Hi All, i have some questions. I currently have a M27, 3.5in barrel. I love it but it is a beauty, so i havent shot it yet. (Begin the assault, lol) Here is my q: Ive heard the M24 44spl balances better than the 4in or bigger M29. I have seen several 3in M29s for sale. Other than the fact the 24 cant handle mags, can someone please explain how these two are different? Theres not much info out there on the 3in M24s and M29s. I would like to know as MUCH about these two platforms as i can. Im leaning to the m29 (3in) bc of the mag compatibility with a 44mag rifle , but ive heard the m24 balances better and is a "better" gun (kinda a hidden diamond, if you will, but that was BEFORE i heard of the existence of the 3in M29). Please educate me, gentlemen. Also, if you would like, use the 3.5in M27 i have as a reference point.
3in N frame decision
- Thread starter BNvy15
- Start date
The 629 or 29 type creature will have a heavy no taper barrel vs a pencil barrel like on the short 27s so more barrel weight and less hop than the thin barrel 24 has. I have a 629 mtn gun and you can really tell the kick and jump difference between it and a standard 629 the same barrel length due to the barrel weight. Best bet for comfort and control would be a 3 inch 629 type with a full underlug no taper barrel if you can find such a thing.
NorthBorder
Member
I used to have a Ruger Alaskan. It was heavy but with heavy loads it was a lot to handle. I bet a Smith 44 magnum would be more so.
I have a 4" M24 and I would give the left side of one of my anatomical features for that M24.
I have a 4" M24 and I would give the left side of one of my anatomical features for that M24.
.38 Special
Member
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2006
- Messages
- 7,713
"Balance" is subjective, and I would distrust any source which tells you one of those guns has objectively "better" balance than the other.
The picture in #3 does illustrate the difference between the "bull" barrel and the "pencil" barrel. The difference, while handling and shooting, is more noticeable with longer barrels. By the time you're down to 3", the actual difference is minimal.
I really dislike sub-4" barrels on N frames, especially for cartridges like the .44 Magnum. I suppose if I was forced to choose, I would take the 29, because it weighs a bit more and because it can handle both Magnum and Special loads. And, perhaps most importantly, because I know where to get a 4" barrel for it.
The picture in #3 does illustrate the difference between the "bull" barrel and the "pencil" barrel. The difference, while handling and shooting, is more noticeable with longer barrels. By the time you're down to 3", the actual difference is minimal.
I really dislike sub-4" barrels on N frames, especially for cartridges like the .44 Magnum. I suppose if I was forced to choose, I would take the 29, because it weighs a bit more and because it can handle both Magnum and Special loads. And, perhaps most importantly, because I know where to get a 4" barrel for it.
Forgive me, apparently i cant see, but what is different about the barrels? They look the same to me.
Col. Harrumph
Member
Here's what I don't get: the N frame is a pretty large gun. King Kong could carry one concealed but I sure couldn't. So why the attraction for a snub? What does a shorty barrel get you?... certainly not portability.
Mind you I bought a 3" 624 40 years ago, and never shot much it until I stretched the barrel an inch... then it came alive.
Mind you I bought a 3" 624 40 years ago, and never shot much it until I stretched the barrel an inch... then it came alive.
I do not have a model 24 but I do have 3, 4, and 5” 629’s which I shoot with both specials and magnums. For holding in the hand, the 3” has a much nicer balance. Shooting specials is sweet and easy (ish) but shooting magnums is very unpleasant in the 3”. (Got blood blisters on my thumb nuckle every time with wood grips til I switched to rubber.) 5” is better but I wish it were 8”.
I can’t find spec weight on the 24 but it does have a thinner barrel profile so that’ll be a couple ounces less and possibly looks like the cylinder is shorter so I little less weight there too. If it were me I’d go with the 29 3” for magnum ability but only shoot specials and it should be comfortable.
I my case yes, portability and weight reduction; both important in my work. How I carry the thickness of the n frame isn’t an issue but I went from a 629 classic (5”) to the 629 delux (3”) to which I fitted a titanium 329pd cylinder which cumulatively dropped the weight from 47.5oz down to 34.5oz . Also the 3” barrel balances better on my chest (less floppiness) and doesn’t get tangle up in the strings tethering other equipment to my vest:
Second photo is my 327 3” not the 629 but I don’t have a picture of the 629 with my work vest on to show what I mean about the longer barrel getting tangled in the tether strings.
