629 "Classic" versus regular model

[singlestack9]

Precisely what is the difference between the 629 "Classic" and the regular version?

In particular, I am weighing whether to get the 629 with a 6" barrel or the 629 "Classic" with a 6.5" barrel.

From looking at the S&W website, the most apparent difference (other than the .5" barrel length of course) is that the "Classic" has Interchangeable front sights whereas the regular has Red Ramp front sights. I take it that the "Classic" also comes with the Red Ramp front sights, just that they are Interchangeable, whereas the regular 629 is fixed with the Red Ramp sights?

The next most apparent difference is that the "Classic" has a .400" trigger, whereas the regular has a .312" trigger. What is it to which this measurement refers? Is this the total distance needed to travel when pulling the trigger back to fire? Or is it the width of the trigger from one side to the other?

Other than a slight difference in weight (ostensibly due to the .5" barrel length difference), and the above noted differences, they appear to be the same gun. Am I missing something? Are these really identical pieces, other than the differences that I've already pointed out?

 

[Dave Markowitz]

Biggest difference is that the 629 Classic has a full underlug barrel, while the 629 does not.

Considering that the 629 w/o the lug came out first, it doesn't make sense to me calling the version with the full lug "Classic." But what do I know?

 

[Ala Dan]

Like I said in a previous post, I've been shooting Smith'
model 29's for a long, long time; and I've seen shooting
the current S&W 629-5 (5" barrel) "Classic" since
July of 2000. I feel as though with the full underlugged
barrel, its "buttery smooth" action, and with its quality
of fit and finish; its perhaps the best one to come down
the pike.

Another opinion might state differently; I really can't say?
My friend and fellow THR member Capbuster is an
avid fan of Smith & Wesson .44's. He is a distinguished
pistol and/or revolver shot, who shoots an old model 29
quite effectively. He also has knowledge of the quality
of my 629-5. Quite frankly, why don't you e-mail him at
[email protected] and ask for his opinion? I'm sure
he wouldn't mind; as he has been my shooting partner
for well over 30 years.

Best Wishes,
Ala Dan, N.R.A. Life Member

 

[Standing Wolf]

The next most apparent difference is that the "Classic" has a .400" trigger, whereas the regular has a .312" trigger. What is it to which this measurement refers?

That's the width of the trigger. That's really not a very significant difference, but I've found the winder the trigger, the more likely people are to pull it with the pad or tip of the index finger instead of the first knuckle joint. Using the pad or tip generally improves single action accuracy.

 

[YodaVader]

Considering that the 629 w/o the lug came out first, it doesn't make sense to me calling the version with the full lug "Classic." But what do I know?

I have thought the same thing ever since they came out with the "Classic" - Agree with you 100%. But that did not stop me from owning 2 - first a 6.5" Model 29 version and my current "Classic" - a 629 6.5". The "Classic" revolvers are amazingly accurate!

 

[singlestack9]

Biggest difference is that the 629 Classic has a full underlug barrel, while the 629 does not.

Well, since I'm considering the 6.5" barrel, I'm thinking that the full underlug might just be a bit too much weight.

If I were getting a shorter barrel (4" or 5"), then maybe a full underlug would make more sense.

I just went down to Reed's Sport Shop and handled the 6.5" with the half underlug, and then I handled the 6.5" with the full underlug, and it's QUITE A BIT more top heavy...

 

[tex_n_cal]

this is a Classic from the early '90's...

That full underlug does make them hang steadier. One day I'll hang a scope on it, just to see what it will really do! That gun has had 2000+ rounds of HOT loads through it, by the way.

I like the 5" models as well - they have a really nice balance to them - they're about as small a .44 as I want to shoot with full tilt loads.

If I found an early .44 without the full underlug, I certainly wouldn't turn up my nose at it, but in a new one, for huntign or target shooting, I vote full underlug.