An old unwanted 29-3

[LittleCooner]

Well, I finally dug into the billfold a few weeks ago. After wandering into my LGS for the past several months, the old 29-3 4" with cheap plastic stocks just remained sitting in the used revolver case. So I took it out, one more time and looked at the holster wear, the TT and TH and decided it needs a new home.

As I wander around the local guns shows and other LGS in my retirement, I see 29s all for sale in the 4 digit price range, no matter what condition. I do love old blued guns and nice walnut, there is a soft spot here from growing up in the 50s and 60s.

Did the conversion to stainless and the production of the 629 just kill the public's interest in the 29? This old gal set in this case for about 6 months and I did the rehoming for only three digits of currency, thinking it was a good investment. Never mind if it's a good investment or not, it looks great beside the only other 29 i have, a 6.5 inch TT TH gun from 1976 with similar holster wear that came to me in 1976.

What are the thoughts on the 29-3 being less desirable that the 29-2 due to the Eastwood connection and the pinned and recessed connection?

 

[CH4]

Thread is useless without pictures.
Of course P&R guns are more desirable to many than those without, but I don’t think desirability of post P&R 29s took a bigger hit than other post P&R models.

 

[shown50]

Loved my 29-3 4”. First outing I shot 100 rounds of full house 44mag and realized I never wanted to do that again. I think people skip the 29-3 early models because they don’t have the endurance package and people consider them to be less robust for full house load shooting regularly.

 

[22hipower]

I've read, but don't know, that the -3 is actually better in terms of being better able to sustained repeated firing with full magnum rounds. I've never really wanted one, preferring P&R or later 629s, but if I wanted one to shoot I wouldn't hesitate on a -3. Even if I didn't want one to shoot I might buy one anyway even one that was scratched up a little with more holes in the barrel than it ought to have. Enjoy yours and we do need pictures.

Jeff
SWCA #1457

https://flic.kr/p/2qgTh9T https://www.flickr.com/photos/194934231@N03/

https://flic.kr/p/2qh16gp https://www.flickr.com/photos/194934231@N03/

https://flic.kr/p/2qh15ox https://www.flickr.com/photos/194934231@N03/

 

[glenncal1]

I had a 4" 27-3 that was a great gun to shoot, of course not p&r. Sounds like you bought for less than a similar p&r gun and if you sell it will sell for less than a p&r gun. So everything evens out, when you pull the trigger you won't care if it is p&r.

 

[Burnston]

I find that I am often an exception to many rules, usually in terms of clumsiness and/or capacity to cause damage. Case in point, I once purchased a suburb 29-3 on this very forum. After talking with John Linebaugh for several hours I allowed myself to be talked into shooting 300gr "Hammer Slugs" over an unmentionable level of 2400. The load was hot, but not what I would consider hotrod. However, this experiment resulted in a cracked forcing cone and frame right along the threads.

This is not to suggest the 29-3's are of low build quality. I am simply pointing out that in the wrong reckless hands, (mine,) any anvil can wind up broken.

 

[stansdds]

The Model 29-3 lack the pinned barrel and recessed chambers of the prior versions of the Model 29. These were cost cutting measures, so the 29-3 is viewed as a cheapened Model 29. The 29-3 also lacks the endurance package of the 29-4, 29-5 and later versions, so it is viewed as being just as "weak" as the pinned and recessed Model 29's. It is an in-between version and gets treated as a red-headed step-child be collectors and serious shooters. The reality is that they can fine shooters, so long as you don't abuse them with full power heavy bullet loads. Some certainly display less attention to fit and finish, but that does not affect how they shoot.

 

[6string]

Let’s put this into context.
The introduction of the 29-3 was a result of the acquisition of S&W by LSI from its previous owner Bangor Punta.

LSI made a number of changes that, according to industry talk at the time, were considered to be improvements, at least from the standpoint of marketing and customer demand.
Within the exact same time frame, S&W introduced the following:
-the 586 & 686 revolvers (no small matter as these were built on the brand new L-frame!)
-the 547 revolver in 9mm with it’s many innovations
-finally addressing the issue of throat sizes in the 25-5 revolver in 45 Colt that had plagued the revolver with bad accuracy problems
-the 645 automatic pistol, the first S&W auto in 45 ACP (this was a huge development!)
-the reintroduction of the .44 Special revolver in the form of the limited edition 24-3 model, the following 3” Lew Horton 24-3, and the stainless 624
-the “Silhouette” model 29-3 with 10 & 5/8” barrel.

The latter is pertinent to the OP. Ruger had introduced their 10” NM Super Blackhawk specifically for IHMSA Silhouette shooting a few years earlier. (If you weren’t aware back then, silhouette was the hottest new handgun game. It had a huge impact throughout the industry in terms of firearms, ammo, and components.)
LSI, along with many S&W customers, felt that the company was not doing enough to keep up with the demand for an improved silhouette revolver. The Silhouette model 29-3 not only had a longer barrel but also a superb new sight arrangement.
This included the innovative 4-position adjustable front sight and a rear sight with a taller rear sight blade, together providing (what I would consider) the best sight picture ever offered on any factory target sighted revolver.

Taken together, I hope that this gives some context to the “-3” N frames, and the resultant discontinuation of the “pinned and recessed” features, not to mention changes in the bluing process.
In a lot of ways, Bangor Punta was dragging S&W down, not unlike what was going on in the US automobile market. Yes, we all lament the changes, but LSI likely considered this a cost expenditure change necessary to impliment the other desirable changes and improvements. This included a better responsiveness to market demand, with a more open mindedness towards new products.
Overall, there was plenty of good stuff, and some positive changes going on in the company.
To the OP, this might give a better perspective on his new 29-3.

 

[75Vette]

My 4" dash 3 has spent plenty of time at the range with me. And since I'm not twenty and indestructable anymore it won't be seeing any ground pounder loads.

 

[SGT ROCK 11B]

OP needs to post pictures. I would like to see "plastic" grips were on it.

 

[panamajack310]

I have a 29-3 and 29-5 with 6”barrels. Both guns are a dream to shoot. So we’ll balanced and the wood grips soak up a lot of recoil for my old hands, due to the added weight
.

 

[Baxter6551]

I obtained my first .44 magnum a 29-3 this year. It had been Metalife hard chromed and magnaported. It did not show any evidence of firing after coming back from Metalife. The owner of Metalife told me the matte finish was likely done around 30 years ago.

 

[JohnRippert]

Never been a big fan of N-frames but I had a 4inch m29 and a Winchester 94 in .44 Mag back in the day. Traded them both off decades ago, but obviously still had the itch for a M29. I found a dash 3 on GB for less than $800 and impulse bought it. I rarely shoot it but when I do it is with .44 Special rounds.

 

[mchom]

Jeff

I gotta say your 29 is quite a stunning revolver. Count me envious!