On another thread ("45 Auto Rim") one of the posts said my Model 25-14 had the "endurance package". So I called S&W and asked. She said my wheelgun was made on 2007 and was a "-3" or above model. Not sure what that meant except that everything "-3" and above has the endurance package.
Smith & Wesson "Endurance" Package"
- Thread starter jski
- Start date
- Status
Ethan Verity
Member
- Joined
- May 8, 2021
- Messages
- 715
It has longer stop-notches cut into the cylinder, you'll notice they extend forward slightly beyond the lead in grooves, rather than being the same length as the lead in groove. This allows for a bit of end shake to develop over time, without the cylinder popping the locking bolt down, thus potentially unlocking it and letting the cylinder roll back on itself during recoil. I think the hammer and trigger stud geometry was also improved where it goes into the side plate, to reduce the risk of a stud breaking from shear stress.
Jim Watson
Member
And a "floating hand" supposed to reduce the risk of coming up short or long.
unspellable
Member
The S&W develops end shake because of the small bearing area on the yoke tail making a groove in the bottom of the cylinder well. Wish hey had seen fit to fix that.
earlthegoat2
Member
In the end, the endurance package is much ado about very little. It really only affects 44 magnums (unless someone is hot rodding 45 Colt in an N Frame which is not recommended) and there is anecdotal evidence it never really helped.
Smith tried to increase the durability of their N-frame in response to them shooting loose from 44 magnum pressures. It helped but not rally that much. A RedHawk will still eat up more 44 Mag rounds than the N Frame and have about 10 times more to go along with it.
The N-frame was never really designed for 44 Mag. Nonetheless, like most other Smith magnums, it can take a select number of them before shooting loose much earlier compared to their competition with was/is the Colt Anaconda, Taurus Raging Bull, and Ruger RedHawk, among others.
All that said, I have owned a 629 in the Endurance package era and shot several hundred magnums from it with no problems. I suspect I could have shot a few thousand which is more than most folks will have ammo for these days.
Smith tried to increase the durability of their N-frame in response to them shooting loose from 44 magnum pressures. It helped but not rally that much. A RedHawk will still eat up more 44 Mag rounds than the N Frame and have about 10 times more to go along with it.
The N-frame was never really designed for 44 Mag. Nonetheless, like most other Smith magnums, it can take a select number of them before shooting loose much earlier compared to their competition with was/is the Colt Anaconda, Taurus Raging Bull, and Ruger RedHawk, among others.
All that said, I have owned a 629 in the Endurance package era and shot several hundred magnums from it with no problems. I suspect I could have shot a few thousand which is more than most folks will have ammo for these days.
In my opinion, I don't think it's "the" solution to any deficiencies real or perceived although I'm sure they don't detract in any ways either.
Take it for what it's worth: a sample of one, but I happen to own two 629's, a -2 and a -3, both 6".
My -2 will occasionally "skip" a chamber under moderate to heavy recoil but my -3 never has.
-2 on the left, -3 on the right.
Take it for what it's worth: a sample of one, but I happen to own two 629's, a -2 and a -3, both 6".
My -2 will occasionally "skip" a chamber under moderate to heavy recoil but my -3 never has.
-2 on the left, -3 on the right.
no.5enfield
Member
The first 3 replies to your initial post answered question number one. All N frames after the late-80s have it done from the factory. You can look up your particular model and see what each - # signifies. They are typically minor "upgrades", such as frame design, switch to MIM parts or ILS. The reality is that you probably won't need the endurance package unless you are shooting competitively.
BobWright
Member
I had an early Model 29, 6" barrel. Heavy usage with magnum cartridges resulted in sheared off pivot pins, both the trigger pin and, I think, the pivot pin for the locking bolt, or maybe it was the hammer. After several repairs, S&W told me they were getting new machinery to install these pins, as the pins were re-designed to eliminate stress points. They kept my gun nearly ten months to install the "endurance package" but when I got it back, no more troubles.
I sort of kept a log of that gun (as I do for all my revolvers) and up until that work was done, it was the most often in need of repairs of any of my revolvers. No longer have that revolver, but after the work was done, no further problems were encountered.
Those pins were a press fit into the frame, and sheared off under recoil.
Bob Wright
I sort of kept a log of that gun (as I do for all my revolvers) and up until that work was done, it was the most often in need of repairs of any of my revolvers. No longer have that revolver, but after the work was done, no further problems were encountered.
Those pins were a press fit into the frame, and sheared off under recoil.
Bob Wright
243winxb
Member
Sent my S&W 29-2 back when cylinder unlocked & rotated backwards. http://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-re...-endurance-package-installed-29-2-update.html
Will still do it using w296 max loads.
When the Endurance Package was announced, years ago, the S&W news letter said No Upgrades are available.
Will still do it using w296 max loads.
When the Endurance Package was announced, years ago, the S&W news letter said No Upgrades are available.
Last edited:
In 1977, bought an 8 3/8" M29. Had the dealer send it to Magnaport with instructions to shorten bbl to 5", magnaport, action job and hard chrome. My favorite 44 mag for yrs until I got the "had to have its" and traded for something else (still regret that). With standard 44 mag loads the cyl would rotate backwards under recoil (as mentioned above). Had several noted "Smiths" attempt to fix, and none could. Current guns -3 (I believe) and higher with the evolving "endurance package" don't have this problem.
Paul
Paul
earlthegoat2
Member
Not nothing but also not much. I used to be a frequenter of the various S&W revolver forums and some lively discussions take place involving the Endurance package. It did help but S&W 44 magnums are not meant to be treated like Ruger RedHawks or the various stronger framed single actions out there.
