4.25" 69 vs 4" 629 Mountain Gun

[surfgun]

I have had my 629 Mountain Gun since 1996. It’s carries nicely.

Never would be able to justify a model 69.

 

[grip frame]

I vote for a third option.

I would take a standard 4" pre lock 29 or 629 over either. 29-5 or 29-6, 629-3,629-4,629-5.

The slightly lighter weight of the mountain gun makes no carry difference. I'd rather have the slightly heavier barrel of the standard 4" for less muzzle flip.

If I need a smaller carry gun its a Glock in .40 or 10mm with hard cast loads.

I would have no use for the 69.

 

[SGT ROCK 11B]

I have a Gun Safe with 29s and a 629 that I carry in the woods. Been packing them 50 years.

Out west we carry six shooters so a five shooter is for those dandy types, JMHO. My advice is for people to "Cowboy Up".

 

[ruggyh]

.....
To be hunting legal, whatever carried needs a 4" barrel locally so clearly these two would be very good choices.

Just a note for others here,
while legal length in your state other states may/do have different length regulations.

As an example Montana has a 5" minimum.

Check you regulations if your traveling out of state.


On the choice between guns I go with the heaver gun.

 

[gdpolk]

You mentioned both hunting and defensive capabilities. To me they are vastly different. For hunting with a 44 Magnum I want a scoped 14" contender or a Blackhawk longer than 6". For defensive purposes I like the 69 4.2". I like it enough that I no longer have any other 44 mag revolvers.

Like steelslaver said, what is 6 going to give you if you couldn't stop it in 5? A reload shouldn't take too long.

No doubt. This is why I have several guns for dedicated use. That said, for example, we have to have a 4" or longer barrel to "hunt" and feral pigs are always legal with any given weapon legal for whatever may or may not be in season. So, if I'm out baiting bears and stumble on some feral pigs I'd like to be able to legally capitalize on that opportunity. If shot with a sub-4" gun, it is legal to drop them in defense but they must remain laying where you shot them. If the barrel is 4" or longer now it's a "hunting kill" and I can legally take the meat.

Likewise, if I'm bowhunting dangerous game, I am allowed to finish game animals off with a handgun but if you get a fresh out of the academy officer they are likely to give you **** about it not being a legal barrel length. So for this instance, just grab a 4" gun and avoid all the nonsense.

As for around town...The 2.7" M69 is king in my collection and is my most carried CCW gun. I shoot it much more consistently and and accurately than any auto that I've ever owned, it conceals in a pancake OWB beautifully and prints less than even a single stack 380 on me, and I've never felt under prepared with 5 rounds.

 

[steelslaver]

Just a note for others here,
while legal length in your state other states may/do have different length regulations.

As an example Montana has a 5" minimum.

Check you regulations if your traveling out of state.


On the choice between guns I go with the heaver gun.

I don't know where you got the Montana has a 5" minimum deal because there are no caliber or barrel restrictions at all in Montana. If you look on page 19 of the big game regulations you will see this. Some of the Wildlife Management areas have some odd restrictions

 

[ruggyh]

I don't know where you got the Montana has a 5" minimum deal because there are no caliber or barrel restrictions at all in Montana. If you look on page 19 of the big game regulations you will see this. Some of the Wildlife Management areas have some odd restrictions

You are correct, I should of looked at current regulations.
My 2015 set of regulations has 5" min and max length of 10.5".
It has been a few years since I hunted Montana.

As stated you should always check the latest regulation for the state you are hunting in.

 

[steelslaver]

I think the only restriction now is 10.5 max barrel length and straight wall and that only applies to the WRAs.

 

[Model 15-4ever]

I've had both guns (older pre-MIM Mountain Gun). Found them both obnoxious to shoot - and yes I have lots of other magnums that I enjoy including .41, .44, .454 and .480.

At least with the Model 69 you are getting a lighter weight revolver, if you are carrying it way more than shooting it. Changing the awful factory stocks to something more cushioning helps.

