I need your advice.
I am getting the urge to add a 44 magnum for woods carry.
Should I get a 629 Mountain Gun or the new Model 69?
The Mountain Gun I am looking at has an IL.

__________________
Accuracy supercedes Speed

What do you plan on doing with it?

I have a 69 and a 629-4 5" fl. Both are nice weapons but if I could only have one it would be the 629.

If you are getting the urge to add a 44 magnum , well just do it..i have a 629 4" Mountaingun and i love it..

I'd choose the 629 every day of the week.

I'm not an expert by any means and my ONLY 2 revolvers are N-frames (29-5 classic hunter & 624)... so maybe I'm biased.

I'd say that if you have the opportunity to shoot both examples, or at least hold them for feel, that would help in your decision. Also, the way you're planning on carrying them may further influence your decision (i.e. - shoulder holster, chest holster, on the hip, etc.).

__________________
\\\ Too close for missiles...

I rather have 6 then 5 if you are in part of the states where you need a 44 for a woods carry. Also, I rather have the N frame's size and weight than the light L frame when shooting 44's but if you are a big guy then I guess that part does not matter.

James

[QUOTE=Yorkie Man;137925938]What do you plan on doing with it?[QUOTE]

Carry in woods while hiking.
Protection from big bad things like bears, wolves, mtn lions. (I have read plenty of bear threads on this forum. Please let us not turn this into a suitability of 44 mag for bears thread.)
Hunt in survival situations.

__________________
Accuracy supercedes Speed

I have carried my 627 in a chest holster and have found this a good way since it doesn't interfere with backpacks, etc.
I would not rule out shoulder holster or on the hip either.

__________________
Accuracy supercedes Speed

I feel like I am getting bigger around the middle every day.

__________________
Accuracy supercedes Speed

The Mountain Gun is a perfect trail companion. I would like one in .44, but have one in .45 Colt, so I'm happy with that. I'll carry either a 4" 629-4 or a 4" 625-7 for woods expeditions, unless I'm carrying my 6½" 657-2, or 3" 657. Hmm...too many choices.

Anyway, I have a single L frame but a safe-full of N-Frames...get the 629!

Good carry guns:
629-4 .44 Magnum


625-7 .45 Colt MG

__________________
No good deed goes unpunished.

Go for a mountainrevolver.....you will not regret it, shure it kicks like a mule with heavy magnumloads, but that`s the way we like it..right ?

Compare the weight and the manner of carry. Sounds like you aren't going shoot it much so throw in one of the 44 airweight versions to compare just for grins...

I have both the 69 and the Mtn Gun. If I wanted heavy magnum loads, the Mtn Gun is the choice. The 69 is my favorite to shoot, though. For heavy 44spl to mid-magnum loads it handles just fine.

I have both -- I use the M69 more than the Mtn Gun -- again, that's just me -- every one is different and will have different preferences.

I cobbled together some posts made over time. Didn’t feel like editing to closely, so some info may seem out of place or redundant – if so, ignore it.


No, I haven’t replaced the 329 with the M69. I’ve been carrying the M69 while walking the dogs for a while now. It is narrower than the 329 and sits deeper in the Simply Rugged pancake. The m69 is very comfortable for belt/hip carry in the SR pancake, but I did notice the extra weight.

Anyway, I have two M69s, bought the 1st one in late January and liked it so much added a backup in early March. To date, I have shot 830 rnds thru the first and 1,167 in the second. Everything from 240gr at 750 fps to 325gr at 1,180fps (all actual chrono results).


Wanted to check point of impact, so I bottomed out the rear sight on gun #2 and shot the following 2 shot groups at 25 yds. Shot from a rest, with butt left free to recoil without any resistance (nothing under butt of gun). The black circles are to separate close or overlapping two shot groups.
.


I really like this gun – the L Frame just works for me. I have had no problems with either gun except for possible sight regulation issue.


Mounted a 4x Leupold on the M69 to do some load development. It was windy, and even though I had a good rest, it was not perfectly stable.
.

.
310gr Lee FPGC chronoed 1,141 fps (not a typo) seated and crimped in the top grove (short OAL). Both at 50 - 60 deg F and 5 long paces from the muzzle.

