629 vs. 629 Mountain Gun

aterry33

aterry33

Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2009
Messages
1,037
Reaction score
28
Location
Charlotte, NC
I have a friend who is not computer-savvy and asked for my opinion on which to get, a 629 4" barrel (the half underlug, not the full lug barrel) or a 629 Mountain Gun. He plans on doing range shooting (maybe a box or two a month) and carrying in the woods.

I told him I'd get the opinions of you good folks here. Me personally.. I have a 29 in the half-lug configuration and I don't notice much difference at all between it and the mountain gun, i.e. the extra weight of the 29 doesn't seem to matter that much (it's only two ounces) and the Mountain Gun doesn't seem to carry all that better (although I find that the tapered barrel is a little bit easier to slip into a backpack maybe).

Which would you choose for this type of shooting? I know it is a preference thing but I said I'd share your thoughts with him.

Thanks.
 
This is very much a personal choice, and it is difficult to know whether EITHER gun is suitable for him, much less which is better. A lot depends on his hand size, what grips he ends up with, and, of course, what loads he fires in the one he ends up with.

That said, I'll tell you MY preference, and you can make of it what you will. Many years ago, I had, and still have, a 4" Model 29 with Pachmayr SN-S Presentation grips, which I felt was appropriate for the use you describe. I had fired it quite a bit, and was comfortable with it. Then I carried it up Mt. Washington. When I got to the top, I was wet with sweat, so I changed underwear. To my dismay, I discovered that the gun was also wet with sweat. I pulled the grips, dried it off, and RIGged it with grease left in the open space in the grip frame. It ended up NOT being damaged, but I went looking for a 629. I found a Mt. Gun, and tried it out, but the slight weight difference in the barrel allowed it to recoil much more than the 29, even though it had good grips, enough more that I felt that a second shot might easily be a lost cause under certain circumstances. I didn't buy it.

So there you have it: for ME, the difference in recoil actually means enough for me not to buy a Mt. Gun. However, your friend's experience might be much different.
 
The effect of the extra 2 oz will be a bit more than you might expect, because it's in the barrel that moves upward in recoil more than the grips do. But i suspect it would still take a side-by-side comparison to notice any difference.

As for carrying, you put the gun on a 2 lb gunbelt in a 1 lb hoslter, gonna be hard to notice that 2 oz.

When i switched from carrying a Browning Hi Power (32 oz) to a Glock 19 (24 oz), I noticed the difference for all of a day or two. After that, couldn't tell.

I have a 629 MG and think it's a beautiful gun, but wouldn't pay any extra to get one.
 
I apologize for the hijack (sorry) but the OP (or his friend) may find it relevant... what's the difference between the 629 Mountain Gun and the 629 Backpacker?
 
I have used both 4" guns quite a bit.

I CAN tell the difference in recoil, shooting them side by side.

I CAN tell the difference in weight placing them in the same holster, one after the other.

The differences are not huge, but they are there.

I most often carry the MG.

If I was going to the range to do a bunch of shooting I would use the standard 29 or 629.

And I will also add this, I find the 6 1/2" Mod 29 to be much more pleasant to shoot. Much More.
 
The 4" .44 Magnum is not very pleasant to shoot full house loads in it. The Mountain Gun is even LESS pleasant. I have a standard 629 (4") and frankly, I wouldn't want any lighter in this caliber. If I always intended to shoot .44 Special loads then the MG would be a viable choice.

I have a number of .44 Magnums and have shot them several thousand rounds as well as taken a number of deer with them, so I do have a standard of reference.

I certainly won't knock anyone else's choices but, for me, the standard 629 is as light as I want to go with this caliber. I am not particularly recoil sensitive, but enough is enough.

FWIW
Dale53
 
Let me add that I have found that factory loads like the 270gr Speer, and the 300gr Federal Cast Core to kick less in the 4" guns than factory Federal, Remington, and Winchester 240gr loads.

The Buffalo Bore "Low Recoil" 255 gr Hard Cast is a good load, but kicks almost like the above 240,s.

Mag Tec 240gr Softs kick less than the 240gr loads from the Big 3.

The Speer 44 Mag 200gr Short Barreled load is a good one for Personal Defence recoil wise. The CorBon 165 HP is not bad to shoot either, IMHO.
 
I have several of both. I like the Mountain Gun.
Recoil is stiff in either 4" .44. I don't think I'd be able to tell the difference between the two if I was firing blind (:eek:).
The Mountain Gun is a little lighter on my hip and that is the version I use far more.
 
Thanks for your thoughts. I've never looked particularly hard, but has anyone seen a 629-4 4" that is not a Mountain Gun?
 