On the other hand, the trigger pulls on my Model 69 and every one I have examined were subpar: very heavy DA and creepy/heavy SA. The matte finish with contrasting dull black oxide hammer and trigger, is also visually unappealing.

The trigger pulls on the N frames, including the current production versions, are much better, as I S&W views the Models 29/629 as their premium guns. The finish is better as well. With all the problems I see weekly with current production S&W J-K-L frame revolvers, the N frames are usually good to go right out of the box.

 

[gdpolk]

Interesting discussion.

In summary of above opinions seem to be split half and half. For input from users without direct experience with both, the consensus seems to be 29 for the extra shot. For people who claim to own/have owned both, the consensus seems to be 69 is a more pleasant gun to shoot if you don't absolutely need the extra round (which is consistent with my experience with my 69 vs larger 629). For the purists, the lock is the biggest issue. I still consider my 4.25" 69 my all time favorite firearm in handling and function, but the two toned look really isn't my preference. I'm looking forward to playing with it side by side with a 629 Mountain.

 

[Bald1]

I think the only restriction now is 10.5 max barrel length and straight wall and that only applies to the WRAs.

Does this mean you can’t use a 15” Encore in 308 ?

 

[Bald1]

To me the whole idea of the 69 is its size. Therefore I’d pick a 2.75” but that doesn’t help your situation. So go with the 4” 629. If not trying to conceal then who cares about a little extra weight. And a 44 has a little kick no matter what gun you’re using. I’m always amazed at how many guys are sensitive to it.

 

[Casual Smith Nut]

I asked this same question couple years ago I think. Also found similar splits in opinion with most trending towards the MG.

My own findings in handling and shooting both side by side is that the 4.25” m69 is my preference. Mine happens to have a great DA and SA trigger both. I found with 240gr specials running approx 850fps that the m69 was easier to control with less recoil than the MG. Maybe the L frame with the factory rubber grip just fit me better who knows. At higher velocities and greater recoil maybe it would be a different story. I don’t shoot much real magnums in the big bores. The m69 is my pick. In fact, that’s the reason I have the MG listed in the ads.

Now for collectors, even with the lock, the nod goes to the MG. But since I try not to collect…

 

[Mike SC Hunter]

I have both, but, if I ain't gotter done in 5 rounds what are the odd that the 6th will finish it???

When de bar is chewing on ya leg.

 

[bananaman]

Mountain Gun all of the way! I am old & set in my ways. Just no desire for a 5 shot revolver. Bob

 

[Paul105]

I've had both and carried both. The M69 (along with the 2.75") is still here, the mountain guns are not. Here are some measurements I took back in 2014/15/16 - don't remember exactly. M69 4.25", Mtn Gun 4"
.

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 “

Brian Pearce -- Bolt notches weakest point - M69 thicker than M629 at this location

 

[Shibadog]

I too had a mountain gun years ago. Switched to model 69 9with the Hillary hole/lock removed and plugged. Mountain guns been gone for years-69 is still here. My all time favorite DA .44

 

[bananaman]

Kinda what has already been said. Give me a 6 shot any day over a 5. Just the way I am. Bob

 

[mtgianni]

I hope that you have made your decision by now but a 4" 610 with 200 gr 10mm bullets does not give up a lot and has 6 shots.

 

[SFury79]

I hope that you have made your decision by now but a 4" 610 with 200 gr 10mm bullets does not give up a lot and has 6 shots.

I actually believe that semi-auto cartridges belong in semi-autos.

In this case 44 magnums are being discussed, and even the weaker cartridge options tend to be far more powerful than 10MM. That would be a significant downgrade in caliber.

If I was to go with a S&W revolver chambered in 44 magnum I would go with the Mountain gun. That, or an option going to the 5"-barrel length, because that would be my ideal sized gun for woods defense in that caliber (or higher).

My 7.5" Ruger Super Redhawk is too long for the task. If a bear is on top of me, getting such a large gun out of holster would be a real task.