Before it need to be thightened up and before the barrel starts to wear out / accuracy deteriorates? Are lead bullets easier on the barrel that FMJ ?

Are the newer ones more durable?

Before it need to be thightened up and before the barrel starts to wear out / accuracy deteriorates? Are lead bullets easier on the barrel that FMJ ?

Are the newer ones more durable?

Enough to make your hand sore.

the question is why shoot the heavy loads in the first place? a 240 grain bullet at 1,200 fps work on anything that should be shot with a 44 mag and a lot more fun

IMHO the 29-2's are as good as the new ones. You will find that most 44 shooters (myself included) shoot way more midrange cast loads than hot jacketed ones. I have shot my fair share of hot loads through my 29's but mainly for load development purposes for different types of hunting, although I have killed several deer with my midrange cast load.
I think a gun shot with predominantly cast bullets the bbl will last indefinitely, but on the other hand I have never seen a handgun that has been "shot out". I have seen several rifles shot to smooth bores, but you are talking a lot higher velocities and a lot smaller bores.
My old standby 29-3 has had in the area of 30,000+ rds through it, again mostly cast loads at midrange or slightly above. It is slightly out of time, and doesnt lock up as tight as it used to, but the barrel is as good now as the day it was new. It actually probably shoots better due to being lead-lapped the hard way.

Probably more than you would expect, but why?

Would you take a thoroughbred race horse out and run it until it dropped from exhaustion?

That's what nags like Rugers are for.

The case at hand is to buy a used one. I am looking at one with unknown mileage, but it probably has 1000-2000 rounds through it. Apart from that I just happen to like heavy loads, and I like the M29, and I don't like Ruger's handguns

I have never heard of anyone who has ever worn out a barrel. It might develop some end shake after a few thousand rounds, but that is easily remedied. Except for super-hot loads, I would think you will wear out before it does.

__________________
Dick

FWIW... a bunch. More specific than that depends largely on the condition of the revolver, how heavy is "heavy" and your tolerance for recoil.

I'd recommend that you have a gunsmith examine any used weapon, 'specially if you intend to run heavy loads.

Next aspect is: How many rounds do you want to shoot? 5000/yr? More? How heavy is "Heavy"? 300gr bullets at 1600 fps? If it's in that range, I'd go for something other than a S&W; if you must do that, recommend looking for a 29-3E (the E is the endurance package) or a -4 and later versions if you must have a S&W. The Endurance package was developed to address several problems related to a continual diet of heavy loads. Bear in mind that the M29 was designed around the factory load of a 240gr bullet at ~1500 fps; as people began to load heavier bullets and at higher velocities, the loads began to exceed the design.

A 29-2 can handle a lot of shooting, but was not designed to handle a steady diet of truly heavy loads (above the Keith load of 250gr bullets at more then ~1200 fps.) If you really want to shoot a lot of heavy loads, a modern heavy design like a Magnum Research BFR would be a better choice. Rugers are the usual choice for heavy loads, but since you mentioned you don't care for them, another make might be a better pick.

If you must have a 29-2 (and I've got enough to know) then you gotta have one. That said, the current condition of the 29-2 you're looking at is really the critical factor. If you search the Forum, you'll see a lot of answers to this question, but the basic one is: Given a 29-2 in sound condition, it'll shoot more than most folks can handle. A tuneup every ~10000 rounds or so to ensure it stays in shooting condition will keep it going a long long time.

In my experience, I've shot ~30K rounds through a Model 57 in about three years of silhoutte competition; not a true comparison to a .44, but in the ballpark. That weapon stayed within factory tolerances. The N frame can take a lot of stress, but there are limits. Beyond that, how much you shoot, how heavy the load is and the relative condition of a 30-40 year-old weapon are the relative factors.

__________________
50 Years of DSOTM

I've personally lost 2 model 29's, one a dash 2 the other dash 3 to Winchester white box 240's. Model 29's are not invincible like some seem to think, both of mine developed unlocking and skipping after less than 1000 rds of factory 240's a 1250. Pretty sad in my eyes, I still have a S&W 44 a first year 629 but it gets nothing hotter than warm 44 specials, period. If you plan on shooting a steady diet of magnum level loads look elsewhere like those "nags" Rugers. My Redhawk has digested thousands of hot 44 loads with zero probs more then I can say for the thoroughbred Smiths. The model 29/629 is one of the most attractive handguns ever made but you need to understand it's limitations before shooting one alot, common sense goes a long way with them.

