Stoopid Question, but Just gotta ask

[Boerrancher]

Alright as the title suggests, I am about to ask what may seem to be a very stupid question. The reason I am going to ask it is because I am very unfamiliar with the subject matter of the question and want to know and understand it, so here it is.

I have heard talk of a rebounding hammer on the Jap Winchesters. What the heck is a rebounding hammer and exactly how does it work? Ok, so it was two stupid questions but all the same I want to know. Thank you in advance for answering.

Best wishes,

Joe

[dragonrider]

I'll tell you what, you can feel only 50% as stoopid now because I don't know what it means either. :)

[oneokie]

Same-similar to the rebounding hammer on many single shot shotguns. Keeps the hammer away from the firing pin.

[Jim]

GO HERE (http://media.winchesterguns.com/pdf/om/02227_wfa_94_om_s.pdf)and read pages 11 through 15.

[fecmech]

It's basically a hammer that has it's pivot point and spring arrangement positioned so that it's normal "at rest" position is a short distance from the firing pin. When cocked and released by the trigger it goes past that "at rest" position to propel the pin to fire the primer. It then "rebounds to the "at rest" position. The problem is that as it goes past the "at rest" position it is now compressing a spring which detracts from it's energy to fire the primer. This is overcome by a heavier hammer spring which in turn increases the trigger pull. Which is why rebounding hammers are a PITA! Hope this is helpful to you.

[Canuck Bob]

Here is a link with pictures that describes removing the function on a Winoku lever. The pictures make the function very obvious.

http://reloadingandlevergunning.blogspot.com/2007/02/winchestermiroku-86-mods.html

The rebounder keeps the floating hammer sitting a ways away from the bolt and pin when the sear is not engaged. It is a loaded chamber safety feature. The problem is that this spring loaded function must be overcome during the hammer strike and some report soft primer strikes. My 92 functions fine. I am following the directions above soon as my rifle is off warranty now. I will investigate adding a secure notch for parking the hammer when it is apart. There is a half cock position but many report that the hammer will fall if the trigger is pulled hard. I've hesitated to test this as I avoid undue pressure to my sear faces.

I might add to the chagrin of our traditional brethern that I like the tang safety. Ever since my childhood double barrel 12 gauge bunny gun I've considered it the only perfect location for a safety. I remember dropping those charging beasts thinking I was swinging my Holland & Holland on a lion! When I bought my Winoku I realized I was buying a high quality clone made to modern standards sadly including liability engineering! I own a real pretty pre-64 94 in 32 Special to prove I'm a true believer so the guys won't throw rocks at me when I brag about my Winoku.

[Boerrancher]

It is perfectly clear now. I think I will avoid the rebounding hammers. Thank you.

Best wishes,

Joe

[MtGun44]

Joe,

Avoid them. My 1886 Extra Lite is a beautiful piece of craftsmanship darn near ruined by
the idiot lawyer fixes. The firing pin is hollowed out and a latch and plunger and spring
added so the hammer hits the plunger on the end, depressing it and retracting the latch
inside the FP and THEN hitting the outer body of the hollow FP. This, obviously, absorbs
energy, and my unit was timed badly, so not fully releasing, so the latch was fouling the
FP travel, further reducing FP velocity.

Add the stupid rebounding hammer, AND the fact that the thumb type safety is a latch
that is just below the surface of the rear top tang and slides out to block hammer travel,
BUT they decided that instead of a notch in the back curved part of the hammer, for the
little safety lever to slide into and retain the hammer, they just decided that they would
just mill away ALL of the whole left side of the hammer below that point, substantially
lightening the whole hammer mass (another reduction in firing system energy) and THEN
they add the rebound effect where the second finger starts slowing down the hammer well
before it impacts the firing pin. . . . . . . and I had 18" vertical stringing due to erratic
ignition and a lot of failures to ignite. Local Win dealer fired 3 rounds of factory .45 -70 and
said it was faulty reloads (BULL HOCKEY!) and when I complained, offered to ship it to
Belgium on my nickel to see if they could fix it, and a 3+ month wait. I declined and
modded the rebounding hammer, and plan on making a new solid firing pin in the future.

I bought an old original 1886 firing pin and it is not even close to fitting. Nice of them.

Beautiful rifle turned almost unusable by lawyer safety "fixes".

Bill

[Canuck Bob]

thanks Bill, I didn't know half that stuff about these rifles! Especially the firing pin information. As you upgrade please keep us informed to your progress. I will strip my rifle soon and inspect it as well. I've only shot Rem factory loads in mine so far. I suspect the Rem primer is reasonably soft. I wonder about the harder manufactured cups ot there.

