[cutnhrse]

I have a new in box, Stainless, model 29-2/N62, color case hammer and trigger, with a 7 3/4 barrel(8 1/2 from cylinder). It is in a teak factory box with blue velvet interior and cleaning kit and cylinder/barrel tool. I cannot find a darn bit of info on this thing anywhere. I know guns better than anyone I know personally and I cannot for the life of me figure out what this is. It IS NOT a 692!!! Can anyone help me with this so that I can get it insured??

[Old Fuff]

Welcome to The High Road, :) But we have a problem already. :uhoh:

This thread started out as one about Ruger's Blackhawk revolver back in 2005. You're not likely to attract much attention when you need information on a Smith & Wesson.

But I'll try to help. ;)

You have a Smith & Wesson model 29-2 / .44 Magnum. It isn't stainless, but it is nickel plated. Apparently the barrel is 8 3/8" long. The odd length was to make a 10" sight radius so that it would be legal for NRA bullseye target shooting.

The serial number is on the butt, but likely covered with the bottom of the wood stocks. To see it you'll have to remove the grips first. On the other hand you may find the number on the rear face of the cylinder, or inside the cut-out in the barrel lug where the ejector rod fits. Both of these numbers are very small, and preceeded with either the letter "S" or "N." The number should allow a closer idea as to when it was made. Estimated value as you describe it is around $900 to $1,200 based on recent auctions.

[cutnhrse]

Nope!.... It's stainless. Thats whats crazy about it!! It is Stainless, no doubt, 100%! Wierd...

[jmr40]

What makes you so sure it is stainless?

[BCRider]

Maybe satin nickel? All the S&W stainless models use a 6 for the first digit.

Test it with a magnet. Some stainless alloys are lightly magnetic so compare the grip on the flat side of the frame to a known mild steel item. If there's no grip or a strongly reduced grip for your gun then it really is stainless. If it's nicked plated the magnet will stick well and about the same as it does on regular steel.

[cutnhrse]

Well, besides the fact that my friend, who is a smitty looked at it and told me it was stainless and was puzzled as well. I took your advice and did the magnet thing and stuck it to a green river blade, then to the pistol. Although it was a little difference, it was more than noticeable. Also, I don't think the plate they inside of the barrels. BTW, someone else couldn't believe it either and put a small gouge by the hammer.

[Oro]

It could be a mis-marked 629. Sometimes, guns were mis-marked and it is not rare.

Not many 629s shipped in boxes compared to 29s, nor did the early ones have case colored hammers and triggers, so it's not clear-cut. Basically, i think you need to get some good high quality photos of it and post them. It could also be refinished with something other than nickel.

If you take off the grips, there will be a capital letter stamped somewhere on the frame - S, N, or B. A photo of that would be good, too.

[Old Fuff]

Also, I don't think the plate they inside of the barrels.

Yes, they do - at least the part you can see.

Carefully remove the stocks and check the serial number - and while doing so look and see if the mainspring is blue or silver colored.

[SaxonPig]

No 29-2s were made in stainless.

Either it's a 629 that was mismarked (it happened all the time with so many models built on the same frames) or the gun has been refinished in something that looks stainless.

BTW- The barrel is 8 & 3/8" in length.

[bottom shelf]

I think the 629s have a full lug under the barrel, while the 29 and 29-2 do not. That'll make it easy to tell if it's a 629.

[harmonic]

I think the 629s have a full lug under the barrel, while the 29 and 29-2 do not. That'll make it easy to tell if it's a 629.

No, the early 629s were identical to the 29, except for being stainless. I'd guess the OP is talking about a 29-2 that was hardchromed.

[krs]

Old Fuff,

The odd length was to make a 10" sight radius so that it would be legal for NRA bullseye target shooting.

All due respect, but when was a rule in effect which required a 10" sight radius?

This leaves aside the consideration that who ever fired a .44 magnum revolver in NRA bullseye competition would necessarily have been both declared unfit in law to own firearms and drummed from the firing line by other competitors if he had not so been sent away by the match officials.

:)

[krs]

I think the 629s have a full lug under the barrel, while the 29 and 29-2 do not. That'll make it easy to tell if it's a 629.

No, the "Classic" models are full lugged, but the rest are not, even today. Full length barrel 'lugs' are a relatively late development - someone may correct me if it was not 1986 when they first appeared.

[Old Fuff]

All due respect, but when was a rule in effect which required a 10" sight radius?

Well since you're being respectful... :D

Back in '35 when S&W brought out the first .357 Magnum, the longest available cataloged length was 8 3/4 inches. But this was soon changed to 8 3/8 inches because someone pointed out that the NRA's bullseye sight radius maximum was 10 inches. At the time some competitors shot the "big gun" loaded with mid-range .38 wadcutters, and being that a depression was on, the maker did not want to lose one single sale.

The 10 inch rule was still in affect when I started shooting bullseye during the 1950's... or was that 1850's... I forget which. By now they may, or may not have dropped the rule, but Smith & Wesson has stuck with that maximum 8 3/8" length, except perhaps in some special runs.

Never did see anyone shooting a .44 Magnum in a center-fire bullseye match, but at one time Remigton did offer a full-wadcutter/mid-range load in .44 Special, and before World War Two S&W offered their big N-frame .44 Military model with adjustable sights.

You just ain't old enough to remember... :neener: :D

[Oro]

Illuminating information about why the barrel length was set at that. I had wondered and never thought to ask. I had assumed the reason was lost to some obscure factory reason back in the '30s. I need to ask Old Fuff more often and wonder about things less.

Full length barrel 'lugs' are a relatively late development - someone may correct me if it was not 1986 when they first appeared.

I thought it was '88 or '89 when the "Classic" came out, but that's a small difference

[BADSBSNF81]

Contact Roy Jinks and get it lettered.