The 265gr SWCGC/17.0gr A2400 is seated deep - crimped over front dr band an chrono's 1,142 fps.

The 240gr/6.5gr HP38 is seated deep (1.502 OAL) and runs 883 fps on the chrono.

As most know and the targets show, it pays to test various loads to determine best potential accuracy.
.

.

.

I posted the following on Lee Martin’s “Singleactions” website:
S&W Model 69 (L Frame .44 Magnum), 4 ¼? Bbl. | Single-Actions

Following is a recap of my comments/observations from the above thread:


Anyway, here are some photos, dimensions, loads, and personal observations. The long/thin barrel shank/forcing cone of the 696 .44 Special is evident in the picture below.

S&W Model 69 (L Frame) 4 ¼”, Round Butt grip frame.

629 Mtn Gun weighs 39 oz
M69 L Frame weighs 37 oz

629 Mtn Gun Cylinder Diameter: 1.70”
M69 L Frame Cylinder Diameter: 1.56”

629 Mtn Gun Cylinder Length: 1.705”
M69 L Frame Cylinder Length: 1.670”

(Note: The M69 cylinder is 1.670 inches and isn't recessed for cartridge rims -- a 1.712" hand load fits, but is right at the face of the cylinder. Lymans No 49 edition shows OAL w their 425421 Keith Bullet is 1.710". A .429 minus plug gauge will enter all throats a .430 plug will not.)

629 Mtn Gun Frame Window - Height: 1.735“
M69 L Frame - Frame Window Height: 1.600“

629 Mtn Gun Frame Window – Width: 1.880“
M69 L Frame - Frame Window Width: 1.820“

629 Mtn Gun Cylinder Wall at Narrowest Point: .095” -- (.0900” between chambers)
M69 L Frame Cylinder Wall at Narrowest Point: .060 “ -- ( .130 “ between chambers)
(629 Cyl Bolt Cuts are over the chamber while M69 bolt cuts are between chambers)

629 Mtn Gun Frame Top Strap – Width: .665“
M69 L Frame - Frame Top Strap Width: .665“

629 Mtn Gun Frame Top Strap – Height: .220“ to top of frame (includes sight mortiss)
M69 L Frame - Frame Top Strap Height: .210“ to top of frame (includes sight mortiss)

629 Mtn Gun Barrel Shank OD: .630“
M69 L Frame - Barrel Shank OD: .620“

629 Mtn Gun Frame Over Barrel OD: .900“
M69 L Frame - Frame Over Barrel OD: .880“

629 Mtn Gun Trigger Reach: 3.10“ (same grips for both 629 & M69)
M69 L Frame - Trigger Reach: 3.00 “


HERE ARE SOME PICTURES:
.
M69 Barrel Shank/Forcing Cone area:
.

.
M696 Barrel Shank/Forcing Cone Area:
.

.
629 Mtn Gun Barrel Shank/Forcing Cone area:
.

.
Family Portrait - 629 Mtn Gun, M696, New M69:
.

.
Sorry about the "so-so" pictures -- light wasn't the best and I'm not the best photographer.

What a neat little package.


Some loads were:

240gr SWC Lasercast (.431)seated to 1.500" OAL and crimped lightly over the front drive band. Multi-x Starline cases and Winchester WLP primers.

5.6gr of HP 38 (Vel: 739 fps)
10.6gr of HS6 (Vel: 1,035 fps)
9.4 gr of Longshot (Vel: 1,078 fps)

265gr SWCGC (429244) (.429) seated deep and crimped over the front drive band. Multi-x Starline cases and WLPs.

16.9gr A2400 (Vel: 1,142 fps)

When seated deep (as was done here), this load will run right at 1,200 fps from a 6" barrel.

Federal Factory 240gr JHP (No. 44A) Vel: 1,217 fps
(We chroned this load at 1,375 fps from a 7 1/2" Bisley Hunter.

.

.

.

.
Couple of observations:

For me, while very comfortable feeling, the grip panels that come with the gun aren't comfortable under heavy recoil (shouldn't be a problem in the field). I'll probably mount some of the S&W 500 Hogues for longer bench sessions to test heavier loads.

Looks like this gun was sighted in at the factory with .44 Special ammo.