Either would be good, I dont think the extra couple ounces would make a huge difference in the mountain gun. But what Id do, Id buy the one I could get the best deal on. I own both these guns and Im still not sure which one Id let go of first.
 
I had a 629MG - I now have a 629 4" production, SKU #163603, and I am happier - even with the IL. There is more than the 2 oz weight difference, most of which is in the normal vs tapered tube. It has both a larger hammer and trigger. It also has an orange ramp front and white-outline rear sight vs the black/black of the MGs. Finally, the barrel writing is roll-imprinted - not laser etched. The latter wears off - witness my 625MGs - imprinted lasts!

Recoil-wise, the muzzle may stay down a bit better with the production 629 vs the MG - that additional mass out front helps. A real improvement in recoil comes with the Hogue made-for-S&W X-frame grips, available from S&W Accessories - they pad the backstrap. They fit round butts - the K/L, N, or X-frames - pretty universal. Below, they are on my 4" 629 - the 296 sported wood service boots - which don't help one iota!

IMG_3465.jpg


Stainz
 
I agree 100% with Stainz on the change to the X frame Hogues. I have a Mountain Gun in .44M and, while it will never be mistaken for a small bore, the grips DO help.
As for the choice between the two, I like the MG, but your friend really needs to shoot both before he decides. There is more muzzel flip with the light contour barrel (the X frame Hogues help here), but the MG does carry better.
 
I personally like the standard 4 inch over the MG. But like everyone else stated it is more of a personal choice based on the individual.
 
This is my take, YMMV.

If both had no IL, I'd get the MG due to rarity.

If one had the lock and the other didn't, I'd get the one W/O the IL.

If both had the IL, I would look elsewhere for one W/O.

In a perfect world, I'd get both, but W/O the IL.
 
I have a couple of 629 standard 4 inchers, as well as a 629 Mtn Gun and a 329PD. For carry I'd rate them:(most desirable to least)
329PD
629Mtn Gun
629 Std

for re-coil sensitivity:(again most desirable to least)

629 Std
629 Mtn Gun
329PD (even with the X frame grips!)
 
The difference is incremental, and it's a small increment. Things like changing the grips, as Stainz suggests, will make a much greater difference than the two ounces. Buy what you can afford and what you like.
 
629-4 with 4 inch barrel

aterry33 said:
Thanks for your thoughts. I've never looked particularly hard, but has anyone seen a 629-4 4" that is not a Mountain Gun?
Click to expand...

I had one and sold it. It was a very nice gun. Had the round butt and no MIM parts or IL. The hammer and trigger were case hardened.

I should have kept it. :(

augy
 
Stainz said:
A real improvement in recoil comes with the Hogue made-for-S&W X-frame grips, available from S&W Accessories - they pad the backstrap. They fit round butts - the K/L, N, or X-frames - pretty universal.

IMG_3465.jpg


Stainz
Click to expand...

Stainz - Are these your grips, or did you pull them off a 500?

Product: Model 500 Impact Absorbing Hogue Square Butt Conversion Grips

There was some discussion in a recent thread regarding the suitability of these grips on the RB N frame. Looks like they are working OK for you...

Kinda strikes me as Bisley grip frame, on an N frame S&W. Looks like just the thing for my 625 MG.
 
The following is my opinion and my opinion only. I have owned a number of .44 S&W Magnum revolvers. For carrying a lot and shooting occasionally, the Mountain Gun is fine. For shooting more than a little bit with full-power loads, I very much prefer the standard weight S&W 29/629. I never fired anything other than the 180 gr. and 240 gr. factory level loads, so possibly there are full-power .44 Magnum loads that recoil less. I only know that with the loads I fired, I rapidly came to the conclusion that the little bit of extra weight in the barrel made a noticeable difference in recoil. JMHO.
 
but your friend really needs to shoot both before he decides.
Click to expand...

This.

I went the standard route.

Not that it matters as you can probably find used, but I don't think S&W is currently making the 629 MG.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

W
629 vs. 629 Mountain Gun recoil
Replies
1
Views
64
Nightowl
Nightowl
G
629 mountain gun
Replies
12
Views
622
sprscientist
S
G
4.25" 69 vs 4" 629 Mountain Gun
2
Replies
34
Views
2K
bananaman
bananaman
R
Miss marked 629 Mountain Guns?
Replies
1
Views
343
Nightowl
Nightowl
6
A Look Inside the New Mountain Gun 629-9
2
Replies
20
Views
1K
blackdeuce
blackdeuce

Latest posts

Back
Top