44 mag reliability

[pat g]

Am I missing the boat. I read that if you want to shoot a 44 mag with a steady diet of full loads, do not buy a Smith buy a Ruger.
Why would Smith make a gun that can not handle the caliber it is designed to use?

Thanks for all of your input. I have a number of Rugers and a number of Smiths. I have found the Smith to be more comfortable and you gentlemen have put my mind at ease. I rarely shoot full loads and do not hunt. ( except for upland game and waterfowl ).

Thanks again,

Pat

 

[Photog]

I have two mid 70's production 29-2's that have had several thousand "full house" rounds through them. One needs to be sent back to S&W for some TLC. It comes down to what you consider a steady diet...50rds a week,100, 500? I have always shot mine with 240 gr. jacketed or 250 gr lead bullets. If you want to shoot 300+gr bullets at maximum loads, they will eventually ruin any of the older M29's. Don't know about the newest models as the newest one I have dates from 1981 or so.
Rugers are built like a tank and if you want to shoot heavy bullets at high velocity, buy a Ruger.

 

[dla]

There are a lot of dense-bob's out there that think maximum published loads are only a suggestion. And there is this internet gun forum myth that Ruger's are better for the dense-bob's learning phase. And that is one reason why I wouldn't buy a used Ruger.

Any revolver will wear out, same as any rifle. Every design is good for a certain number of rounds. S&W revolvers will handle more 44 mag rounds than 99% of shooters are going to light off. And S&W's customer service will take care of the customer when the revolver does need a tune up.

 

[CWH44300]

Just be sensible. Do most of your work with mid-rang loads then finish up with full power loads if you have to. They will last a long time

 

[Fishinfool]

S&W N frame revolvers were designed well before the advent of the .44 magnum. Earlier guns can shoot loose after a steady diet of thousands of hot rounds, but remember in the early 1990's I believe it was, S&W incorporated the "endurance package" that alleviated a lot of the wear issues that some experienced in earlier 29's.

That said, most shooters who shoot their 29's regularly use mid-range, or standard 240 grain at 1200 fps loads out of their guns for the most part, and reserve the petal to the metal loads for hunting, or occasional range use. Just makes shooting more enjoyable that way.

Rugers are strong, especially the Redhawk series, no doubt about it. I have several I have tried to wear out over the years with heavy hunting loads, with no success. But I also have a modern 629 with several thousand heavy loads thru it that is still as tight and accurate as the day I bought it.

Larry

 

[redhawk444]

The Redhawk is the tougher gun and being a little heavier than the model 29, handles the recoil better.

Any gun can be shot loose, as has been mentioned above, but it takes longer with a Redhawk than with a model 29.

The model 29 is a somewhat nicer gun, more classic in design and some would say more pleasing to the eye esthetically, but for pure brute strength, the Redhawk is hard to beat.

 

[Maximumbob54]

I thought this was all about heavy for caliber bullets like trying to use 300 grain instead of 240 grain bullets. And then there are the guys who want +P magnums for their own reasons. Maybe they want to blow bowling pins apart instead of knocking them over or to really reach out and touch those silhouette targets. Or maybe they want a .44 magnum that is the most bear medicine they can get without stepping into a .454 or higher. But either way you look at it, I wouldn't call the Smith weak. It just was designed around a time when the max loads were what they were and today there are those who expect a little more than the design will last shooting. I look at it like I look at SAA's. They aren't weak, they are just weak with modern loads that they weren't made to shoot. 29's and 629's are the same way to me. That's why Smith made the X frames. They still get to be the biggest kid on the block.

 

[cochise]

Yes older S&W are a bit more delicate when compared to Rugers, especially the Super Blackhawk.

The model 629 -4 and 29-4 and "up" were beefed up to endure a bit more abuse. The cylinder notches are located differently, the crane is tougher, [backside ratchet] and the top strap is a tad thicker. I have a few older -2 and -3's that are still going strong. Keep the loads within specs and have fun!

 

[NFrameFred]

When the model 29 was introduced factory magnum ammo was supposedly hotter than today's offerings.

The stories about 29's shooting loose or coming apart are no doubt from such in-duh-viduals as I have encountered on the range whose mantra is that loading manuals build in a 30 to 50% "safety margin" in their figures, so they (knowing more and being smarter than the rest of us) overload accordingly. These people are dumb enough that even when they blow up guns, erase head stamps after two loadings, and their guns rattle like a 39 Ford, it's the gun's fault or a manufacturing shortcoming/defect. The only cure for stupid is dead.

Sticking to factory ammo or equivalent will not harm your 29. Some folks may be able to buy or reload enough ammo and get off on acquiring carpal tunnel syndrome to fire enough rounds to shoot one loose, but it's gonna be a whole lotta rounds and a whole lotta money.

Silhouette shooters using blue-pill loads and firing thousands of rounds were the first ones to call attention to the "problem". I'm guessing less than 1/4th of 1 percent of 44 magnum owners would ever have a chance to encounter such a problem.

Let the flames from the "manly men" begin . . . .

>shrug< YMMV

 

[off road]

buy a Ruger.

