hey guys i am looking to add a 44mag double action smith and wesson to my collection....i am a bit of a ruger single action fan but wAnt to try something different....i am looking for a stainless ina a 4 (maybe 6) inch barrel...would like to kee it around $500 ($600 max) used is fine....i guess a good comparision would bea 4in ruger redhawk here in town for$500
s&w 44mag da recommendations
- Thread starter TennJed
- Start date
- Status
loadedround
Member
I'm not sure what your use is for a 44 mag, but my first choice for an "all round" 44 mag would be a SS S&W 629 with a 4'' barrel. However YMMV.
Zaydok Allen
Member
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2011
- Messages
- 13,274
+1 to the 629
In a Smith the 29 or 629 is pretty much it. I have had a 8" and a 4" and the 4" is much more an all-around gun (if a .44 mag is ever "all-around"). Personally I have not seen one, even used, for $500.
I also own a 329PD, the ultra-light Scandium gun, but all-around it's not unless what you really want to shoot is .44 Specials.
I also own a 329PD, the ultra-light Scandium gun, but all-around it's not unless what you really want to shoot is .44 Specials.
buck460XVR
Member
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2007
- Messages
- 10,085
Around here, $600 is the standard price for a used 629 in 90% or better condition. LNIB may bring $650. For hunting and range, I'd stick with a 5 or 6 inch barrel. For a trail gun I'd stick with a 4''. For hunting deer, I have a PC Compensated Magnum Hunter and I love it. Also have a 5'' that sees a lotta range time.
Myself I prefer 6" for a .44 mag to take advantage of the power.
The only advice I'll offer that no one else has is if you want to shoot very hot loads or the 300 gr bullets make sure the gun has the Endurance Package.
The early S&W .44's were designed to shoot a 240 gr bullet. If you shoot a 300 gr bullet in these revolvers they go out of adjustment pretty quick. Also the cylinder will at times rotate backwards leaving your next shoot on an already fired chamber. The Endurance Package's intent was to fix this problem.
Almost all of my S&W .44's do not have the Endurance Package and I'm not a fan of the 300 gr bullet. I limit myself to 250 gr bullets from these guns.
The only advice I'll offer that no one else has is if you want to shoot very hot loads or the 300 gr bullets make sure the gun has the Endurance Package.
The early S&W .44's were designed to shoot a 240 gr bullet. If you shoot a 300 gr bullet in these revolvers they go out of adjustment pretty quick. Also the cylinder will at times rotate backwards leaving your next shoot on an already fired chamber. The Endurance Package's intent was to fix this problem.
Almost all of my S&W .44's do not have the Endurance Package and I'm not a fan of the 300 gr bullet. I limit myself to 250 gr bullets from these guns.
MachIVshooter
Member
Hard to beat the 629 (love my 3").
That said, you're gonna be hard pressed to keep it under $600 in most areas. It happens, but by and large, I see the decent used ones between $600 and $800 on most shelves, sometimes more for a less common variant. They run $800-$1,100 new for non-PC guns.
That said, you're gonna be hard pressed to keep it under $600 in most areas. It happens, but by and large, I see the decent used ones between $600 and $800 on most shelves, sometimes more for a less common variant. They run $800-$1,100 new for non-PC guns.
ChefJeff1
Member
Which 629's have the endurance package? I would assume the newer models would have it.
ChefJeff1, my memory is terrible anymore but I believe the Endurance Package came out around the -4 models for the 29, and I think -2E for the 629. Also, I think improvements were made with the 29-3 but the -4 just had more.
Part of the Endurance package deals with the notches that are cut in the cylinder. If you look at 2 S&W 29's together the one with the Endurance package will have longer/larger notches on the cylinder.
You may want to do a Google search for S&W Endurance package for better information than I have.
I still remember buying my first 629-1, a used revolver from a gunshop. I asked the gunsmith if the gun was any good. He told me he would prefer stainless living in FL and warned me to not shoot 300 gr bullets out of it. According to him that gun was designed to shoot a 240 gr bullet. I have followed his advice for 10 years now and have no issues with any of my older .44's.
Part of the Endurance package deals with the notches that are cut in the cylinder. If you look at 2 S&W 29's together the one with the Endurance package will have longer/larger notches on the cylinder.
