Quote Originally Posted by Iain K D View Post
http://i301.photobucket.com/albums/n...Chiappa/17.jpg

This is the gun partially opened: the trigger mechanism has started to move - remember it is attached to the air cylinder - and the sear is being dragged past the front face of the hammer. See how rough the face of the hammer is here.

http://i301.photobucket.com/albums/n...Chiappa/16.jpg

This is now open enough to cock the hammer (and still open, hence the position of the trigger). The bottom edge of the sear has engaged with the hammer. On the front face of the hammer you can see the rough, laminated construction as it disappears into the frame and a glint closer to the sear - just below what might be called the full cock notch.

The question is - is this just wear or would this be brought to a sharp corner in the interest of a good trigger pull?

Iain
Just had a closer look at mine with a bright Cree led torch. There seems to be some variability in finish between our pistols! The last 5mm of the visible part of the hammer has been polished to remove the rough stamp markings on the inner and outer laminations. Regarding the earlier photo that showed the shoulder of the hammer that the sear latches when set, mine has a more regular profile across the four laminations and also appears to have been polished on the last 5mm.

The minimal marks on yours appears to be (normal) wear, whereas on mine it appears to have been deliberately profiled.

This not the only difference as previously mentioned, the casting near the breach is painted black on mine (bare on yours), the plastic end cap on mine is black (white on yours), the bottom edge of the barrel has been chamfered (not on yours which snagged the alloy casting), and mine has no shim on the barrel (present on yours).

I will try to get some close up photos, but it might be difficult in situ (I have no plans to strip the pistol).