulebook- for ALL divisions and weapons. That way we would know what's coming up and could check it ourselves and not end up with a broken gun due to excessive and unneeded coonfingering somewhere like Springfield.

Cool--I learned a new word!

From the Urban Dictionary:

1. Coonfinger

Refers to RACCOONS. They pick up anything and everything, turn it over and over, looking at it , trying to decide whether to wash it or eat it, or both.

[Joe4d]

Chamber not aligned with the barrel ? really ? The firing pin doesnt slide out also. Worse that could happen would be a misalignment of less than half the width of a primer, BY shape. If the pin hits a primer it is lined up with barrel. Even so why do IDPA folks insist on just making up local stuff all the time ?

What is Up with the IDPA attitude, guy wants to lecture you ?

My thoughts are either the gun isnt legal and you shouldnt be allowed to shoot. Or the gun was ok and the SO had no business running his mouth. But being as its IDPA, they like to pull stunts like that all the time.

Maybe one day when IDPA gets rid of the suggestion pamphlet and creates an actual rule book. And then actually follows their own rules I'll give it a try again.

[Carmoney]

If the action will cycle with the cylinder open, somebody could hold a loose cartridge up against the recoil shield, with the primer against the firing pin hole, and snap the action to pop off an uncontained round.

Is it theoretically possible somebody could do something that stupid? Sure.

Is it an issue in the real world? Obviously not. But that's the kind of mentality you guys are dealing with here.

[dcloudy777]

The whole idea of a mandatory "safety check" for everyone's guns is pretty ridiculous, period. That's about as far as I can go and still maintain proper BEnos Forum decorum.

[BillChunn]

I'm glad to see that my revolver was not the only one that had this issue. Last year, the individual at the safety check station checked for the presence of the hammer flag safety by jiggling the gun and listening for the rattle, and opened the cylinder and then tried to pull the trigger. This year, there were additional checks. The safety test rendered my firearm inoperable for the entire match and thankfully I had two staff members offer to let me borrow setups from them so I could complete the match.

Ok, let me see if I've got this straight. The person that did the equipment safety check broke your gun? That would piss me off beyond belief..... especially if the specific test was unannounced and ended up disqualifying me from the match!!!

BC

Edited March 15, 2013 by BillChunn

[GuildSF4]

Cool--I learned a new word!

From the Urban Dictionary:

1. Coonfinger

Refers to RACCOONS. They pick up anything and everything, turn it over and over, looking at it , trying to decide whether to wash it or eat it, or both.

I like this one... As for the OSHA comment.... they might do that anyway.

[sbcman]

My revosmith and I tested out my newly carmonized/slicked-up revolver for the issue at hand. He had dropped a little lighter spring in the cylinder bolt and with the gun horizontal, it wouldn't cycle but up or down a little, letting the pressure off from the front of the hammer, it would. So, I dropped a stock spring in it today and tested- we're good. Hammer will come half-way back, but I couldn't slip of the trigger enough for the firing pin to move. I'm calling it good to go.