Hi all, my first post here! So, I just went through this exact same dilemma and decision making process myself. Couldn't afford both, and this was my first ever revolver purchase as well. As far as aesthetics, I was torn because I truly admire both looks equally - the stainless 6 1/2 Classic with full underlug, and the blued 29 in 6 1/2 with half-lug. To me, one wasn't any more 'handsome', just different kinds of great-looking. A subtler, more sophisticated, even 'debonair' element to the 29, and a 'meaner'? kind of shock & awe or oooh la la! to the formidable sheen and lines of the 629. The only thing my eye didn't care for as much on the 629 were the black rubber hogue grips. And I fully intended to have some fun picking out just the perfect set of high end wood grips to compliment the gun if I chose it. My whole interest in these guns began when I decided I wanted a wheel gun in large caliber for the mixed purposes of some hunting (hog primarily, maybe black bear), home defense, open-carry/woods carry, and my father in-law mentioned he had a beautiful old 29-2 from the early days he might be inclined to pass on to me, EVENTUALLY. Well, the more I looked at these guns and all of the major manufacturers, the more I realized I wasn't going to wait on the 'possibility' of a hand-me-down. I wanted one, now. The possibility of eventually inheriting the 29 may have played some part in me ultimately deciding to take the 629-6 Classic now. Having owned it for about a month now, and maybe about 100 rounds later, all I can say is MAN AM I EVER HAPPY WITH MY CHOICE! If I never get the old 29-2 I will never regret getting this 629. Where to begin??? I will say it needed a good polishing from off the shelf. Whether from a lot of handling off the counter or that way off the factory floor, I don't know. But after some vigorous application of mothers mag polish, I could shave in the reflection. The fit of it is fantastic. The trigger unequalled (and I have fired a python). The accuracy was unbelievable to me. And most of all, the way it eats up recoil of standard Keith mag loads left me in disbelief. Almost wondering if I shouldn't have gone up to a .460 so I really know I'm shooting something. Combination of the hogue grips, barrel length, full lug? I am not sure as I haven't fired a bunch of different .44 mags, but I have been so surprised and impressed with the experience that I am now not going to even change the grips, however much I prefer the look of wood. Pappy always told me "if it ain't broke, don't fix it", and I won't. It could be my novice zeal speaking, but I feel like I'd be messing with perfection if I did. (Lock not included under that statement.) Anyway, good luck with your choice. Hope you're as happy as I am with mine.
Model 29 or 629 -- which would you buy?
- Thread starter Redlegvzv
- Start date
Budnjax
Absent Comrade
simple...keep the one YOU like the best
Doesn't matter what anyone else thinks. Everything else being equal they're the same except for the type steel. Just keep in mind that stainless will rust, too although blue steel requires more maintenance to stay pretty..
Doesn't matter what anyone else thinks. Everything else being equal they're the same except for the type steel. Just keep in mind that stainless will rust, too although blue steel requires more maintenance to stay pretty..
I am sorry, but in trying to give you advice, I hear my father, who was a machinist, talking to me. When I would toy with buying a stainless steel firearm, he would always say that stainless steel is softer than carbon steel, and will chip easier. With that being said ...
With the exception of my Ruger SR1911 CMD, all of my handguns are blued carbon steel. When I purchased my 41 Magnum, which I had hoped to use for handgun deer hunting, I feared that the uncoated stainless steel would spook a deer faster than a blued revolver, if the sun caused a reflection. I have learned, while a blued handgun will show that it has been used, it is honest wear. My oldest Smith is a Model 14-1, which does show holster wear, but I would never consider refinishing it, nor would I be ashamed of it's appearance.
I would suggest that you get the Model 29, because even if the finish wears, it reflects the care of a true shooter.
With the exception of my Ruger SR1911 CMD, all of my handguns are blued carbon steel. When I purchased my 41 Magnum, which I had hoped to use for handgun deer hunting, I feared that the uncoated stainless steel would spook a deer faster than a blued revolver, if the sun caused a reflection. I have learned, while a blued handgun will show that it has been used, it is honest wear. My oldest Smith is a Model 14-1, which does show holster wear, but I would never consider refinishing it, nor would I be ashamed of it's appearance.
I would suggest that you get the Model 29, because even if the finish wears, it reflects the care of a true shooter.
Irrifleman, on your point of carbon being harder than stainless, I wonder if that is why some competitors using revolvers use carbon cylinders in their stainless frames? I have seen this but never knew why.
No full length under barrel lugs (or un-fluted cylinders for that matter) for me. Ever. I do not want useless, ugly, dead weight on my revolver or woman.
Edit to add; BTW, I have one each in carbon and stainless.
Edit to add; BTW, I have one each in carbon and stainless.
Last edited:
Gripgrabber
US Veteran
I suggest the 629, but I like shiney silver things, don't judge me, don't rule out the 3" 629-4!
