S&w 629

[Tatume]

Hi Folks,

While I have owned and do own quite a few N-frame S&Ws, including a nicely customized 5" 629, I'm thinking of getting a new 7-1/2" or 8-3/8" revolver for hunting. My guns are all fairly old, and I haven't dealt with S&W in recent times. I'd like to get some feedback on recently-made guns, and recent service experiences.

Thanks, Tom

[W.R.Buchanan]

Tom: My newest Smith is a 696 no dash I got a few months ago. It is an L frame .44 Special. I think S&W told me it was made in 1997 and the last guns of this type,,, 696-2's were made in 2007.

This gun is all Smith & Wesson quality, and a joy to shoot,,, with mid range loads. With hotter loads it knocks the snot out of my hands just like it's bigger brothers do.

I have a friend who bought a 629 6" about 2 years ago. Same story. I think you would do fine with a new 629, and at $1000+ they should be fine!

I personally would resist the urge to get the longer barrel. My First M29 was an 8 3/8' gun and after shooting a shorter barreled version I realized that I wasn't gaining anything buy carrying around the extra barrel length.

If you are planning on hunting with the gun then you will need to set a realistic max range you will shoot at. You should be about to hit a Deer sized animal with a 6" gun just as easily as with a 8 3/8" gun and the 6" gun will carry a lot easier.

I cut my Ruger SBH Bisley 7.5" to 5" for this exact reason.

I would also shoot a Ruger Super Blackhawk Bisley before I bought a S&W 44. The Bisley grip is MUCH easier on your hand than the S&W grip. The S&W's hit the web of your hand really hard with heavy loads. The Bisley grip spreads the recoil out much better than the S&W grip does, and as a result I shoot it better with heavy loads simply because I don't have the pre recoil anticipation of getting hit hard to distract me.

You're going to shoot it mostly Single Action anyway, so that shouldn't be a consideration. I'd compare the two before I dropped a grand.

My .02

Randy

[Tatume]

Thanks Randy. I'm presently shooting a Super Redhawk 454 Casull and another Super Redhawk 44 Mag. I like both of them just fine. I'll take a look at the Bisley Super Blackhawk too. As I said, I already have a few N-frame guns, including a 5" 629, but I have the itch for another. I'm in no hurry though, so I'll look hard at other options.

[dh2]

I have an S&W model 29 from 1995 that does a very nice job killing deer in heavy brush , that was up dated to a model 629 with a nice trigger job ,both with 6 and 3/4 barrel , they both take very well to 240 gr Hornady hollow point, pushed by H110, both guns preform very well and I have no complaint about either one of them, but do to more hand gun hunting and Mo. hunting laws becoming more favorable to hand gun hunting , three years a go I went to a Ruger in .454 Cassull to give me more range and harder hit.

[Thumbcocker]

Bisley Hunter models kick butt if you don't mind 7.5" barrel.

[Petrol & Powder]

I'll second the barrel length comment that Randy made. The ballistic guys will feed you all kinds of data & velocity numbers about muzzle velocity, barrel length, energy, blah, blah, blah. It is all true and it all takes a back seat when lugging that long barrel around!
For a hunting handgun, a 6" barrel is plenty and 5" would be better for me. The slight amount of velocity you lose is inconsequential in my opinion when compared to the added weight & bulk of the gun. Quite frankly, I think 4" barrel would be fine if the shorter sight radius doesn't matter to you.
I own one 8" barreled revolver that I inherited and it lives in the safe.
The only 6" barreled revolver is a K-38, everything else is shorter.
If you're comfortable with your 5" 629, I'd stay with that. Contrary to popular belief, deer have not become bullet proof. I'm certain that a 240+ grain soft lead flat point driven at 900 -1000 fps will cleanly kill any deer with the proper bullet placement. A 5" 629 will do that everyday and now here in Virginia,.... Twice on Sunday !

[BruceB]

In 1989, I went on a combined moose/woodland-caribou hunt on a big island thirty miles out in Great Slave Lake. I took along my 7.5" Super Blackhawk (illegally), and later mentioned that it had felt a bit cumbersome (after twenty-odd years!).

That was the year S&W introduced the .44 Mountain Revolver, and I was given one at Christmas.

After carrying that 4" S&W for years in some of the wildest country left on Earth, I'm convinced that S&W got the concept of a field revolver absolutely RIGHT. There's not a single thing I would change on this .44.

I've looked over its sights at grizzlies, at moose, at caribou.... and had perfect confidence in the results. That is a mighty good feeling, I assure y'all. My carry load was always full-power 250-plus SWCs, cast and loaded by myself. The demonstrated performance of those loads on BIG animals was very impressive.

