Model 29 cannot handle .44 Mag?

[Coaltminer]

We all know the Ruger is a heavy duty piece, but their trigger pull is no comparison to the Smith 29. Face it folks, you probably won't wear either one out in a lifetime. I get a kick out of the semi-auto endurance tests that seem to be popular. "We fired 10,000 rds. of this, or 20,000 rds. of that, the gun never broke." Whoopee, who cares. Ask the average handgun owner how many rounds he/she shoots in a year, most have no idea, or, "well, I go to the range every week or two and shoot 4 boxes." This would be a helluva a lot of shooting for most people, a lot more than the majority, and that's not figuring that they probably own more than one gun, rotating something each time they go out. The average is most likely several boxes a year through each gun. I shoot a lot, but I'll never wear one out, nor will my children or grandchildren. We are too busy working, raising families, maintaining the business of life to worry about it. Professionals, well, that's a different story. In reality, 10 or 20 boxes per year in each gun is about it, more than likely, less. So, why worry? There are exceptions, but I'm not one of them, and I've been a frequent handgun shooter for more than 40 years, owning close to 100 guns in that time period, not counting rifles and shotguns. Shoot and enjoy, life is too short

 

[M29since14]

Yes or no on this, I would still love to see S&W make an L frame equivialnt to the N frame...

No! What most people who consider themselves "sixgunners" want is the S&W equivalent of the Model 29 that will stand up to a true .45-caliber magnum, like the .454 Casull cartridge, in basically the same fashion the 29 does with the original 44 Magnum. (At least among the folks I know.)

Beyond that power level, the gun will cease to be a sixgun and becomes more a mutation between handgun and carbine, doing the job of neither as well as the other two.

Not being an engineer, I can only theorize, but it would seem possible to make a slightly beefier gun, similar to an N-frame, that would still be practical to wear on a belt, for the (mythic) "average size man." The X-frame is just too big and too heavy to be practical.

Having to tune up a finely made gun every 3000 or so rounds is really no great hardship. The Model 29 does what it does just fine. Let's not tamper with it.

 

[scooter123]

I am the Knucklehead that the OP was referring to posting on another forum.

Now, the points that I was trying to make. I should also note that I was basing my statement on the assumption that the query was for opinions on a standard production model 29. My normal preference for barrel length in a revolver is 4 inches because I like they way they "handle". Keep that in mind. In hindsight I should have asked about what barrel length was the subject of the query. However, even with a 6 1/2 inch semi lugged barrel the model 29 can be what I find to be a bit brutal with a heavy Magnum.

1) The model 29 and it's siblings are the revolvers most prone to developing End Shake when used with a heavy diet of 44 Magnums. IMO it's a result of the Yoke Tube peening and not a result of the frame stretching. I also stated that it's not a safety issue, simply something that someone using this model with a steady diet of heavy Magnum loads need to be cognizant of and something they need to keep an eye on.

Now I ask you, what model yields the most posts about End Shake on this forum. Number one is the 44 Magnums and number two is probably the 686 due to it's popularity.

2) I've never actually met someone who only shot 44 Magnum loads in their S&W 44 Magnums. Seen lots of claims on the net but apparently they don't live in Ohio or Michigan. In fact I've only seen full house 44 Magnums used for just 20-30 rounds, after that the shooter moved to 44 spl. or equivalent loads in a 44 Magnum case. Since the difference in volume and muzzle flash is quite obvious, it's pretty easy to tell when the shooter has backed off on what he's shooting. BTW, I've also never seen any 460 or 500 Magnum shooter expend more than 10 rounds in one range session, however I expect there are people on the net who claim to shoot 100 rounds or more in one range session.

There are some shooters here who have posted extensive use of 44 Magnums for steel silhouette shooting and I do not doubt them one bit. However, a model 29 with an 8 3/8 inch barrel is considerably heavier than a model 29 with a 4 inch barrel. In fact I expect that the long barreled model 29 would feel a lot like a 4 inch 44 Magnum X frame. It's the mass of that long barrel that made extensive use of 44 Magnums tolerable and your experience isn't quite the same as shooting the 44 Magnum in a shorter barrel.

