Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Which 629

I’m thinking about getting rid of some handguns I never use, and replacing them with a .44

I have always liked the 4” S&W 629. If you were out looking for one, which variant would be your most desired?
I’m assuming most here would prefer an older pre-lock 629?

Thank you.

Mountain Gun

Check out the 69 too, love mine

It would have to be a pinned and recessed no dash for me. Bring your wallet.

Would that be a -2 variant, same as the 29? Or only no dash were pinned and recessed??

How much would you think one might run?

I have a very nice wather PPK (Interarms) and a S&W 39 I’m thinking of parting with to cushion the blow.

How much are you going to shoot it and how often are you going to shoot heavy loads?

My favorite .44 Special is a 329PD. It is uncomfortable to shoot with .44 Magnum loads, but great with .44 Special level loads.

I have had 4" 625 and 629 MGs and found the 625 easier to shoot with heavy loads.

I like the Mountain Gun but the thin barrel makes it really snappy, especially with full-house loads. Another option is the 329 PD which is a 629 but titanium. Its also snappy. But my main application is backup when salmon fishing so I really prefer something lighter, and just deal with the barrel flip.

For all around use a straight 29 or 629 in a 4 or 6" would be optimum. I like the older ones with the pin on the hammer. Not sure the technical name for that. But a lot steadier, especially with X frame grips.

And one year, right after shoulder surgery, I used a long barreled 629 as my only deer "rifle". It was all I could handle, left hand no less, and I'm a rightie.

Well I’ll be handloading for it, so will cook up some reduced loads for shooting fun, and make up some heavy stuff for pig and backpacking.
I’ll check out the 625 as well as the suggested Mountain gun, which if memory serves me, is a pretty light revolver, made to carry.

The 29-2 is the last of the P&R blued version of the same gun.

The only stainless 629 that is P&R is the 629, with no dash.

Nice 4"ers usually bring 1k plus.

N-Frame Mountain Guns are quite a bit heavier and larger than the 329PD. Lots of people have put the cushioned grips from a 460 on the 329PD to help handle the recoil.

Have been reading a lot of reviews, most seem to prefer the straight 629 over the MG, preferring the heavier barrel to the lighter one. Zoned in on those reviewers who owned both.

I think I’ll stick to a straight 629, put the x- grips on it.
Anyone know which varients were pinned and recessed? That info is proving hard to find.

629. No dash.

I would prefer the pre lock models. Be sure you get one after the "endurance" upgrade. Not sure which "dash" model that was. Having said that I carried a 629-8 for several years, very heavy on a belt holster. Anything over 4" will be a hassle to sit down with in a belt holster. I finally settled on a rather rare S&W, the 357PD which is a 41 Mag scandium titanium like the 329PD 44 Mag. Not near as nasty with full house loads. One deer season I even forgot it was there and walked into a Walmart in Nebraska and nobody said anything. Always knew that the 629 was there, listing to one side..

What am I missing?

K, L, And X frames have the same grip.

N's are bigger.

The X grips are bigger than the N's. So an improvement on a 629 would be the x frame grip. They are a bit bigger but also wrap around the frame so the grip doesn't pinch you when it goes bang.

Actually the X and the N frames have the same grip. K and L are the same also.

I should say that X frame grips and N frame grips will fit each other. Not exactly the same. K and L frame fit each other as well.

The endurance package started with the 629-3’s, they were completed with the -4’s. Early -4’s still had the square butt grip frame, but changed to round butt during that model numbers production run.

Ditto.

What was the endurance package?

The endurance package is refinements to the action for greater strength & less wear. Larger cylinder latch/notches etc.

Actually, 629-5 marked the final enhancements for endurance & was the beginning of use of MIM hammers & triggers(which bothers me NOT)

629-6 notes the addition of the side lock.

Mountain guns are a bit snappier than the standard 4" & seem to to be even a bit snappier than the 4 1/8" L frame 5 shot 69.

You want a -4 or -5 629 Classic (full underlug) in 5”. 4” a little short, 6.5” is a little long unless it’s a pure hunter. 5” is the absolute sweet spot. Probably also the hardest to find. Forget Pinned & Recessed unless you just want to admire it. If you intend to shoot it, you want the endurance package and the -4 or -5 gen. And you can admire it too. If you find one, prepare to open your wallet wide.

