feelings on the mountain gun series?

B

bullfrog99

New member
I've been pondering getting a smith mountain gun in 44 magnum or 45 colt. I was wondering what your opinions were on this gun as a general purpose revolver. Do you mountain gun owners recomend these guns( do you like them?), or would i be better off picking up a ruger redhawk?
 
Very different from a Redhawk

First I think you need to determine what roll the revolver is going to play, the S&W Mountain guns are very different from a Redhawk. If you're looking for something to carry when you're out tramping around in the mountains the S&W in either 44 mag or 45 Colt is going to suit you much better than the massive Redhawk. If you're looking for something to shoot lots of full bore magnum rounds in and want to hunt with it I think the Redhawk is the route to go.

I just recently picked up a S&W M29 and have been comparing it to my M24 which has a round butt. I was thinking that a M29 with a round butt would make a great packing gun, which is just about exactly what the Mountain series is!

Either the S&W or the Ruger are good choices, it just depends on what you want to use them for.

John
http://www.handloads.com
 
What you plan on doing with the revolver should determine which one you get. If you plan on doing a lot of shooting, go with the Ruger. If you just want something to carry around in the woods to shoot every now and then, the Mountain Gun would be okay. Personally, I am not a big fan of the light weight magnum revolver concept. Generally they can't take the pounding that the heavier frame versions can and they are not a whole lot of fun to shoot full house loads in. Just my two cents. Good luck, whichever you choose.
 
The Mountain Gun concept is a lighter, handier large frame revolver. This way, you will have it when you need it, since it won't be too much of a hassle.

The Ruger is big and heavy, the sort of thing you take along when you know or believe you will need it.
 
Anyone know if you can get the butt rounded on a M29 without spending more than a new gun w/ a round butt?
Thanks
Michael Goeing
 
Yep, Ahlman's Guns in Morristown, MN will roundbutt any K, L, or N-frame S&W.

It costs about $45.
A blued revolver will need to be reblued, and that adds $65.

Takes about two weeks for stainless, six weeks for blued.
(They only blue every six weeks.)

1-507-685-4244
They have daily shipping with UPS.

-Kframe
 
i realize that though more durable, the ruger is pretty much a hunting handgun period. it's a touch big and heavy for most anything else less plinking which cost to much with the 45 colt anyways. if i got a mountain gun, it would be for woods carry, defense/combat if i needed it, a heavy ccw for those situations you know may be dangerous(with a boot grip) and hunting. sort of a jack of all trades gun.
 
I have a MG in .44Mag. Bullfrog, it was purchased for just the reasons you mentioned. Recoil with factory 240 grain loads is controllable, but unpleasant to me. I have shot the gun in a couple of IDPA matches (44 special loads).

Giz
 
Bullfrog,

There is another choice: a "non-Mountain Gun" N Frame Smith. This alternative can provide extra barrel length and mass in a relatively easy to carry size. In addition, N Frames are available in the wide variety of revolver rounds plus 10mm and .45 ACP semiautomatic loads. In addition, N Frames have a deserved reputation for excellent quality, reliability, durability, and accuracy.

By the way, IMHO you cannot go wrong with a Ruger "Hawk" or a Smith "N" Frame, including their Mountain Guns.
 
Mtn. Gun is great for "carry much - shoot little"; the Redhawk is just a flat-out shooter (and I, while definitely not a large man, find a 5.5" Redhawk perfect for carry and IPSC competition).

The Redhawk can handle ammo that the S&W cannot.
 
Bullfrog99 "if i got a mountain gun, it would be for woods carry, defense/combat if i needed it, a heavy ccw for those situations you know may be dangerous(with a boot grip) and hunting. sort of a jack of all trades gun."

Have you considered the Dan Wesson 44 mag or 45 Colt? With their interchangable barrel you could easily go from a 4" carry guy to a 8" hunting gun in minutes. The Dan Wesson is a big gun though, along the lines of the Redhawk, so depending on how big you are it might not be an option for CCW.

John
http://www.handloads.com
 
i could stow it JohnK, I played guard on my college football team. i like the dan wesson series, i have a 15hv with an 8 inch barrel that shoots like a dream, isn't the price pretty high on those, i always assumed but never checked into it. i guess it's a question i'll have to rattle around in my head until i make a choice. who knows maybe i'll win the lottery and i can get one of each.
 
I chose the .41 Magnum 657 Mountain Gun for all the above reasons. I have two 3 week back-packing/camping/fishing trips upcoming this summer. One in the Northeast, one out west. Recoil is noticablly lighter than .44 Mags, and the .41 Mag can handle anything in these areas.
 
I have Mtn Guns in 44 mag and 45 colt. Recoil w/ full house 44 mags is strong. .45 colt recoil is much less, but I haven't used full-power loads. If you put either gun in an appropriate holster (I use a Kramer), you'll hardly notice that it is there. I've used both as a carry gun, although I put .44 specials in the 629.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top