Skip to main content
Help Center Community Shop

hammer vs hammerless

thallman
I've got somewhat of a newbi question that I can't rashion out myself pertaining to a firearm equiped with an external hammer (Sig P225) or an internal action hammer (Kahr PM9 or the .380 P3AT).

I've been looking for a concealed carry pocket gun for along time and my current carry keeps getting small--now carrying the SIG. I like the external hammer because I can keep a round chambered at all times in my vehicle. If someone were to try and "car jack" me I could just reach over with one hand, grab the pistol, and pull the trigger. Waalla, instant results.

However, as such with my fiance who carries a Highpoint 9mm (Yes, I've tried telling her there are MUCH better 9mm's but she hasn't like shooting anything but the high point?!?!) I don't see how practicle NOT having an external hammer is. Such as, if she didn't keep a round chambered she would have to use to hand to chamber a round before shooting my cocking the slide. If under a car jack as described above it makes no sense if all you have is one arm to work with.

Therefore, if you keep a round chambered in with an internal hammer firearm, such as the highpoint, you can keep the safety on. But from what I've noticed is it isn't hard to knock the saftely off (especially in a womans handbag) thus leaving the trigger easily to be set off.

So, why would you want to go with a interal hammer design as such with many of the "pocket" pistols out there? How can it be safe to keep a round chambered if there's no way of releasing the internal hammer?
0

Comments

4 comments

Date Votes
  • beantownshootah
    I think you are acting under a misapprehension here.

    Having no external hammer on a gun DOES NOT make the gun unsafe to keep/store with a round in the chamber.

    Most if not all of the guns that have internal hammers (or "strikers") keep the internal hammer either entirely UNCOCKED or only "half" cocked.

    The "half-cocked" ones (like the Glock, for example) rely on the extra pressure from the trigger pull to fully cock the striker before firing the gun. Since at rest the hammer is only partially cocked, the gun CAN NOT go off unless you pull the trigger.

    So if you can tolerate the idea of having no EXTERNAL safety that you have to disengage before firing the gun (and some people actually PREFER this), then you can keep a loaded Glock handy with a round in the chamber, ready to fire with just a trigger pull.

    Personally I *DO NOT* like guns that have a standard external safety for defensive use. That's because in my experience, its too easy to forget the safety is on when you need the gun the most, or accidentally engage the safety under stress when your fine motor skills are eroded by adrenaline.

    Even better, in my opinion, the double action guns have a totally uncocked hammer, kind of like an uncocked revolver. Pulling the trigger is what cocks the hammer (or internal striker), and with these guns, the first trigger pull is extra-heavy to accomplish this.

    So with these guns, again, you can leave a gun with a round in the chamber, and it will be safe and ready to fire in an instant just by pulling the trigger.

    In the case of these DA guns, the first trigger pull will be extra-heavy, and the extra-heavy trigger pull by itself acts as a sort of manual safety to help prevent accidental discharge. Many (though not all) of these DA guns have a decocking type safety to lower the hammer safely on a live round for carry purposes.

    quote:How can it be safe to keep a round chambered if there's no way of releasing the internal hammer?
    Again, I don't think you quite understand.

    The Kel-Tec 3AT, for example, has an internal hammer, that can ONLY be cocked and released by pulling the trigger. In effect, its a "double action ONLY" type gun.

    When you aren't actively pulling the trigger on this gun, the hammer lies at rest UNCOCKED. You don't ever need to "release" the internal hammer because it isn't cocked to begin with!

    For guns that do have a fully "cocked" internal hammer, as already mentioned, many of them actually do have external decocking type safeties that will let you uncock the gun safely for carry purposes.
    0
  • He Dog
    I must admit, I cannot think of any really good reason for having an external hammer. I have both, and prefer the striker fired pistols.
    0
  • dfletcher
    I believe the OP is thinking of older model striker fired handguns such as the Mauser 1910/1914, Colt 1903, Colt 1908 or Baby Browning in which the striker is at full cock & carrying an external safety. As pointed out in the first few posts, the current striker or internal hammer semi autos may outwardly appear similar, but they are different in function and safety.

    Took me a while to visualize the difference - old habits and assumptions sort of thing I guess.
    0
  • Colt Super
    For years, I carried an AMT .380 Backup, cocked, with a round chambered.

    It has an internal striker, but has both a thumb safety AND a grip safety, like a 1911 - a single-action, hammerless pocket pistol, that can be carried cocked and locked in (near) perfect safety.

    I will be getting another.

    They are all stainless, smaller than the palm of your hand, and weigh enough to dampen the recoil - also hold 7 shots, if I recall correctly.

    Think about one.

    They are also wicked looking.

    Doug
    0

Please sign in to leave a comment.

Recent Activity