Sitting on the ground sending lead downrange, braced up shooting across your knee. That screams Elmer every time. So it's easy to guess what I have. Blued 4 inch for me. HOOYAH!!
https://598d5fcf392acad97538-395e64...kcdn.com/3698857_1425511769566_dc5cc8e8_m.jpg
https://598d5fcf392acad97538-395e64...kcdn.com/3698857_1425511769566_dc5cc8e8_m.jpg
Bozz10mm
US Veteran
If I have a choice, I always go with stainless. I would get the 629.
Tom_R
Member
The 629-1 gets fired, the 29-2 does not, and probably will not.
The 629-1 was well used when I got it. I cleaned it and polished it repeatedly and put a beautiful set of Kuracs on it. I do shoot it once in a while.
The 29-2 is one that I was not looking to pick up, but at the price I got it for, I had to snag it. I had the set of Kuracs you see on it, waiting for a gun.
The 29-2 was so lightly used and had a few little marks on it, that for now, I have decided to safe queen it.
So my advice would be to get the 629 first, because it would probably get shot more.
The 629-1 was well used when I got it. I cleaned it and polished it repeatedly and put a beautiful set of Kuracs on it. I do shoot it once in a while.
The 29-2 is one that I was not looking to pick up, but at the price I got it for, I had to snag it. I had the set of Kuracs you see on it, waiting for a gun.
The 29-2 was so lightly used and had a few little marks on it, that for now, I have decided to safe queen it.
So my advice would be to get the 629 first, because it would probably get shot more.
Jäger1
Member
I am not a fan of the N frames; they simply do not fit my hands. A personal issue; not a criticism of the N frame.
That aside, I do have a little over 40 years under my belt of S&W K frames: carrying a 5" as a cop, PPC for decades, some CCW, and a lot of in the brush carry. Blued and stainless varients. So a few opinions from that.
I find the 5" length in the K frame is one of God's little secrets, just as the 3" barreled J frames are. And I like full underlug barrels, even though I also like early Model 19s. So I would assume a 5" K frame would feel pretty nice in the hand as well.
Blued versus stainless. Unless you're an absolute dog when it comes to revolver maintenance, blued will last just fine. PPC revolvers get a lot of handling, a lot of dry firing, a lot of holster use, and a LOT of cleaning. I wouldn't be ashamed to let anyone look at my PPC revolver because of the finish. And I had it built in 1979...
If the slightest mark on bluing perturbs you, fair enough. Maybe the slightest mark on stainless won't bother you the same, because stainless does pick up wear marks as well. For blued revolvers, oxpho blue or similar wipe on/wipe off bluing agents eliminate a lot of the wear marks (although it obviously isn't the same as the factory blue).
As a result, with the exception of a stainless 4" Model 65 that gets carried in really bluing unfriendly conditions, the other stainless Smiths I have dabbled with have moved on to other, more appreciative, homes.
So I'm probably no help at all - for general use I'd want a 5" blued, underlug barrel version. I have been wanting to try the Model 69, however, even though it is stainless and doesn't have a full underlug barrel. Should feel very similar to the Model 65 in the hand, which is to say "pretty darned nice".
That aside, I do have a little over 40 years under my belt of S&W K frames: carrying a 5" as a cop, PPC for decades, some CCW, and a lot of in the brush carry. Blued and stainless varients. So a few opinions from that.
I find the 5" length in the K frame is one of God's little secrets, just as the 3" barreled J frames are. And I like full underlug barrels, even though I also like early Model 19s. So I would assume a 5" K frame would feel pretty nice in the hand as well.
Blued versus stainless. Unless you're an absolute dog when it comes to revolver maintenance, blued will last just fine. PPC revolvers get a lot of handling, a lot of dry firing, a lot of holster use, and a LOT of cleaning. I wouldn't be ashamed to let anyone look at my PPC revolver because of the finish. And I had it built in 1979...
If the slightest mark on bluing perturbs you, fair enough. Maybe the slightest mark on stainless won't bother you the same, because stainless does pick up wear marks as well. For blued revolvers, oxpho blue or similar wipe on/wipe off bluing agents eliminate a lot of the wear marks (although it obviously isn't the same as the factory blue).
As a result, with the exception of a stainless 4" Model 65 that gets carried in really bluing unfriendly conditions, the other stainless Smiths I have dabbled with have moved on to other, more appreciative, homes.
So I'm probably no help at all - for general use I'd want a 5" blued, underlug barrel version. I have been wanting to try the Model 69, however, even though it is stainless and doesn't have a full underlug barrel. Should feel very similar to the Model 65 in the hand, which is to say "pretty darned nice".
DocAnyday
Member
Stainless or Blue?
I'm with scrounger - buy BOTH. I have several N-frames (and there are lots of replacement grips out there that will help improve the feel/control of N-frames if factory grips don't) - stainless, nickle (my 29) and blue. There is nothing quite like the luxuriousness of a fine blued gun for appearance, Nickle makes a different statement which couple beauty with protection. Stainless has a "working man's" look - and that's a praise not a Knock - and would serve you well depending on your purpose(s) and climate. With a lot of elbow grease stainless can be polished out to a nickle-like finish.
BUY BOTH (ALL).
