Manual lowering of hammer on DA/SA handguns?

[RickT]

I'm a 1911/HK LEM guy so forgive my ignorance, but in a small SC match yesterday one of the competitors had a DA/SA CZ without decocker.  Apparently in USPSA (and SC I assume) the correct procedure is to manually lower the hammer to put the gun in DA configuration.  While this can be done safely, and the competitor was safe, this did not seem like a desirable procedure particular in SC with so many draws.  The equipment rules to the best of my knowledge are identical in USPSA and SC so unless someone says otherwise I'm going to assume this to be the proper procedure?

[GrumpyOne]

It is.

[Jmoreno88]

Yup but i did see someone do it with a revolver once. Should've just opened the cylinder but decided to drop the hammer and bam. Quick dq

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[Joe4d]

that makes no sense at all. You dont chamber a round by racking the slide on a revolver, so no need to lower the hammer at load up.
Nor do any I have ever heard of allow you to open the cylinder with it cocked.

[RickT]

OK, notwithstanding what one does with a DA/SA revolver lowering the hammer is apparently the correct procedure with a semi-auto (e.g., some CZ) not equipped with a decocker.

[Joe4d]

Yes proper procedure despite it not being too prudent, nor really needed. With all the near single action striker guns out there, and proven to not make much difference in match scores, I dont really get the arbitrary division of single and double action. Maybe made sense when there were actual double and singles, but now with the blurred line of striker guns. I really dont think it matters. 

[Pasley]

5 hours ago, Joe4d said:

Yes proper procedure despite it not being too prudent, nor really needed. With all the near single action striker guns out there, and proven to not make much difference in match scores, I dont really get the arbitrary division of single and double action. Maybe made sense when there were actual double and singles, but now with the blurred line of striker guns. I really dont think it matters. 

 

Yes, steel challenge has way too many divisions.  

[RickT]

 

22 minutes ago, Pasley said:

 

Yes, steel challenge has way too many divisions.  

I'd just as soon see Production, Single Stack and Limited lumped together in steel challenge as long as the gun "divisions" were shown on the results.  There aren't enough people shooting SS to be meaningful (wife and I in that group).  Carry Optics seems like a gimmick to advertise guns. but I'm in CA where few carry.  How about CFPI, CFPO and Open for centerfire handguns?  Open would be no holds barred and the other two divisions would limit mods to current Limited.  If you're an ace working toward a win in CFPI then you would gravitate toward a Limited configuration gun and race holster.  The rest of us are just trying to improve and don't begrudge a great shooter winning our division with "better" equipment.

[Pasley]

42 minutes ago, RickT said:

 

I'd just as soon see Production, Single Stack and Limited lumped together in steel challenge as long as the gun "divisions" were shown on the results.  There aren't enough people shooting SS to be meaningful (wife and I in that group).  Carry Optics seems like a gimmick to advertise guns. but I'm in CA where few carry.  How about CFPI, CFPO and Open for centerfire handguns?  Open would be no holds barred and the other two divisions would limit mods to current Limited.  If you're an ace working toward a win in CFPI then you would gravitate toward a Limited configuration gun and race holster.  The rest of us are just trying to improve and don't begrudge a great shooter winning our division with "better" equipment.

 

Centerfire pistol should be two divisions.  Irons or Optics.  Use any safe holster configuration you like.

Revolver: don't care

Rimfire and PCC: make them have production,  limited and open divisions,  if the centerfire divisions can't be consolidated.

[MemphisMechanic]

6 hours ago, Joe4d said:

Yes proper procedure despite it not being too prudent, nor really needed.

 

It is entirely prudent. Once the operator realizes there’s a safer method than pinching the hammer (slip = bang) or thumbing it down cowboy style (slip = bang)

 

Wedge your thumb between the hammer and slide with the thumbnail against the hammer, and depress the trigger. Keep the trigger pulled and roll your thumb smoothly up out of the gap. This can be done consistently and 100% safely with hands soaked in summer’s sweat, or when they are numb from arctic cold.

