.44 magnum snub nose choice?

J

JERRYS.

New member
I realize there is a 250-300 difference in price, but if you could pick just one snub .44mag would it be the ruger redhawk (talo?) or the s&w 629?

both are all s.s. 6 shot guns weighing about the same and similar size and bbl length. shooting specials or magnums I don't care, just which would you pick and why?
 
Last edited:
I have a 3" 629. The Ruger is probably better suited for heavier loads, but to me the trimmer, lighter Smith is my preference.
 
how much lighter/trimmer et cetera is the 629 than the ruger backpacker? I tried to find a side by side comparison on youtube et cetera but didn't have any luck.
 
I have the Ruger Alaskan and wouldn't trade it for two 629,s. I like the 629 but after getting the Ruger there,s no comparison.
 
I own a Ruger Super Redhawk Alaskan and a S&W 629 manufactured in 1983.

Here's the differences. The old S&W has a superior trigger to the Ruger, it's slightly lighter weight and the overall size is a bit smaller.

However - if you're buying a NEW S&W, the triggers on the new guns are, in a word - awful - in comparison to the old Smith triggers.

I have a new Jerry Miculek M625 that came with a horrendous trigger that could only be worked to 7lbs DA (down from 10.5) and 5.5lbs SA (down from 8).

You can compare that to a 1984 M624 with a 3.5lb SA and 6lb DA, or the 1982 M57 with a 2.5lb SA and 5lb DA triggers - that's what you used to be able to do with a Smith trigger.

The days of making Smith triggers the envy of the revolver world are over with the newly manufactured guns - the new triggers stink.

In fact, the gunsmith that worked on both the JM 625 and the Ruger Alaskan said, "Today, I can do more with a Ruger trigger than I can with a new Smith trigger."

He was right. The Ruger Alaskan trigger is better than what he could do with the new JM 625 - but neither gun is close to the 1983 M629.

If you're buying a new gun - my advice would be to get the Ruger and take a pass on the M629.
 
buckhorn, that the gun would be a "snub nose" the difference of a 7lbs and 9lbs trigger is nothing to me. I find stacking to be the biggest detractor from a D/A pull than overall pounds.

so aside from a still very serviceable trigger (in my hands anyway) there is no difference to you? when you say slightly lighter and slightly smaller how much are you talking?
 
Ruger lists the 2.5" barreled Alaskan @ 45 oz.

Smith lists their 4" 629 @ 41.5 oz, that is almost 1/4 lb lighter with 1.5" more barrel. I don't see a shorter version listed currently.

Smith shows their 4" 329 @ 25 oz.

My 3" 629 is 37 oz. on my scales. That is 1/2 lb lighter with a 1/2" longer barrel.

Just my opinion, in a full size gun with a 6" or longer barrel used for hunting I'd probably give the edge to the Ruger. But in a snubby the weight matters. Especially if you plan to shoot mostly 44 specials or mid-level 44mag loads.

Edit:

I looked at the wrong Ruger, the Talo version is 1 oz lighter with a 2.75" barrel vs 2.5" on the Alaskan which I initially compared. The 1oz less weight does not change my opinion.
 
Last edited:
buckhorn, that the gun would be a "snub nose" the difference of a 7lbs and 9lbs trigger is nothing to me. I find stacking to be the biggest detractor from a D/A pull than overall pounds.

so aside from a still very serviceable trigger (in my hands anyway) there is no difference to you? when you say slightly lighter and slightly smaller how much are you talking?
Click to expand...


Trying to describe this on the Internet is like three blind men describing an elephant...it just doesn't work.

You need to go to a gun store and handle the guns themselves and make up your own mind.

You've never said why you're buying the gun or HOW you plan on using it. Let me give you several examples.

I bought the Ruger Alaskan for one reason - field use in northern Montana and Idaho where you may run into brown bears. I needed a smaller pistol that I could carry in a belt holster that would not impede me getting in and out of my truck.

I have a .460 X-Frame, but the only way you can carry that easily is in a cross chest holster - which sort of rules it out for all day carry in-and-out of vehicles.

The Alaskan is the answer to that specific use. I load the Alaskan with 305 grain, hard cast flat nose bullets. I would NEVER shoot those regularly (practice + field use) out of an S&W M629 - that type of load just puts too much stress on the 629's lighter frame and cylinder.

The Smith is lighter weight and has wood grips which makes recoil feel far worse, and gun control for follow up shots harder. The Ruger Alaskan is better for recoil and gun control as the gun is heavier, and the factory grips are made to reduce felt recoil and assist the shooter in handling the gun better.

If I want a lighter weight .44 caliber revolver for field use, I carry a M624 .44 Special with a tapered, light-weight, 2-inch barrel, that has a drop butt grip - it was a special run made for Lew Horton (gun distributors) in the mid-80's.