The .44 may seem like "too much" for some uses and some folks. Maybe it is, for some purposes..... but I'd much rather have "too much" than "too little", and the .44 can handle anything on this continent if the chips are truly down.

( I dislike carrying two different loads, due to the 'Murphy factor' of possibly having the wrong load in the gun when we need the "real" .44 performance.)

[LAH]

I would also shoot a Ruger Super Blackhawk Bisley before I bought a S&W 44. The Bisley grip is MUCH easier on your hand than the S&W grip. The S&W's hit the web of your hand really hard with heavy loads. The Bisley grip spreads the recoil out much better than the S&W grip does, and as a result I shoot it better with heavy loads simply because I don't have the pre recoil anticipation of getting hit hard to distract me.
Randy

I shoot a Bisley BH 45. The little sixgun is great in every way but the N-Frame S&W is much easier on my hand. Everyone is different. I like the recoil straight back into my hand & the less roll the better but like Randy, that's just my 2.

[Deep Six]

Just bought a 4" 629 this past spring. Fit and finish is great, shoots good too. Trigger is classic s&w perfection. The only issue, and it seems common on the newer 44s, is that the throats are tight. It takes some heavy tapping to push a .429 jacketed bullet through. So probably plan on reaming.

[Petrol & Powder]

In 1989, I went on a combined moose/woodland-caribou hunt on a big island thirty miles out in Great Slave Lake. I took along my 7.5" Super Blackhawk (illegally), and later mentioned that it had felt a bit cumbersome (after twenty-odd years!).

That was the year S&W introduced the .44 Mountain Revolver, and I was given one at Christmas.

After carrying that 4" S&W for years in some of the wildest country left on Earth, I'm convinced that S&W got the concept of a field revolver absolutely RIGHT. There's not a single thing I would change on this .44.

I've looked over its sights at grizzlies, at moose, at caribou.... and had perfect confidence in the results. That is a mighty good feeling, I assure y'all. My carry load was always full-power 250-plus SWCs, cast and loaded by myself. The demonstrated performance of those loads on BIG animals was very impressive.

The .44 may seem like "too much" for some uses and some folks. Maybe it is, for some purposes..... but I'd much rather have "too much" than "too little", and the .44 can handle anything on this continent if the chips are truly down.

( I dislike carrying two different loads, due to the 'Murphy factor' of possibly having the wrong load in the gun when we need the "real" .44 performance.)

I'm a huge fan of the Mountain Gun Concept. I don't care for full power 44 magnum loads but I certainly agree with the "Murphy Factor". One of the advantages of the 44 Magnum is its versatility. A 4" barreled Mountain Gun is a great tool !

[bobthenailer]

I too had the S&W 8/38 barrel craze ! all gone now , i currently have shorter barrels on all my S&W revolvers , in 44 mag i have a 6.5" , 6" , 5" and 3" barrels.

[44man]

I can't shoot a Bisley with accuracy, never seem to get the same grip on them, hands are big. The trigger guards whack my knuckle too. The 29's I have owned proved to be grip sensitive for me.
I like longer barrels because they are easier to find loads with and noise is farther out front. My low limit would be 6".
Friend hunts with a 7-1/2" SBH Hunter and Ultra Dot, amazing gun, shoots as good as a SRH. I seen him shoot deer in the neck at 50 yards, it is so accurate.
Shoulder holsters remove carry problems. I carry the 10" BFR in 45-70 and never know it is there.
I consider my revolvers primary hunting guns, not an addition to a rifle. I might want smaller for hip backup carry. Since the only danger here is a nut crazed squirrel, I don't hip carry just in case I can use it on a deer because you never will when you have that rifle in your hands. A dedicated revolver is good to 100+ yards so I have no need for 4" or less.
I have carried my 10-1/2" SBH for years and I am near 77 years old. I laugh about guys talking about a few ounces when I carried a 12# Hawken up and down southern Ohio hills for years. Take the cans of pop and 5# of candy out of your pockets. Get a 6# tree stand and stop taking a 20# climber on your back. I go light with a small back pack, knife and drag is in it and a good place to put cloths in if it gets hot. Even the largest revolver is a far cry from any rifle. I use a sling on the butt so it can hang at my hand when walking and I will not drop it out of a tree stand. Guys are using the monster X frames to hunt, not needed but you need to make up your mind, are you handgun hunting or rifle hunting?
Guys carry fancy sticks they need to adjust when you come with a rest, they are called KNEES! I have never had time looking for a rest with whitetails. A scope is a pain in the neck and a rest is needed while a red dot is easy off hand. So are open sights if you can still see.
Take 2" off a barrel and weigh it, about like a shotgun shell, maybe less. I don't carry extra shots, the gun will have 5 in it, none in pockets.
I do not understand a .454 with a 2" barrel for anything, was it not bought for distance and power? Why turn it into a .45 Colt.

