Super Blackhawk Hunter or SW 629

I have the old style blackhawk with wood grips and open sights. The gun kicks hard. It is nice to carry. I like the classic look. I cannot honestly recommend a gun like this as a first 44mag. Hogue grips would help a lot, if you go that route.

I just purchased a super redhawk and it is bit much the other way. That gun seems like it is best suited for the 454. It is easy easy shooting all day long in 44mag. Takes a scope easy. A scope on a redhawk or super is heavy and any scoped handgun is bulky. I found I could hold 2" at 25 yards with open sights. I like using a scope for confidence and shooting paper. I am undecided on hunting with a scope. I appreciate having the option. The stock trigger was way to stiff. I added a spring kit. I also went over the gun with mothers polish.

Long winded, and I apologize. I had the opportunity to handle a performance shop S&W hunter. Oh My God! Smooth. Great finish. Machined in scope base. Perfect soft grips and with a 7" barrel this gun feels just right. I plan to get one. Someday. Three is the charm. Ok, well, Nothing is ever 100% perfect. The smith had muzzle brake! I need to be 100% that can be swapped out or ordered with a blank. The brake is a total deal breaker on an otherwise perfect gun.
 
I dont like the brake because of potential for hearing damage. I dont wear any hearing protection when hunting. I dont think a brake is needed for a 44mag.

I can understand the need for a brake on a 500mag. I don't have experience with a 500, but; I appreciate that it is probably needed. In that case, I believe a shooter should also have hearing protection, even hunting with a brake. I would never carry a gun with a brake for backup or bear protection, since it might be necessary to shoot without hearing protection.

I have a friend with ringing in the ear disease. I forget the word. I am boarder line deaf and plan to hold on to every decibel I have left.
 
Tinnitus is the word you are looking for and its no joke. I suffer from it mildly and am now religious about ear protection. A set of Lehigh electronic muffs (or other) is the solution. They muffle loud noises over 80db I believe but you can turn up the sound and have bionic hearing if you want. Makes hunting by ear pretty cool.


Having owned both I say go for the.....one you like. Either will handle a 44 mag load that will stomp a deer, hog or black bear into the dirt just fine. Both are plenty accurate for close in pistol hunting. Heck I rang a 22" gong at 180 yards with my 5" 629 in single action, you'll able to knock a deer down no problem. To me either handles recoil fine just in different ways. The double actions put it into you hand more where the single actions twist up and slip more. Double actions you feel it more but can get on a second shot quicker. Sinlhe actions, due to the grip shape save your hand more but you'll be resetting your grip after each shot with "hotter" ammo.

You cant go wrong with either.
 
Those muffs might also be helpful at the range, since they allow normal conversation. Google came up with a different spelling.

But which model? This one, "Howard Leight Impact Pro Muffs" :

http://www.cabelas.com/product/Howa...080&CQ_search=lehigh+electronic+muffs&CQ_st=b

these are a lot less bulky:

http://www.cabelas.com/product/IMPA...Q_search=howard+leight&CQ_st=b#tabsCollection

Both 4.5 star reviews with the usual glowing praise and few scarry bad reviews.

Edit: I dont want to add a new post and hijcak the thread. I just purchased the 2nd option (yesterday) with the thin profile. I will return today. I found the muffs were not tight on my ear to block as much sound as my old industrial grade muffs. I will be returning the Howard Leight muffs and stick with my old technology. I think the issue is new Chinese vs old American. I pity buyer of new products.
 
Last edited:
Not to stir the pot, but have you taken a look at the S&W Mod. 69?

it's a 5 shot 44 Mag/Special that is really a very nice revolver, not quite as BIG as the Mod. 29 or Ruger... Although.... I see you're choosing it for hunting so a longer barrel may be a better choice (my 69 is 4.25 inch - stainless - not sure if they have a longer barreled option). However, it is an alternative, and really makes for a nice setup in a chest rig!

Whichever you choose, good luck!
 
On the hearing protection subject, I too suffer from a bit of tinnitus... It sucks.

I don't where hearing protection when hunting, and I should. But I will say that in the hunting situation where a shot is taken with no hearing protection, my 6.5" barrelled 629 Classic (no brake/compensator) gave me ringing in the ears worse than my 22" barrelled 270 ever did. I also own a S&W 460V with a 5" compensated barrel. I have NEVER fired that with no hearing protection, never will, and I use hearing protection when I hunt with it. You can FEEL the percussion hit you in the face, and that is mostly due to the compensator. With my non-comped 44mag being as intensely loud as it is with no muffs, I simply couldn't imagine what that comped 460 would be like without protection...

I suspect a comped/ported 44mag would only be marginally easier on the unprotected ear than my comped 460. I wouldn't fire one with no ear protection, even when hunting.
 
I dont know much about the performance smiths. I think they are missing a bet with not including a brake cover or solid option with every gun. In some cases I think it would be easy to make a cover or filler. In other cases the ports are cut into the top with no way to defeat or block it off.

I had a friend of a friend buy a ported Marlin guide gun. That one was traded in fast.
 
I've had a number of New Model Ruger SA's, fewer Old Models and 3 Model 29's including a 629. The Smiths were more accurate, generally capable of 2" 50 yard rested groups, when I got everything right six times in a row. It is invariably easier to accomplish this with a Smith 29/629 than with any of the Rugers. The only exception was a blue Redhawk I owned. That one would shoot with any of my 29's, but I had refined the Redhawk's trigger to S&W weight, crispness and I installed a trigger stop in it. If you're going to wring the last bit if accuracy from a hunting revolver, the trigger is important.

