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

 

[pop-gunner]

I currently have 3 N frame .44s I shoot.
4 inch 29-2
4 inch 629-2 mountain gun
6 inch 29-5
None of them have the endurance package Smith started doing with the 29-5 (guess I have an early gun) and I have not experienced any problems.
I feed mine a steady diet if 240gr hardcast SWC running 1100fps and my other load of the same cast bullets or Hornady XTP running 1250fps and have never had a problem.
I know these loads aren't near what the gun is capable of handling but that's what I shoot 2-300 of per month.
Never have I seen anything that would indicate the slightest problem.
I have heard of silhouette shooters back in the 80s putting so many heavy loads through the guns that they stretched the frame and had the cylinder rotate backwards but I think those issues were handled by the endurance package which is available on any older Smith for $50 from the factory.
I guess if I was gonna load 300grain bullets to 1300fps and shoot 200 of then in a range session I would look into that but I like being able to feel my fingers after shooting.

 

[Nframe357]

Alot of conjecture and name calling, I've personally lost 2, count em 2 model 29's to Winchester white box 240's. So spare me the "you're just a dummy" BS if you wear a Smith out, it can and will happen and Smith will tell you to just "buy a new one". Happened to me twice folks, now if you treat a 29/629 with sanity they will last a good long time but they are not made for hot mags day in and day out,period. Newer models with the E pkg upgrades are certainly better but will still wear out if you insist on alot full power ammo. I treat my Smith 44's like 44 special +P guns with an ocasional mag load thrown in.

 

[1x2]

I echo a couple of the above sentiments.
29-2? A guy I talk to at the range occasionally has one- it's "shot out"- only apt description. It's got endshake, side shake, head shake, tail shake, battered forcing cone, you name it- from years of 240gr deer hunting loads, at, his estimate, ~ 1450fps. He offered that I should shoot a cylinder full one day while he was sighting it in for deer season. I examined the revolver and congratulated him on a fine piece, and declined- it seemed really unsafe to shoot, though I did not say so. He continued on, unfazed.

As an aside, I think the hot 240gr loads at that speed batter the revolver harder than the 300gr loads I shoot at 1279fps. I'm not suggesting that the 29-2 would have lasted longer had he been shooting the 300grainers at a little less velocity, but I think any revolver would rather have a little more push and a little less snap, for loads.

The Light Hunter I had and carried for a couple years spit several thousand of the aforementioned 300gr loads, and as noted in posts above, looked brand new when I sold it (had the lock, you know), as tight as the day it left the factory. I have a Heritage 29-I'd-have-to-go-look with the endurance package and no-lock that serves the same 300gr duty now, which I practice with, for large-scale predators.

That said, I've been carrying a 7 1/2" Redhawk in .45 Colt. Same WFN-GC bullet, same bullet weight (within 10gr), same velocity, a little less pressure (no big deal either way), and recoil is easier to manage for follow-up shots. I cannot foresee wearing either of these out, though I would not bet against the Redhawk outlasting the new 29.

BTW, the 29 wears Eagle RB->SB conversion grips and the Redhawk grips are the wood factory panels. Both feel just great to my medium-sized hands. However, I had a Redhawk 44 that bit me constantly, with the same factory panels as the 45, and under the same bullet and velocity. I can think of no other variables, except the load pressure, to account for the discomfort of shooting the 44 Redhawk, so "had" is the operative word- it's sold.

 

[BigBill]

My very first 44mag was a ruger super blackhawk w/ 7 1/2" barrel. I sent stout(max) 44mag loads down the pipe most of the time. Its a 44mag and made for the 44magnum loads. I never had a problem with it but as time went on the grip frame screws need to be tightened more often, were the grip frame attaches to the main frame. But i have to say we hammered it.

I then chose the ruger redhawk's in 44mag. I purchased the 5 1/2" barrel and the 7 1/2" barrels. At first we only shot the 44magnum loads out of both of these too. Again with no problems at all. I purchased these two when ruger first offered them to the market. I chose these because there are no screws to come loose.

For many years i only shot the magnum loads(jacketed bullets) more often. The past decade or so i shoot more leadcast now inbetween the jacketed. Back then i was shooting 2 to 3 times a week too.