Last edited:
Col, for me it is partly the aesthetics, partly length, but for some reason, i shoot shprt barrel guns, i,e, sig p938, better than any gun, 1911, full size sigs, etc. Its always been a mystery to me why i can shoot shorty much better than bigger guns. Shrugs.... i guess, think the old school Mannix look, or Lenny Briscoe, granted they didnt have a 44, but thats kinda why it appeals so much. To me, it clears holster faster, and i shoot shortys much better, and it just feels better to me.
I see what you mean.
I have a 3" Lew Horton S&W Model 624 and a standard 4" S&W Model 624.
First, recoil is subjective for the shooter.
I find the 3" Lew Horton Model 624 more objectionable to shoot than the 4" Model 624.With an N-frame revolver, I do not feel gives you any recoil advantages or carry advantages over a 4" version. The guns, regardless of barrel length, are just plain big.
I'm not obtional to recoil. I shot 357 Magnum handguns in IHMSA Handgun Silhouette Competition in years past and I bring out the 460 XVR once in a while when my pocket can afford the cost of the ammunition.
But, give it a try and do what you feel best. Different strokes for different folks.
First, recoil is subjective for the shooter.
I find the 3" Lew Horton Model 624 more objectionable to shoot than the 4" Model 624.With an N-frame revolver, I do not feel gives you any recoil advantages or carry advantages over a 4" version. The guns, regardless of barrel length, are just plain big.
I'm not obtional to recoil. I shot 357 Magnum handguns in IHMSA Handgun Silhouette Competition in years past and I bring out the 460 XVR once in a while when my pocket can afford the cost of the ammunition.
But, give it a try and do what you feel best. Different strokes for different folks.
Riomouse911
Contributing Member
The 3” have a bit of panache, as they are discontinued and paren’t as commonly seen as the 4” versions. Recoil with both 3” and 4” .44 Mags using full house loads are attention getting.
The 4” Mountain Gun is a decent compromise, a bit lighter than the standard gun with an inch more sight radius to help aim. The barrel-rib thickness between the special and magnum is the first clue, the shorter cylinder of the special is the second. (.38/.357 shown)
The MG, too receive a premium price since they are long discontinued. (My 629 MG was a bit less cost-wise, probably because the prior owner almost polished off the barrel markings.)
I also have a new-production 4.2” Model 69 .44 Mag. This 5-shot is on the smaller L frame and somehow has a more pleasant recoil experience than the larger N frame MG. These also come with a 2.75” barrel length as well.
Stay safe.
The 4” Mountain Gun is a decent compromise, a bit lighter than the standard gun with an inch more sight radius to help aim. The barrel-rib thickness between the special and magnum is the first clue, the shorter cylinder of the special is the second. (.38/.357 shown)
The MG, too receive a premium price since they are long discontinued. (My 629 MG was a bit less cost-wise, probably because the prior owner almost polished off the barrel markings.)
I also have a new-production 4.2” Model 69 .44 Mag. This 5-shot is on the smaller L frame and somehow has a more pleasant recoil experience than the larger N frame MG. These also come with a 2.75” barrel length as well.
Stay safe.
shoebox1.1
Member
If anyone is interested there is a like
New Kramer owb holster on a E auction site for like 120.00 for a 3 inch N frame. I’d buy it if I had a 3 inch
New Kramer owb holster on a E auction site for like 120.00 for a 3 inch N frame. I’d buy it if I had a 3 inch
Ugly Sauce
Member
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2020
- Messages
- 6,562
Naw, not too difficult. This carries "okay". Not my "EDC", or summer T-shirt weather carry, but I do take her to town or out and about once and a while.
.38 Special
Member
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2006
- Messages
- 7,713
Ah, sorry. My mistake - old eyes...
This is the typical profile of the Model 29. Note the straight, untapered barrel. This adds weight, as compared with the tapered "pencil" barrel of the 24, which aids recoil control and changes balance - which makes it better or worse, depending upon who you talk to. Again, though, with such a short barrel, the weight and balance difference is negligible...
So, using my model 27 as a reference, what exactly would be the difference bt the 29 and the 24 (3in versions). If yall need to, exagerate a bit to make me understand the nuances (given i donf have them to compare side by side).
Charlie98
Member
+1
One of the grail guns in .41MAG is the Lew Horton 3" 657... I've been offered one, from a friend, and I want nothing to do with it. A 4" N-frame Magnum, even one of the Mountain Guns, would be a minimum for me. I don't understand the whole rather large N-frame... with a tiny barrel thing.
