I have a neutral question. I feel the need to preface with that statement, given this thread.
The S&W 29s, made since 1956 (they were not model marked until about 1959), have been known to shoot loose, perhaps get out of time, among probably some other issues. My uncle (an avid shooter, handgun hunter and competitor) told me he saw a 29 with top strap cutting problems, which S&W replaced for the guy. I assume the loads in that gun were really pushing it, but I don't know for sure, and the guy that did that has since passed away.
My question is this: for all of the evidence that the 29s and for that matter, 629s are weaker, has there been as much evaluation of 629s that were made POST the endurance package? I mean the 629 debuted around 1980 IIRC, and that was before the endurance package. I guess what I'm saying is that there are many generations and variations of model 29s and 629s. Were all of them given equal consideration? I think its a well known fact that a majority of 29s, and perhaps even 629s would be PRE endurance package. Or is it a simple matter of even the endurance package 629s do not hold up either? I don't know either way, I'm just asking. All I can say is that the same Uncle mentioned above has a 629 Classic DX which has had zero problems. I also don't think he pushes the gun to the top limit, so then really, its probably irrelevant to the exact point of this thread: which gun could handle a steady diet of high pressure 44 mags the longest?
If you were Buffalo bore, or some other high power pistol ctg manufacturer, it would be much easier to say for liability sake "No S&W 29 or 629" rather than give serial number ranges for certain generations which would be safe, and those which would not. Many people would probably get confused, and make mistakes, which is why for liability purposes, blanket statements are often used, whether true or not.