The S&W can still get it done hunting with 240gr loads and can stand a bit of target shooting. Even heavier factory ammo can beat it up though.
no.5enfield
Member
According to which source you pick, a Smith can handle thousands of full-tilt 300gr silhouette loads or get shot loose after a few hundred factory 240s. Both may well be correct, considering the tolerance deviation over the years. I've seen guys that have hunted with a Model 25, shooting heavy, fast .45 colts, for decades, not knowing the gun wasn't meant for that sort of abuse....
For me this started when I was discussing, on this forum, loads for my S&W 45 ACP wheelgun (Model 25-14). Someone posted a message saying that my 25-14, manufactured in 2007, could easily handle 45 Super pressure levels because of the “endurance package”.
Jim Watson
Member
What about the 4 and 5 screw guns?
I have always thought they gave up some cylinder stop power by going from a plunger and screw to just cramming the spring into a recess in the N-2 guns.
I have always thought they gave up some cylinder stop power by going from a plunger and screw to just cramming the spring into a recess in the N-2 guns.
no.5enfield
Member
Clark does .460 rowland conversions on them too, but that is well outside the recommended pressure of 32,000psi. The super appears to fall under that though.
I copied this around 2007, others ideas about the Smith and Wesson endurance package.
http://smith-wessonforum.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/530103904/m/1651007542
Alright, then, just a few additional points:
First, I guess phils and I are the only persons on board with such dreadful luck. (Or is that just a balanced view of the real limits inherent in the M29/629?)
Personally, I don't hand-load, shoot silhouette, or fire any but standard-pressure, 240-grain factory ammunition in my 44 Magnum revolvers. This includes my Freedom Arms Model 83 and my S&Ws.
My "newest" S&W 44 Magnum is a M629-3; It shot loose in less than 3000 rounds fired. Again, I suppose YMMV (it certainly appears everyone else's does). In stark contrast, my Freedom Arms Model 83 is as tight as the day it was made (which is much tighter than any S&W revolver ever manufactured), and I've fired it many more thousands of rounds.
Evidently, the term "tight" is subjective here. Funny, I always thought it meant the parts don't move perceptibly unless they are supposed to. IMO, any amount of cylinder endshake or sideplay is unacceptable (but I have to admit it's possible I'm just spoiled).
It's of little or no consequence, but in terms of engineering changes, [M29-4 ≠ M629-4]. Instead, [M29-4 = M629-2]. This is simply a fact, one that can be easily verified by consulting any number of references.
The principal effect of the so-called "endurance package" applied to the M29/629 is that it virtually eliminates spontaneous opening of the cylinder upon firing (standard-pressure 44 Magnum ammunition). In the interest of fairness (part and parcel of any balanced, unbiased review) such conveniences must of course be acknowledged.
Unfortunately, however, back-rotation can and still does occur given a too-weak cylinder stop spring, which feature is not exactly rare in S&W revolvers.
In addition, the central locking assembly of the M29/629 was not improved or in any way strengthened as part of the "package". Neither was the cylinder stop. A particularly weak part in the former is the center pin, the end of which tends to become battered through normal use (there's that standard-pressure 44 Magnum ammunition again). Once battered, the end of the pin mushrooms, which in turn causes some difficulty (excess friction) when deliberately opening the cylinder. In an extreme case, the mushroomed center pin can freeze within the assembly, effectively preventing opening (or closing) of the cylinder.
Returning to the bright side, a secondary positive effect of the endurance package is to minimize breakage of the hammer and trigger studs in the frame. This portion of the overall "upgrade" is referred to as the "radius stud package". Unfortunately, however, the studs remain relatively prone to breakage (relative to modern designs such as the Ruger Redhawk, the Dan Wesson 44, and the Freedom Arms Model 83).
Still another breakage-prone part in the S&W locking assembly is the bolt. A simple visual inspection of this part (or even a drawing of it) is sufficient to reveal why this is the case.
Now, a M29/629 can be made as tight as any other revolver, but the inherent weakness of the basic design ensures that it will not stay that way very long under normal use (yes, that means firing standard-pressure 44 Magnum ammunition). Worse still is that such normal use can produce broken parts in similarly short order.
If this were not the case, how exactly would one account for the competing designs? Was there no impetus whatever for making them stronger than the M29/629?
Keep in mind while considering those questions that the Ruger Redhawk was designed and appeared on scene before the heyday of silhouette shooting. In addition, having done a bit of that myself in the deep, dark past, I can assure you that competing in that sport does not require the use of overloaded ammunition in any caliber.
How I do so wish such urban legends were not so popular...but I digress.
The widely acknowledged 'father' of the 44 Magnum, the late Elmer Keith, reported that he shot a mere 600 rounds during the first year he had the gun. In addition, his favored reload for the caliber developed less pressure than the current SAAMI limit for the cartridge. (Anyone who doubts this should do some homework before claiming otherwise.) The point being, maybe he was onto something (in both respects)???
Lastly, anyone who has never owned and fed one would do well to read John Taffin's sixgun.com article on the S&W 44 Magnum before taking the plunge. No one can deny that Mr. Taffin likes the gun as much as anyone. Moreover, he too is aware of its limits - and he respects them.
