Model 29 cannot handle .44 Mag?

[jmichna]

At another forum I frequent, a poster made the claim that the Model 29 will develop mechanical issues upon extensive use of .44 mag ammunition. He further stated that .44 Special should be used, and .44 Mag only sparingly, and that the Model 29 issue with .44 Mag ammunition was well known and acknowledged at Smith & Wesson forum.

>>>Copyrighted Material Deleted<<<

I'm looking for feedback... either confirmation that this fellow's claims are true, or any information/evidence to the contrary.

 

[TAROMAN]

In my experience, there's some truth to this.
In 1975 I purchased a new 8-3/8" 29-2.
After several years of hunting use, I used it for revolver silhouette shooting. 240 grain FMJ with 22.0 of 2400 was my standard load.

After firing several thousand of these, it started to occasionally reverse rotate the cylinder upon firing.

Later S&W introduced the "endurance" package to address this issue.

My $0.03 - draw your own conclusions.

 

[roundgunner]

I would tend to agree, the S&W is a fine revolver but it is not built like a safe.

I would say it compares to a Jeep, if you run it on road all the time or when off road stick to first and second gear it will last a long time, if you run it off road as fast as it will go you are going to have to put some money into it for repairs.

 

[M29since14]

Most of the problems I had with my Model 29s (at that time I had two that I used most of the time, both 29-2s) were with heavier than standard bullets. When I used 240- and 250-gr bullets, I never had a cylinder "run backwards," but I sure did with the 300-gr loads.

Can you beat up a Model 29 - sure. Can you "wear one out" - sure. You can beat up and/or wear out anything. The Model 29 is what it is. It's a great machine that does well what it was intended to do. It is from an era when it was not common to shoot a lot, or to use a gun like it in competition.

As to shooting 44 Specials and recoil, etc., I am not sure why the gentlemen says what he does about the "average experienced" shooter. I know lots of guys who shot lots of 44 Magnums in their 29s, and certainly they did not limit themselves to 20-30 shots. One of my friends who had the resources to do it would routinely shoot 200-300 rounds in an afternoon - sometimes more. While a very good shot, he never struck me as exceptional in his ability to handle the gun.

Most of the problems with recoil that I am familiar with involve the 4-inch guns. They have always had a bad reputation. I don't know anyone who shot them a lot, but certainly the 6.5-inch gun was not considered abusive, and the 8-inch gun not much of a strain at all.

Those are my "recollections."

 

[Snapping Twig]

The 29/629 can shoot any SAAMI rated bullet of any weight without any problem.

Enter the Ruger/TC only loads and you've got problems.

I've been shooting 265g cast from the Lyman 429244 in my 29's and 629's at 1200fps for over 25 years and they aren't even loose yet. 2 are pre endurance and the others aren't.

Keep it to a dull roar with SAAMI approved pressures and you've got no worries.

Methinks your friend doth protest too much.

 

[NFrameFred]

His information, while factual, starts from the premise (as I see it) that the S&W 29 is too lightly designed and one is better off buying a Ruger - BALONEY.

The caveat is - use the ammunition the gun was designed for and you won't have a problem. If you are one of those who must shoot heavier bullets and the highest pressure loads because you need to or because it just satisfies some testosterone high that validates manliness, then get a Red Hawk or a Blackhawk or spring for a Freedom Arms revolver.

While nothing said in his reply is necessarily "untrue", it ignores the fact that the problems stem from using heavier loads than the gun was designed for. I never got into silhouette shooting, and I don't encounter brown/grizzly bears when I stroll down to get the morning paper so for my purposes standard velocity/weight/spec 44 magnum ammo treats my model 29's just fine and seems to punch big holes in whatever needs it while giving me as much recoil as I care for.

On a side note, the old chestnut tossed in about the "Dirty Harry" character acknowledging the weakness of the gun and using light 44 special loads shows me this is someone who really doesn't understand what he's talking about and buys into movie myth and misinterpretation to make a point. That whole subject has been grist for other entire threads and it's one of those movie myths that just won't die. It was the result of a flubbed line by the star and wasn't considered grievous enough at the time to re-shoot the scene. But all the "experts" love to pounce on that to stir the pot . . . .