I think, at least for me, it has to do partially with the look of it. It just seems right. Idk
Charlie98
Member
One man's trash is another man's treasure!
Actually, back in the early 1990's, I bought my mom a 3" full-lug J-frame model 60 in .38SPC. That pistol was a jewel. In that instance, the 3" barrel was better, vs the typical model 60's 2" barrel, but I think it would have been awkward with a 4".
The 624 3in is about 3oz less than a 629 3in Deluxe (which weighs about the same as my 629 Mountain Gun).
I guess it comes down to what your planning on shooting.
Magnum loads?
Special loads?
Light Magnums?
I don't routinely shoot Magnums from my MG.
240grn at 1100fps is my go to, more stout than a Special, not a Magnum for sure.
I guess it comes down to what your planning on shooting.
Magnum loads?
Special loads?
Light Magnums?
I don't routinely shoot Magnums from my MG.
240grn at 1100fps is my go to, more stout than a Special, not a Magnum for sure.
dobedo
Member
I recently went on the other side of the fence and purchased a Kimber 357 2"DASA. I shot a buds Ruger, S&W and Colt equal models to the Kimber. The Kimber weighs 23oz with flat side cylinder making I deal for CCW and the with 1.39 " with 6 rounds. The 2.5" colt weighs 40oz, the 2" Ruger weighed 36oz., the 2" S&W weighed 22.4oz. All were excellent shooters the Colt was a tad better on recoil due to its weight but would be a beast for CCW. Overall, they were pretty much tied in performance and accuracy. What sold me on the Kimber besides on width which was the narrowest was its trigger smoothness. It had a smoother trigger than all the others. I also have a couple of Pit Bulls which are what they are and cannot compete with style, manufacturing, and operation of the others you get what you pay for.
It would primarily be specials, or "warm/hottish" specials, just for economy/reloading (which i want to learn) but i like the "ability" to use mags (same as lever rifle) but not a hard requirement, if the m24 is better by itself, the rifle could always handle warm/hot specials.... make sense? Thats why im asking, is there any specific reason to objectively pick the m24 vs 29? Allow me a further example for clarifications sake... so, i have the m27, 3.5, 357 right? Some describe it as a boat anchor, carrying a battleship, etc. It is, to an extent. However, i had the new m19 carry comp, and omg, that thing was huge, felt SO much heavier than my m27, and if i hadnt had my grandfathers old revolver to compare the size ans weight would have turned me off to wheel guns forever, as all the articles and forums talked about the size (fairly small for ccw) lightish (same) etc. I was stunned when i got it, and compared to the m27, the carry comp was the boat anchor, whereas rhe m27 is an overweight bass..... i hated the carry comp m19, but love my m27. Hence the probing questions about the m24 vs 29. Hopefully this helps you help me, hahaha
My vote would be the 29 just for the slight edge on comfort shooting specials and down the road versatility having the magnum option. But if you know for certain you will never shoot magnums and/or you would take more pride and satisfaction in a less common gun, get the 24.
Or buy both, try them, and sell whichever you like less.
Or buy both, try them, and sell whichever you like less.
Ugly Sauce
Member
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2020
- Messages
- 6,562
The difference in balance, that would be purely subjective. What feels good or bad to one person, might feel bad or good to the next. Other than a pistol to carry in bear country, (the grizzled kind) a 24 would be perfect, and I don't think you would want anything with a 3" barrel anyhow. I see no reason for a .44mag. In that case, a 24 can be loaded up to any reasonable level. Don't need over the counter .44 magnum loads, or .44 mag pressure and/or velocity.
I'm posting a picture of my 24 again. I think the slim barrel is more "elegant". I think the 24 is a better looking pistol. And I'll say again, that other than hot summer T-shirt weather, it's not uncomfortable to carry. But that's just me, some guys would cry and moan, and whimper if they packed it around all day. Don't bother me.
This pistol has also had the chambers lengthened to accept .44magnums, by the Previous Owner, so they will take the pressure. (I never have, or will, fire .44 magnums in it) (the full wad-cutter loads in the pic are in .44 mag cases, but loaded to about 850fps) In other words, a 24 can be loaded up to as much recoil as is reasonable, or as much hoss-power you could possible want or need, without going full on .44 mag loads.