Finally, when the 44 Magnum and the model 19 were designed the Standard Operating Principle was to use the Magnums for serious work and practice with the Specials. Design decisions made in the 50's that were perfectly reasoned have proven somewhat marginal in light of the way that shooters today operate their guns. Quite simply, IMO the model 29 and it's siblings are great 44 spl. revolvers that can be used on occasion with 44 Magnums. If someone wants to shoot purely 44 Magnums, they need to be aware of it's tendancy to develop End Shake and maintain it properly. If that's done, I see no reason why they won't last well beyond any or our lifetimes.

As for the cylinder unlocking, that issue was well resolved with the Endurance Package and this was carried on with the production models following the development of the Endurance Package. BTW, I expect that problem was most prevalent in the shorter barrel lengths because mass does a lot to tone down recoil reaction forces.

Finally, I've shot just 1 round of 44 Magnum at the urging of a friend. That was enough for me, I don't have any need to beat myself silly and have enough accumulated wrist injuries to know better. However, that 6 1/2 inch model 29 loaded with 44 spl. was a real cupcake to shoot and a real hoot. BTW, that friend also tried to talk me into trying his 4 inch 460, however after feeling the effect of a 44 Magnum in that model 29 those urgings fell on deaf ears.

If you all want to call me a Wimp, go ahead. However, at 56 years old I am directly aware of the result of long term repetive stress injuries to the hand and wrist because I live with the effect every single day. Quite simply, once you pass 50 you learn that some of the things you did in your 20's and 30's while lots of fun extract a price when you get older.

In closing, I'll stand by my opinion, That the model 29 is a great 44 spl. and use of full house Magnums should either be limited or done with the thought that it will increase the maintenance requirement. I also think the 4 and 6 1/2 inch versions are too light for the energy that the 44 Magnum can produce. I'll grant that this is the opinion of someone who does have some wrist injuries, however in another 20 years you may find yourself with those same injuries. BTW, mild Tunnel Carpal, Both Wrists AND arthrytis at the base of the thumb on Each Hand. Personally, if I ever do purchase a model 629, it's going to be treated as a 44 spl..

 

[Maximumbob54]

No! What most people who consider themselves "sixgunners" want is the S&W equivalent of the Model 29 that will stand up to a true .45-caliber magnum, like the .454 Casull cartridge, in basically the same fashion the 29 does with the original 44 Magnum. (At least among the folks I know.)

Beyond that power level, the gun will cease to be a sixgun and becomes more a mutation between handgun and carbine, doing the job of neither as well as the other two.

Not being an engineer, I can only theorize, but it would seem possible to make a slightly beefier gun, similar to an N-frame, that would still be practical to wear on a belt, for the (mythic) "average size man." The X-frame is just too big and too heavy to be practical.

Having to tune up a finely made gun every 3000 or so rounds is really no great hardship. The Model 29 does what it does just fine. Let's not tamper with it.

"Yes or no on this, I would still love to see S&W make an L frame equivialnt to the N frame... "

Didn't you just say the same thing as what I was trying to say??? I was trying to say an L change from a K so it would go from an N to (?) with more steel where ever the engineers deemed it was needed. I'm not trying to say make a six shot X frame .44 Magnum... Maybe a X frame .444 Marlin, but that's different. I will say it different. We took the 66 and made the 686... Do that for the 29/629...

 

[Snapping Twig]

The K frame .357 is what keeps popping into my head when I read your thoughts on the 29. Specials often, magnums for carry.

Your hand issues notwithstanding, I'm OK with magnums in my 29/629 pistols which range in length from 3" to 6.5" and I shoot them all with wood Hogues - smooth, finger. The grips fit my hand and I find the recoil satisfying, but not unpleasant.

I also shoot a Spl load in a magnum case through them, but I have been known to only shoot magnums in it during a range session, in fact, most of the time. A typical session sees a box of 100 down the pipe. I have other revolvers typically and need to spread the love to them as well, so 50 to 100 per gun and somewhere around 200 ~ 300 rounds in a session.

I am close to you in age at 55, so I believe all of us are different and what's OK for one isn't so good for another and so on. One size doesn't fit all.