YMMV

 

[CelticSire]

ANY revolver will develop problems if you consistently shoot loads that are more powerful than it was designed for. I qualify with a Model 29-2, 4 inch barrel, and I can handle the recoil quite well for the 75 round course.

 

[redbos]

I just shoot lots of .44 Specials because they are pleasant, feels like my Model 14's in .38.... I have heard thousands and thousands could affect an older S&W, but how many of us will shoot thousands of hard core .44 Mags thru our guns? Very few of us...

 

[Doc Mark]

Greetings, All,

Well, personally, I think the OP is passing along erroneous and misinterpreted information. In truth, "much ado about nothing".

I bought my M29, 8 3/8" barrel, nickel-plated, NIB, and have shot it a great deal on the range, working up loads for deer hunting. I have never used the "burn down the barn" super heavy bullet loads in it, and see no reason to do so. If I need something more than that 29 can offer, I simply shoot my FA .454 Casull, and call it good.

I think the M29 was designed very well, and made perfectly. It's a wonderful pistol, and has legions of trusting admirers, all over the world, me included. IF the OP is sincere in his questions here, and I have no idea if that is the case, then he has been misled by others, and is going to get the straight info here, which is good. IF he is NOT sincere, then he is just trying to stir the pot, and knows little about whence he speaks. My opinion, and YMMV.

As to being able to handle full "normal" .44 Mag loads in the M29, my lovely wife, Sweet Bride, can regularly hit targets out at 100 yards, off-hand, with that gun, and 240 grain hot .44 loads. Smacks then with authority, too!! If that big Smith was abusive with such loads, she would not be shooting it that well, period. For what it's worth...... Take care, and God Bless!

Every Good Wish,
Doc

 

[bmcgilvray]

"I have yet to actually meet a 44 Magnum shooter who only uses that caliber in a S&W."

He just needs to get out more. I embraced hunter pistol silhouette competition in the late 1970s/early 1980s. My Model 29-2 has been shot with large quantities of 240 JHPs handloaded over heavy charges of H110 in the 31 years I've had it. It has given perfect satisfaction. No timing or end-shake issues.

Don't care if Ruger's are "built like tanks." I'm unwilling to own one of the clunky things.

 

[mike454]

I ran a fair amount (400 rounds) of heavy (320 grain) 44 mag stuff through an early 629 and did run into a few problems. The recoil was brutal. Occasionally the bolt would unlatch and the cylinder would rotate. And rather frequently the ejector rod would unscrew tying up the gun. Another later gun, 629-4, I ran standard loads through didn't have any of those problems. It was more annoying than anything else. I don't think anything was stretched or anything like that, but I didn't feel like those loads were a good match for that gun.

 

[Photog]

I must agree with the posters who think that the 29 series is weak...I believe it so strongly that I think that all the other posters who agree should send me those old, unsafe, unreliable, weak S&W 29's, 29-2", 629's and so on, so as to keep anybody from having such an inferior weapon. Send me your address and I will even be glad to cover the shipping cost to my dealer. I will even include a shipping box so all you do is put the gun in the box, seal it and drop it off at your dealer and my dealer will work out the shipping details!
Many people have said it best....if you use the ammunition the gun was designed for, you will have a gun that will probably outlast you. Give me ANY brand 44 mag, some handloading equipment and I will gurantee that I can make is shoot loose.

 

[keith44spl]

In my experience, there's some truth to this.
In 1975 I purchased a new 8-3/8" 29-2.
After several years of hunting use, I used it for revolver silhouette shooting. 240 grain FMJ with 22.0 of 2400 was my standard load.

After firing several thousand of these, it started to occasionally reverse rotate the cylinder upon firing.

Later S&W introduced the "endurance" package to address this issue.

My $0.03 - draw your own conclusions.

I concur with the above...As I too have experienced the
same difficulties with a 29-2 that I used for handgun
silhouette shooting.

Change bullet weights and it helped, went from usin' the 240 & 265 grainers to a Sierra 220 grain match type.
Wound a heavier locking bolt spring also, if I remember right.

Hey it's a machine, things manfunction sometimes.
But, I was shooting somewhere in the neighborhood of
300-500 rounds a week through it.
* I used three different revolvers in rotation,
although one of those was my primary competition revolver.