__________________
Sie vis pacem parabellum

My experience is that 29s develop enough endshake fairly quickly to need some attention - usually a couple washers fixes the problem, without needing to send the gun back to Springfield. Sooner or later, the barrel will need set back, but in my very humble opinion, this is more a matter of fixing other problems with the gun than of wear to the barrel and forcing cone area. I would hazard the guess that propellants have a lot to do with this. Since most of my experience is with lead bullets and Nr. 2400 powder, I admit my knowledge base is limited.

If I were determined to shoot a lot of high-end 44 Magnums, I would leave my Model 29 at home in the safe.

This is incorrect. The N-frame was adapted to the .44 magnum. It was designed around old turn of the century rounds and much lower pressures. I love 29's, but they aren't as durable as Rugers. They are MUCH NICER guns though. The newer guns, from 29-5's on will handle a steady diet of full power loads. The 29-5's and above have all the endurance package, not just part of it.

Around 3,000 rounds, 5,000 if you never fire more than 50 at a time and let the barrel fully cool.

Back in the 1970s I had a part-time job working for an engineering firm that did product testing. The division that I worked for tested guns for gov., military and police.

I still remember the day we got a 29. The barrel wore out before 3k but they kept shooting it hot. Frame failure was around 10k.

I have a 29-2 that my father bought used 25 years ago. It may have been a lemon when it left the factory or it may have been "shot apart." Recently, it was spitting lead and I couldn't get it to group much better than about 6" at 25 yards from a bench. I have no idea of the round count.

I sent it to Karl Sokol late last year. He recut the forcing cone and the crown, then aligned and reamed the yoke. Someone who knows revolvers better than me can say whether these are the typical repairs for a 29 that's been shot apart. Total cost for all of this was just over $200 shipped. I'm not done testing loads, but I've got it shooting into 2.5" at 25 yards pretty regularly.

I think that if you stick to a 250-grain bullet under 1,200 fps, you'll be able to shoot that old gun for quite a while.


Okie John

12,573 using 240 gr standard. If using lite special loads, use a multiplier of 1.25837. If using full bore b@ll buster loads, use a multiplier of .9997865-lead bullets should use a multiplier against each of the above of .9999321, whereas jacket uses no mutiplier.
The newer ones with the endurance package (so marked at least in the stainless series as -2E and above, ie -3 and up) will stand up a bit more. Sorry but I do not know what the corresponding dash in the carbon series is.

__________________
Forum consigliere

Check it carefully. Back 30 years ago, I did a lot of metallic silhouette shooting. Some shooters used M-29s and shot them with heavy handloads until they were loose. Then they would try to find a sucker to sell it to.

__________________
6/23/2022

I hate lawyers but I think that I love Cajun Lawyers!

__________________
I'm not Fonda Hanoi Jane!

Elmer Keiths load of a 250 grain bullet at 1250 fps has taken every large game animal in the world...nothing else is needed. In my 44 Mags...all of them, my standard load is a 250 Keith (or lighter) pushed by 9.5 to 10 grains of Unique. This makes a great practice/defense load, and is powerful enough to get the job done for those purposes. The Smith 29 action was designed around the "standard" top end load for the era, and, because the design has really not changed all that much since its inception, I would consider that to be the maximum load for the gun. If you must shoot the high end 44 Mag stuff, I would suggest buying a gun that is "made" to take it. If you "must" own a Smith, and intend to shoot loads that are beyond it capabilities...put some money aside for the ocassional refit that will be necessary.

Hope you fellas don't jump too hard on this, but my minty 29-2 6", which was supposedly used [I think the seller honest] for just a few boxes of factory has become noticeably looser [carry up and end movement] with about 4 boxes more of Fiocchi [yeah - seems warm] and American Eagle through it. This is a total of less than 500 rounds through the gun.

I was surprised and a bit disappointed. No handloads. YMMV.

My late-model 629 4" shows no such change after more rounds.

Regards,

Dyson

Guns are individuals, just like people. Loads are also pretty variable. How people care for their guns influences how long they last. Above, its already been stated that shooting he hell out of an already hot barrel isn't good.

We go back to the old discussion on how long your gun will last. Do you clean it? If you shoot cast bullets, do you clean the bore regularly and look for leading? If leading starts to appear, so you even know what it looks like. Or what the tight patch looks like?