I've had Rugers and I just couldn't get past the triggers. They are built strong, there's no denying that. The Bisley's are catching my eye and perhaps one day I'll make the grab on a 4.5" ~ 5.5" Colt version.

 

[roaddog28]

We all know the Ruger is a heavy duty piece, but their trigger pull is no comparison to the Smith 29. Face it folks, you probably won't wear either one out in a lifetime. I get a kick out of the semi-auto endurance tests that seem to be popular. "We fired 10,000 rds. of this, or 20,000 rds. of that, the gun never broke." Whoopee, who cares. Ask the average handgun owner how many rounds he/she shoots in a year, most have no idea, or, "well, I go to the range every week or two and shoot 4 boxes." This would be a helluva a lot of shooting for most people, a lot more than the majority, and that's not figuring that they probably own more than one gun, rotating something each time they go out. The average is most likely several boxes a year through each gun. I shoot a lot, but I'll never wear one out, nor will my children or grandchildren. We are too busy working, raising families, maintaining the business of life to worry about it. Professionals, well, that's a different story. In reality, 10 or 20 boxes per year in each gun is about it, more than likely, less. So, why worry? There are exceptions, but I'm not one of them, and I've been a frequent handgun shooter for more than 40 years, owning close to 100 guns in that time period, not counting rifles and shotguns. Shoot and enjoy, life is too short

Amen! Most shooters will never see enough 44 magnums put through their model 29 to wear it out. This whole thread reminds me of the subject of K frame magnums not being able to handle a steady diet of 357 magnums. I say enjoy your revolvers and quit worrying about shooting the revolver too much and wearing it out. After all, I bought my revolvers to shoot not worry about using them too much.
Regards,
Howard

 

[Bullseye Smith]

I have this one and all it has shot is the rounds from the factory:

I love the "L" frame myself and I have over fifty of them that are stock and custom. The "N" frame was built to work, the big frame ruger was never carried by a LE, but for the "N" frame I bet you could almost cover the state of Texas with them. They handled the mags well and were good for parting the hair on those who though they were tuff, ha. The "N" is better than most people can understand.

 

[M29since14]

Didn't you just say the same thing as what I was trying to say???

I suppose by the time I had finished writing I had confused things enough that it sounded like it.

But the answer is no. I am perfectly happy with the Model 29, just as I am with the Model 19. I shoot "specials" and magnums in both guns, and have no serious complaints. Use them as intended and it's all good news.

What I was lobbying for was a bigger gun, but not as big as the X-frame, or even close. I'd like a true .45-caliber gun, which an N-frame is not, with anything but low pressure loads. (It is my understanding that S&W always thought of the N-frame as a .44-caliber design, long before the 44 Magnum came along.) It should be built to handle 300-gr loads, maybe at 1200-1300 FPS... ?

I believe the S&W engineers could have come up with a design like that, and it could be carried on a belt and used like a handgun. Instead, we got the X-frame. Obviously, my opinions, and those of my few friends, do not amount to much in Springfield.

The gun I have in mind is a different animal than a Model 29. It shouldn't even be offered in 44 Magnum caliber. If you start to confuse the two, it will give the bean counters an opportunity to shelve the 29, just as they did the 19.

Lots of people (myself included) don't really need a .45-caliber magnum S&W DA revolver - but I would still like to have one. I have enough 19s and 29s, I guess, but I would hate to see S&W cash out the 29, as they have the 19/66 in deference to the 586/686.

We may be talking about similar guns, but I don't see the need to "improve" on the 29 for the sake of the 44 Magnum cartridge. I think that's the main difference.

 

[Bendutro]

Super Redhawk in .454 with 7.5" barrel = 53oz

John Ross 5" 500 riding in primo Ken Null leather on a Simply Rugged belt from Rob Leahy = 57oz

Smoothness, style, toughness, pointability and versatility for that 4oz premium = priceless.

Take that Lord Humongus X frame and put a Titanium cylinder in it like the 520 and you'd be under the SRH weight. The tooling costs for a new frame are not small, wishing for a new midpoint between the N and X ain't gonna happen but Mr. Ross has addressed the issue here

 

[buck460XVR]

I am the Knucklehead that the OP was referring to posting on another forum.