I had two M29's back in the day. Absolutely hated those ridiculous hardwood Goncalo Alves grips (aftermarket grips weren't as well developed in those days). Still can't figure out what S&W was thinking. Never could stand the ergonomics of the original Ruger Redhawk either, but the minute the Super RH came out, I jumped ship! And once the Alaskan came out, don't really have much use for the Standard RH anymore. The Hogue Tamer grips rule!

That said, I now have a 329NG on order. It is a full pound lighter than the Alaskan! As a pure trail gun, it will get carried often, but fired seldom.

 

[Maximumbob54]

I had two M29's back in the day. Absolutely hated those ridiculous hardwood Goncalo Alves grips (aftermarket grips weren't as well developed in those days). Still can't figure out what S&W was thinking. Never could stand the ergonomics of the original Ruger Redhawk either, but the minute the Super RH came out, I jumped ship! And once the Alaskan came out, don't really have much use for the Standard RH anymore. The Hogue Tamer grips rule!

That said, I now have a 329NG on order. It is a full pound lighter than the Alaskan! As a pure trail gun, it will get carried often, but fired seldom.

Thank you for someone else saying that. I don't know who the gorilla hands guy is that said that is the grip to have. I know it helps spread the recoil but it's freaking huge… I'm just glad to hear someone else finally say it besides me. For wood, nothing beats Ahrends on an N frame.

 

[bigshot500]

my 629 power port (my favorite of all my smiths) gets fed max hand loads and has been for years...zero issues....

 

[off road]

Who was Goncalo Alves??? Mexican revolutionary???

 

[Maximumbob54]

It's the species of wood they used to make the grips out of. It was the most common if I'm not mistaken. Then walnut and rosewood would be the next most common. Gancolo Alves is from a Portuguese word according to Wikipedia. I wasn't there when they named the tree so I don't know why they call it that.

 

[GyMac]

It's hard to imagine someone being able to afford to shoot enough normal factory ammo to "wear out" a S&W in .44 Magnum. And if you're reloading, why would you load everything to the hilt? This is probably more a theoretical question than anything else.

 

[NFrameFred]

Who was Goncalo Alves??? Mexican revolutionary???

I smell sarcasm . . . .

 

[Maximumbob54]

It's hard to imagine someone being able to afford to shoot enough normal factory ammo to "wear out" a S&W in .44 Magnum. And if you're reloading, why would you load everything to the hilt? This is probably more a theoretical question than anything else.

I smell sarcasm . . . .

I think one cylinder of Garret's Ruger or T/C only loads in a 29 would be a bad afternoon.

And I always miss sarcasm if it is even more dry than my own. Deerrrrrrrrr...

 

[dla]

When the model 29 was introduced factory magnum ammo was supposedly hotter than today's offerings.

The stories about 29's shooting loose or coming apart are no doubt from such in-duh-viduals as I have encountered on the range whose mantra is that loading manuals build in a 30 to 50% "safety margin" in their figures, so they (knowing more and being smarter than the rest of us) overload accordingly. These people are dumb enough that even when they blow up guns, erase head stamps after two loadings, and their guns rattle like a 39 Ford, it's the gun's fault or a manufacturing shortcoming/defect. The only cure for stupid is dead.

Sticking to factory ammo or equivalent will not harm your 29. Some folks may be able to buy or reload enough ammo and get off on acquiring carpal tunnel syndrome to fire enough rounds to shoot one loose, but it's gonna be a whole lotta rounds and a whole lotta money.

Silhouette shooters using blue-pill loads and firing thousands of rounds were the first ones to call attention to the "problem". I'm guessing less than 1/4th of 1 percent of 44 magnum owners would ever have a chance to encounter such a problem.

Let the flames from the "manly men" begin . . . .

>shrug< YMMV

You're right. I used to be one those "dense-bobs" that would overload because I thought the manuals were being conservative. Fortunately I grew up and my head popped out of my sphincter. Every now and then I'll see posts on this board from someone claiming that his overload is "safe" in his RugerBigManlyDanglyBits revolver. I've learned that you just can't fix stupid sometimes.

 

[kennyb]

When the model 29 was introduced factory magnum ammo was supposedly hotter than today's offerings.

The stories about 29's shooting loose or coming apart are no doubt from such in-duh-viduals as I have encountered on the range whose mantra is that loading manuals build in a 30 to 50% "safety margin" in their figures, so they (knowing more and being smarter than the rest of us) overload accordingly. These people are dumb enough that even when they blow up guns, erase head stamps after two loadings, and their guns rattle like a 39 Ford, it's the gun's fault or a manufacturing shortcoming/defect. The only cure for stupid is dead.

Sticking to factory ammo or equivalent will not harm your 29. Some folks may be able to buy or reload enough ammo and get off on acquiring carpal tunnel syndrome to fire enough rounds to shoot one loose, but it's gonna be a whole lotta rounds and a whole lotta money.

Silhouette shooters using blue-pill loads and firing thousands of rounds were the first ones to call attention to the "problem". I'm guessing less than 1/4th of 1 percent of 44 magnum owners would ever have a chance to encounter such a problem.

Let the flames from the "manly men" begin . . . .

>shrug< YMMV

well said fred!

 

[Fishinfool]

I smell sarcasm . . . .

I like his grips...But then I wear a size 20 ring...lol