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.

__________________
Aaron Terry

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 ().
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?

__________________
Aaron Terry

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!



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 themmost desirable to least)
329PD
629Mtn Gun
629 Std

for re-coil sensitivityagain 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.

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 - 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.

__________________
Regards - GCF

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.

__________________
<><

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.

__________________
Watch & Pray

I have always been surprised that S&W has never made the Model 29 and 629 in the 4 inch, full underlug barrel version. They have done it in .45 ACP and 10mm, and I think a .44 Magnum benefits more from the extra weight of the full lug than .45 ACP ever would.

IMHO for all around use, you can't beat the 629MG. All the reasons are stated in previous posts

Attached Images

	DSC00637.JPG (123.0 KB, 825 views)
	DSC00639.JPG (128.5 KB, 901 views)
	DSC00638.JPG (129.3 KB, 697 views)

__________________
'Nam 1968-69.DAV,VFW,NRA Inst.

I have a 629 Mtn Gun, & the differences are small. That said, I would rather have the standard 4" 629.

Darrel

I have a 629-2 Mountain "Revolver" that is probably the most accurate S&W I've ever owned. I like it so well that I bought another Mountain Gun in case I ever wear out the first one.

I also have a 6 1/2 inch 629 Classic. It is easier to shoot well than the Mountain Guns and I use it for hog hunting, but it's considerably heavier the longer holster makes it unhandy to carry.

I bought a 5 inch 629 Classic, and it is a good compromise between the two.

Then I bought a 329PD and threw a wrench in the whole works.

Yup, I can see how that would happen. I think I exorcised that particular demon with a .44 Special 396 Airlight.

A comprimise between the two could be, what I think I have, the 3 inch round but with the combat grips. I'm not sure of the dash designation but looks like a Lew Horton. I shot it last time I went shooting and didn't bring tears to my eyes and I was shooting hornady soft tips out of it. Doeboy

I am not sure that a heavier weight always means lighter felt recoil. I have both a 629-4 Mountain Gun and a 5 1/2 in Redhawk. At least for me the Smith is the easier of the two to shoot with factory 240's. even though the Redhawk weighs 9 1/2 ozs more than the 629. I think it is because of the grips. I have Hougs on the Redhawk and they are larger in size than the Houg/Smith grips. The smaller grips on the 629 allow my fingers to wrap around and really hold the gun firmly while the Redhawk just never seems quite right. The 629 is light enough that it doesn't pull my pants down slowly as I walk with it holstered and at 4in it can be hidden fairly well too. I vote for the Mountain Gun First and then get the other one later because you will want another, it can't be helped.

Yup, the 'ol "Plumbers Butt Syndrome". Pretty common problem for many of us, that prefer packin' big iron...

__________________
Regards - GCF

<I have always been surprised that S&W has never made the Model 29 and 629 in the 4 inch, full underlug barrel version. They have done it in .45 ACP and 10mm, and I think a .44 Magnum benefits more from the extra weight of the full lug than .45 ACP ever would.>

I could not agree more! I have a 610 with that full-lugged 4" barrel with an unfluted cylinder to boot. That thing is a tank. Not much effort required to keep the sights on the scoring rings in rapid DA fire with stout 10mm loads. My 629-4 MG does rock and roll shooting full power 240 gr. loads. That said, that particular MG would be my gun of choice, if I was limited to a single centerfire revolver.

I had a 629-2 unmarked that I assumed was an early "mountain revolver". I sold it when I found a MG in 45 Colt. I did carry the "mountain revolver" but never fired it. There are very few guns that I don't regret selling.

Shootability always depends on the grips. And what purpose will the revolver serve? There is no reason to have to endure "an extended range session" with a .44 Magnum. Rubber is more comfortable in terms of managing recoil but I don't like how it sticks to clothing. My 4" N Frames all wear Miculek grips. The 240 gr. Elmer Keith handload is as heavy as I'll ever go in my 629-2 MG. Recoil is severe, but I can manage it well enough that this is my most accurate field gun. I will never fire more than a few shots with it at any one time using this load, so I'm not intimidated by the recoil. For all reasons other than shooting big game, this revolver will live on .44 Special handloads. I think the Mountain Gun is just about perfect in terms of horsepower to weight ratio and within reason it is a very manageable platform.

Dave Sinko

I have had a 624--- 4 inch, a 629--- 4 inch and the 629 MG.