 

Edited December 4, 2017 by MemphisMechanic

[Mountbkr]

 
It is entirely prudent. Once the operator realizes there’s a safer method than pinching the hammer (slip = bang) or thumbing it down cowboy style (slip = bang)
 
Wedge your thumb between the hammer and slide with the thumbnail against the hammer, and depress the trigger. Keep the trigger pulled and roll your thumb smoothly up out of the gap. This can be done consistently and 100% safely with hands soaked in summer’s sweat, or when they are numb from arctic cold.
 

Maybe you could make YouTube video showing the process? Some of the noobs (including myself) could benefit from the expert instruction a video would provide.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[MemphisMechanic]

@Mountbkr Someone beat me to it. I learned this before ever operating my Tanfoglio, and it’s the only way I ever lowered my hammer:

 

 

 

Edited December 5, 2017 by MemphisMechanic

[zzt]

Slip/bang doesn't happen with the CZ pistols mention above.  It is perfectly safe to lower the hammer without risk.  There is a 'technique' to it, but I've never been worried when ROing such shooters.    Besides, the gun is pointed down range.  If a bang occurs, the shooter goes home.

[Mountbkr]

 

 

[mention=11460]MemphisMechanic[/mention]

 

Thanks, very much appreciated !!!

 

 

 

[kneelingatlas]

http://forums.brianenos.com/topic/205983-lowering-the-hammer-technique/

[Joe4d]

My point about it not being prudent, is the gun obviously wasnt designed to be decocked after chambering a round. Makes as much sense as telling 1911 guys to lower the hammer to half cock.
Gun is obviously designed to be cocked and locked and thats the safest way to handle it. 
Just the jumping through hoop to comply with a rule that has been made obsolete by short trigger short reset striker fired guns.
I mean tell me, what actual competitive difference is there if a CZ is simply cocked and locked , compared to a worked over XD, M&P, Walther, etc. 

[M1A4ME]

Back in the late 70's, when I was on the battalion combat pistol team we were still using 1911A1's.

 

I have no idea why they did it like this but they would have us insert the magazine, release the slide and then drop the hammer to half cock.  When we got the "FIRE" command we then had to thumb cock the old gun to begin firing.  Seemed stupid as hell to me.  Who, in combat, is going to carry a 1911A1 around with the hammer on half cock?

 

Anyway, the way we were told/shown to drop the hammer to half cock was to hold the pistol in our firing hand, aim it down at the ground in front of us at a 45 degree angle, then place the thumb of the opposite hand between the hammer and the back of the slide and pull the trigger.  The hammer would fall against the back of your thumb.  The you took your finger off the trigger and removed your thumb from the back of the slide.

 

I don't do it that way now, but it worked.  You know, I can't think a single time I've lowered a hammer from full cock to half cock in the last 40 years.

 

[Matt1]

My point about it not being prudent, is the gun obviously wasnt designed to be decocked after chambering a round. Makes as much sense as telling 1911 guys to lower the hammer to half cock.
Gun is obviously designed to be cocked and locked and thats the safest way to handle it. 
Just the jumping through hoop to comply with a rule that has been made obsolete by short trigger short reset striker fired guns.
I mean tell me, what actual competitive difference is there if a CZ is simply cocked and locked , compared to a worked over XD, M&P, Walther, etc. 

Actually, the gun was designed to operate this way. That’s kinda the whole point of a DA gun.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Joe4d]

Well unless we track down the original designer and ask, hard to say one way or the other. Most DA's have a decocker mechanism and/or a firing pin block. Case could be made it was simply an improvement of the Browning design to allow second strike capability on hard eastern block primers. Most likely it is that way because a goverment contract asked for it. Like the 1911's grip safety.
Doesnt change they fact that it is a pointless procedure to comply with an obsolete rule .
Question, where is the firing pin block on these now ? Is it defeated by lowering hammer all the way ? Or does it reengage when releasing the trigger ?

Edited December 6, 2017 by Joe4d

[Jmoreno88]

that makes no sense at all. You dont chamber a round by racking the slide on a revolver, so no need to lower the hammer at load up. Nor do any I have ever heard of allow you to open the cylinder with it cocked.

 

Let me clarify, they were supposed to unload and clear before he even started as they were changing something on the range. So instead of opening the cylinder, he decided to pull the hammer back (habit, new guy, idk?)and then was told to put the hammer back down to unload. So that's what I meant by should've just opened the cylinder, not meaning open it while hammer was back. I tried to keep the info short and it appears wrong without the story.  

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk