I think I have narrowed down my consideration for an N-frame (to replace a Model 28 I sold 30 years ago) to either the 8-shot .357 or a 629/Nickle 29. I'm familiar with the recoil of the 357, and I'm fine with it (using wood stocks with a Model 60 & 3" 686 and the memory of the Model 28). I have no doubt that Ahrends grips combined with 627 will be comfortable for me to shoot.

For the 44 mag, I have a Ruger Alaskan I've fired with both wood grips (a bit painful, but I had problems finding a wood grip that fits my hand - should have filed it down more to fit me) and the "compact GP100" old style rubber grip. It shoots nicely with the old style rubber grips for me.

Does anyone own both the Alaskan & a 4 or 5 inch 629? If so, how does the recoil compare to you? The 5" 629 looks pretty sweet, as do the nickle plated 29s...although the 5 incher is calling my name. Of course, so does the nickle 29. Goodness knows, both LOOK nicer than the Alaskan! My Alaskan shoots well, but looks like it was finished by a blind Afghan with a fondness for boulders.

I have shot all the revolvers you mentioned.
I find the grip of the S&W N frame more comfortable than the Ruger DA.

When it comes to recoil between a N Frame 357 Mag, and the N Frame 44 Mag...

Back in my early days on the job, I took a few Officers down to the river bottoms and let them shoot my 44 Mag, side by side with their 357 Mag.

This was usually after dark and they discovered that the 44 actually had less flash and did not recoil that much more.

Several of them bought 44 Mags for their duty guns.

I still use a 4" 44 Mag most all the time when I am hunting or in the field.
I will admit, sometimes on a quick trip to the deer lease I just carry a 1911, in 45 ACP, but I do prefer the 44 Mag Revolver.

The beauty of a 44 Mag is, you do not always have to shoot full power loads, but you CAN when you want to or need to.

For carrying I prefer the 4". If I am hunting with a S&W 44 Mag on "purpose" I prefer a 6 1/2" or a 6".

bsms

An 8 shot N frame S&W in 357 Mag has a LOT to recommend it.

I have nothing against the 357 Mag, it is just that I have used a 44 Mag for so long... I am a 44 Mag kind of guy.

I've owned a 29-3 3", a 629-1 2.5" and a Ruger SRH Alaskan. Both the S&W's had wood grips and were really not all that pleasant to shoot. The Ruger on the hand, while not the looker like the other 2 is just plain fun to shoot with the beefy stock rubber grips that has the gel pad insert. I haven't tried shooting it with wood grips and doubt it'll pretty it up any, it's a huge hunk of metal that you could probably pistol whip a bear into submission with

The S&W 44 Mags with rubber grips that cover the back strap are a lot more comfortable to shoot than the same gun with wood grips.

I recently bought my first 44 magnum and have been shooting/owning handguns for 37 years. I love 357's and have always had one. I have to say I wish I had bought the 44 sooner. It just worked out that about once every 5-10 years I would have the chance to shoot a 44 mag and it was always owned by some flaming idiot that reloaded as hot or worse ammo that the moron could. I finally last year had a buddy offer to let me shoot his with some normal target reloads and I really liked it. The S&W grip is way more comfortable and shootable to me than the Ruger and I highly suggest you go with a 629 with Kurac grips on it...I wouldn't go so far as to say you will sell all your 357's but I bet the Kuracs you wont look back!!!!

With Hogue Tamer grips, I can shoot the Alaskan all day long. Put wooden grips on it, and all bets are off....

Owned a 'Dirty Harry" 29 back in the day. It had those stupid 'Goncalo Alves' (who was Goncalo Alves?) wooden grips that were designed by some complete idiot! By today's standards, the .44 isn't much more than an 'intermediate' cartridge, but it got its undeserved reputation for recol based on the old days when grips were still in the stone age.

I also have a 329NG, and with the excellent Pachmayr grips that came with it, I would rather shoot it than the old 29.