Yanus, check out these comments reference to .44 magnum handguns by that .44 magnum expert(this guy KNOWS his .44s) I mentioned in your other thread:
"After 26 years and 400,000 rounds of full load .44 magnums (almost all
25gr. WW296, 250 grain H&G #503) here are my opinions:
If you want a gun that will go 50,000 rounds without ever breaking any
part whatsoever, the gun most likely to accomplish this will be the
Ruger Redhawk. The Dan Wesson may be as good; I have never broken
anything in one but my most-used DW has fewer than 10,000 rounds
through it.
The S&W M29 has the best out-of-the-box trigger, and will still have
the best trigger if you sent all choices to a good pistolsmith (my
choice for this would be Jim Clark Jr.)
At about 65-75,000 rounds, tool-steel Smiths will often get a hairline
crack in the bottom of the frame at the cylinder stop notch. By this
time you will have broken 3 or 4 trigger studs and maybe a hammer stud
if your gun was made after 1965. I have never broken any of these
parts on an older gun; that may be luck.
Avoid stainless 629s made before 1990 or so; at that time they were
much softer than either the tool steel guns or the stainless Rugers.
They have a noticeably worse DA pull, and hold up much less well than
the 29s. You can see this by the fact that ones which were carried a
lot are all scratchy-looking. Around 1990 S&W started making the 629
out of as different alloy, or heat-treating it differently, or
something.
Although I used to feel that Model 29s made in the first decade of
production were superior, I have lately had to eat my words. M29s and
629s that I have seen lately (meaning current production) all have
chamber throats that mike EXACTLY .429" and will shoot 2 1/2" at 100
yards off sandbags using good ammo, in my recent experience. Oversize
chamber throats (or differing chamber throats) are the most likely
source of mediocre accuracy, and Redhawks typically go .432".
(Caveat: I miked a bunch 6-8 years ago, none recently.) You can fix
this to some degree with bullet alloy/size/design, but not entirely
and it is a nuisance, IMO. The conventional wisdom is that lawyers
demand oversize barrels/cylinders for "safety" reasons; I think that
is crap. Manufacturers don't have enough irritated people like me
bitching at them. I believe Dan Wessons are very good, but in truth
I've not miked any because mine always shot very well.
20 years ago, one magazine article after another talked about how the
Super Blackhawk was stronger than the M29 because the cylinder walls
were thicker. Well...not quite. I bought the ballistics lab and
pressure gun from the now-defunct Super Vel ammo company and set it up
at Kent Lomont's house in '76. Testing both an (old model) SB and a
M29 to destruction came up with some interesting results. The SB let
go at 68,000 CUP and the Smith at 114,000. Rockwell tests of the
Smith cylinder (before shooting) were within 1 point of each other for
all six spots; the Ruger varied eleven points on the C scale,
depending on where it was tested.
Before you send me a nastygram, this was more than 20 years ago, it
was ONE gun of each make, and perhaps a fluke. However, over the
years I have seen a bunch of SBs with chambers/topstraps missing from
stupidity, and a grand total of ONE M29 with a jugged chamber. On the
other hand, as I said before, with 75,000 rounds of 40,000 CUP ammo, a
M29 will break some internal parts over the years and need to be sent
back to Springfield. An Old Model Super Blackhawk will fed the same
diet will break NOTHING except for shooting off the ejector rod
housing every time the screw crystallizes."
These are not my comments.....Dave