Of course pratices pays off...
Was IHMSA state revolver champ two years a runnin' way back when.

Su Amigo,
Dave

 

[dcxplant]

That it can eat the power loads some people put through them at all is a testament to how well this gun was originally designed!

The Model 29 was introduced in 1955, and based on the N-frame from even earlier.

Subsequent designs for the 44 mag from competitors reflect the direction of today's modern shooters, plus they have the Model 29 as a baseline.

Know what you want, and meet your need. Be educated and you won't be disappointed.

 

[mc5aw]

The automobile analogy seems to be closest to the truth. If a car is consistently run at red line for an extended time, the engine is going to fail at some point. Firing an excessive amount of fullest house Magnum loads for a similar extended time will no doubt cause a 29 to eventually experience a form of mechanical failure. Running any device at it's max limit all the time is a self fulfilling prophecy, but is in no way evidence of a specific car, pistol, or widget being inferior.

And as far as using Hollywood as a reliable source for factual information ...

 

[Maximumbob54]

Yes or no on this, I would still love to see S&W make an L frame equivialnt to the N frame. Add some bulk where it is needed, make it not slowly die to shoot 300 grain bullets, and put the Smith and Wesson .44 magnum back on top where it used to be. I'm not saying make the N frame capable of .500 SW mag performance, just beef it up where they could even add a .454 option or even a .475 if the window was made long enough. I'm not saying the 29/629 should go the way the 19/66 went, it would just be nice to see a S&W that didn't have to be the size of the X frame to really throw Thor's hammer down range and not beat the internals to death.

 

[dcxplant]

...eventually, some one will think the X-frame is a bit under designed...

Another car analogy for you:

Compare a 1955 Ford to a 2012 Ford.

As to that point, how many 1955 designs of ANYTHING are still for sale by the original designer, still kicking, still doing it's job better than most? A few, but not many, and whatever they are, they are classics and timeless in the best of terms.

Know what you need, get what you need. That's it right there. If I wanted 0-60 in 5 sec, airbags, and traction control, I would not pick a 1955 car!

 

[Engineer1911]

The other side

First 44 magnum was a Ruger Super Blackhawk. After 3,000 magnum loads it wouldn't shoot a 4" group at 25 yards. It was traded for a Ruger Redhawk, same loads shot a 2" group at 25 yards as long as I owned it. Found a M629, 8-3/8 barrel, unfluted cylinder at a very nice price in the LGS. Counter man said it was traded because the owner "couldn't hit anything with it." I bought it on the condition I could return it within a week for store credit.

I took the M629 to the indoor range with my usual box of 44 mags. Sights were grossly out of adjustment. Rounds #19 thru #24 shot 5-Xs and 1-10 on a 25 yard Bullseye target. I sold the Ruger Redhawk because it was not as accurate as the M629.

Today I have 1,600 pieces of 44 magnum brass / ammo and ZERO 44 Special brass. All the brass is on its eigth or more reloading. Over the past 3 years I've been fortunate enough to acquire 8 more S&W M29 / 629s. I have not had any poor design issues with my 5 M629s or the four M29s.

 

[A10]

My .02, Rugers are more durable but you pay the price in weight. If you are shooting lots and carrying little, the Ruger is great. Vice versa for the Smith. BTW, all my magnums are Smiths, I've owned my share of Rugers but didn't care much for the fit and finish, and didn't appreciate the additional weight in the woods.

 

[357 shooter]

There was a fairly informative article "way back" in 1990 in Guns & Ammo that pretty much stated what many here have already mentioned about the 29.

A couple of silhouette shooters were featured and told Smith of some of the issues they experienced and actually got Smith to listen to them.

The main feature of the article was the then new 29/629 with the endurance upgrades. The accuracy of seven 629 DX revolvers tested was impressive.

My own 629-5 has NEVER fired a 44 Special. Most have been 240XTPs with H110 or 296. I can sure fire more than 20 or 30 rounds without discomfort. It is mainly the cost of 44 ammo that keeps me from shooting too many rounds - and I do reload.

The accuracy of this 629 is incredible for a mass produced revolver. I don't need to shoot loads that put down an elephant. If I really need a lot more than the 44 can deliver I'll break out the .30-06.