I have noticed that the x grips fit an N frame although the x grip flares out a little more as it approaches the trigger guard and the frame beneath the hammer. So the fit is not completely snug. X grip is definitely a bit beefier and more comfortable.

The analogy is pulling on size 46 waist pants on a 42 inch waist. It'll fit but …...

I haven't tried putting an N frame grip on an X frame so cant comment on whether they fit interchangeably..

Would be nice IMO if someone came up with a larger grip made of space age materials that fit the N-frames perfectly but that did an even better job of absorbing recoil. A "decelerator" equivalent.

I like them all, but if your application is fishing, or as a backup for hunting, say in a chest rig, I like the shorter length like 3-4". This is for pure defense. Lighter, more compact, and more of a "get off me" belly gun. There is a reason the Ruger Alaskan and others have a snubby barrel.

For this application as soon as I get to a 6" barrel, its too big and heavy. And in the way of job 1, which is the task at hand (fishing/hunting), saving the .44 for last ditch defense.

And frankly Ill take whatever variant I can get so long as its a Smith. They are all a quality piece of machinery that you can rely on.

Been shooting my many vintage P&R Smith's for decades, and admiring the quality of workmanship and hand fitting that has not been present since 1981. What's your point?

So then no pinned and recessed with the endurance package..unless it was sent in after purchase?

I have a 19 and 66, can’t help it, love the P&R

Some of the P&R made in the 60s and 70s were junk.Truthfully the new S&Ws lock and MIM parts and all are a much better revolver.The S&Ws made from the 30s through the 50s are a whole different ball game,but many here would not know that.

Ive had -1 and -3 versions.
One 4" two 6" and one 8 3/8".
If not shooting heavier than 240's id stay w a reg 6" -3.
That my preferred hunting and range toy.
If backpacking or similar......4". Im limited to 50 yards w a 4". Can shoot the 6" ok out to 100.

Agree on the Classic,.........5" the way to go.

Do not care for the looks of the new N frames. They might be stronger. I dont care.
Looks are important.
I just shoot deer......so dont need the endurance package.
Tried some 300s way back in my -1 4" and yup.....trigger pivot broke. Smith fixed it pretty fast

629 Classic w/ full lug

2 uses for me. Carry as a backup and rarely shoot, 329-PD all the way. Light enough you never have the urge to leave it this morning.... it goes ALL the time. Backed off the Keith load, at about 18-19 grains only, hard cast 240. Will go right through moose shoulders, bear skulls etc... I do have heavy loads for it, and just have mostly given up on them. But will be going up to 270 hard cast but slowing them a bit. Mass will be more important than speed I believe.

If was going to hunt and shoot a lot with it, I think I'd just as soon go to a super Blackhawk. Redhawks to big and heavy BTDT. 29/629 are great too, but I like the feel super Blackhawk personally and it will last as long or longer IMHO.

And I"m far from a ruger fan.

Well stated ,in January of 1980 I paid $500 for ANIB 8 3/8" 629, was offered $1250 for it last year, If I found a 4" in the same condition as my 8 3/8" for a grand I'd jump on it. Mine wears smooth Rosewood SW Target grips and shoots well.

Did not intend to imply you can’t shoot an old P&R gun. As you point out, many who are lucky enough to have them can and most certainly do. My ‘point’ to the OP is merely this - the P&R doesn’t ‘do’ anything for the gun’s performance, besides improve its aesthetics. The Endurance Package does DO something, in that it (obviously) improves the gun’s durability under heavier/hotter loads and frequent use. Why narrow the field of what you can readily (or not so readily) find, and simultaneously prepare to pay an even higher price tag for in an old P&R gun, when a -4 or -5 will suit your stated purposes even more admirably? Unless, of course, the aesthetics or sheer collectibility of the gun factor higher than your intentions of shorting the hell out of it. That’s all.

Side note - I have nothing against the more modern or current production 629’s either. Have a -6 with the MIM, yeah the Hilary Hole too. It’s a fantastic gun in all aspects. But with the Q/C (or lack thereof) across the board today, you gotta know how to pick your cherries. Buyer beware.

I have a 629 -4 mt gun and love it....bu I never saw a 629 I didn't love...