Model 29-2 with 5 inch bbl

[flundertaker]

I just returned from Gander Mountain in Evansville where I looked at the 29-2 we are discussing. I did not ask them to take it out of the case as I am sure the barrel has been cut to five inches and the red ramp on a ramp base mounted to the barrel with two pins that are not polished flush to the barrel rib. It is possible S&W did the work, but that is irrelevant if the barrel is not original.

A nice shooter in my opinion, that is priced about $3,000 too high.

Bill

this is my surprised look.........

I dealt with GM in Little Rock and their level of incompetence and stupidity never ceased to amaze me. I hope they bought the 29-2 in question thinking it was the real deal and got taken with the seller laughing all the way to the bank. Hopefully, anyone considering dropping $4k on an gun will either be extremely knowledgable or do their homework before doing so. It would warm my heart to know GM took a $2500-3000 bath on that gun.

 

[flundertaker]

I've often wondered why Smith & Wesson didn't produce more 5 inch .44 Magnums. I've owned 8 3/8 in., 6 1/2 in., 6 in., 4 inch and one 5 inch .44 magnums. The 8 3/8 are great shoot but a pain in the neck to carry. The 6 1/2 and 6 inches are nice to shoot and not to bad to carry. The 4 inch is a little nasty to shoot with full house loads but carries great.

The 5 inch carries almost as nice as a 4 inch but with out the bluster when shooting. To me, it also seems to point and handle the best. Plain and simple the Smith & Wesson 5 inch .44 Magnum is pick of the litter.

Here is my 5 inch pre-29; one of the few guns I own that is on my "I won't ever sell it" list.

Nice pre 29 bill. Now is that a factory 5" or has it been cut down? I am trying to figure out what a factory 5" barrel looks like and this thread has gotten confusing.

 

[Bill Bates]

Nice pre 29 bill. Now is that a factory 5" or has it been cut down? I am trying to figure out what a factory 5" barrel looks like and this thread has gotten confusing.

I've not had this revolver lettered.

The barrel has a diamond stamp by the serial number which means it is replacement or has been worked on. There is a service date stamp of 9/63. I 'm guessing this pre-29 started life with a 6 1/2 inch barrel. The work on the crown and sight look factory but I'm betting it was shortened and re-blued in September 1963.

 

[feralmerril]

Bill, your lettering isnt centered. My 5" 29-2 was supposedly sent in 6 1/2", yet my lettering is perfectly centered. Go figure!

 

[Bill Bates]

Mine is one of a couple hundred pre-29 with what is called forward roll stamping that are found in the S175-181000 serial range

 

[Doc44]

Bill Bates...the B followed by a diamond indicates a refinish most likely in September of 1963. Also, the extractor rod has the relieved area behind the knurled tip indicating it has an improved, left-hand thread that first appeared in 1962.

Bill

 

[1blindref]

I found this 5" 29-2 at a LGS a few years ago.
This LGS deals mostly with newer plastic guns and I've scored a few very nice old S&W's at VERY good prices there over the years. I bought this one at a VERY GOOD out the door price, so I wasn't really disappointed when I got my letter from Roy stating that this gun started out life as a 8 3/8's inch gun. I don't know if the barrel was cut, or just replaced. The lettering looks very close to being centered, but who knows? Either way, I'm very happy with the gun, and I can shoot it as much as I want without decreasing its' value.

 

[Doug M.]

There is just something about a 5" N frame with the standard barrel (not the full lug abomination) that looks right. One of my back burner projects for myself is to snag a 629-4 with a longer barrel and have it cut to 5" by someone who knows what they are doing. Maybe a more visible front sight and opened up rear (I'm prone to the XS front, and maybe an opened up C&S heavy duty, since my eyes are not what they used to be).

 

[Bill Bates]

I found this 5" 29-2 at a LGS a few years ago.
This LGS deals mostly with newer plastic guns and I've scored a few very nice old S&W's at VERY good prices there over the years. I bought this one at a VERY GOOD out the door price, so I wasn't really disappointed when I got my letter from Roy stating that this gun started out life as a 8 3/8's inch gun. I don't know if the barrel was cut, or just replaced. The lettering looks very close to being centered, but who knows? Either way, I'm very happy with the gun, and I can shoot it as much as I want without decreasing its' value.

I'm with you on this. I bought my 5 inch pre-29 at a regular 29 shooter price. I can put it in a holster and shot it without to much worry; just like the retired Idaho Fish and Game officer that owned it before me did for many years.

Who ever had the work done in 1963 was looking for a working gun, not a collector gun. The work done, was done with thought and with a purpose in mind. It was done professionally, with care. It is how I like my old guns, used and well cared for by men that knew what it was all about. they carried and used them with a real purpose.

I hold, care for, carry and shoot them and wonder what stories they might tell.