Cheers,
BlrdNo3F
http://www.sixguns.com/range/SmithWesson44Mag.htm
In 1957, the .44 Magnum became the Model 29 as Smith & Wesson switched from such names as the Outdoorsman, the Combat Magnum, the Highway Patrolman, and the Heavy Duty to a system of model numbers. We lost something here as Model 15 just doesn't evoke the same emotion as Combat Masterpiece. Stamping of the .44 Magnum with Model 29 inside the crane began at serial number S179000.
It was about this same time that the first of the long barreled .44 Magnums arrived as the Model 29 joined the Model 27 .357 Magnum with an eight and three-eighth's inch barrel length. These quickly became quite popular with hunters and long range shooters. At this same time in 1958, the H.H. Harris Co., a Chicago distributor, placed an order for 500 five-inch barreled Model 29's. These sixguns are now very rare and quite valuable. I've never seen one.
One of the problems with those early .44 Magnums was the fact that the ejector rod screw would loosen under recoil, back out and move forward making it impossible to open the cylinder. In 1960, this rod was given a reverse left thread so it would tighten rather than loosen under recoil. With this change, the Model 29-1 had arrived with serial number S270000.
The 29-1 is quite rare as the 29-2 arrived just one year later. Previous to this change the screw in front of the trigger guard held a spring plunger that provided power to the cylinder stop or cylinder bolt. This screw was dropped and we now had a three screw .44 Magnum with the cylinder stop spring riding in a hole in front of the trigger guard.
The 29-2 is the .44 Magnum most prevalent on the used gun market as it stayed in production from 1961 to 1982. During this time of production, the serial numbering was changed to an N prefix in 1969, while the six and one-half inch barrel model was shortened to six- inches, a negative move in my estimation. The meager extra one-half inch of the original barrel length seems to balance much better in my hands and it definitely looks better.
With the dawning of 1982, and Smith & Wesson under the control of those who seemingly cared nothing about providing quality sixguns, two major changes were made to cut costs. The 29-3 arrived without the pinned barrel and also counter-bored cylinders disappeared. Up to this point in time, all Smith and Wesson barrels were held tightly in place not just by thread pressure but also by a pin that transversed the frame through a slot in the top of the barrel threads. With today's strong brass, counter bored cylinders, or cylinders that completely enclose the rim of the cartridge case, are probably not needed. They also fill with crud and must be periodically cleaned or cases will not chamber BUT they are a sign of manufacturing quality and they are gone.
For years, Smith & Wesson refused to acknowledge a problem that definitely existed. It became especially prevalent when silhouette shooters started pounding hundreds of rounds of fullhouse loads down range in a single day. When a cartridge was fired, the cylinder would unlock, rotate backwards and when the hammer was cocked, the fired round would be back under the firing pin. Silhouetters literally "beat their swords into plowshares" as far as the Smith & Wesson .44 Magnum was concerned. About the same time silhouetters were pounding 240 grain bullets unmercilessly through the Smith & Wesson .44 Magnum, handgun hunters discovered 300 grain bullets which put a further strain on the mechanism whose basic design went back to 1899.
Instead of listening to silhouetters about this problem, Smith & Wesson refused to publicly acknowledge that anything was amiss and instead brought forth a Silhouette Model in 1983. This model featured a ten and five-eighth's inch bull barrel and sights with a standard adjustable rear sight with a higher blade and also a four position adjustable front sight. The front sight was to be set for the four distances addressed in long range silhouetting. Nothing was done to correct the mechanical problem. Of all the .44 Magnum Smith & Wesson sixguns I have shot over the past four decades, this one, Smith & Wesson's answer to the unlocking cylinder problem, is the only one that I have ever encountered in which the cylinder unlocked and rotated backwards on a regular basis! Needless to say, silhouetters did not flock to the .44 Magnum Silhouette Model.
Finally with a change of management, Smith & Wesson began to address some of the problems associated with the .44 Magnum Model 29. By now, both Ruger and Dan Wesson had heavy duty .44 Magnum sixguns on the market that were designed around heavy usage. The Smith & Wesson had a distinct disadvantage as it was built on a platform going back to 1908. Should they scrap it and start over? Or should they try to fix what they had? They opted for the latter and I am certainly pleased that they did. In 1988, the 29-4 was ushered in with two changes. The retention system on the yoke or cylinder crane was strengthened and studs within the frame were radiused to help remove metal stress. It was not enough. At the same time eight and three eighth's inch models were made available with integral scope mounts on the barrel rib.
The 29-4 lasted only two years to be replaced by the 29-5 in 1990. Now we began to see obvious outer changes in the Model 29 as the cylinder notches were made longer to prevent the bolt from jumping out of the notch upon recoil. At the same time the bolt was changed and the innards of the Model 29-5 were changed to provide a method of holding everything tightly together when the .44 was fired to prevent battering under recoil.
Finally, the latest Model 29, the 29-6 arrived in 1994 with the main changes being a switch from wooden grips to Hogue's rubber Monogrip. The wooden stocks from Smith & Wesson had been deteriorating for many years changing from a useable, smoothly rounded stock that filled in behind the trigger guard in 1965 to a pair of sharp bulky saw handles that had so much wood removed from behind the trigger guard that the knuckles were routinely punished in the 1980's. Hogue's Monogrips were a welcome change and though not having the beautiful grain of Goncala Alves wood, they were at least useable.
The 29-6 also arrived with a rear sight assembly that is rounded at the front of the frame signifying that it is drilled and tapped for scope mounts. All the recent Smith & Wesson's I have seen, both long and short barrels, K-frame and N-frame, .44 Magnum and other calibers, are all drilled and tapped for scope mounts.
