Some time back I picked up a used 8 3/8" barrel Model 629-1. Having similar guns in 6 inch barrel lengths the 8 3/8" barrel seemed somewhat as an oddity, but I just couldn't resist it, and the price was right. Besides, I had an 8 3/8" 686 that I foolishly sold back in the early Nineties that I loved. Being .357 with a full underlug I wasn't sure how similar the balance would be to the 629. I shot very, very well with the 686.
After getting the 629 back from my smith who had replaced a head bolt to tightened up the ejector fit, I spent some time in the evening holding the gun out one-handed and two-handed until my arm(s) got tired. My theory was that this would help me acclimate to the different balance of such a long barrel while toning muscles for that particular task. I plan a similar regimen for my Raging Thirty and Raging 454. The 629 has felt progressively lighter and lighter as I have done this.
Today during some lunch hour shooting I got to fire the 629 for the first time. Doggone of I don't love the balance of the gun. It's not at all nose-heavy as I might have expected, and any weight that is out there only reduced muzzle climb, or so I would expect, in comparison to my 6 inchers. Another nice surprise was that I very much preferred shooting mag loads to Specials. Having that weight out front really made the gun a pussycat and I would have to imagine soaked up some of the recoil. I'm not at all recoil sensitive and am much more concerned with muzzle climb. In that regard the long barrel really is a big plus. My 686 must have been a real pussycat. And while I do like shooting .44 Special, it wasn't as good for me, with the magnum loads shooting tighter groups. Every time I switched to Specials I was soon saying "Okay, enough of that" and going right back to the magnum loads. That isn't so much the case with my shorter 6" barreled .44 mags. I will reserve judgment on all of that until I have a 4" barrel .44 mag to shoot.
Below is my gun, dirty as a pig after lunch at the range. She's a keeper.
After getting the 629 back from my smith who had replaced a head bolt to tightened up the ejector fit, I spent some time in the evening holding the gun out one-handed and two-handed until my arm(s) got tired. My theory was that this would help me acclimate to the different balance of such a long barrel while toning muscles for that particular task. I plan a similar regimen for my Raging Thirty and Raging 454. The 629 has felt progressively lighter and lighter as I have done this.
Today during some lunch hour shooting I got to fire the 629 for the first time. Doggone of I don't love the balance of the gun. It's not at all nose-heavy as I might have expected, and any weight that is out there only reduced muzzle climb, or so I would expect, in comparison to my 6 inchers. Another nice surprise was that I very much preferred shooting mag loads to Specials. Having that weight out front really made the gun a pussycat and I would have to imagine soaked up some of the recoil. I'm not at all recoil sensitive and am much more concerned with muzzle climb. In that regard the long barrel really is a big plus. My 686 must have been a real pussycat. And while I do like shooting .44 Special, it wasn't as good for me, with the magnum loads shooting tighter groups. Every time I switched to Specials I was soon saying "Okay, enough of that" and going right back to the magnum loads. That isn't so much the case with my shorter 6" barreled .44 mags. I will reserve judgment on all of that until I have a 4" barrel .44 mag to shoot.
Below is my gun, dirty as a pig after lunch at the range. She's a keeper.