 

[feralmerril]

I am really puzzeled by mine. It lettered as being shipped june 24th 1964 in 6 1/2" to stoger arms N. J. Butt, barrel, clyinder and frame number above the model # are all S231718. Both crane and left bottom of grip frame is 30753.
I own a number of other old smiths to compare with and I again did last night. Now I am positive the barrel wasnt changed. The lettering is perfectly centered, the crown and sight look as the others. Since doc said the pins should be flat and not rounded I looked hard at that. You can barely see the pins as they are flat and blended in the same as my old model 27-2 that I bought new. Another thing. I seen another exactly like mine at a gun show many years ago and the number was like 7 numbers away from mine. Now if my gun was a cut back barrel, okay, what is--is! No big deal I have had hundreds of guns go through my hands. What I am saying is I wish I had the oppertunity to have roy and doc look at this one and show me any visable sign of it not being original.
One question: Was the 5" and 6 1/2" barrels lettered at the same length on the barrel?
My 27-2 I bought new and it is also 5" and it looks the same.
My picture doesnt show the cokes but I have them.

 

[Doc44]

feralmerrill...Your 29-2 may have had a new, 5-inch barrel put on it rather than having the barrel cut from 6 1/2-inches. Since the barrel shows no signs of being refinished, this is what I suspect S&W did.

I can tell you S231719 has an original 5-inch barrel and was shipped about a year earlier than your 29-2.

Bill

 

[rck281]

I was told by a very knowledgable collector that 5" barrels were available in the service department into the early 1970's. Don't know if that's true.

 

[feralmerril]

Doc, if that is so, then how is it the barrel is the same number in the ejection houseing as it is the same number of the clyinder, frame and butt?
I have had reworks done myself from the factory and know where to look for the star, diamound etc and this has none of that. Again, if it were cut back from a 6 1/2" would the stamping (lettering) be still centered? Are they the same in location? This barrel matchs the gun. If it was changed later at smith would they stamp that barrel with the same serial # as the clyinder and frame. And last, if the factory done a barrel swap would they not put on a star, date and or diamound? Thank you.

 

[Doc44]

I wish I could answer your questions, but I can't as sometimes S&W marked guns that were redone, but not always. I checked my two five inch 44 Magnums and it appears as though the roll markings on your 29-2 are a little farther forward than on my two. That doesn't support a particular conclusion, but it is an observed difference.

I have a 1950 45 Target that was rebuilt by S&W in 1955 into a 1955 45 Target with a 4-inch barrel, and there are no marks on it to indicate it was ever reworked. The new 1955 Target 4-inch barrel has the serial number stamped on it just like it would if it was original.

Bill

 

[feralmerril]

I know its apples and oranges but I have a colt saa. I found the clyinder to be overbored. I shot it against my s&w 25-5 and the emptys would bulge and stick in the colt chambers and yet drop right out of the smith with the same ammo. I sent the colt back to the factory with the request that if it needed a new clinder could I have one with the removable bushing. I got the gun, old AND new clyinder with the removable bushing back and both clyinders are numbered to the gun. They didnt charge me anything. Thanks for your imput.
It still has me a little suspicious of a possible record keeping mistake though. Later tonight I am going to compare the lettering on the barrels location with a 1950 6 1/2" target I own. If the lettering is located in the same place I can accept the fact that my barrel started out as a 6 1/2" and some non factory craftsman did a perfect like factory job in shorting the barrel. One thing that supported my questioning it besides it looking perfect was the sighting of another identical one that was only about 6 numbers apart. Thanks for your replys.

 

[Nightowl]

Merril: Did your gun ship to H.H. Harris? If so, it would add to your position that it is original. Maybe not much, but a little.

 

[viceunit]

I remember reading Col. Jeff Cooper in G&A years ago. He was appalled that people would cut a 6 1/2" model 29 down to 5". I would love a 5" 29, but I'd never have one of my 6 1/2" guns cut down. But, if someone else did it and I could buy it at a shooter price that's a different story.

 

[feralmerril]

No it shipped to stoger arms co. in new jersey. From everything I have read the gun "Looks" to be a original factory gun from all possible standpoints, date, perfect work, all numbers match, lettering centered, pins polished flush as my other smiths, crown perfect, no reworking star or diamound. The only thing that blows it out of the water is ray says it left the factory as a 6 1/2".

 

[Nightowl]

Well its still a darn nice 5" .44 Magnum!

 

[Bill Bates]

No it shipped to stoger arms co. in new jersey. From everything I have read the gun "Looks" to be a original factory gun from all possible standpoints, date, perfect work, all numbers match, lettering centered, pins polished flush as my other smiths, crown perfect, no reworking star or diamound. The only thing that blows it out of the water is ray says it left the factory as a 6 1/2".

The record entries were and are made by humans which means; there will be mistakes. The reality of it all means; the records and Roy's letters, based on those records, are the best information we have and what we as collectors have.

Could your 5 inch be factory original and the records are wrong, maybe and maybe not. Unfortunately it means when it comes time to sell your revolver will bring less than it would if it lettered as a 5 inch.

If you're like me and have no intention of selling, it really doesn't matter if it letters. We both get to own 5 inch Smith & Wesson .44 Magnums that look factory original. Original or not, they are very special.