When people ask how many rounds a M10 will last, I'm always amused. These are often the guys who buy a gun and start to worry after the 2nd or 3rd box of 158s go down range. Relax. Most K frame guns with modest or target loads will go maybe 100,000 rounds. I like to use .38s as examples because the ammo is so cheap. These days, you can get 100 rounds at Wally World for maybe $20 or so. The first 1000 will cost you $200, the first 10,000 will run $2,000. And by the time its rattly, you'll have paid $20,000 in ammo, and nearly as much in range fees and fuel, lunch and supplies. Not bad service from a second glance level gun.

N frame guns don't last that long. Maybe not half as long. But the ammo costs nearly twice as much. If in total, you've blown $600 on a gun and $20,000 on ammo, and it starts to get loose as a goose, sell it. Get your $600 back. It probably only cost you $300 20 years earlier, anyway.

Nice old N frames, or even nice new ones have a lot of life in them. If you want to see how much powder you can put in a case, buy a not so nice gun. Its the other brand, built like a brick, finished like one, too. Inside and out.

Use factory ammo, or handloaded equivalents. Most of us do as related above, we shoot target level loads because they're a lot more fun to fire. My old hands hurt when I fire my 329 with 240 grain full power loads. I don't care how many of them will work. More than I plan on shooting.

Keep cost in mind when you make these comparisons. If you fear wearing one out, sell it after the first 1,000 rounds and start over. Sell it cheap... to me...

__________________
Dick Burg

O.K. Here's my take on the subject:

This Model 29 is an early one, with just over 15,000 rounds fired through it:



The history behind it: At just over 5,000 rounds I began experiencing trouble. The worst problem was that the internal pivot pins sheared off, and the cylinder would unlock under recoil. Also, got double firing pin strikes from hammer "bounce."



I contacted Smith & Wesson outlining my problems. I was told to return the gun to the factory. I did this, and at the same time had an 8 3/8" full lug barrel installed. When I got the gun back, it shot like a rifle out to 200 meters or so, but that full lug barrel was a little too much. Had my gunsmith, Bob Mason, cut it back to a more managable 6". Since doing the work, no more problems and the gun is standing at just over 15,000 rounds fired.

I liked the set up so well I bought another Model 29 and had it fitted with the 5" full lug barrel. This a later model with the endurance package standard, now has just over 10,000 rounds fired through it.




And, yes, I do count rounds fired and log them in each session.

Bob Wright

__________________
Bob Wright

My 6 1/2" 29-2 has thousands of rounds of 250 gr hard-cast Keith style lead bullets over 10 gr. of Unique with absolutely no ill effects. It is a nice load that many consider a "3/4 magnum" but I have killed a number of deer with this load and never recovered a bullet. I am sure it would be all I need to hunt anything in Ohio, and most of the Country within handgun range except dangerous game like bear or boar. I've put some heavy magnum loads through the gun just for fun (its not fun for long) and would carry them for bear defense if I was ever in that situation, but 99.9% of the time the Keith load is more than adequate and I can hit with it better than the hot stuff.

__________________
Tony

quote:
Bear in mind that the M29 was designed around the factory load of a 240gr bullet at ~1500 fps; as people began to load heavier bullets and at higher velocities, the loads began to exceed the design.
___________________
This is incorrect. The N-frame was adapted to the .44 magnum. It was designed around old turn of the century rounds and much lower pressures. I love 29's, but they aren't as durable as Rugers. They are MUCH NICER guns though. The newer guns, from 29-5's on will handle a steady diet of full power loads. The 29-5's and above have all the endurance package, not just part of it.
________________

Nope. You misread the post.

True, the N frame is by no means designed around the .44 Magnum. Didn't say that, and never would; I have multiple N frames older than 1955. I said the M29 was designed for that particular load... but don't take my word for it:
________________________

"Keith especially called for a ".44 Special Magnum" with a 250 grain hard cast bullet at 1200 feet per second. His pleas seemed to fall on deaf ears. Ammunition companies were afraid of heavy loaded .44 Specials taking old sixguns apart. Keith then asked for a new cartridge 1/10 of an inch longer than the .44 Special to preclude its being used in any old sixguns, and also a new sixgun chambered for the new cartridge. Again, the plea was ignored.

In the early 1950's Smith & Wesson started to listen. Working in tandem with Remington, who would supply the new .44 Magnum ammunition, Smith & Wesson engineers went to work on the new sixgun. In 1954, Remington gave Smith & Wesson the dimensions of a new cartridge that was 1/8" longer than the .44 Special. Smith & Wesson then chambered four specially heat treated 1950 Target .44 Special sixguns for the new ".44 Magnum". The guns performed well but at the thirty-nine ounce weight of the 1950 Target, recoil was brutal to say the least. Elmer had asked for a new .44 with a 250 grain bullet at 1200 feet per second. This is the .44 Special Keith load and it generates heavy recoil in the Model 1950 Target .44 Special. Remington delivered a 240 grain bullet at 1500 feet per second that was originally fired in the same thirty-nine ounce Model 1950 Target .44.