For the first time, the basic outline of the Model 29 was changed with the arrival of the .44 Classic series in 1991. The 29-5 was also available with a full underlug barrel, non-fluted cylinder, drilled and tapped for scope mounts plus the "strengthening" package offered in the standard Model 29-5 and 29-6. The Classic .44 was available both as a 29-5 and a 29-6 from 1991 to 1994 in blue finish and barrel lengths of six and one-half inch, eight and three-eighth's inch, and for the first time in a factory production .44 Magnum, a five-inch barrel. The Classic also ushered in the round-butted grip frame on the N-frame series of Smith & Wesson sixguns.
A deluxe version of the Classic was offered as the .44 Classic DX with six and one-half and eight and three-eighth's inch barrel lengths, round butted grip frame, and the choice of finger groove Smith & Wesson stocks or Hogue's Monogrips that changed the grip profile from round to square butt. Most importantly, a new front sight system was present on the Classic DX with five interchangeable front sights including a gold bead as available on a custom order prior to the 1970's.
Finally, a special custom deluxe 1 of 3000 Magna Classic was issued in 1990 with a barrel length not seen since before World War II on Smith & Wesson sixguns, namely a seven and one-half inch length. These were all 29-5 sixguns with serial numbers running from MAG0001 to MAG3000.
Today the only Model 29 cataloged is the standard blue finished Model 29-6 with a choice of either a six-inch or eight and three- eighth's inch barrel length. Long gone is the highly polished Bright Blue finish as well as nickel plating, the pinned barrel, the counter bored cylinder, and the four-inch barrel length. That is the bad news. The good news is that the present sixguns under the Model 29 banner are stronger and better shooting sixguns than the originals.
There have been numerous special runs of the Model 29 over the years other than the 500 five-inch sixguns ordered by the H.H. Harris Co. back in the late 1950's. Some notable ones are the three-inch barreled Lew Horton Special in 1984, a Combat Magnum, round-butted style of defensive sixgun; and the Elmer Keith Commemorative in 1985, a four- inch specially engraved Model 29-3 serial numbered from EMK001 to EMK2500. The first 100 of these Elmer Keith sixguns were deluxe models with ivory stocks.
Distributor Lew Horton also ordered 5000 Classic Hunter Specials in 1987 with six-inch full underlug barrels and the four position front sight. These were all 29-3 sixguns. In 1989, 2500 Classic Hunter Model 29-4's with eight and three eighth's inch barrels were manufactured, followed by the re-introduction of the six-inch Classic Hunter in 1991. A small number of five-inch Model 29-4's with full underlug barrels were also offered in 1989.
The number one variation on the Model 29 theme is the Model 629, a stainless steel .44 Magnum introduced in 1978 with serial numbers N629062 to N629200 for a special run of "pre-production" guns followed by the first production gun, serial number N748564. In 1980 both four- inch and eight and three-eighth's inch barrels were added to the catalog. A very few five-inch barrels have been offered.
In 1982, the 629-1 joined the 29-3 in dropping the pinned barrel and counter bored cylinder features. The 629-1 lasted until 1988 with 8000 also offered with three-inch barrels and round butts. In 1988, the Model 629-2 arrived with the same internal changes as the Model 29-4. Transitional changes were made in 1989 along with the cylinder crane being hardened and these 629's were stamped 629-2E.
In 1990, the 629-3 ushered in the same changes as found on the blued 29-5. Four years later, the addition of Hogue Monogrips, frame drilled and tapped for scope mounting, and a change in the extractor brought forth the Model 629-4. This latest model remains in production today with barrel lengths of four, six, and eight and three-eighth's inches with Hogue grips, target hammer and trigger, and red ramp front and white outline rear sight.
As with the blued 29, the stainless 629 received the Classic treatment with full underlug barrels first being offered in 1990. These remain in production as 629-4's with five, six and one-half, and eight and three-eighth inch barrel lengths. One year later, the Classic DX 629 arrived in the latter two barrel lengths with interchangeable front sights. Both models remain in production today.
As with the Model 29, several special variations of the Model 629 have been offered over the years since its introduction. Some notable ones are the 629-3 Magna-Classic. These were highly polished, heavy- underlugged, seven and one-half inch barreled .44 Magnums with interchangeable front sights and marked on the barrel "1 of 3000". All Magna Classics that I have known that have been shot have been superbly accurate sixguns. Mine is sighted in for 100 yards using the gold bead front sight insert and 300 grain cast bullets over 21.5 grains of WW296 or H110.
As with the blued Model 29-3, the stainless 629-1 was offered by Lew Horton in a three-inch Combat Magnum version. Five thousand of these were manufactured in 1985. The 629 also received the Classic Hunter treatment with 5000 six-inch guns brought forth in 1988, 2500 being offered with eight and three-eighth's inch barrels in 1989, 3200 three- inch barreled models in 1989, and 2000 eight and three-eighth's inch barreled 629-3's in 1991.
The most famous, and probably the most sought after, Model 629 is the Mountain Gun. There have been three runs of Mountain Guns in .44 Magnum all with round butts and four-inch .44 Special type slim tapered barrels. The first run consisted of special group of blued Model 29's for the Smith & Wesson Collector's Association's 25th Anniversary. The regular factory production of the Mountain Gun consisted of 629-2 Mountain Revolvers in 1989 followed by a second run in 1993.
The 629 has also been offered in numerous three-inch barrel lengths such as the 629-3 Carry Comp and Carry Comp II Stainless sixguns from the Performance Center through Lew Horton, a run of 5000 standard 629's with three-inch barrels, semi-target hammer, smooth trigger, standard 29/629 sights, and wooden stocks. In 1994, the same basic sixgun as the latter was offered as the BackPacker.