AS I don't shoot that many 44 Magnum full house rounds, the only one left in my stable is the 629 MG.
I could tell the difference in recoil, using full house loads, between the standard 629 4 inch and the 629 MG.

Using light/target loads in the .44 magnum cases or .44 special loads I couldn't tell the difference in the recoil.

FWIW the 624-- 4 incher and the 629 MG weighted the same on my postal scale.

__________________
Semper FI

For regular carry I'd go with the Mountain Gun (ok, I went with the MG). While it's only slightly lighter, the center of gravity is moved further to the rear giving the gun excellent balance. And the tapered barrel and shortened underlug is more suited to a holster. And, of course of critical importance, it looks good!

Barrel length......Backpacker is a 3 inch and has a non-tapered barrel.

If ever there was a gun that was a candidate for Magnaporting,
the .44 Magnum Mountain gun is it. I have what I believe is the first issue Mountain gun, a 629-2 as well as 4" 624. The 629 is built better and may have better metallurgy. These guns came with a satin matte finish I happen to like and the markings are roll engraved. I took a hiatus from shooting for awhile but intend on working up some mid range loads for this
and my other .44's. Think 7.5 grains of Unique and a 240g SWCGC. One or three rounds of full house ammo to make sure
you are going to hit what you shoot at is probably enough in this gun. The picture is a before pic. When I get it back from Magnaport I will post another.

---
Nemo

Attached Images

4in 44mag Mountain R.JPG (174.7 KB, 576 views)

I prefer the 629 MG and don't care at all for the magna porting.

I had a friend send me load data for Solo 1000 for .44 mag & .44 special. It is clean burning and I use it all the time.
I have been shooting low powered hand loads with 240 gr lead round nose bullet for 20 years with great success in the 4 inch 629. When I load factory rounds or the high power ammo I hardly notice the differance until about the 12th shot. The point here is, I only load up the heavy stuff when out in the field or when it is needed. I mostly shoot this gun recreationally, as I suspect most people do on this forum.

The advice I can give you to offer to your friend is get one, what ever you can afford. I like the standard 4 inch w/o the full lug.

I have hand loaded every combination I could brew up for this gun and find at 25 meters it is all mostly the same. I put a scope on it for a while just to see how accurate this gun could be. Shot from a rest, shot from sitting, standing and every other ways I could think of. I switched to open sights and also tried a red-dot on this fine revolver. So, I went from the lowest load to settle on 7 gr Solo 1000 behind a 240 gr lead round nose bullet just because I have fine 7 grain pellets next to my bench. It is an easy reference for me. ( my favorite light load is 4.2 gr of solo behind the 240 gr LRN)

I started my boy on a daisy 717 which is about the same weight as the 4 inch 629. I have let my newbie nephews shoot the loaded down .44 ( and also my .45) with great results. It is just a blast to shoot and exciting to expose younger or inexperienced shooters to shooting the big bores. ( There ae braggin' rights to be had: "I shot a .44 magnum and it was way cool". We shoot paper, but rolling around a big coffee can is just plain fun. They mavel at the big raggedy holes in the cans and want to take it home as a trophy. I think I have turned more new shooters on to shooting by letting them shoot a real S&W .44 than any other gun. I was a 4H youth shooting instructor for a few years and about every kiddo and parent who got to shoot this gun remembers the experience.

I love this gun and so will your friend. Get him into reloading and he will save a ton of money on ammo, and be able to load the rounds to low recoil ammo ( we affectionately call powder-puff loads ) When starting out we don't talk too much about how un-manly these loads are. We just go and shoot and have fun. I only pull out the full power ammo when I wish or need to refamiliarize myself with the heavy rounds in this gun. But from the years of shooting this gun I have no hesitation or flinch when shooting the high power ammo because of so much practice with the powder-puff rounds. Both loads will knock down plates and both have about the same impact point at 25 meters. ( close enough to knock down a plate MHO that is as practical accuracy as it gets; for practical defensive shooting)

So good luck with your friend's choices but one last comment. He or any man will be proud to own a S&W 629 and will likely never regret the purchase. Especially if he learns to reload, saving money, shooting low recoil ammo and adding a whole new dimention to his shooting hobby.

I forgot to post a pic of the MR after porting it (and getting Herrett Trooper grips).
I am glad I ported it. The muzzle flip was greatly reduced.
The Troopers or the 500 grips handle the actual recoil just fine.
This is still the tightest S&W I own.

===
Nemo

Attached Images

629-Herretts-R-800.jpg (175.7 KB, 432 views)