I'm looking to buy a snub-nosed model 629, and was wondering if anyone has an opinion on the best of the current models? I'm thinking about the PC 629 that looks like the Bloodwork gun, and the 629 Backpacker with the full lug 2 1/2" Magnaported barrel and Hi-Viz sights.

I was also wondering if a Performance Center gun is that much better/different than a standard production revolver?

I recently acquired a 3" 629 RB with combat grips. I'm amazed by what a different creature this is from the 4" 629.

With something less than 7-800 rounds through them each, I've determined I far more prefer 44 specials in the 3" for a variety of reasons. And full mags in the 4" are not all that unpleasant, although I prefer the moderate recipes.

The configurations available are rather overwhelming, independent of the cosmetic aspects. In the PC models action work I've had, my own tastes for style, is that I'd rather pick the configuration I prefer and then have it slicked up properly if needed than buy most of the PC stylings just to get the slick lock work. Most of the barrel stylings of the PC models simply are not to my taste. To each their own.

Although the 627 V8 I was introduced to 3 years ago certainly bumped up my appreciation a notch.

__________________
Dum vivimus Vivamas

As I have posted on other threads, my current carry gun is a Trail Boss. I really like it, it balances fairly well for a short barrel gun, and is easily concealed in my Simply Rugged pancake. Magnum rounds are fairly stout in it, my favorite being the 270 JSP's from Speer (when I can find them). Around the house I keep a few shotshells in the first chambers for critters, and keep 180 grain specials for self defense. Shoots great with the lighter loads. Buy one, you'll like it!

I'm an unabashed fan; my 629 "Trail Boss" is go-to backpacking gun. Definitely 'stings' after 100 rounds at the range, but it is accurate and plenty hard-hitting.

Seen below variously with Ahrends and Eagle grips....

--Neill

i have a 3" M29...love it and carry it often...i also like the 3"657 in 41 mag.

__________________
SWCA#2208
KK4EMO

I once put 50 rounds through a V-Comp 44 Mag snub at the S & W shop in Springfield. Those were the most punishing strings of fire I ever dealt with, and I've frequently used other 44 Mags, 454 Casull, and 500 Mags. My advice would be to use 44 Specials in such a small gun. Recoil and muzzle blast are significantly reduced, but they still have good knockdown power especially at the close ranges a snubby would be used at.

I love my 629 Mountain Backpacker and 629 with non fluted cylinder both in 3". Not really into current production guns....

I've got a soft spot in my heart for any and everything .44RemMag.

That being said, I want no part of anything ported. The buck and roll of recoil at the range is expected with such rounds. The additional bark of those ports is something I hate...even with double protection, too.

I couldn't imagine the hearing damage if used without hearing protection.

My 629-5 2.5" .44 mag is one of my favorite S&W's to shoot...doesn't carry bad either.

If I'm shooting stout loads, I put a set of S&W Night Guard grips on it instead of the Spegel boot grips...tames the beast. My favorite just for fun load in it is a 240 grain LSWC over 9.0 of Unique. For more "excitement" I step up to a Hornady XTP and 19.5 of 2400.

I have one Performance Center revolver, a 627-PC. The action is much smoother on this 629-5 than on the 627-PC. They were both made within a two year period and do not have the IL.

__________________
C & L

You referred to "current models" and I take that to mean new guns, ones in production at the present time. Regardless, I have a fairly recently-acquired 629 PC 2 5/8" and am happy with it. It has a good trigger and seems reliable and accurate. The standard boot-grips are not the most comfortable things I've shot with, but I've decided to keep them on the gun for now and have found a grip methodology that works well. If I could make one change to the gun it would be to flute the cylinder. I'm not personally all that fond of unfluted ones. Plus it would reduce the weight of the gun by a small amount, and this is a snub. I think that the gun is too big for CCW use, at least for me, but I'm using it for woods carry in a Simply Rugged holster and it's perfect for that purpose.

I have a 3 inch and 2 1/2 inch 629-5, they are actually very accurate for what they are. When I use factory loads its usually the 200 Gn Gold Dot Short bbl loads. My relaods Ive been usuing in them is 10 gn Universal clays and either a 200 or 210 gn Gold dot or Hornady's XTP.