Weight had to be added. The cylinder was lengthened to fill in the cylinder window and the six and one-half inch barrel was changed to a heavy weight full bull barrel style as found on the 1955 Target .45 ACP, resulting in a weight of forty-eight ounces. The new sixgun, as the first Magnum introduced twenty years earlier, was simply named by its chambering and called "The .44 Magnum" in those pre-model number days." From Taffin's "Smith & wesson's .44 Magnum, at http://www.sixguns.com/range/SmithWesson44Mag.htm
______________________


What I stated was that the M29 was designed around Keith's load; Remington's factory load, developed for S&W, was the 240gr @ 1500fps. I will concede that the the M29 was not, technically, designed for that load: the first (1955) S&W .44 Magnum, aka pre-29, was. The M29, which only differs from the .44 Magnum in name, was produced starting in 1957 when S&W went to model numbers. There's much more in Supica & Nahas' SCS&W.

__________________
50 Years of DSOTM

I have a ton of Taffins writings, including some of his books like Big Bore Handguns. I also have a ton of Brian Pearces articles.

I'll stand by what I posted. The 29/44magnum was not designed for, or around the .44 magnum round. It was adapted to it. Heavier barrels, a longer cylinder and heat treated steels were all adaptions made to allow the use of the .44 magnum round in an already existing platform. It was/is basically a 30,000 PSI frame design put into service with a round designed at higher pressure levels than that. That is why SAAMI lowered the specs from 43,500 CUP maximum to 36,000 PSI a few years ago. The gun was/is not designed for that level of pressure.

This is from John Linebaughs websight- It is in his "Writings" section and deals with exactly what I'm saying.
Notes on the Smith & Wesson

The Smith & Wesson Model 25-5 chambered for the .45 Colt is a fine gun and one I pack daily myself. The problem with the Smith &Wesson guns in general is not so much a strength factor but rather a design factor. Before you S&W people beat up on me please listen. It has long been evident that the Model 29 in .44 Magnum very quickly beats itself apart with full-power loads. This is not technically a "strength" problem as much as a design problem and the assemblage of several small parts that are not as rugged as the Single Action design. In the course of time if all the little parts wear a tiny bit this soon adds up to a lot of play in the overall fit and lock-up of the gun. This in turn allows the gun to get a further "run" at itself under discharge and thus hastens the battering process.

In reality the Model 25-5 is about 80% as strong as the Model 29 in the cylinder area. The frames are the same and are designed for a 40,000 psi load level even though we know this is a bit more than they are happy with. It's too bad S&W built a 40,000 psi cylinder and installed it in a 30,000 psi frame, so to speak. (note: since this writing S&W has worked on the problem of the cylinder unlatching and rolling back under recoil after it gets a bit worn).

The note above, is in reference to the endurance package that was in full application with the 29-5 as I posted above.

I have a number of 29/629 with anywhere from 200 rounds to over 3,000 rounds fired. I have yet to have a problem. I stick to 240 gr. and under with published loads. I save the heavier bullets for the redhawks. while the 29 may not be the most robust design, there is just something about them.....

By the way, Bob, are you the Bob Wright that was written about many years ago in guns and ammo? There was an article about the Magna Classic/endurance package in a back issue i just happened to be reading recently. I noticed your name and got to wondering. The Bob Referenced in the article was a silhouette shooter and his new 629 started skipping chambers. It was partially his inquiries to S&W that prompted the endurance package. very interesting article. If you are the same gentleman, I would imagine you would have quite a bit of knowledge about this subject.

In the 80's I bought a model 29 and I wasn't very gentle on it as back then as I always loaded max loads. I shot the gun a lot for me and it would wear me out at the range. I guess I put several thousand rounds through it. The gun was still functional and had some play when I sold it and I bought a Ruger Red Hawk with a 7.5 inch barrel. The Ruger is built like a tank but it was my least favorite revolver ever.

I recently started shooting again after taking about 15 years off and I sold the Red Hawk and bought a Nickel 29-2 just recently. Unfortunately it's new and unfired so I doubt I will fire it. I will probaly buy a blued one for the range that is a shooter and not new unfired.

Gun 4 Fun --

I'll stand by what I posted. No need to take this further.

__________________
50 Years of DSOTM