Posted: 9/25/2007 5:05:51 AM EDT
|
I've been wanting a .44 Magnum for a bit...I want to be able to send it off, get it ported and the action slicked if need be too. It's purpose being more of a camping type weapon with the option to CCW when in town, so I need it to handle the heavier (+P) type .44 Magnum bear rounds when out and about (and lighter defensive loads) at least 50-100 times in the gun's lifetime. It will never see a steady diet of the big boomers (that tend to be rated for Rugers only) and I am partial to the S&W 629 with the 4 inch BBL for it's size, aftermarket options, $$$, and looks. I am not interested in the new breed of survival .44's with less than a 4 inch tube, and am leery of the recoil and bullet separation issues in the S&W LW ti/scadnium hand cannons. Any other suggestions of good .44's that come out there that fit this bill...? |
I really like my 29...they are classic. Mine has some top-strap cutting. Anybody else see this in 29's or 629's? I think some "expert" wrote that the cutting stops/doesn't progress beyond a certain point, but it is kinda strange. dvo |
I have the Ruger Redhawk and like it. It has a 5.5" barrel. It is a big handgun and I would not call it ideal for concealed carry. I do carry it concealed when camping or bow or muzzle loader hunting, and nobody seems to notice. It is a remarkably accurate handgun. At least for the first few shots. It is my understanding that the S&W does not like the full power 300 grain handloads loaded to the rear cannelure and that the Ruger is built to withstand higher pressures, but the S&W is apparently smoother and more refined. |
|
It's actually not available in .44 magnum, but the perfect revolver for your application is the freedom arms model 97, in any of the five shot calibers. You can reproduce and even exceed any SAAMI spec .44 magnum round in a .45colt '97, Buffalo Bore factory ammo is available at 250gr at 1550fps and 300 at 1200. Maximum loads are pretty vicious in the recoil dept. as the 5.5" model only weighs 35 oz. empty, but 250 gr gold dots at 1050 or so are quite pleasant for CCW duty. The pistol CCWs really well, particularly in a Mernickle PS6SA. Maybe a 4", round-butt, fixed sight model would be even betterthan my 5.5". Not cheap. |
|
I like the looks of the SW 29, and 629, and they seem smaller than the Ruger series. This is a gun that will not be shot a lot with full loads, and the REALLY full loads (for outdoors only, meaning sight it in, fire some rounds for familiarization, and stoke it when out in the woods, and in town change ammo to more defensive rounds. I carry a Sig 229 .40 and hide it well daily in an IWB, so I know how to conceal big guns... I'm thinking the 29 mountain gun, port'ed and smoother trigger pull... |
I wouldn't. Handle one--Taurus guns are still iffy at best. Gun rags post, seemingly every couple of years, how "Taurus is making great guns these days"--BS. That, and their blatant rip-off of other manufacturers appearance and designs, REALLY turns me off. 
|
| I have the S&W 629 with the 4" barrel. I opted for it as opposed to a 6" because it's used as a back-up as you say out and about. My pops has the model 29-2 with a 6 1/2" barrel, still all original and is as near if not 100% as you can get, circa about 1971-2. Yes, same as Harry's. The 629's trigger, at least mine, breaks as smooth as glass. So does the 29's. The 629 has a hogue grip and helps a bit on the recoil. The 29 has its original wood grips with a bit of a spur overhanging the web between your thumb and forefinger which is a nice feature to help with the roll back. I keep the 629 in a Galco vertical shoulder holster. The 29 has a belt holster. The 29 is a better gun to aim and fire. The 629 is faster to get out and fire. For my needs I prefer the shorter 629 with the 4". Also, I'm not sure if porting the 629 would make much of a difference. In any event, you will know it's a 44. Then again, there are the 2 consecutive numbered .44 Auto Mags. Yep, same as Harry's. |