The rear sight has some room to move the POI down, but may need a higher front sight.

I was real pleased with the limited test targets.

That Fed Factory load looks to have excellent accuracy potential.

Recoil with the 265gr SWCGC/16.9 A2400 and the 240gr Fed Factory load were the same and would not be abusive with proper fitting (to the individual) grips. We'll see what it's like with some 305s and 325s.


CHRONOGRAPH DATA:

Load Data for REFERENCE ONLY -- NOT A RECOMMENDATION.

Replaced the factory grips with the Hogue 500s (see 629 photo above).

Didn't shoot any groups but ran some loads over the chronograph.

Chrono 5 long paces from muzzle and temp was about 45 deg f., 5 shots except for 240gr Fed Factory, and 325gr WLNGC (both 3 shots):

Bullet make, OAL, cases and primers shown above

240gr, 9.4gr Longshot, ... 1,078 fps avg, 18 fps ES.
240gr, 10.6gr HS6, ....... 1,035 fps avg, 24 fps ES.
265gr, 16.9gr A2400,...... 1,142 fps avg, 37 fps ES.
240gr, Federal Fact, ..... 1,216 fps avg, 12 fps ES


Load Data for REFERENCE ONLY -- NOT A RECOMMENDATION.

300gr WFNPB 1.651" OAL - LBT type - source unknown.
20.0gr H110.
Fed 155 (Mag)
New Top Brass (Scharch.com).
1,102 fps avg, 37 fps ES

310gr RNFPGC DC 1.605" OAL (top crimp grove) - LEE mold.
20.0gr H110.
Fed 155 (Mag)
New Top Brass (Scharch.com).
1,141 fps avg, 23 fps ES

325gr WLNGC 1.711" OAL - Beartooth Bullets.
22.0gr H110.
Fed 155 (Mag)
New Top Brass (Scharch.com).
1,182 fps avg, 13 fps ES (3 shots only)

Load Data for REFERENCE ONLY -- NOT A RECOMMENDATION.


The Hogue 500s worked great making this gun comfortable to shoot with the heavier loads. I have a problem with grips that are hard or narrow at the top (or both) -- recoil just hammers the bone at the base of my thumb -- the Hogue 500s pretty much solve this problem for me.

Fitted with the Hogue 500s, FOR ME, it is comfortable to shoot with any and all loads likely to be used. Again, FOR ME, it is the ideal handgun - reasonable weight, portable size, good balance, good accuracy (so far), and sufficient/versatile caliber.



I took the 329, 629 Mtn Gun and the M69 to the range one afternoon. Ammo was the aforementioned Federal Factory .44 Mag 240gr JHP (No. 44A). My perception was that recoil of the 329 is definitely snappier/faster, and the Mtn Gun has a bit more muzzle rise vs. the M69. Only thing I can think of is that the barrel is skinnier and the bore to grip relationship is higher on the 629 vs. the M69 (which rides lower in the hand and has a bit more weight forward). Could also just be my imagination. As should be expected, the Mtn Gun feels a bit bulky compared to the M69 – subtle, but noticeable to me.

Recoil is subjective, so your mileage may vary.


Some more chronograph data.

240gr Horn JHP XTP at 1,323 fps (Hodgdon says 1,522 fps from 8.275” Bbl)

270gr Speer JSP at 1,153 fps (My 6” 629 gives 1,207 fps -- Hodgdon says 1,421 fps from 8.275” Bbl)

260gr LBT WFNGC at 1,224 fps

240gr lasercast CSWCs at 880 fps.

200gr Horn JHP XTPs at 1,236 fps.

For general use, the 6.5gr HP38/240-250gr load gets the nod – seated deep and crimped gently over front drive band. It is accurate, reasonably powerful and comfortable to shoot in quantity.

Recoil continues to surprise favorably – seems to recoil less than 629 Mtn Gun with same loads (can’t explain it other than it has a bit more weight forward and sits lower in the hand).

The more I shoot the m69, the better I like it – it just works for me – YMMV. In fact, I like it so much, I have a backup on order.

Hope some of that is useful.

Paul

Paul,
Thanks for the very interesting and informative post. Lotsa info there.

Go with the 629 mtn gun. You'll be happier in the long run. I have 4 mtn. guns in various calibers and love them all.

