[The Old Coach]

Or isn't. I've never had to give this any thought before either. Nor was I aware of these lawsuits. I never considered owning one until after I retired to Ohio, which at the time was only shotgun or handguns for deer. This one was for sale locally as a bare action, so I grabbed it and had a happy time fitting barrels and testing. I began to have me doots when I started testing the .357 Max barrel, but forged ahead anyway.

The idea of carrying it in a shoulder holster never occurred to me either. Only way I've hunted with it was from a blind, with a rest. Carried it up there unloaded and cased. Frankly, I can't hit a barn from the inside with it offhand. I do not have Paul Bunyan's hands.

Since I've owned mine, I've often thought that Warren Center never had big game hunting in mind when he designed the original. It isn't strong enough for anything beyond the .22 Hornet and moderate pistol cartridges, I now believe. Target shooting and small varmints seem to me to have been the intended market. The set trigger is a definite plus for those uses. But Americans being Americans, owners HAD to hot-rod the thing, so we got .30-30, .35 Remington, and of course The Max, all of which will actually stretch the frame if overindulged in. And will lead people to stalk around the woods with it loaded and in a shoulder holster.

 

[The Old Coach]

Blackhawk355--- There were at least three variations of "Contenders" and the last one I had in my hands was about 20 years ago. MY MEMORY, which is subject to age, wear and harmful additives, says when the gun has been opened by pulling up on the trigger guard extension and then closed, there is a sliding block attached to the trigger that is in place UNTIL the hammer begins to cock. At that point, a small coil extension spring pulls the safety block out from its position so the hammer can only then hit the firing pin. I know one model had a safety built into the selector switch so the nose of the safety hit the frame and nothing could hit the firing pin. That could be the first model made.
I remember the sound of that block falling and somewhere I have a cake pan full of T-C parts and a frame that I put a rotating hammer block in before being called off the case. The lawyer paid the bill and said "Keep all that stuff". I should look through there. I've probably got a dozen barrels.

In the interest of technical accuracy......pulling the hammer back with the Gen 1 set trigger cocked doesn't release the hammer block. You have to first trip the set trigger to get the block to drop out of the way.

Squeezing the trigger guard sets the trigger, and also pushes the hammer back to what COULD be mistaken for a half-cock position, but it's really just the hammer resting on the hammer block. Further manipulation of the hammer alone will not release the hammer block.

If you pull the trigger while the gun is on "halfcock", the trigger will un-set, but hammer block will remain trapped by the hammer, until you pull the hammer back a tiny bit. Then hammer block spring will retract the block, and the hammer can go forward to rest on the firing pin.

I am unable to get my set trigger to trip by slamming the gun butt-down on a table, but that may be due to the Pachmayr grip I have on it. The hard OEM grips may be another story. So I cannot discount the possibility that dropping the gun on its' butt might not only trip the set trigger, but also jostle the hammer enough to release the hammer block. Now a blow to the back of the hammer would fire the gun.

Deliberately carrying the arm with the trigger UN-set would exacerbate the problem. Jostling the hammer alone will let the hammer block fall, thus putting the hammer in contact the firing pin. An unwise shooter might think that by closing the gun and pulling the trigger (without cocking the hammer) to release the set trigger is somehow safer. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Carrying the gun fully cocked = insane, but I suppose somebody has done it.

BTW mine has the three-position gizmo in the hammer. In the center position nothing touches the firing pin. There's a "nose" on that rotating gadget that hits the frame first.

 

[The Old Coach]

Let me get this out of the way: YOU'LL BE SOOORRRY.

It took me three additional barrels and almost $1000 to get over my affliction.

The original Gen 1 Contender had a hammer-block safety, coordinated with a set trigger arrangement. Loved the set trigger, but the hammer block turned out to be the cause of many light-strike misfires. Was snookered into many dollars in unnecessary springs and bits by Mike Bellm, none of which did any good at all. The solution was simply stretching the spring which retracts the hammer block, By increasing the preload, it accelerates the block out of the way faster. Cost: ZERO$$$

The Encore is a more robust frame, but still suffers from a lockup system (the sliding bolt) which American shotgun makers discarded before WW1. NOT, in my not-so-humble opinion as an engineer and gunsmith, suitable for the big, high pressure cartridges. The Gen 1 should never have been used for anything more than .38 Special and .32-30. Even .30-30 and .35 Remington would result in stretched frames. The Encore might be OK for those, but I'm skeptical of the .308 in it.

I honestly don't know and don't care whether the Encores have a hammer block safety. Having recovered from the T/C virus, I never want to see another one ever again.