Used Smith 29/629... hyphens?

[azredhawk44]

I'm going to buy either a used Smith & Wesson 29 or 629, or a new Ruger Redhawk 4" in the next month here.

There's a BIG, AWFUL, UGLY REASON that I won't be buying a new Smith.

Can someone give me some good links to study up on what all the hyphen numbers mean in Smith-ese? The dominant gun I see for sale buy Gunbroker for what I'm looking for is a 29-2, and I don't know much about submodel variations... Are any submodels "Bad" due to design flaws in them?

If I can't find a good Smith 29/629 after a few weeks, I'm gonna buy a Redhawk 4". I just need to be well armed for my pawn shop and used gun shop quest for a good, carryable 29 or 629.

BTW, finish isn't a big deal to me. This gun will probably be carried a lot and get sweat on it, brush and bushes brushing against it, lots of holster wear, etc.

 

[GCW5]

I'm not sure eather, other than I'm personally opposed to owning the new ones with the trigger locks. I bought a "Mountain Backpacker", which is a 629 (stainless) with a 3" barrel new about 3 years ago, and love it. From what I've seen, you might look for a "Mountain Pistol", they had 4" barrels, but seem to be hard to find, at least around here. As far as I know, any of the old stile, w/o the trigger locks should be fine. Hope this helps.

Good luck!

 

[cmidkiff]

You're going to wear and sweat on it? Get a 629... or a Redhawk. Either would suit you better than a 29. I have a 29-2, love it, but I wouldn't dream of rubbing all that beautiful deep blue off of it

I'm no expert, but if I recall correctly, the 629 wasn't introduced until 1980, the -1 came in '82, when they eliminated the recessed cylinders. They did the same with the 29-3 at around the same time.

Smith .44's are said to be 'less strong' than the Redhawk. They'll stand up to years of shooting with a 'normal' .44mag load, but if you want to push the pressure limits, go with the Ruger.

 

[Gator]

Here's a start:

http://www.handloads.com/misc/Smith.Model.Changes.asp

There are no "bad" models, but starting with the 29-3E S&W added an "endurance package" to the 29s. This was to address problems that shooters who put a LOT of heavy (over 240 grain) bullets through their 29s had; like silhouette shooters. I think the 629-5s got the change.

I agree with "cmidkiff", if you are going to use it with any sort of regularity get a 629; and if you want to shoot some firebreathing, bullwhacking, 300+ grain handloads get the Redhawk.

 

[SunRunner]

I’m probably going to take a beating for this one and it doesn’t exactly address your specific question regarding model number. Without sounding like a total hypocrite because of a previous post I started RE; what I might assume be part of the big ugly problem. I don’t think now personally I’d let that get in the way of a good deal on a newer model S&W. Politics aside, IMHO, the “big ugly problem” is not beyond workarounds that actually leave it intact.

After a little cleaning, a little polishing, a bit of tweaking. I took my 44mag. 629-6 to the range on Monday and fired it double action at 10 yards with very dirty (Amerc) 240gr LRN bullets until the flash build up on the front of the cylinder locked it up tighter than a rat’s rear end. The magic number was 86 rounds. My cylinder to barrel space is nice and tight and that’s exactly how I want it to be. To this I then wiped off the front of the cylinder and fired the remaining 14 rounds of the 100 RNL and an additional 50 rounds of high velocity 180gr JHP, all double action. It performed well.

On a positive side note; it has an excellent trigger and the cylinder timing is IMO perfect. I find it comfortable to shoot with the factory Houge grips, controllable double action fire and also accurate. I also like the hi-vis sight that’s on mine. Just my .02 worth.

BTW, I also have a 29-2 nickel and bought the 629 to shoot and save the 29. Also, one little point on the 29s. We use to do a lot of reloading. Every once in a while when pushing the hotter loads the firing pin that on my 29 that is attached to the hammer would pierce the primer and lock up the whole thing. I guess nothing is really totally failsafe.

Monday at the Range…

 

[.41Dave]

The "-" in a Smith & Wesson model number simply signifies a minor engineering change. For example, the model 29 was introduced. Then S&W changed the ejector rod from right-hand to left-hand threads and a model 29 that incorporated this change was designated a 29-1. When they eliminated the trigger guard screw, it became a 29-2. When the barrel pin and cylinder counterbore was eliminated, it became a 29-3, when they added an "Endurance package" and a new yoke retention system, it became a 29-4, and so on. If you plan on shooting tactical nuclear reloads, you might want to buy a 29-4 or later or a 629-3 or later. However, if you plan on shooting sane loads don't worry about it. There are no "bad" ones, so unless you are a collector none of it really matters much.

 

[Deanimator]

I took my 44mag. 629-6 to the range on Monday and fired it double action at 10 yards with very dirty (Amerc) 240gr LRN bullets until the flash build up on the front of the cylinder locked it up tighter than a rat’s rear end.

You might just as well beat your gun with a ball peen hammer as shoot Amerc in it.

I've never fired their loaded ammunition, but I once made the mistake of trying to reload some of their .38 Special brass. It was quite simply THE worst brass I have EVER seen. I crushed and threw away EVERY piece I could find.

 

[SaxonPig]

The classic and most favored .44 Magnum Smiths are the 29-2 and earlier models. Many shooters see the 29-3 as the beginning of a downhill slide in features and quality.

The 629 is the same gun in stainless as the 29-2. The 629-1 equals the 29-3.