Ideal .44 Magnum Barrel Length

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

SWAddict

Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2009
Messages
40
Hello.

I may take the plunge and get a S&W model 629 .44 magnum. I am looking at 629's with a full lug barrel. What would be the ideal barrel length? These are the factors I am considering:

1. Portability.
2. Felt recoil.
3. Accuracy.
4. Sight radius.

Bearing those factors in mind, I am considering a 5" barrel or possible getting a 629 with a 6" or 6.5" barrel and having it cut down to 4". What would you guys recommend?

I already have a 4" 625 and love the look and balance of it. I also have a 610 that has a 3 7/8" barrel and this barrel length seems to have an even better balance. Both of these have full-lug barrels and their recoil is easily controllable. How close to the recoil of my 625, or 610 would a .44 mag be in similar barrel lengths? Any and all opinions welcome. Thanks.
 
Full lug? 4", because 6" full lug barrels are too front heavy to suit me. I don't think the sight radius between 4", 5" and 6" is a big deal, but obviously a 6" sight radius will give a bit of an edge.
 
what primary purpose will the weapon serve?
.44mag is great in a 10.5" Super Blackhawk for hunting medium-sized game.
great in a 3-4" barrel for SD Vs. black bears.
completely useless for SD vs. two-legged uglies, IMHO. YMMV.
 
Last edited:
Well, it used to be that .44 mags were hard to sell because of the horrendous recoil, with 6-inchers being the best. If I were an Alaskan guide, I'd sure get one in both, but as a shooter, I'd stay with a 6-inch.

If you handload, my choice would be a 4-incher -- that is, if you wanted a gun for self defense. For short-barreled guns, I like the .357 and for .44 mags, a 6-inch. Anything longer than that should have a bayonet mount! I like the craftsmanship of the 4-inchers; I just wouldn't enjoy shooting them.
 
I bought the S&W 629 5" classic. Love it. IMHO, the 5" fully lugged barrel is the perfectly balanced .44 mag.
 
I shoot and carry the 4" 629 all the time. Great gun! With the 4" barrel the size is just great for carry, both IWB and OWB.

I shoot a lot of .44 Spc. through it (~8,000 last year) but the recoil is by no means uncomfortable, even with my 300 gr. reloads at over 1,200 fps.

A great gun, that hits a sweet spot between power and carry-ability.

-Sam
 
+1 on the 5"

I agree with almostfree - a Brazilian Navy S&W M1917 that I put a pair of Magna grips on to replace the disintegrating factory stocks has turned out to be one of my favorite revolvers. It's not a 44 by any means, but the overall feel of it and the holsterability are just superb. A late friend had a nickel M29 with a 5" bbl he got in the early 70's and it was a veritable Da Vinci in looks, portability and quality. But I digress... :D
 
I have a 3", 4" and 6". The 3" round butt is what I carry all the time when out hunting, hiking or just out knocking around in the boon docks. It's more portable than the other two. If I was handgun hunting than I would have the 6" due to longer sight radius and higher velocity.
 
I have N frames in 3", 3.5", 4", 5", and 6.5". Some of them are .44 magnums but not all of them. On your criteria I would say:

1. Portability. - 3", by a country mile
2. Felt recoil. - 6" or 6.5"
3. Accuracy. - any from 4" to 6.5"
4. Sight radius. - any from 4" to 6.5"
Click to expand...

The accuracy/sight radius issue is just not that big a deal - it is between 4" and, say 8 3/8", but on any length between 4" and 6.5" is going to decide accuracy on the gun itself and it's inherent quality more so than the length. There was an extensive test of this on a combat handgun test famously reprinted in Gun Digest. Skilled shooters in the comparisons scored equally well with 4" or 6.5" guns at a wide variety of distances. You will always get a few more fps out of the longer barrel, but not necessarily more accuracy.

5" balances nicely. But the 4" carries more easily. But I don't think they made a factory 4" full lug did they? If that is a strict criteria, get the 5" full lug and live with that - the high cost of altering it for 1" of length is not worth it. Like medmo, my 3" .44 magnum gets carried as much as all others combined (except the 3.5") because of the ease of carry.
 
Last edited:
I like 5" for most stuff. My Redhawks are 5 1/2". Of course, it is a matter of personal preference.

If you intend to hunt with it, check your local regs. Where I live, 6" is the minimum length.
 
4" might be a little slow for needed velocity.
Click to expand...

Here's some reading on that:

http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=355776

Basically, each revolver will produce it's own velocities due to a number of factors including b/c gap, and some 4" revolvers will shoot the same ammo at a higher velocity than some 6" guns.

But compared side-by-side a 4" and a 6" barrel will most probably produce less than a 30 fps difference in velocity. i.e: nothing worth worrying about.

-Sam
 
7" or more

That cartridge was born as hunting round not to be used in a CCW piece...

The 44 Mag perform the best in longer barrels.
 
I'll chime in on the 5" being the best all around that I have had. I would like a 3" 5 shot.
 
saturno_v said:
7" or more ... That cartridge was born as hunting round not to be used in a CCW piece...
Click to expand...

That would probably be news to Elmer Keith, who we have to thank for the existence of the .44 Magnum.

Besides being a handgun target shooter, Keith was also an avid handgun hunter, and was a very skilled one. He claimed to have shot and killed a mule deer at a range of 600-yards using his 6-1/2 inch S&W Model 29.[1] Keith later had this gun cut to 4-1/2 inch barrel length; it is currently part of the Keith collection with the factory standard 4 inch barrel length that he more commonly carried.
Click to expand...

So, while he did hunt with it, he actually cut down his hunting gun to make it more carryable. So, it would seem he carried it more than he specifically hunted with it.

I like his way of thinking and CCW my 4" 629 regularly.

-Sam
 
That would probably be news to Elmer Keith, who we have to thank for the existence of the .44 Magnum.
Click to expand...

What do you mean??

I do not see Keith handling a short barrel revolver or a snubnose here...:rolleyes:

GAfifty_101105D.jpg


1571572651-books-resized200.jpg


A 4" or less 44 Mag revolver is nonsense, IMHO.
 
Last edited:
And yet, he cut 2" off his 6-1/2" 629 to more easily carry it. And, apparently, he had a factory 4" version as well, which he carried more often. It seems these are part of his estate's collection, so I don't think they're imaginary.

You may feel that they are "nonsense," but it seems that the guy who invented the round came to disagree with your point of view!

You should try a shorter 629... mine's a pussycat. Even with the big loads it's not uncomfortable to shoot a lot -- just lively.

-Sam
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

A
  • Locked
Did/Does S&W ever make a 629 .44 mag with a full lug 4" barrel?
Replies
5
Views
722
Alaskan Ironworker
Alaskan Ironworker
S
  • Locked
3" 629 long enough for full length ejector?
Replies
9
Views
699
CH47gunner
C
C
  • Locked
Best Barrell length/lug for GP-100
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
L-Frame
L
M
  • Locked
44 Magnum old vs new
Replies
15
Views
2K
BobWright
BobWright
TarDevil
  • Locked
Magnum Barrel Length
2
Replies
34
Views
1K
CraigC
CraigC
Back
Top