2) I've never actually met someone who only shot 44 Magnum loads in their S&W 44 Magnums. Seen lots of claims on the net but apparently they don't live in Ohio or Michigan. In fact I've only seen full house 44 Magnums used for just 20-30 rounds, after that the shooter moved to 44 spl. or equivalent loads in a 44 Magnum case. Since the difference in volume and muzzle flash is quite obvious, it's pretty easy to tell when the shooter has backed off on what he's shooting. BTW, I've also never seen any 460 or 500 Magnum shooter expend more than 10 rounds in one range session, however I expect there are people on the net who claim to shoot 100 rounds or more in one range session.

wow...you fellas from Ohio-Michigan are amazing. Not only can you not tolerate moderate recoil, but you cannot believe any one else can. Don't know anyone who's EVER shot more than 30 rounds TOTAL outta their .44mag or anyone that's EVER shot more than 10 rounds during a range session outta their X-Frame? Sure snub nosed revolvers in .44mag and .460/500 S&W mag can be brutal, but so can the recoil in lightweight .38specials. Just can't YOUR hand can't take it, don't mean the gun or someone else's hand can't. I don't shoot .38 specials in my .357s and I don't shoot .44specials in my .44mags. I generally shoot a minimum of 200 of each at a range session(they are smiths BTW). Been doing this for about once a month for years for 10s of thousands of rounds. Since it takes me a half an hour to set up and another half hour to tear down, I don't go to shoot "a box". Oh, and I generally will shoot 50 to 100 rounds outta the X-Frame per trip.

 

[Evil One]

My .44 mags only saw lighter loads when my children were going to be shooting them.
I dont like to go to the range unless I have at least 100 rounds of full power magnum ammo.
I bought them FOR the recoil.
My wife likes to put a few rounds out of them downrange also.
No, you dont want to be loading up ruger/tc loads.
I find the factory, or my slightly hotter magnum loads to be FUN to shoot.
Cant see turning my magnum into a pop gun.
Thats what I bought .44 spl snubby pocket guns for.


Jim

 

[pthomas65]

Throw my 2 cents in. I own 2 29-2's (6 1/2 Blue & 8 3/8 nickel), fired 4 or 5 thousand 240 gr reloads @ standard velocity through these guns without a problem. I don't fool around with super hot loads and/or 300 gr bullets maybe that is why both guns are still in great shape and I would not part with either one of them.

 

[jmichna]

I appreciate getting everyone's input, personal experiences and opinions.
Regards,
John

 

[cooperduper]

Really?!?

ONE round of 44 Mag experience and lots of opinions?

Now, my Ruger GP 100 frame is directly comparable in size to my 629s. And it's only a 357. However, that does not mean my 629s are not plenty of gun for all the in-spec 44 magnum shooting I can do.

Although, Elmer's pre-magnum N frames only saw "44 Special" ammo too. Maybe you have a point ;-)

 

[Kavinsky]

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

Concerning that Dirty Harry line I think John Milius spoke out and said he ment a lighter Magnum load, not specials (probably a 180 rather than the 240 loads) and he said it was a writing mistake that it actually said special

and I can tell you from experience the remington 180's sound alot like the shots from the film and for me their easier to hit my target with, plus they sound great!

FYI the only trouble my M29-2 has given me was with the extraction of PMC ammo, where after those rounds had been shot they just woundnt come out easily, the rest were fine and its like you guys have been saying only shoot the ammo the gun was ment for and it'll last you a lifetime, specifically with the M29 the remington 180 44 magnums and magtech 240 magnums

Hell someone oughta direct that guy towards hickok45 and so he'll sound off on this recurring discussion and set him straight with his 8 inch 29 -2 and the huge amount of MAGNUM rounds he put through it since he bought it new in 1974.


and in shootability you just cant beat the M29 with a doube action ruger, the smith easily trumps in that and the shootability department, I pick up my redhawk and it feels like a downgrade in those departments, the trigger just aint nowhere near as good as the 29's and that's the most important thing about a gun!

and the 29 feels natural to my hand while the ruger feels cumbersome

 

[NFrameFred]

Concerning that Dirty Harry line I think John Milius spoke out and said he ment a lighter Magnum load, not specials (probably a 180 rather than the 240 loads) and he said it was a writing mistake that it actually said special

I saw an interview with either John or Clint several years ago when that question came up and that was the gist of it - though my recollection was that Clint said he was supposed to say " it's a special light load" instead of " a light Special load" and he got the line backwards - no one paid much attention to it at the time and filming proceeded. Like I said, that's one myth that the "experts" will never let die . . . . besides, the context was for a competition shoot - not what he was carrying on the street.

