What does the 629 Classic Deluxe pistol have in it with the Endurance Package that other 629's do not have?

__________________
Shooting guns is good therapy

I like to hear about this as well.

I find the silence on this question compelling. Makes me wonder if there really is an endurance package or if this is one of the many misconceptions that exists about various guns, sort of like M16's shooting tumbling bullets out the barrel rather than on impact.

The Endurance Package was introduced in 1987 on the model 29-3. There are some guns marked 29-3E, however in 1988 the 29-4 engineering change - which was the endurance package - was introduced. These had a new yoke retention system, a radiused stud package and a floating hand. Now you know as much as I do, thanks to the SCSW.

Adios,

Pizza Bob

__________________
NRA Benefactor Member

I started a thread over on The HighRoad about this topic and the issue was quickly resolved by a member named Slamfire1. He found this great article and posted it's link. Sorry to revive this old thread but I hated that the question wasn't answered. Here is the link to a great read.

Smith & Wesson's .44 Magnum

The endurance package was added to all Smith .44 mags when introduced not just the Classic DX models.

The full strength and reliability upgrades/changes to the 29 series were in full force by the 29-5 and the 629 models from the 629-3 on.

As an example if you are looking for a strong pre lock/mim model 29 I would look for a 29-5 or 29-6. In stainless you would want a 629-3 or 629-4.

The Classic DX revolvers were special because they were hand picked for accuracy and came with test targets, 5 interchangeable front sights and two sets of grips, Hogue rubber with S&W emblems and round butt wood finger groove combat grips.

This is my 629-3, I had wondered about the endurance package myself. But I was also wondering if the finger groove grips that are on mine, came this way from the factory.

Attached Images

	101_1431.jpg (114.2 KB, 53 views)
	101_1430.jpg (110.3 KB, 48 views)
	101_1434.jpg (109.5 KB, 40 views)