Other variations on the Model 29 and 629 have been offered by various distributors and organizations. I hereby give full credit to Jim Supica of Old Towne Dispatch and co-author of The Standard Catalog of Smith & Wesson for much of the model variation information above. The reader is also referred to this excellent publication for information on all Smith & Wesson sixguns, and their current value, from the 1850's to the present.
One of the latest Model 629's available from Smith & Wesson is the Performance Center's Model 629-4 with PowerPort. This is a six-inch heavy underlug barreled .44 Magnum with a special recoil reducing port in front of the front sight.
The following is a complete listing, subject to change at any time by Smith & Wesson's production plans, of the available .44 Magnums. All N-frame Smith & Wessons now are of the round-butted style.
Model
Finish
Barrel Length
Barrel Style
29-6
Blue
8 3/8"
Standard
629-4
Stainless
4, 6 and 8 3/8"
Standard
629-4 Classic
Stainless
5, 6 1/2, 8 3/8"
Underlug
629-4 Classic DX
Stainless
6 1/2, 8 3/8"
Underlug
I am an admirer, in fact a real fan of the Model 29. As such I treat it right. There is no way that the Model 29 or 629 in any variation can take the punishment that larger framed and heavier cylindered sixguns such as the Ruger Redhawk, Dan Wesson Model 44, or Freedom Arms .44 can handle and beg for more.
In the late 1950's/early 1960's I would not think of shooting any load except the Keith load in a Smith & Wesson. Anything else would have seemed almost sacrilegious. Today I know better. My Smith's, especially the early Model 29's, are treated like the thoroughbreds they are. I still use the heavy loads. Sparingly. My standard loads are either a 250 grain or 300 grain hard cast bullet over 10.0 grains of Unique for 1150 feet per second. Both I and the Smith & Wesson .44 Magnum sixguns appreciate this load and will both last longer shooting it.
I currently own a M629-4 and probably have shot less than 1000 full power rounds through it. Big recoil and muzzle blast do not appeal to me like they used to. My pistol is still tight. I don't shoot anything heavier than 240/250 grain bullets. The full power load I shot most was a 240 lead with 22.0 grains 2400. I did own a Redhawk and it was apparently to me that the Redhawk was designed to be more rigid, and it was more massive. If anyone wants a tank, the Redhawk, or Super Redhawk are good choices for full power magnum rounds.
http://smith-wessonforum.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/530103904/m/1651007542
Alright, then, just a few additional points:
First, I guess phils and I are the only persons on board with such dreadful luck. (Or is that just a balanced view of the real limits inherent in the M29/629?)
Personally, I don't hand-load, shoot silhouette, or fire any but standard-pressure, 240-grain factory ammunition in my 44 Magnum revolvers. This includes my Freedom Arms Model 83 and my S&Ws.
My "newest" S&W 44 Magnum is a M629-3; It shot loose in less than 3000 rounds fired. Again, I suppose YMMV (it certainly appears everyone else's does). In stark contrast, my Freedom Arms Model 83 is as tight as the day it was made (which is much tighter than any S&W revolver ever manufactured), and I've fired it many more thousands of rounds.
Evidently, the term "tight" is subjective here. Funny, I always thought it meant the parts don't move perceptibly unless they are supposed to. IMO, any amount of cylinder endshake or sideplay is unacceptable (but I have to admit it's possible I'm just spoiled).
It's of little or no consequence, but in terms of engineering changes, [M29-4 ≠ M629-4]. Instead, [M29-4 = M629-2]. This is simply a fact, one that can be easily verified by consulting any number of references.
The principal effect of the so-called "endurance package" applied to the M29/629 is that it virtually eliminates spontaneous opening of the cylinder upon firing (standard-pressure 44 Magnum ammunition). In the interest of fairness (part and parcel of any balanced, unbiased review) such conveniences must of course be acknowledged.
Unfortunately, however, back-rotation can and still does occur given a too-weak cylinder stop spring, which feature is not exactly rare in S&W revolvers.
In addition, the central locking assembly of the M29/629 was not improved or in any way strengthened as part of the "package". Neither was the cylinder stop. A particularly weak part in the former is the center pin, the end of which tends to become battered through normal use (there's that standard-pressure 44 Magnum ammunition again). Once battered, the end of the pin mushrooms, which in turn causes some difficulty (excess friction) when deliberately opening the cylinder. In an extreme case, the mushroomed center pin can freeze within the assembly, effectively preventing opening (or closing) of the cylinder.
Returning to the bright side, a secondary positive effect of the endurance package is to minimize breakage of the hammer and trigger studs in the frame. This portion of the overall "upgrade" is referred to as the "radius stud package". Unfortunately, however, the studs remain relatively prone to breakage (relative to modern designs such as the Ruger Redhawk, the Dan Wesson 44, and the Freedom Arms Model 83).
Still another breakage-prone part in the S&W locking assembly is the bolt. A simple visual inspection of this part (or even a drawing of it) is sufficient to reveal why this is the case.
Now, a M29/629 can be made as tight as any other revolver, but the inherent weakness of the basic design ensures that it will not stay that way very long under normal use (yes, that means firing standard-pressure 44 Magnum ammunition). Worse still is that such normal use can produce broken parts in similarly short order.
If this were not the case, how exactly would one account for the competing designs? Was there no impetus whatever for making them stronger than the M29/629?