You may want to do a Google search for S&W Endurance package for better information than I have.
I still remember buying my first 629-1, a used revolver from a gunshop. I asked the gunsmith if the gun was any good. He told me he would prefer stainless living in FL and warned me to not shoot 300 gr bullets out of it. According to him that gun was designed to shoot a 240 gr bullet. I have followed his advice for 10 years now and have no issues with any of my older .44's.
BCRider
Member
Well, if you really want a S&W I'll hardly argue with you since I'm a keen fan. But the Redhawk is also a darn sweet gun. Especially once it's tuned up a bit for a smoother trigger.
If you're after a S&W in stainless then you're looking at a 629 for sure. From there it's only a matter of the style of barrel. For a shorter length the full underlug is the most common and certainly aids in soaking up the recoil. For the longer stuff you get your choice but the full underlug again will give you a little more forward mass to aid in soaking up some of the lift during recoil.
I'm a big blued gun fan. If I were to get a S&W in .44Mag it would be the blued 29. And ideally in the same barrel length as Harry Calahan's
If you're after a S&W in stainless then you're looking at a 629 for sure. From there it's only a matter of the style of barrel. For a shorter length the full underlug is the most common and certainly aids in soaking up the recoil. For the longer stuff you get your choice but the full underlug again will give you a little more forward mass to aid in soaking up some of the lift during recoil.
I'm a big blued gun fan. If I were to get a S&W in .44Mag it would be the blued 29. And ideally in the same barrel length as Harry Calahan's
Just my 2 cents worth, you won't go wrong with any of them. I have both the Redhawk and Smith 629-4. Actually it's a Super Redhawk, which I prefer to the standard Redhawk (I owned one of these too, but had to sell it for college money).
The Smith is a classic piece and has a very nice balance to it. I love the click click click it makes when you rock the hammer back. Mine has the S&W marked Hogue grips, which I really like.
My Super Redhawk also sports a set of Hogue grips, which change the entire ergonomics of the gun. I really didn't like the wood and rubber grips that come from Ruger, but the Hogues make it feel as well balanced as the Smith.
The Ruger is a beefy gal, and the cylinders are a bit longer than the Smith, which means that you have more room to load heavy boolits if you choose.
I believe all the Redhawk parts are stainless, which is great if you are going to use it in the Northwest, where it rains 24/7 all year 'round. The Smith retains a few color case hardned parts, trigger, hammer, and some internals. While beautiful, they can rust if not attended to in the wet.
It's a tough choice, I prefer shooting the Smith, but if I had to choose for down and dirty in the mud, I'd probably choose the Ruger.
Either way, you won't go wrong, WTH, get both.
The Smith is a classic piece and has a very nice balance to it. I love the click click click it makes when you rock the hammer back. Mine has the S&W marked Hogue grips, which I really like.
My Super Redhawk also sports a set of Hogue grips, which change the entire ergonomics of the gun. I really didn't like the wood and rubber grips that come from Ruger, but the Hogues make it feel as well balanced as the Smith.
The Ruger is a beefy gal, and the cylinders are a bit longer than the Smith, which means that you have more room to load heavy boolits if you choose.
I believe all the Redhawk parts are stainless, which is great if you are going to use it in the Northwest, where it rains 24/7 all year 'round. The Smith retains a few color case hardned parts, trigger, hammer, and some internals. While beautiful, they can rust if not attended to in the wet.
It's a tough choice, I prefer shooting the Smith, but if I had to choose for down and dirty in the mud, I'd probably choose the Ruger.
Either way, you won't go wrong, WTH, get both.
Get a Smith and Wesson, firing a Ruger is like driving a tank!
I've got a 629 - 5" with one of those stoned and honed trigger packages and it's all that and more. I did a side-by-side comparison between Ruger and S&W with the same ammo at a range before I paid the cash and the S&W convinced me more and more between every round while the Ruger disappointed me more and more between every round.
I've got a 629 - 5" with one of those stoned and honed trigger packages and it's all that and more. I did a side-by-side comparison between Ruger and S&W with the same ammo at a range before I paid the cash and the S&W convinced me more and more between every round while the Ruger disappointed me more and more between every round.
ChefJeff1
Member
Thanks Joed, I have a -6 and want to load some heavier lead for backcountry use.
- Status