I'm with scrounger - buy BOTH. I have several N-frames (and there are lots of replacement grips out there that will help improve the feel/control of N-frames if factory grips don't) - stainless, nickle (my 29) and blue. There is nothing quite like the luxuriousness of a fine blued gun for appearance, Nickle makes a different statement which couple beauty with protection. Stainless has a "working man's" look - and that's a praise not a Knock - and would serve you well depending on your purpose(s) and climate. With a lot of elbow grease stainless can be polished out to a nickle-like finish.
BUY BOTH (ALL).
Nothing nicer than a blued gun
Davethegundoctor
Member
I think it is a simple answer here. Buy both Quick. Do not look back!!
squawberryman
Member
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2013
- Messages
- 58
- Reaction score
- 392
Buy the 29 and send me the number of the gun shop with the five inch 629
I agree that if you're asking this question, you should just get the 629.
To me, if I were to have to chose just one, it would definitely be the 29. Absolutely beautiful guns. IMO, the blued guns look great, even when well used. If you take care of them, they will not rust.
Now, I'm not saying that a LNIB 29 will stay in LNIB condition after you shoot it, but neither does a stainless gun, and if you take care of the thing, it will keep looking great. I've got a bunch of blued revolvers that have been shot quite a bit, some carried in the field, etc., and they still look great, some of them still look like new...
The only issue I have with blue revolvers is if you are hung up on getting the burnt carbon deposits off of the cylinder face. Easier to do/less wear & tear on a stainless gun. For my shooter blued guns, I just don't bother scrubbing the cylinder face marks very often. Kind of blends into the blue color anyway.
Obviously, stainless guns don't need as much care and attention in terms of corrosion prevention, but blued guns are not that demanding either.
I never like how easily my stainless guns get the swirl/fine marks in the finish, the stainless just seems like a 'softer' finish. That said, I really like the look of a like new stainless gun. Now if I had to chose between a worn looking stainless gun, or a worn blued gun, I'd still chose the blue... I think you already know what one you really want, just get it!
Or, like others have said, try to get both!!
To me, if I were to have to chose just one, it would definitely be the 29. Absolutely beautiful guns. IMO, the blued guns look great, even when well used. If you take care of them, they will not rust.
Now, I'm not saying that a LNIB 29 will stay in LNIB condition after you shoot it, but neither does a stainless gun, and if you take care of the thing, it will keep looking great. I've got a bunch of blued revolvers that have been shot quite a bit, some carried in the field, etc., and they still look great, some of them still look like new...
The only issue I have with blue revolvers is if you are hung up on getting the burnt carbon deposits off of the cylinder face. Easier to do/less wear & tear on a stainless gun. For my shooter blued guns, I just don't bother scrubbing the cylinder face marks very often. Kind of blends into the blue color anyway.
Obviously, stainless guns don't need as much care and attention in terms of corrosion prevention, but blued guns are not that demanding either.
I never like how easily my stainless guns get the swirl/fine marks in the finish, the stainless just seems like a 'softer' finish. That said, I really like the look of a like new stainless gun. Now if I had to chose between a worn looking stainless gun, or a worn blued gun, I'd still chose the blue... I think you already know what one you really want, just get it!
Or, like others have said, try to get both!!
- Joined
- May 12, 2011
- Messages
- 1,546
- Reaction score
- 864
Is 5" long enough? I think so. 5" is nicely balanced on an N-frame. I prefer 3" for IWB carry, and 4" is a good compromise too, and quicker out of the holster than 5" for self defense. Heck! Get one of each.
Blue or stainless? One is for shooting (S/S) and the other's for fun (beauty). I finish my blue revolvers with Renaissance Wax after cleaning. It protects well from rusting, doesn't wipe off and resists fingerprints. It makes the blue look a mile deep. I use RW on stainless too, because it fills the inevitable scratches and looks nice.
Smoke stains on stainless are ugly and hard to remove (e.g., Flitz). They're not as visible on blue, but Flitz works there too without hurting the finish (so far). IMO, smoke stains are evidence of hard work. I don't bother except for photos.
Blue or stainless? One is for shooting (S/S) and the other's for fun (beauty). I finish my blue revolvers with Renaissance Wax after cleaning. It protects well from rusting, doesn't wipe off and resists fingerprints. It makes the blue look a mile deep. I use RW on stainless too, because it fills the inevitable scratches and looks nice.
Smoke stains on stainless are ugly and hard to remove (e.g., Flitz). They're not as visible on blue, but Flitz works there too without hurting the finish (so far). IMO, smoke stains are evidence of hard work. I don't bother except for photos.
69HEMI-R/T
Member
I have both a Model 29 or two and a Model 629 or two and feel you cannot go wrong with either model but, if it is going to see a holster for carry, I think the Model 629 might be a better option.
They are hard to find around here but I love my Mountain Gun 629. It does tend to be a recoil beast with full-power loads but, pull one out at the range and watch it draw a crowd!
Actually, a Model 29 will also draw a crowd and be prepared for offers to buy it.
They are hard to find around here but I love my Mountain Gun 629. It does tend to be a recoil beast with full-power loads but, pull one out at the range and watch it draw a crowd!
Actually, a Model 29 will also draw a crowd and be prepared for offers to buy it.
Similar threads