Keep in mind while considering those questions that the Ruger Redhawk was designed and appeared on scene before the heyday of silhouette shooting. In addition, having done a bit of that myself in the deep, dark past, I can assure you that competing in that sport does not require the use of overloaded ammunition in any caliber.
How I do so wish such urban legends were not so popular...but I digress.
The widely acknowledged 'father' of the 44 Magnum, the late Elmer Keith, reported that he shot a mere 600 rounds during the first year he had the gun. In addition, his favored reload for the caliber developed less pressure than the current SAAMI limit for the cartridge. (Anyone who doubts this should do some homework before claiming otherwise.) The point being, maybe he was onto something (in both respects)???
Lastly, anyone who has never owned and fed one would do well to read John Taffin's sixgun.com article on the S&W 44 Magnum before taking the plunge. No one can deny that Mr. Taffin likes the gun as much as anyone. Moreover, he too is aware of its limits - and he respects them.
Cheers,
BlrdNo3F
http://www.sixguns.com/range/SmithWesson44Mag.htm
In 1957, the .44 Magnum became the Model 29 as Smith & Wesson switched from such names as the Outdoorsman, the Combat Magnum, the Highway Patrolman, and the Heavy Duty to a system of model numbers. We lost something here as Model 15 just doesn't evoke the same emotion as Combat Masterpiece. Stamping of the .44 Magnum with Model 29 inside the crane began at serial number S179000.
It was about this same time that the first of the long barreled .44 Magnums arrived as the Model 29 joined the Model 27 .357 Magnum with an eight and three-eighth's inch barrel length. These quickly became quite popular with hunters and long range shooters. At this same time in 1958, the H.H. Harris Co., a Chicago distributor, placed an order for 500 five-inch barreled Model 29's. These sixguns are now very rare and quite valuable. I've never seen one.
One of the problems with those early .44 Magnums was the fact that the ejector rod screw would loosen under recoil, back out and move forward making it impossible to open the cylinder. In 1960, this rod was given a reverse left thread so it would tighten rather than loosen under recoil. With this change, the Model 29-1 had arrived with serial number S270000.
The 29-1 is quite rare as the 29-2 arrived just one year later. Previous to this change the screw in front of the trigger guard held a spring plunger that provided power to the cylinder stop or cylinder bolt. This screw was dropped and we now had a three screw .44 Magnum with the cylinder stop spring riding in a hole in front of the trigger guard.
The 29-2 is the .44 Magnum most prevalent on the used gun market as it stayed in production from 1961 to 1982. During this time of production, the serial numbering was changed to an N prefix in 1969, while the six and one-half inch barrel model was shortened to six- inches, a negative move in my estimation. The meager extra one-half inch of the original barrel length seems to balance much better in my hands and it definitely looks better.
With the dawning of 1982, and Smith & Wesson under the control of those who seemingly cared nothing about providing quality sixguns, two major changes were made to cut costs. The 29-3 arrived without the pinned barrel and also counter-bored cylinders disappeared. Up to this point in time, all Smith and Wesson barrels were held tightly in place not just by thread pressure but also by a pin that transversed the frame through a slot in the top of the barrel threads. With today's strong brass, counter bored cylinders, or cylinders that completely enclose the rim of the cartridge case, are probably not needed. They also fill with crud and must be periodically cleaned or cases will not chamber BUT they are a sign of manufacturing quality and they are gone.
For years, Smith & Wesson refused to acknowledge a problem that definitely existed. It became especially prevalent when silhouette shooters started pounding hundreds of rounds of fullhouse loads down range in a single day. When a cartridge was fired, the cylinder would unlock, rotate backwards and when the hammer was cocked, the fired round would be back under the firing pin. Silhouetters literally "beat their swords into plowshares" as far as the Smith & Wesson .44 Magnum was concerned. About the same time silhouetters were pounding 240 grain bullets unmercilessly through the Smith & Wesson .44 Magnum, handgun hunters discovered 300 grain bullets which put a further strain on the mechanism whose basic design went back to 1899.
Instead of listening to silhouetters about this problem, Smith & Wesson refused to publicly acknowledge that anything was amiss and instead brought forth a Silhouette Model in 1983. This model featured a ten and five-eighth's inch bull barrel and sights with a standard adjustable rear sight with a higher blade and also a four position adjustable front sight. The front sight was to be set for the four distances addressed in long range silhouetting. Nothing was done to correct the mechanical problem. Of all the .44 Magnum Smith & Wesson sixguns I have shot over the past four decades, this one, Smith & Wesson's answer to the unlocking cylinder problem, is the only one that I have ever encountered in which the cylinder unlocked and rotated backwards on a regular basis! Needless to say, silhouetters did not flock to the .44 Magnum Silhouette Model.
Finally with a change of management, Smith & Wesson began to address some of the problems associated with the .44 Magnum Model 29. By now, both Ruger and Dan Wesson had heavy duty .44 Magnum sixguns on the market that were designed around heavy usage. The Smith & Wesson had a distinct disadvantage as it was built on a platform going back to 1908. Should they scrap it and start over? Or should they try to fix what they had? They opted for the latter and I am certainly pleased that they did. In 1988, the 29-4 was ushered in with two changes. The retention system on the yoke or cylinder crane was strengthened and studs within the frame were radiused to help remove metal stress. It was not enough. At the same time eight and three eighth's inch models were made available with integral scope mounts on the barrel rib.