The single action trigger of garden-variety Smiths is better than all but a slicked-up Old Model Ruger- and light years better than a New Model. The Ruger New Model SA triggers can be smithed very nicely but it requires a lot more than replacing springs or unhooking a leg of the trigger return spring. Creep is a bigger enemy to fine accuracy than any two pounds of pull between revolvers. Creep in Ruger SA's can only be addressed via reducing sear notch depth of the hammer. It's not something I recommend for the kitchen table gun tinkerer.

Recoil is subjective but few will argue that a double-action revolver is more comfortable to shoot with 300 grain/1300+ fps loads, than a Ruger single action of similar weight. Here is where the single action shines and the Bisley grip beats them both.

What the best factory trigger? Get the S&W. Want the best grip for recoil management? Get a Ruger Bisley. Want both? Get a Bisley and a gunsmith- who understands the fine points of Ruger SA triggers.
 
I just bought a brand new S&W 629 classic and while I like it, there is a flaw in the design. I'm getting flash burns on the cylinder. The rear sight has two screws and the one in front does go all the way through and creates a gap. Fortunecookie45LC has a YouTube video that explains it better. Kinda wished that I had got the Redhawk instead.
 
I'm getting flash burns on the cylinder.
Click to expand...

I dont understand this. The only video I found was his 629 dirty harry. he mentioned how you use metal polish to clean the cylinders. All revolvers get that same smoke stain on the cylinders. That is not a problem. I like to understand this, do you have a link?

If the shooting starts to cut the top strap, then you have a serious issue. I thought S&W has a minimal gap to reduce that effect.

The Ruger is very strong and heavy. Built like a tank and a pleasure to shoot in 44. I dont know if this is typical Ruger over-design or if the gun was designed for 454 right from the start. The action is rough and trigger pull hard compared to S&W. The hammer spur is narrow and bites the finger unless you reduce the spring tension. It smooths out nice with a spring kit and some firing and more snap cap dry firing.
 
Not cutting. There are two screws in the top strap for the rear sight. The forward screw does not come all the way to the bottom side of the strap. Therefore when fired the gas/carbon/etc that come up get redirected because of that screw hole and force all that debris onto the cylinder in a concentrated spot. Makes a little spot of tough to get off carbon fowling on the outside of the vylinder. Ive though of trying an industrial epoxy to fill said screw hole to negate this. Havent yet.
 
And then there is the ultra-lightweight 329PD.

Pic from the web + a good article:
IMG_1271-660x495.jpg

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2015/05/01/sw-329pd-lightweight-44-long-term-review/

I test fired one of these at the local gun shop / range's manufacturer shoot. Having previously owned a 6 inch 629 - I grabbed some Cowboy 44 specials to shoot the above gun.
 
Not cutting. There are two screws in the top strap for the rear sight.
Click to expand...


I think if you look close, you will see there are three holes. Two are used for the rear sight, three are used of one removes the rear sight and mounts a scope base.

Carbon stains on a stainless cylinder.......nature of the beast with magnum calibers.

I dont like the brake because of potential for hearing damage. I dont wear any hearing protection when hunting. I dont think a brake is needed for a 44mag.

I can understand the need for a brake on a 500mag. I don't have experience with a 500, but; I appreciate that it is probably needed. In that case, I believe a shooter should also have hearing protection, even hunting with a brake. I would never carry a gun with a brake for backup or bear protection, since it might be necessary to shoot without hearing protection.
Click to expand...

If you are hunting with a .44 mag handgun, without ear protection, you are suffering permanent hearing damage, no ifs and buts about it. Come time to save my life against a bear, I could care less about hearing damage. Good ears won't do me any good when I'm dead with my ears ripped off. Since in the real world, the threat of a bear attack, and having to use a handgun against it, is almost nil, I don't lose sleep at night worrying about it.
 
What Buck said....

While I have on two occasions fired a 44 at game with no ear protection, I did find it to be worse than any shot I have taken with a rifle.. I'm sure it's not as damaging as a 460 or 500, but still nasty.. Mine is a S&W 629 Classic with 6.5"bbl... Not exactly a snubby!
 
The point is with a brake is more hearing damage than without. Obviously only an idiot would choose to die than go deaf. But, a smart person might like to survive and keep their hearing.

Yes any gun fire can do some hearing damage, but there is a big difference between a little and a lot.

While I have on two occasions fired a 44 at game with no ear protection, I did find it to be worse than any shot I have taken with a rifle.
Click to expand...

Bad enough. right. Why would anyone subject them selves to porting or a brake in a 44mag? Ok, its an individual choice. And you would think a semi-custom (performance center) revolver would provide OPTIONS for their customers.
 
Fourbore: You're absolutely right it was bad enough. The example I posted was in agreement with your not liking the muzzle brake/compensator for that reason as they only make it worse for the shooter. What they do for the recoil aspect is great, but you pay a steep price for that with how hard it is on the ears. Same reason I would not buy a new Winchester 94 in 450 Marlin as they only come ported..no non-ported option there... No thanks.
 
I have, and hunt with, both, a 7.5" SBH and 4" 629. Both are great, accurate shooters, but lately I have opted for the 4" 629. Mainly because I prefer hip holsters and the 629 carries nice for me and make sitting down easy. That said, you can't go wrong with either in my opinion.
 
When hunting with the .44 Magnum, I prefer the longer barrels, for both the power, and the sight radius (I don't use optics on my revolvers).

Hip holsters, worn crossdraw avoid most of the issues with sitting with a 6" or longer barrel. Shoulder or chest holsters avoid ALL of the issues with sitting.

Speed of the draw, when hunting, is not important.

If you are going to run a scoped rig, (or a dot sight) a shoulder holster, or one of the cross chest designs is definitely the way to go.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top