It weighs 37 ounces unloaded, and 42 ounces loaded with 240 grain bullets. The rounded grip is smaller than the standard S&W grip which makes it easier to wear under a jacket, and doesn't snag when you need to draw the gun. You can still find them for sale now and again on Gunbroker.

As for the M629. The one I have has a 4-inch barrel. I bought it because I like .44 magnums and wanted one with with an intermediate length barrel. This one was relatively unused, was an older model that has a trigger that can be tuned, and was the right price.
 
Last edited:
black bear or wild boar are the worst 4 legged vermin I'd come across. the 629 with standard magnums would be fine. ive thought about a 4" model 24 as stout special loads are pretty damn good too. I leaned towards stainless for the ease of care....

the grip problems you mention aren't a concern for me as I would replace the stock grips with what suited me, not what the factory wanted for me.
 
the grip problems you mention aren't a concern for me as I would replace the stock grips with what suited me, not what the factory wanted for me.
Click to expand...

I will tell you that for the Super Redhawk Alaskan - there are no better grips than the Hogue "Tamer" rubber grips. They have been specially designed for the Super Redhawk Alaskan to assist with recoil. In this case, the factory provides absolutely the best grip possible.

The Ruger Redhawk Talo has wooden grips, and looks much like the M624 Lew Horton model that I referenced previously - but with a much heavier frame and cylinder.

From your responses, it appears you have all of this thought out for yourself and I have no idea at this point in how to assist you. Buy whatever you want, modify it however you want and use the gun.
 
I'm torn on several guns.... theres the S&W 696, the 629 snub both at about the same price.... I know one is a magnum and 6 shots.... but not one of my holy grail guns.... then there is the Ruger backpacker, less money but built for the heaviest loads.... but you're right... without being able to lay hands on each to see for myself how they balance and feel, its a gamble I'm just going to have to make one way or another...
 
Warning here....

Snub .44 Magnums, especially light ones, KICK LIKE BLUE BLAZES if you use real magnum loads.

And I say that having owned the S&W 3 inch Backpacker.

Hence I would only make it a "+p' .44 Special in reality and thus a Backpacker style S&W would work.

If I do intend on using real snorten .44 Magnum or worse loads, I'd just buy a Ruger Taklat 5 inch .454 and use it.

But since I don't live in monster bear country, nor moose, I tend to just pack this, my 629-1 .44 Magnum.

attachment.php


and if light weight was a must..

attachment.php


The 629 Mountian Revolver at the top (the other one is a 625 .45 ACP and with .45 Supers it ain't all that bad either.)

But I've found if one is real worried about 5 or 10 ounces of weight... then work out and lose 5 LBS!!!

Deaf
 
Hey Jerry,

I love 44's and was looking for something between the 2 1/2" Bulldog and 7 1/2" SBH, settled on something with a 4" barrel . In fact I was pretty much set on the Redhawk as I have been a Ruger fan for 40+ years and having put over 3000 full house loads through my SBH (picked it up in the mid-late 70's)which is still a tack driver and tight as can be. Happened to handle a 4" 629 at the LGS after my last range session and it just felt right for me. Decided I "had to have one". Order it last week and should arrive any day now. That said, I don't see how you could go wrong with any of the revolvers referenced in this thread. Look forward to seeing what you ultimately end up with!
 
If stout specials would work, you might consider the old Rossi 720. It is stainless with a 3" barrel, heavy enough to be soft shooting and durable, small and light enough to be easy to carry. Some folks think it is the best thing Rossi ever made. I love mine, the trigger is outstanding. They have been out of production for many years, but show up on Gun Make Me Broker every few months or so.

Sorry if that is off topic.
 
well, I went and dun did it.

I found a 626-6 Mountain Gun for a good price and bit on it. its a 4" gun and so far my only gripe is the built in lock.

after two cylinders of wwb 240gr. JSP I wish I had gotten a 6" gun. the MG has a tapered bbl like the old Model 24s.... im glad I didn't find the real snub because the 4" MG is as light as I want to go for magnums. heck, if I can find a 6" full lug gun for trade I'm going to do that, but for now this MG will be my woods etc gun.
 
I'm a sucker for short-barreled big bore handguns, and really liked the Talo Redhawk. However, I already have this:



so I resisted buying another 44 mag snubby. This is a Performance Center Model 629-6, and I don't think you can find a more compact 44 magnum revolver. Of course, you do pay for it when firing maximum loads, so I usually carry 180 grain loads in it.

I have a Ruger Super Redhawk Alaskan in 454, and it's a lot heavier and bulkier than the Smith. Too big and heavy for a 44 magnum, in my opinion...
 
What you need is a 329 PD. Looks like a 29 S&W, but is made of skidum, or something like that, and weights as much as a 38 SP. Hope you like recoil though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top