Model 29 or 629 -- which would you buy?

[Redlegvzv]

Today I was looking at the S&W 29 and 629. My LGS had a Model 29, beautifully blued, for the first time in a couple of years. A beautiful firearm, no doubt of that.

They also had a Model 629 5". This seemed to be a very well-made and workmanlike gun, a solid tool. Not the beauty that is the 29, but solid. The stainless steel construction made the gun look indestructible. I also liked the full lug barrel, which seems very desirable for a .44 magnum. Is a 5" barrel too short?

Well, which is the better handgun? The little devil is dancing on my shoulder, but I could not make a decision.

 

[Lou_the_welder]

If you're going to do alot of shooting with it........I'd go with the stainless. In any flavor.
Bluing will take a beating and they're only pretty when NOT fired sitting in wooden boxes.

Turn marks on the cylinder. Flame marks between the flutes. Holster marks. Im convinced the only way to keep a nicely blued revolver is to not shoot it.

.......

 

[S&W SS Revolvers]

Blued is beautiful. My favorite. SS is practicle. Double lug shoots sweet. SS cleans up so nice. Corrosion is negligible...

Buddy you have to choose. Either way...it's your choice and cleaning procedures concerning protecting the finish as well as holstering are beyond important to preserve the finish. SS is more forgiving. Blue is prettier...IMO.

We have a 686-3 that is a workhorse polished to 2500 grit with many years of "I don't care about looks (but care about mechanics)". It served so well...It needed to be spoiled and semi-retired. It's the last one "they'll get." BTW...

 

[sturtyboy]

Me too...Stainless for a shooter. But I do love all my other 29's in blue and nickel. their great to look at...but the stainless is much easier to keep clean and does the same thing as the pretty ones.

Can't go wrong with a nice 29...or 629. I buy all I can get.

 

[jimbo728]

I guess it`s a matter of personal preferance. I agree with all of the input here so far but would add that the 5" 626 is very attractive and
would serve many uses very well. It is a good barrel length, not too short.
You did not mention the 29`s barrel length. Blued 29`s own a distinguished beauty all their own.
It all comes down to what your preferances are.
Jim

 

[Joe A.]

I have a 5 inch 629 Classic. Just right length for me. When I used to shoot it, I did a lot of 100 yard shooting with it. I killed a deer at 95 yards with.

I plan on shooting it some this year. Recently, I loaded 250 44 magnum rounds for it and the new load shoots great. I have 250 more bullets to load and I'll be set.

I can't see where a person can go wrong with a 5 inch 629 Classic with the full under lug.

 

[SeamasterSig]

I bought a 5" 629-3 Classic last year and can say that the 5" barrel with the full underlug feels very well balanced in hand, has enough weight out front to help tame the recoil, and enough barrel length to support genuine magnum velocities. From what I've read on the forum, the 5" version has its own fan base. Not as handy as a Mountain Gun, but probably a lot more fun to shoot.

The SS finish cleans up easily and is basically indestructible. Pros include the easily interchangeable front sights and the fact that it comes from the factory already drilled for a scope. About the only con IMO is the general lack of available holsters designed specifically to fit the 5" 629.

 

[SweetMK]

You can tell my preference,,,

75% of the time,,, I prefer stainless!!

Actually, I only shoot the 4",, plinking at 25 yards, it is the most accurate in my hands.

The 8 3/8" is kinda muzzle heavy,, maybe I should try it off a bag??

 

[Gunhacker]

Something that hasn't been mentioned yet... what dash numbers are the two guns? One of the things that would add to the decision making process for me is whether or not either one has the endurance features incorporated into the later versions.

With the 629 having a 5" full lug barrel, it most likely does have the newer features.

I personally love the 5" barrel N-Frames, they just feel right, I can't get enough of them.

I have a 6" 629-4... and I would gladly exchange it for a 5" if one could be readily found in my location.

Also since you're in CA too, another word of advise... don't hesitate too long or you might lose out.

 

[trigger945]

I would likely go with the 29

 

[629shooter]

My blued ones don't come out to "play" as often as the stainless. But, you can't really go wrong either way.

 

[Hillbilly77]

Get the blue one.

Everybody knows that stainless guns are ugly.

 

[CWH44300]

I'll cast a vote for the 629's.
I have about all the barrel lengths. I like the 4" guns but lots of people like mid length 5" - 6 1/2" guns. Don't discount the longer ones, they can be scary accurate. Here are a few different mid length guns.

 

[Stirling]

I'm surprised no one has mentioned getting both! Since you're in California I would certainly try doing that. I have a 4" M29 and would love to get my hands on a 5" full lug M629.

 

[twodog max]

I am old school and prefer blued. Even when worn, scratched and a lot of the bluing gone through honest use they just look good to my eye. Yet I have many stainless because of the practical aspects.
The 5 inch full lugs are a good compromise. I had a 6 inch and thought it to muzzle heavy.

 

[SPEEDGUNNER]

Get the blued one for just lookin' at and get the stainless on for just shootin' with!

Can't go wrong then!!

 

[Redlegvzv]

Great input here fellow shooters. I am heavily leaning towards the 629. We'll see next week.

 

[Ross226]

Blued. And as for the wear it will eventually and inevitably show, well, that just adds a whole lot of fine character.

 

[DD357]

I prefer blued guns and dislike the full underlug on a barrel over 4" so it's an easy call for me

 

[fyimo]

I like the looks of the Blued Model 29-2 and if you make it a shooter some honest wear would not detract the revolvers beauty to me. Stainless revolvers are easier to keep clean and stay looking new longer so really the choice is which one do you like best.