Thanks for posting this picture. This is one of the guns I'm seriously thinking about. Does anyone know if PC guns are built any differently than regular guns - does each get built by the PC shop, or do they just have a tuned action?

Try the Speer 200 grain Gold Dot Hollowpoint .44 Magnum Short Barrel Load. 200 grain .44 Special deep HP bullet at 1080 from a 4" gun...and they expand every time...

I shoot them in a 629 Mountain Gun and my friends 329PD...

There is also loading data for that bullet in the new Speer #14 Reloading Manual.

Bob

629-3 Lew Horton PC Quad-Port.. one of 300...Shoots Smooooth

__________________
SWCA #2306
DAV in honor of POP

Same here. I'll take the recoil any day.

Sweet gun, but man, that thing does not look like it would be pleasant to shoot, unless a bear was on top of you...

Heck, he could run some Buffalo Bore rounds through it and still not kick as harsh as the Hellboy gun (see recent thread). I'm whimping out with either one and I'm a big old ugly fella who can handle some recoil.

I really like my 3". Carry it alot with 200gr Speer 44mag SB @ 980 FPS.

__________________
Shoot fast & live long
Warren

I think that the primary difference with this and many other PC guns is that yes, they are built in the Performance Center, and in addition to the tuned action often have a different finish, in this case the more matte/bead-blasted looking one which I happen to like, although I find more standard stainless guns attractive too. This gun has a ball-detent in the crane rather than securing the ejector rod at the end of the housing, and also has the skeletonized housing. Dovetail front sight, for whatever it might be worth. And they chamfer the rear of the cylinder chambers a little bit. Oh, and the nice wood boot-grips rather than the rubber ones. Of course, I suspect that most who buy the gun will replace those. I've elected to keep them......for now. I'll discuss that a bit more in a reply to another post.

I think I would find it significantly less pleasant to shoot if a bear was on top of me!!! That would purely suck. Seriously, it does kick with those grips. I'll try to remember to take a pic of the rear profile of the grip and post it. The stock boot grips are quite narrow in profile, giving the rear of the grip a hard and angular aspect. I did find, however, that with my loads which are less than full charge, but more than a hot 44 Special, that if I modified my grip a little and kept my thumbs low and away from the cylinder and cylinder-release button, both of which tend to gouge if you're not careful, it wasn't too bad. But I do find that my 500s are more pleasant to shoot than this gun. That's okay, though, I like handguns that kick! Rifles, well, that's a different story......

I have a 3" 629 Trail Boss, commemorative of 150 years of S&W with porting from the factory. After replacing the hard wood grips with Hogue grips it is a dream with 240 gr hollow points.

A range acquaintance let me shoot his custom, smokeless powder, 45-70 revolver. That was rowdy.

I had a 3" 629 from the 1980's and grips were very important in dealing with recoil from full power loads. The longer barreled .44 mags are easier to shoot.

The PC guns are not regular production guns with an action job. Here is a 3 1/2" .357 eight shooter, from Lew Horton. Ball detent lockup and moonclipped; all it needs is a gold bead front sight. So far no reliability problems and this should be a great carrygun:

__________________
July 4, 1776 not Jan 30, 1909

I LOVE me some .44 mag snubbies, owned 2... should be getting the 3rd this weekend. 2.5" fixed sigh 629.
YES they are more comfortable to shoot with the goodyears on em.
I can go thru a couple hundred rounds at the range.
Also... learn to properly shoot it, and you can put your rounds on target pretty quickly.
The key is to practice, learn your gun, and make the adjustments needed.
My 14 year old shot my Terminator with magnums... and when loaded with specials, I almost had to pry it out of his hands.


Jim

__________________
Big bullets leave big holes

Do you have a picture of the gun in your holster? I was wondering how well it works with this gun and if it's comfortable?

Hate to pile on here,but: if they made that 629 Mountain Backpacker I'd buy one in a minute.

Not wanting to Hijack this post...

I am seriously considering getting a 2" to 2 3/4" 44 Mag.

I feel a 3" is not that much =different in size from a 4" MG.

Its main use will be as a second gun to a 4" Mountain Gun, or a 6.5" Mod 29 when I am driving to a hunt, and I want/need to travel "light".

It makes things simpler of all your handguns shoot the same cartridge.

I cannot decide on whether to get a "steel" gun or an "alloy" gun.

