which one

[two bit okie]

I am considering a new (used ?) double action. I have had both a mod 28 smith, and a 29 smith. My new one will have the short barrel, probably another 44 mag. The two choices are another smith, or a redhawk.

I am aware that the redhawk will take loads all day that would KABOOM the smith. I know that for what I want (CC, Ok, so I have a fat azz and can hide it, I also need power wheel chair so weight is not critical.)

Brute power like ruger only loads are also not necessary as I will not be in griz country. and for cc I would carry with special verity loads. (even 44 specials make big holes and scare the snot out of hard cases.)

So, lets take a poll. A Smith 29 in 4" or a redhawk in 4".

 

[deac45]

For strictly CC I would look for an S&W Mountain Gun, preferably pre-lock. They wear the slim, tapered four inch tube. If alot of range time were expected with full snort loads I'd go with the Redhawk.

deac45

 

[Ruber]

One of my favorite handguns was a 3" 629 with the combat grips. It shot neck to neck with my 7.5" SBH. I tended to shoot close to max loads, but always stuck with published loads in both (I don't shoot the 'Ruger Only' .44 Mag loads). Ultimately, I wanted something a little bigger than the .44 and got rid of the Smith for an SRH, still miss it though.

 

[medicdave]

If your going to shoot specials, why not look for a 696 or a 396NG. My 696 is my favorite carry revolver. If you don't need a 44 magnum, the L frame carries nicer. Sorry to throw a monkey wrench in there for ya.

 

[twobisquit]

I too have a 629 with 3in barrel and I like it a lot. With .44 Specials and Skeeters load its a shooter. I had been carrying it in a thumbsnap Bianci holster made for a 4inch N frame but have been thinking of a Simply Rugged pancake holster that aught to be just about perfect

 

[Bear Paw Jack]

I voted 4" Redhawk, but reading your needs I'd say go with a 3" 629. Smith did a run of those recently.

 

[ADP3]

A S&W 629 Mountain Gun weighs in at a half pound less than the Redhawk. As a belt gun I'd be happier with the Redhawk, but for CC I'd go with a S&W Mountain Gun. It would be a toss-up between a Redhawk and a standard 4" 629. The weight difference is then down to 2 ounces.
Best Regards,
ADP3

 

[Tommy Kelly]

You could go with a alaskan in 44. Or I have a 29 3" you could find one of these used. Or else you could go with the alaskan in 454 casull which I also have and shoot 45 colts for light loads like specials in a 44 or 38's in a 357. The 3" 29 I have was a special run smith came out with about the time they made the lew horton guns mine has a round butt and unfluted cylinder. Is shoots great and very accurate. I also have a x frame 500 with the 4" bbl. The 500 is just too big for concealed carry. I have a permit and when I do carry it's a sp101 mostly with the 2 1/4" I really like it and so does my wife soo much so that she bought herself one yesterday at the gunshow. When I bought mine she fell in love with it and said she wanted her own just like mine.

 

[buckeyeshooter]

I love the ruger single actions, but in double action-- I much prefer the smith and wesson. My personal ccw gun is a 3 inch s&w 29 in nickel. As far as the redhawk goes, the grips are too small for my hand, they are too heavy and I have never fired a factory one that did not feel like the action was full of sand.

 

[Old Judge Creek]

My S&W 629 Trail Boss wins, hands down.

 

[maxpress]

i would go for the smith 329ng in your case to. i liked the smith 29mg and my redhawk 4" about the same

 

[sunday bill]

I voted for the S&W but my personal choice would be a S&W 24-3, combat version, or short 624. The gun is just a tad lighter and a tad more concealable than those 44s with the longer cylinders.

You said it yourself concerning the scare factor of the caliber.

Just as with the Ruger, why pack extra S&W steel if you don't need it?

Rich

 

[Ltdshooter]

Given those two would be the only choice for street carry I'd go with the S&W for the reason of a better trigger and lighter weight. Given other options for the street, I would carry neither and stick with one of my 1911s or Glocks. I know what you are going to say but the Autos get my vote every time for carry purposes on the street. In the wild - Big Bore Revos (45 colt and up) always are on my side.

 

[Yosemite Sam]

S&W 329 PD, 4".
S&W 396 NG, 2".
Older S&W 624 .44 Special, 3-4".
Worst case, go with the 629.

You really don't want to try lugging a Redhawk around. I carry my 624 3" on occasion, and it's bigger and heavier than is necessary these days (47 oz unloaded - that's 3lbs!). Carrying a full size 1911 is more comfortable and easier to conceal, frankly. I have a 4" .44 Mag Redhawk and it's noticeably bigger and heavier than the 624.

-- Sam

 

[Meeteetse]

If you are content with lighter .44 spec loads go with the S&W Mtn Gun. If there is a chance you will be using hotter loads, I suggest the Redhawk.

The standard 29/629 and the Redhawk are about the same weight and present the same issues for CC. The S&W's generally have a better trigger, however recent reports indicate the 4" Redhawk has a better trigger than its predecessors.

 

[two bit okie]

thank you all for your opinions. I should have included that for beasties, I have vaqueros for the heavy loads. and a 44 250 at 800 900 should do the job