[fecmech]

I have done some work on my Winchester 94 .357 polishing the hammer hook and slightly changing the angle on the sear so that it does not at least cock the hammer as I pull the trigger. I removed a portion of the rebound leg and installed a lighter hammer spring. I have a nice clean fairly crisp 2.5 lb trigger that is 100% reliable with most pistol primers. It is not 100% with CCI small rifle primers that I use for my 296 loads, maybe 98%. That is not a problem for me as I don't hunt and accuracy with the SR primers is excellent as long as they fire. Were I to hunt I would reinstall the stock hammer spring which would give me the 100% but by adding almost a pound to the trigger. I too like the tang safety particularly for dry fire practice and emptying the mag tube of live rounds. I don't "need" it but it does not bother me at all.

[starmac]

I understand that some of the imported levers do not have these upgrades.
So I too have a dumb question, were these so called lawyer upgrades mandated or were they just a business decision for the companies involved. I have not messed with one with the rebounding hammer, so no knowledge of how well they work or don't work. What year did these appear, on the wins and marlins.

[fecmech]

So I too have a dumb question, were these so called lawyer upgrades mandated or were they just a business decision for the companies involved.

They were obviously not mandated as Rossi is importing with the old half cock hammers. They do however have a small safety on the bolt which can easily be ignored. I think the Rossi's are the best thing going right now in 92's. You could buy one for about half of the Winchester, put some nice wood on it and still be under the Winchester cost.

[MtGun44]

Since some rifles on the market don't have them, they are not required by any sort of
a law, just the Win lawyers are CYA them against any sort of a lawsuit, I'm sure.

Bill

[Boerrancher]

I hate all of this safety stuff added to the workings of a good rifle. My 66 Win 44-40 only has a half cock for a safety. There is no safety to keep it from firing with the bolt half open (which it will do but don't ask) and it is one of the slickest running levers I own. I am glad that the importers of all of the clones have still decided that the old ways were the best ways. I was done buying American Made lever guns when the cross bolt safety became a permanent feature. As long as American gun makers continue to make new guns that are almost rendered useless because of all of the safety features I will not buy them. I love the Ruger 77 bolt guns, but will never buy one because of the lawyer designed trigger. I don't want to have to buy the gun, then buy a trigger for it. I would own several Ruger 77's if it were not for that trigger, but since they won't fix the triggers in their guns and make them shootable, I buy Mod 700's from Remington. At least Remington puts an adjustable Trigger that works well in their rifles.

Best wishes,

Joe

[Ed in North Texas]

When I was an Instructor at Ft. Sill I used to tell the troops that the only stupid question - is the one you didn't ask.

[jimkim]

Joe,

Avoid them. My 1886 Extra Lite is a beautiful piece of craftsmanship darn near ruined by
the idiot lawyer fixes. The firing pin is hollowed out and a latch and plunger and spring
added so the hammer hits the plunger on the end, depressing it and retracting the latch
inside the FP and THEN hitting the outer body of the hollow FP. This, obviously, absorbs
energy, and my unit was timed badly, so not fully releasing, so the latch was fouling the
FP travel, further reducing FP velocity.

Add the stupid rebounding hammer, AND the fact that the thumb type safety is a latch
that is just below the surface of the rear top tang and slides out to block hammer travel,
BUT they decided that instead of a notch in the back curved part of the hammer, for the
little safety lever to slide into and retain the hammer, they just decided that they would
just mill away ALL of the whole left side of the hammer below that point, substantially
lightening the whole hammer mass (another reduction in firing system energy) and THEN
they add the rebound effect where the second finger starts slowing down the hammer well
before it impacts the firing pin. . . . . . . and I had 18" vertical stringing due to erratic
ignition and a lot of failures to ignite. Local Win dealer fired 3 rounds of factory .45 -70 and
said it was faulty reloads (BULL HOCKEY!) and when I complained, offered to ship it to
Belgium on my nickel to see if they could fix it, and a 3+ month wait. I declined and
modded the rebounding hammer, and plan on making a new solid firing pin in the future.

I bought an old original 1886 firing pin and it is not even close to fitting. Nice of them.

Beautiful rifle turned almost unusable by lawyer safety "fixes".

Bill

You sure that system wasn't designed in Washington?

[runfiverun]

joe:
get the hawkeye.
it's got the lc-6 trigger it don't need adjustment.

[dragonrider]

Ok, I had a completely different idea. Thank for asking the question Boerrancher

[Dirty30]

I'm glad you asked this stupid question because I was wearing the dunce hat my own self. All I knew is that I was completely un-qualified to do any work on that portion of my rifle.