I really like the size and weight of my 325NG, but after shooting a couple pf 329's with several different full power loads, I feel an alloy 44 Mag might be too much of a good thing...

Also they do not seem to have the durability needed in a 44 Mag.

Thoughts and comments are appreciated.

I'd stay away from the Magna-ported version. If you need to fire the weapon in a SD situation with your arm NOT fully extended you will not enjoy the muzzle blast across your torso and up into your face. I carried this 629 for years into serious social situations....

Attached Images

	DSC00595.JPG (98.6 KB, 420 views)
	DSC00596.JPG (85.8 KB, 381 views)
	DSC00597.JPG (85.8 KB, 306 views)

Nice Sambar Stag on that one!

__________________
C & L

Very nice! I peed a little when I saw this pic.

Here ya go. It's a Simply Rugged Sourdough Pancake holster. I just got it about a month ago and have only worn it twice. It seems comfortable but needs to be broken in a bit more, is just a little stiff at present. What I really liked about this holster in the context of this particular handgun is the fact that I can carry either strong-side, or as a cross-draw. I like strong-side carry typically, but when I am hunting and carrying a rifle I prefer the cross-draw setup so the butt of the rifle isn't periodically clunking into the butt of the revolver while carrying the rifle slung.

I have a 2 1/2 inch 29 and, in all honesty, it is a bit silly to have a .44 Magnum with that short a barrel. Loaded with Specials, it makes more sense.

That holster looks great. Thanks for posting it. That is exactly what I had in mind.

Then I guess you and I are a couple of silly rascals!!

I have two ultra-light guns, a 340PD and the 2" 327 Perf.Center gun. The latter isn't bad to shoot, is a regular pussycat with 38s and with full mags is robust, but tolerable. The PD is a different story. In any case, I have carried both a lot more than I've shot them, and they do seem to suffer more nicks and surface wear than a steel gun. I've read accounts that are variable, some claim they can be shot many thousands of times with no more wear than a comparably sized steel gun, and others which claim they fall apart fairly quickly. I'm inclined to believe that the truth is somewhere between those extremes. I seriously doubt that they are anywhere near as durable as a steel gun when shot with high-intensity loads. When I decided I wanted a compact 44 Mag, I decided to steer away from the Scandium/Ti models and opted for the heft and durability of stainless steel.

I'd owned an 8 3/8" 629 back in the early 80s, but had sold it after just a few years and hadn't owned another until picking up the 2 5/8" gun just recently. I have a brace of 500s and those seemed to suffice as my heavy artillery in the handgun realm. However, now that I have the snub I find myself wanting a more "practical" 44. A 4", to me, while very popular with many shooters, just seems a tad short and not all that much different from my snub. Thus, I'm tilting either toward a 6" standard configuration barrel 629, or a 5" with the full underlug. I realize that this is off topic, but would be appreciative of any comments regarding the relative merits/demerits of those options, or the 4" for that matter. I mean, the latter was much loved by Elmer Keith so it can't be all bad.....

MTKTM

Thanks for your reply. Like you I am a little nervous about an alloy 44 Mag.

Just sa few weeks ago I took a 4" MG and a 6 1/2" Mod 29 to the range and tested Around 20 different loads for recoil and point of impact differences.

I had not shot a 6 1/2" 44 Mag side by side with a 4" Mountain Gun in a long time.

I was amazed at the difference in recoil and muzzle jump.

I shot the MG a lot as I carry it most all the time when in the woods.

The 6 1/2" was much more plesant to shoot.

NE450No2,

Was the 6 1/2" a full underlug barrel, or the old partial underlug? I handled a 6" with the standard barrel profile, a 6 1/2" with the full underlug, and a 5" with the full underlug. And also a standard profile 4". I think I liked the 5" with the underlug best from a purely handling/balance standpoint. Pretty subjective stuff. I do imagine that the 6 1/2" would soak up some recoil and muzzle-flip. A Mountain Gun with the slender 4" would be pretty light in the front-end. I'll bet it'd balance pretty similarly, and also recoil, not a lot different from the 2 5/8" snub......but with more substantial grips!

MTKTM

It was a standard 6 1/2" barreled 29 dash 2, that I have had since the early 1970's.

I would say get the one that feels best to you.

I have used that gun so long that I like it better than the full length under lug.