Model 29-2 with 5 inch bbl

[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.

 

[410bore]

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

This tells it all unfortunately. A gun of this era should only be serial numbered on the butt, inside the yoke cut, and on the back side of the extractor. The soft fitting dept was eliminated in the late 1950's so there was no need to number each part afterwards.

The factory did, however, number these parts on occasion when a gun was sent back to the factory for service as to ensure that all of the original components found their way back together during reassembly. I would say that your gun was sent in for a barrel change/modification.

 

[feralmerril]

If that be so then why isnt there a star? Anyway it doesnt make a differance to me as I am keeping it but it will to my heirs. Possibly if and when I am totaly incapacitated I would sell it and most my collection for the best price but most of us dont as that is like acknowledging their is no hope and giveing up.
Anyway are you saying that someone could send a gun to the factory for a barrel change and the company would put on a new barrel, letter it with the gun but not put a star on the gun? I didnt know that.

 

[410bore]

What I am saying is that the gun should not have came from the factory originally with all those parts being serial numbered.

 

[feralmerril]

Thanks. ??? So someone else put on all the numbers? Or it was factory practice to get a gun back, replace or cut the barrel to 5"s, stamp the guns serial # on the barrel (where there never was one) along with some more locations but not stamp a star? That solves everything, still clear as mud to me. Thanks anyway. By the way, what was " the soft fitting department"?

 

[Bill Bates]

Before 1957/58 parts were machined and then each major component was fit by hand then polished, finished and assembled. The parts after that were hand fitted were all serial numbered including grips so they could be matched up for final assembly.

Okay, I'm just guessing here but I'll bet one of the last operation was to drill the hole for barrel pinning when the revolver was assembled. That means the barrel would be fit first and would need to be kept with the frame after drilling the pin hole.

On your revolver if it went back for service, like having the barrel cut, they would stamp the serial number on the barrel; send it to have the barrel cut; the sight re-installed and then back to for re-assembly. It was a way to make sure the right barrel got back to your frame so the pin hole lined up. They can screw the barrel back on and re-pin it to the frame and nothing has been changed when it comes to cylinder to forcing cone gap.

When it comes to rework stamps I've seen lots of revolvers reworked without stars and only date stamps under the grip. I've seen stars without dates. I've got a 1917 Commercial with no stamps beyond a single diamond on a replacement barrel that had major reworking.

I have no idea, if say someone put in a change order, before shipment what happened to the records or when it comes to rework stamps.

It sounds like your revolver is right as rain and the work was all Smith & Wesson but it wasn't how the revolver came off the line originally. After assemble, who knows when, Smith & Wesson removed the barrel, serial numbered it and shortened it to 5 inch.

This does beg a question, and this is the old machinist in me coming out, were all the barrel blanks say 8, 6 1/2 & 4 plus inches and the crowns cut to the desired length. If that is the case it make some sort of sense that all the 5 inch barrels (and other special order barrel lengths) started longer and were cut to the desired length by Smith & Wesson so we're all just talking about when in the process, when it comes to the record entries.

I wonder if and when all the records including the service records are digitized if some of the special order reworks will jump in value when the work can be proved to be factory?

 

[Doc44]

Four of the approximately 220 known 44 Magnums with a 5-inch barrel have extra charges invoiced to cut the barrel. I believe barrels for the 44 Magnum were forged in 6 1/2, 4, and 8 3/8-inches. Barrels were only cut when a custom length was ordered for this model (known lengths are 3 1/2, 4 1/2, 5 1/2, 6, and 7 1/2 inches) or the required barrel was not in stock.

Bill

 

[S.B.]

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.

I've recently aquired another 29-2, 6 & 1/2"er and had forgotten how much better they balance than any other I've carried(to me anyway). I've often wondered the same about the 6 & 1/2" barrels(why they dropped them from production).
Steve

 

[Boxhead]

I yearned for one for years and decided to have one built on this $400 piece I picked up whilst living in Alberta 4 or 5 years ago.