 

[ShrinkMD]

I've been working my way up in power, and I am now controlling a 240gr lswc over Unique 10.0 gr, which chronographed about 1090 out of my 4" 629. I have been able to shoot 200 at a session and maintain most of my accuracy (with some resting)

At this medium level of power, do I have any worries for the gun? How about the 19 gr of 2400 loads? I'm hitting the range every weekend and I love my 44 magnum.

 

[beach elvis]

Well, there's at least one guy in Ohio who regularly cranks Magnums out in their 629...me. Granted, she's a 629-5 Classic DX so recoil is a bit lesser because of the full underlug and being a -5, she has the Endurance Package.

But in the 6 years I've had it, there's never been a factory load through it OR a single .44 Special fired from it. Always 240 gr. XTP's over either H110 or Unique. (I did load 50 300 gr. XTP's once but I wimped out and used Unique under 'em. Pussycats they were, and the load was shockingly accurate in my particular specimen.)
BTW, I've always used the factory Hogues. Never tried firing it while she wore the morado grips that were also included. I'm sure they would add a bit of "authority" to the recoil. Been wanting to try one of the X-frame grips on 'er.

Anyway, I've never fired less than 150 rounds at a session through it and sometimes as much as 350 when I was testing different loads (how I love my Dillon). Fortunately for myself, one of my best friends is a gunsmith and upon my hearing about the consternation about a steady diet of Magnums, I had him check my gun for endshake and any other issues from pressure. She got a clean bill of health. I was especially worried after my first batch ever using 240 gr. XTP's over 24 gr. of H110 (1/2 a grain under max.) and got sticky cases and flattened primers. I started using a tiny bit less crimp and those issues went away.

I can't speak about the earlier iterations on earlier 29's or 629's beause I don't have much experience with them other my cuz's 8 & 3/8" 29-2. But HE shot silhouette matches with it weekly back in the 1970's and we've both burnt an awful lot of powder with it and no trouble to speak of.

Quick note to the fans of shooting Specials in the 29's: To them what ain't aware, shooting a lot of Specials will eventually build a ring of residue in the chambers that will keep Magnum rounds from fitting all the way into them. If you shoot a lot of Specials in your Magnum, please be sure to run some solvent and a borebrush through the chambers before you plan a range trip with any Magnum loads.

ETA- My first .44 Magnum was a Ruger Super Redhawk 7 & 1/2". After shooting my cuz's M-29, I couldn't stand the trigger on the SRH. Pretty good accuracy with a couple of factory loads as I hadn't yet started handloading and boy, anybody that messes up a Ruger had to WANT to do it. They are tanks.

Fascinating thread.

 

[fyimo]

I had a Ruger Red Hawk with the 7.5 inch barrel and it was a great revolver and I sold it and bought a S&W Model 29-2 and I have never looked back or regretted the decision. In fact now I own many Model 29-2's and a set of 629 no dash revolvers in all barrel sizes.

 

[buckeyeshooter1]

Well, I shoot exclusively 44 mags out of my 29-2, 6 1/2 inch and have for 33 years. I do at this point have a cylinder unlocking problem with full power 240 and 300 grain bullets at max velocity. 240 grain bullets over 10 grains of unique still work fine. I will have to get the gun looked at soon, because I like shooting 20 grains of 2400 with a 429421 (keith load adjusted for 'new' 2400). I can't tell you how many rounds fired in this gun, but its been alot. I usually shoot 100-200 rounds a session. When I was younger I had a shooting range behind the house and shot several times a week for many years. Oh, I do live in Ohio for what that matters.