Lets talk hammers

[gabe]

So I've got a variety of hammers for autocockers and I'm trying to find what has been everyone's experience with each type and what valves they might work best with.

The first type is just the standard WGP type hammers from WGP, Check-it, and AKA sells one like this. Flat faced and with a deeper pocket in the back for the mainspring

Second type is the "divot face" that has that little indent in the face for the valve stem. Freeflow, Meteor, and some others. Has a divot face and should have normal length back but the meteor has a shallower spring pocket in the back.

3rd type is the CCM type long hammers. Long, flat face, and due to the longer length behind the hammer lug tends to have higher spring preload. Heavier than the others by a wide margin.

Now how I understand it is the divot face hammers don't open the valve as far and possibly also have shorter dwell which would increase pressure but also efficiency. The CCM type is the opposite with full valve opening and higher dwell from weight. Stock WGP hammer sits somewhere in the middle but takes noticeably more spring preload at the IVG for the same spring pressure due to the pocket in the back of the hammer being deeper.

Anyone have thoughts on what their preferred type is and what valves work best with each?

[Cdn_Cuda]

I've never really given much thought to the hammer itself, I think the most important part is how it works with your valve. I have recently purchased as ID hammer and valve as an update to a System X cocker and they work together well and give me no issue, so I'm happy. I didn't pay much attention to the features of the hammer at all.

[Grendel]

I'm with Cdn_Cuda the hammer specifics are not high in my concern given they are made of good quality material and smooth.

That is if I am not shooting for super low pressures. In the case of shooting for super low pressures the weight of the hammer starts really factoring in to getting appropriate dwell without farting. I like the CCM hammer but my favorite is the Brass with Stainless face that I believe ShockTech used to make. I have never noticed any real difference between the hammers with divots and the hammers with flat faces. The real work and magic is in getting the correct balance between valve and hammer springs and if you leave the others alone not to bad to figure out but as you add variabilities to your valve train you induce complexity in setup.

[iamthelazerviking]

I do like CCM guts. Also the Shocktech Phat hammer. I once had a magical combination that felt nearly CCM smooth with a Shocktech hammer, WGP valve, and some kind of springs I don't recall. The whole setup also sweet spotted low 200 psi shooting 280s with maybe two IVG turns.

[gabe]

Interesting there seems to be so little opinion one way or another on hammers. I've heard from various people things like "divot faced hammers have way better efficiency" or "ccm hammers don't work well with AKA valves".

My experience has been pretty limited with them. I've run pretty much CCM internals with CCM hammer and had the expected great results. In a thread from the old MCB where I was trying and failing to get a Tornado valve to work someone suggested a divot face hammer for more hammer travel and possibly higher velocity.

'm working on a Meteor right now (thank again iamthelazerviking) and I picked up the factory Meteor hammer (that has a divot in the face) and after installing noticed the valve opening is cut in half compared to the CCM hammer that came out of it. The CCM hammer opens the valve by about 1/4" travel and the Meteor hammer is just over 1/8" opening. The divot in the face of the hammer is over 1/16" probably about .070" which I think is why the opening is less. One poster on PBN said his Meteor ran at higher than normal pressures for an autococker but was very efficient. I'm wondering if perhaps the hammer might have something to do with this. Freeflow internals are very similar like this from what I've read.

[latches109]

3.5 turns in IVG set at 350psi with stock meteor internals.

[Super69ur]

You can make ANY hammer work (so long as the lug still travels within the slot length) with any valve, so long as you fiddle to find the right spring combos.

i however tend to agree with DocFire and say that companies have figured out their lower tubes specific to their spring weights. I therefore stick to one specific brand for the entire lower tube whenever possible.

the only cocker I have that falls outside this realm is a Nummech body in which I’m using a CCM 11/16 valve and an Empire Resurrection hammer. Had to get rather creative with springing in that one. But the hammer itself is just part of the system that needs to be accommodated for through springing.