The 29-4 lasted only two years to be replaced by the 29-5 in 1990. Now we began to see obvious outer changes in the Model 29 as the cylinder notches were made longer to prevent the bolt from jumping out of the notch upon recoil. At the same time the bolt was changed and the innards of the Model 29-5 were changed to provide a method of holding everything tightly together when the .44 was fired to prevent battering under recoil.
Finally, the latest Model 29, the 29-6 arrived in 1994 with the main changes being a switch from wooden grips to Hogue's rubber Monogrip. The wooden stocks from Smith & Wesson had been deteriorating for many years changing from a useable, smoothly rounded stock that filled in behind the trigger guard in 1965 to a pair of sharp bulky saw handles that had so much wood removed from behind the trigger guard that the knuckles were routinely punished in the 1980's. Hogue's Monogrips were a welcome change and though not having the beautiful grain of Goncala Alves wood, they were at least useable.
The 29-6 also arrived with a rear sight assembly that is rounded at the front of the frame signifying that it is drilled and tapped for scope mounts. All the recent Smith & Wesson's I have seen, both long and short barrels, K-frame and N-frame, .44 Magnum and other calibers, are all drilled and tapped for scope mounts.
For the first time, the basic outline of the Model 29 was changed with the arrival of the .44 Classic series in 1991. The 29-5 was also available with a full underlug barrel, non-fluted cylinder, drilled and tapped for scope mounts plus the "strengthening" package offered in the standard Model 29-5 and 29-6. The Classic .44 was available both as a 29-5 and a 29-6 from 1991 to 1994 in blue finish and barrel lengths of six and one-half inch, eight and three-eighth's inch, and for the first time in a factory production .44 Magnum, a five-inch barrel. The Classic also ushered in the round-butted grip frame on the N-frame series of Smith & Wesson sixguns.
A deluxe version of the Classic was offered as the .44 Classic DX with six and one-half and eight and three-eighth's inch barrel lengths, round butted grip frame, and the choice of finger groove Smith & Wesson stocks or Hogue's Monogrips that changed the grip profile from round to square butt. Most importantly, a new front sight system was present on the Classic DX with five interchangeable front sights including a gold bead as available on a custom order prior to the 1970's.
Finally, a special custom deluxe 1 of 3000 Magna Classic was issued in 1990 with a barrel length not seen since before World War II on Smith & Wesson sixguns, namely a seven and one-half inch length. These were all 29-5 sixguns with serial numbers running from MAG0001 to MAG3000.
Today the only Model 29 cataloged is the standard blue finished Model 29-6 with a choice of either a six-inch or eight and three- eighth's inch barrel length. Long gone is the highly polished Bright Blue finish as well as nickel plating, the pinned barrel, the counter bored cylinder, and the four-inch barrel length. That is the bad news. The good news is that the present sixguns under the Model 29 banner are stronger and better shooting sixguns than the originals.
There have been numerous special runs of the Model 29 over the years other than the 500 five-inch sixguns ordered by the H.H. Harris Co. back in the late 1950's. Some notable ones are the three-inch barreled Lew Horton Special in 1984, a Combat Magnum, round-butted style of defensive sixgun; and the Elmer Keith Commemorative in 1985, a four- inch specially engraved Model 29-3 serial numbered from EMK001 to EMK2500. The first 100 of these Elmer Keith sixguns were deluxe models with ivory stocks.
Distributor Lew Horton also ordered 5000 Classic Hunter Specials in 1987 with six-inch full underlug barrels and the four position front sight. These were all 29-3 sixguns. In 1989, 2500 Classic Hunter Model 29-4's with eight and three eighth's inch barrels were manufactured, followed by the re-introduction of the six-inch Classic Hunter in 1991. A small number of five-inch Model 29-4's with full underlug barrels were also offered in 1989.
The number one variation on the Model 29 theme is the Model 629, a stainless steel .44 Magnum introduced in 1978 with serial numbers N629062 to N629200 for a special run of "pre-production" guns followed by the first production gun, serial number N748564. In 1980 both four- inch and eight and three-eighth's inch barrels were added to the catalog. A very few five-inch barrels have been offered.
In 1982, the 629-1 joined the 29-3 in dropping the pinned barrel and counter bored cylinder features. The 629-1 lasted until 1988 with 8000 also offered with three-inch barrels and round butts. In 1988, the Model 629-2 arrived with the same internal changes as the Model 29-4. Transitional changes were made in 1989 along with the cylinder crane being hardened and these 629's were stamped 629-2E.
In 1990, the 629-3 ushered in the same changes as found on the blued 29-5. Four years later, the addition of Hogue Monogrips, frame drilled and tapped for scope mounting, and a change in the extractor brought forth the Model 629-4. This latest model remains in production today with barrel lengths of four, six, and eight and three-eighth's inches with Hogue grips, target hammer and trigger, and red ramp front and white outline rear sight.
As with the blued 29, the stainless 629 received the Classic treatment with full underlug barrels first being offered in 1990. These remain in production as 629-4's with five, six and one-half, and eight and three-eighth inch barrel lengths. One year later, the Classic DX 629 arrived in the latter two barrel lengths with interchangeable front sights. Both models remain in production today.
As with the Model 29, several special variations of the Model 629 have been offered over the years since its introduction. Some notable ones are the 629-3 Magna-Classic. These were highly polished, heavy- underlugged, seven and one-half inch barreled .44 Magnums with interchangeable front sights and marked on the barrel "1 of 3000". All Magna Classics that I have known that have been shot have been superbly accurate sixguns. Mine is sighted in for 100 yards using the gold bead front sight insert and 300 grain cast bullets over 21.5 grains of WW296 or H110.