__________________
S&W Accumulator

Thank you Paul!

I have found your data most useful, as I reload constantly looking for that "perfect" round for my various shooting requirements. I have never used H38, and I'm looking forward to trying it out. I put the Hogue (500 grips) on my M69 too, as well as my 629. They fit my hand much better.

Seems to be little more than comparing L frame, 5 shot, with N frame, 6 shot, both at a given barrel length. The rest is trivia that accompanies each primary variable.

I have two Mtn Guns, a 629 44 Mag, & a 625 45 Colt. To be honest, I would prefer the 4" standard 629 to the Mtn Gun. I would rather have either 629 than the L frame 69. My 629 came with an IL, was replaced with "the Plug", all's well now. S&W didn't change the frame profile of N frames to make room for the IL, like they did on the smaller frames, so it's not so bad to "Plug" an N frame.

Everything's about those damned locks. I still think there should be a subforum for the date of locks and forward, so everyone is on the same page, new guns can be discussed with head held high, and we have no need to discuss anything re the IL except maybe the decision to plug the hole (not sharing reasons why).

I carried a five shot Charter Arms 44 Special Bulldog, moved to the longer barreled target model and finally transitioned to 4" 629 with bull barrel. It weighed 43 oz. I feel the six shot 4 inch gun meets the portability / shootability balance point. The information Paul105 provided shows a 2 ounce difference in weight, from 5 shot to six shots and a 1.7 inch to 1.56 inch cylinder. I have used a heavy loaded model 24 4 inch to take a 700 lb water buffalo cow, so the compromises are acceptable in my mind. I'd carry the Model 69 as a backup to the Model 629 Mountain Gun. The shroud concept is one I've not had too much familiarity with. A lightly used Model 357 (.41 Mangnum scandium frame / titanium cylinder) seems to be OK so an L frame should do fine too. Your comfort with a five shot instead of six shot may be the issue, either the thought of having "only" a five shot or ease of concealed carry / slightly slimmer may tip your decision. I'd put the heavier M69 ahead of the M696 as a carry gun, more versatility in loads, more beef in the forcing cone, from the great pictures provided.

I dont have a mountain gun to compare to, but i do have a ruger redhawk and sw pc 629 vcomp 5". The vcomp is my fav, but my next 44 will almost certainly be a 69. Although maybe not my first choice deer hunting (i deer hunted almost exclusively with revolvers for years), I think it might be a very good woods hiking gun.

[quote=ridgewalker;137926069][QUOTE=Yorkie Man;137925938]What do you plan on doing with it?I carry a Springfield XD in 45 ACP with high capacity magazines. More to fear from the pot growers and druggies in the woods these days than critters.

I prefer the 629, as it has one more charge hole.

Choose what works best for you. I have both poly .45 acps, 329 PDs and 629 mtn guns. The M69, 5 shot L-Frame .44 Mag Just works for me. If I could have only one handgun, it would be the M69.

FWIW,

Paul

Not really a mountain gun but serves the purpose well…329 night guard.

Attached Images

IMG_2447.jpg (37.8 KB, 183 views)

I don't have a gun hobby, just tools of the trade for outdoors bear/cougar/wolf/moose turf.

First .44 was a 6" Anaconda 'cause I was a Colt guy, soon replaced with the 4" model for the weight and convenience. Then went to a 629MG, immediately put the Hogue X-grips on it. Nice, lighter, better fit for my hand. About 10 years ago got the Taurus Tracker .44 for even smaller and lighter. Put the good Hogues on that too. Easy to carry, easy to shoot.

Still have all three, but my "go to" gun now is the Tracker. I can't load the Garrett 310's in it, but it does fine with the Buffalo Bore LR 255. Handloads for plinking.

Been reading up on the M69, could it replace the Tracker and MG? I've read of lots of quality issues with the 69, read the same about Taurus but the Tracker has been flawless for me. Having 5 vs 6 shots means nothing in the bush. 4oz less that the MG but still 4 oz heavier than the Tracker.

Anybody else that has had both the MG and Tracker and went to the M69? And I'm not interested at all in the 329, bulky size and recoil issues.

I like my 629...

Edmo

__________________
TRUTH: Don't delete my posts!