Any down side to the 3"? Been lookn for a 4" moutain gun but there is a 3" ported in the for sale. So, am I given up much with the 1"? What about flash and muzzle blast, bout the same? What say ye , oh wise ones?
Thanks,E.

I'd say the 3" will throw a little more fire, but will still be manageable. I'd go for the 3", sounds just plain tuff lookin'!

__________________
Get off my lawn.

The 4" will be unpleasant with full-house factory loads, the 3" miserable. If you load your own then either is OK. Otherwise shoot Specials, which is also OK. Ported guns aren't for everybody. Some like them, some don't. I've only owned one, a 3" 657, and I wasn't thrilled. Blast is increased, and 20-30 rounds was enough to make the front sight invisible due to fouling (lead bullet loads). Recoil isn't so much reduced as redirected back toward you, but muzzle lift is reduced dramatically. In low light the blast from the ports was pretty impressive. I won't buy another ported gun.

I've had several ported Weatherby's and currently own a 629 with the big rectangular factory port in front of the sight, all ported guns are extremely loud. I was shooting my 629 at the range before a New Mexico elk hunt, they have big signs posted NO 50 CAL CENTER FIRE ALLOWED! After a few rounds a range control guy was tapping me on the shoulder explaining the sign. He thought it was a new 50 cal S&W. If ever the right trade comes up for an unported 29 or 629 I will do it.

Mine's not a Mountain Gun, just a plain old 3" 629-2.

I still want a 4", but I can tell you that these 3" versions pack well and hit hard. You can be just as accurate with it as a longer barrel with practice.

As to porting being the incarnation of the devil and extra flash and noise - had mine for 20+ years and so far I don't see what all the jabberin is about. No more flash than any other 3", no more noise, no leading issues, but there is one big advantage - felt recoil. I shoot it with heavy rounds and a wooden grip painlessly - even comfortably.

I have both the 3-inch 29 and a 4-inch in Mountain Revolver configuration and can hardly tell the difference between them as far as weight goes but the 4-inch does seem to balance a bit better. As to the ports, I consider it vandalism. Noise and blast are increased with little to no effect on recoil in the short barrels.

i'm with snapping twig...i have a M657 ported 3" and a M29 3" not ported...they both shoot great...the M657 has had an action job,night sights,and is ported..had it at the range friday...it's a dream to shoot

__________________
SWCA#2208
KK4EMO

i have 3" 44's, some ported, some not. I shoot both Specials and Magnums through them. I don't really "feel" the porting until i start getting some power out of the cartridges. The difference is then immediately apparent in both muzzle rise and recoil. I love ported short barrel revolvers, and frankly prefer them to the longer barreled guns I own, including a 629-4 mountain gun.

I have a 3" double-Magnaported Perf Ctr 629. It seems to recoil about the same as my 4" 29. The one time I tried a 629 Mountain Gun (4" tapered barrel), it was worse.

It appears to me that the Magnaporting works. However, grips are also very important, but advice is not always useful, since the best answer will depend partly on hand size, which isn't the same for everyone.

I have a 4" 629 and a 3" Lew Horton 629. Definitely more felt recoil and more fire out of the 3". I have a pair of Fuzzy Farrant grips on the 3" and CT Hoghunter on the 4". I have a ported 642 and a 4" model 500 that are ported. The 500 needs ported in my opinion.

Pinkymingeo's comments are quite accurate.

Snapping Twig - Like the grips, looks good - nice fit.

Well, I'm getn it. Tired of lookn for a Mtn and this thing is a tough lookn Rosco! Hell, I'll prob only shoot it once anyway!
Eman out.