Grips? I have never seen any revolver that came with grips that fit my hand that i liked. I put the rubber presentation pachmayer grips on all my double action revolvers. I have no clue why the gun manufacturers put so small sized grips on the magnum revolvers. The only handguns that come with grips were i can shoot them right out of the box is the pistols.

Now I lube all my guns with moly and shoot them not to worry about ever wearing them out, in my lifetime. Moly eliminates all wear, reduces friction, prevents galling ect. My 1976 ruger 357mag police service six is proof that moly does work. After shooting the magnum loads for all these many years now the revolver is still functioning like it was brand new. Its proof in a real world test that moly eliminates all wear.

I'm sure using moly coated bullets will prevent wear on the forcing cone and inside the barrel too. I do use the moly coated leadcast bullets. I have seen less leading in the barrels so far.

Overall I think the S&W and Ruger revolvers are heavy enough to handle the 44magnum round.

I'm not sure how the manufacturers think about how much or how little will there guns be shot. I believe from what I see in the used handgun cases at my local dealers some of them still look like new and either hardley shot or still unshot while some look used too. I would guess that the %'s are about 45% of the new handguns sold aren't shot or shot very little. While the other 45% get shot and shot more often. I'm going to say that 10% of the handguns that are sold get hammered, shot the most or well used. I'm trying to give an honest estimate from what i see in the used handgun case, I browse often. I purchased 4 used handguns which 3 were still looked to be unshot. I'm sure the manufacturers think about this too and how many miles will there product see and how long it will last before it needs repair. I wonder if they do life testing on there new designs/products.

The engineering group that i worked for did life testing on all there new designs and products. They even life tested the vendors products that they purchased too. I've seen gear boxes run for 100 years on the test stand when we pulled it apart to inspect it and then reassembled it and ran it another 100 years. You can't ask a product to have better results than this. But i wonder what the manufacturers think about the lifespan of there guns and how long they will last. Ok your thinking about guns lasting 100 years but i have rifles that are well over 100 years old and still shoot accurately. What about the guns from the 1800's and early 1900's. How about the older S&W's that are still around.

Now i wonder how long the action would really last if it was life tested and if the manufacturer does it? Bill

 

[BigBill]

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.

At one time in my life bigger is better (flames)and the more powerful the better. Its not a 44 special its a 44magnum afterall. Its the 44 magnum craze that drove us all right? It was more about the louder bang and the bigger flames comming out the cylinder/barrel. I'm sure i'm not alone. But as we get older and settle down either standard mag loads or loads in the middle of the spec's seem to suit me more now. Heck i'm even happy now shooting the leadcast. Bill

 

[ms]

What's your source

I have heard of silhouette shooters back in the 80s putting so many heavy loads through the guns that they stretched the frame and had the cylinder rotate backwards but I think those issues were handled by the endurance package which is available on any older Smith for $50 from the factory.QUOTE]

for getting the endurance package installed on an older gun for $50?

 

[pop-gunner]

for getting the endurance package installed on an older gun for $50?[/QUOTE]

The factory.
I checked on this about 2 weeks ago when I had them on the phone for something else.

 

[tgmr05]

The best way to explain the difference between a smith N frame 44 magnum and a ruger 44 magnum is this.... K versus L frame/ruger gp100 357 magnums.

The smith N frame 44 magnum is EXACTLY like a K frame 357 magnum. It will last a lifetime with specials, even with a small smattering of magnums mixed in - but will not take the abuse of magnum loadings all day long, and cannot be loaded any where near the L frame/ruger capabilities... It carries easier than an L frame, and is lighter, but simply is not as rugged.

 

[Maximumbob54]

The best way to explain the difference between a smith N frame 44 magnum and a ruger 44 magnum is this.... K versus L frame/ruger gp100 357 magnums.

The smith N frame 44 magnum is EXACTLY like a K frame 357 magnum. It will last a lifetime with specials, even with a small smattering of magnums mixed in - but will not take the abuse of magnum loadings all day long, and cannot be loaded any where near the L frame/ruger capabilities... It carries easier than an L frame, and is lighter, but simply is not as rugged.

Now you've done it. Prepare to be flamed by the Combat Magnum experts.