As with the blued Model 29-3, the stainless 629-1 was offered by Lew Horton in a three-inch Combat Magnum version. Five thousand of these were manufactured in 1985. The 629 also received the Classic Hunter treatment with 5000 six-inch guns brought forth in 1988, 2500 being offered with eight and three-eighth's inch barrels in 1989, 3200 three- inch barreled models in 1989, and 2000 eight and three-eighth's inch barreled 629-3's in 1991.
The most famous, and probably the most sought after, Model 629 is the Mountain Gun. There have been three runs of Mountain Guns in .44 Magnum all with round butts and four-inch .44 Special type slim tapered barrels. The first run consisted of special group of blued Model 29's for the Smith & Wesson Collector's Association's 25th Anniversary. The regular factory production of the Mountain Gun consisted of 629-2 Mountain Revolvers in 1989 followed by a second run in 1993.
The 629 has also been offered in numerous three-inch barrel lengths such as the 629-3 Carry Comp and Carry Comp II Stainless sixguns from the Performance Center through Lew Horton, a run of 5000 standard 629's with three-inch barrels, semi-target hammer, smooth trigger, standard 29/629 sights, and wooden stocks. In 1994, the same basic sixgun as the latter was offered as the BackPacker.
Other variations on the Model 29 and 629 have been offered by various distributors and organizations. I hereby give full credit to Jim Supica of Old Towne Dispatch and co-author of The Standard Catalog of Smith & Wesson for much of the model variation information above. The reader is also referred to this excellent publication for information on all Smith & Wesson sixguns, and their current value, from the 1850's to the present.
One of the latest Model 629's available from Smith & Wesson is the Performance Center's Model 629-4 with PowerPort. This is a six-inch heavy underlug barreled .44 Magnum with a special recoil reducing port in front of the front sight.
The following is a complete listing, subject to change at any time by Smith & Wesson's production plans, of the available .44 Magnums. All N-frame Smith & Wessons now are of the round-butted style.
Model
Finish
Barrel Length
Barrel Style
29-6
Blue
8 3/8"
Standard
629-4
Stainless
4, 6 and 8 3/8"
Standard
629-4 Classic
Stainless
5, 6 1/2, 8 3/8"
Underlug
629-4 Classic DX
Stainless
6 1/2, 8 3/8"
Underlug
I am an admirer, in fact a real fan of the Model 29. As such I treat it right. There is no way that the Model 29 or 629 in any variation can take the punishment that larger framed and heavier cylindered sixguns such as the Ruger Redhawk, Dan Wesson Model 44, or Freedom Arms .44 can handle and beg for more.
In the late 1950's/early 1960's I would not think of shooting any load except the Keith load in a Smith & Wesson. Anything else would have seemed almost sacrilegious. Today I know better. My Smith's, especially the early Model 29's, are treated like the thoroughbreds they are. I still use the heavy loads. Sparingly. My standard loads are either a 250 grain or 300 grain hard cast bullet over 10.0 grains of Unique for 1150 feet per second. Both I and the Smith & Wesson .44 Magnum sixguns appreciate this load and will both last longer shooting it.
I currently own a M629-4 and probably have shot less than 1000 full power rounds through it. Big recoil and muzzle blast do not appeal to me like they used to. My pistol is still tight. I don't shoot anything heavier than 240/250 grain bullets. The full power load I shot most was a 240 lead with 22.0 grains 2400. I did own a Redhawk and it was apparently to me that the Redhawk was designed to be more rigid, and it was more massive. If anyone wants a tank, the Redhawk, or Super Redhawk are good choices for full power magnum rounds.
Rubone
Member
29-5 with the first "full" endurance package...
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
In a nutshell, they fixed what they could, while staying with the existing design. Ruger had the luxury of designing his Redhawk to eliminate all the known shortcomings from the design. I wonder if he knew at the time he was allowing enough room to expand into cartridges like the .454 and .480?
captain awesome
Member
Slamfire, thanks for posting that. I enjoyed the read.
It is only pertinent if you're interested in shortening the life of your revolver
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
IMHO, the "folks that know" come from the John Linebaugh/Brian Pearce school of thought. Because they have tested guns to destruction and know at what pressure level things let go. They also accept the fact that N-frames have limitations, as opposed to the the diehard fanboys that deny the possibility. Loading data is developed with the goal of a 100% safety margin. In that context, the S&W is not safe for "Ruger only" loads at 30,000psi. It's rated for 23,000psi or equal to .45ACP +P. Maybe a bit more. So I wouldn't shoot a lot of .45Super (28,000psi) out of one and definitely no .460Rowland (40,000psi). Despite the fact that Clark converts them to the Rowland.
halfmoonclip
Member
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2011
- Messages
- 2,762
The car in my garage is reputedly factory governed to 150 mph. I have yet to see that speed, and likely never will.
Kinda share the same opinion with my 629; it's seen a share of 1400 'sec reloads, but it's far more likely that it will see 1200'sec loads; they're bunches nicer to shoot, for me and the gun.
Great info regarding the model; have some N frame .45s as well, which will see a bunch more shooting.
Moon
ETA- Just checked on my 629; it is a dash 3.
M
Kinda share the same opinion with my 629; it's seen a share of 1400 'sec reloads, but it's far more likely that it will see 1200'sec loads; they're bunches nicer to shoot, for me and the gun.
Great info regarding the model; have some N frame .45s as well, which will see a bunch more shooting.
Moon
ETA- Just checked on my 629; it is a dash 3.
M
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