[youngmman]

I have several N frame S&W's purchased over the years including 629's and had The Jordan Trooper Grips, from Herrits Stocks, made for them (the made to measure type) to shift the recoil from the web of the hand to the palm. They work and look great and contribute to accuracy at least for me.

[Shuz]

FWIW--I have a dozen Smith and Ruger .44 mag revolvers at the present time, (6 of ea), with barrels ranging from 3-3/4" to 7-1/2". I never shoot the 7-1/2" guns anymore so I'm gonna try and reduce the inventory at the Spokane Gun show this weekend.
I've been shooting cast boolits in the .44 mag and hunting with various barrel lengths since 1963, and in my opinion, I don't need any bbl longer than 5-1/2 or 6".

[snowwolfe]

If you are looking for a revolver that will be used 100% for hunting check out S&W's Stealth Hunter 629. I own one and its super accurate with a superb trigger. Top of the 7.5 inch barrel has a built in rail for mounting optics as well. It is finished in some type of black matte finish which is perfect for hunting.

[44man]

If you are looking for a revolver that will be used 100% for hunting check out S&W's Stealth Hunter 629. I own one and its super accurate with a superb trigger. Top of the 7.5 inch barrel has a built in rail for mounting optics as well. It is finished in some type of black matte finish which is perfect for hunting.

That would be a fine revolver. I like 7-1/2" but 6" is also great.

[MtGun44]

Current production S&W revolvers are the most consistently high quality guns
that they have produced in many decades. This is from a gunsmith that has worked
on them for 30 years or more and has been inside all generations and models.

Current parts fit and internal dimensional consistency is reported to be the best
he has ever seen. I have purchased a number of new S&W revolvers in the
last 10-15 years and can echo his opinion. Are they all perfect? No, but they
are all very good and some are fantastic. Reports are the S&W takes problems
seriously and fixes them.

The 8 3/8" guns are awkward in a holster, but really fine for shooting. The 6"
is a good compromise length if carrying is going to be done in anything but a
chest holster or a gun bag. They are also offering the 5" again, a great choice
if much hip holster carry is desired. Still long enough for less muzzle flip and
better sight radius, but carries easier than the 6" and a ton better than the 8 3/8".

http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/w...layErrorView_Y

Bill

[W.R.Buchanan]

I will add one other point to this discussion. Elmer Keith who invented this stuff used 4" bbl's.

My point about the 4" bbls is that they carry easier. Not necessarily lighter, they just don't get stuck on as much stuff.

A long barreled gun is a PITA in a car or truck, and if you watch enough westerns you'll see that the majority of mounted shooters used Crossdraw Holsters. If you have the gun on your thigh, it must be tied down and if it is tied down when you sit on the horse the holster and gun are trying to be folded into your hip joint. Hence the Crossdraw solution. Same thing applies to car or truck carry.

I started with long ones and now I like short ones,,, what else can I say. Everybody has their own opinions on this subject, it's all about whatever works best for you .

It's good that we talk this stuff out.

Randy

[Tatume]

If you are looking for a revolver that will be used 100% for hunting check out S&W's Stealth Hunter 629. I own one and its super accurate with a superb trigger. Top of the 7.5 inch barrel has a built in rail for mounting optics as well. It is finished in some type of black matte finish which is perfect for hunting.

That is, in fact, exactly the model that I am most considering. It's a neat looking gun, has the right barrel length, no porting, and comes through the Performance Center (which I presume means a good smith tuned the trigger). Thanks for the vote of confidence in this model.

[Tatume]

I will add one other point to this discussion. Elmer Keith who invented this stuff used 4" bbl's.

My point about the 4" bbls is that they carry easier. Not necessarily lighter, they just don't get stuck on as much stuff.

A long barreled gun is a PITA in a car or truck, and if you watch enough westerns you'll see that the majority of mounted shooters used Crossdraw Holsters. If you have the gun on your thigh, it must be tied down and if it is tied down when you sit on the horse the holster and gun are trying to be folded into your hip joint. Hence the Crossdraw solution. Same thing applies to car or truck carry.

I started with long ones and now I like short ones,,, what else can I say. Everybody has their own opinions on this subject, it's all about whatever works best for you .

It's good that we talk this stuff out.

Randy

Hi Randy,

I like the short (actually medium) length barrels too, and most of my revolvers are four to five inches. However, I own several with 7-1/2" barrels too, and as 44Man said, in an across-the-chest holster, they are also convenient to carry. This type of carry is appropriate for hunting, but not a trip to the local grocery. So I'll carry one of my shorter revolvers most of the time.

Thanks, Tom