3" vs. 4" .44 Magnum

P

P-990

New member
Just what the thread title says. How much of a shootability difference is there between a 3" 629 and a 629 Mountain Gun? Noise, blast, recoil, etc?

As a note, I currently own a 6" 629-1 .44 Magnum which I consider a great shooter. (Well, it IS a great shooter, no matter what I think.) I've been contemplating getting a safe-mate for it in one of the smaller sizes, just out of convenience sake. I mean, the 6" is great for the range and I don't mind carrying it in the woods when I'm in the mood to open-carry, but somedays I'd like to have something a little less obtrusive. A 3-4" with round-butt frame and grips would seem to solve this issue, well, more like alleviate a little of the pain.

Given that it will be some time before I've saved the $$ to make a purchase, I figured I'd start casting about and seeing what the opinions are. Just to state, I'm not overly recoil shy and I reload, two factors to keep in mind.
 
L

Ledbetter

New member
I have a four inch 629 Mountain Gun with a tapered barrel. It doesn't seem concealable to me and I weigh 220#.

The day I qualified for my CCW, a guy had a snubby .44 magnum and couldn't hit a thing with it. He could have been a really bad shot, though, for all I know, and it was an "airweight."

Not to dissuade you, just to think about. I really like my Mtn. Gun.
 
C

cje1980

New member
but somedays I'd like to have something a little less obtrusive.
Click to expand...

I don't think that you're going to find a 44Mag revolver that is less obrusive. The 44Mag is a big cartridge, thus requires a big gun. Why do you need a 44Mag for daily carry? I find a J-Frame to be a very handy little gun. I like the S&W M60 with a 3" barrel. Its small and light but also very accurate. This was kind of done to death in the 357 vs 44 thread. The 44Mag is great and powerful but quite frankly at least twice as many people are actually carrying 357Mag revolvers. If you want a 44 revolver for carry, you can try some of the 5 shot L-frame revolvers. A 6 shot 44Mag is never going to conceal easily. That is why the 357Mag is a better overall choice for "all around" use.
 
R

rxrick

New member
I don't think that you're going to find a 44Mag revolver that is less obrusive. The 44Mag is a big cartridge, thus requires a big gun. Why do you need a 44Mag for daily carry? I find a J-Frame to be a very handy little gun. I like the S&W M60 with a 3" barrel. Its small and light but also very accurate. This was kind of done to death in the 357 vs 44 thread. The 44Mag is great and powerful but quite frankly at least twice as many people are actually carrying 357Mag revolvers. If you want a 44 revolver for carry, you can try some of the 5 shot L-frame revolvers. A 6 shot 44Mag is never going to conceal easily. That is why the 357Mag is a better overall choice for "all around" use.
Click to expand...

Methinks you are making unnecessary assumptions. While a .357 gets the nod in urban settings, a .44 is what I am carrying while fishing out here in grizzly country. In my circumstance, I prefer the 3" to my 6.5". Having a long barrel makes it that more cumbersome and snaggable in the brush along the river banks. The 3" rides high and close.

I've never shot a 4" .44 magnum, but the 3" will wake you right up. Rubber grips DO make a significant improvement in that regard.
 
H

hpg

New member
I used to own a 3" 657(41Magnum), wish I had kept it for the collector value. Besides the incredible noise and HUGE muzzle flash, it wasn't all that accurate. I think a lot of it had to do with recoil on the shorter barrel. It was a handful to say the least.

With the shorter barrel you can't expect Magnum performance, most performance goes out the end of the barrel as muzzle flash. hpg
 
P

P-990

New member
cje,

Not looking for concealable. rxrick is on to what I'm looking for. The weight and lack on concealability don't bother me that much. The barrel gets in the way though. 6" has a tendency to get in the way when you kneel, sit and bang around.

I'm short and thin; the only thing I can really HIDE is a P-32 or P-3AT. All others will bulge, even things like the mini-Glocks. Just my body shape.
 
P

P-990

New member
Have you tried a shoulder rig for the 6"?
Click to expand...

Not yet, but it will be cheaper than a new gun! :D

As far as performance goes, I realize there will be increased flash. But burning large amounts of the slowest powder that provides proper operating pressure will still give the best performance, fireworks notwithstanding!
 
C

cje1980

New member
Understood P-990, I thought you were looking for something that could be carried daily. I really like the way the 629MG feels. I think a 4" would be nearly perfect. I know how you feel about the barrel getting in the way. I used to carry a 5.5" 44Mag Redhawk when hiking but find that I take my GP100s and S&W 686 with me more often. I'm not in grizzly territory so the 357Mag will work fine. For a woods sidearm its hard to beat the 629MG is awesome. It isn't called a Mountain Gun for nothing.
 
S

shoots awe lots

New member
My buddy has the 629mg and it is a well balanced, accurate, nice looking gun. He also has the 329pd that is a mule to shoot. The difference in 4" vs 3" in 44 mag will be OuuuuuuCH or OuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuCH.
 
T

tjhands

New member
hpg, not to be a smartypants, but recoil doesn't have much to do with accuracy. A healthy flinch does, however! :D
 
M

Majic

New member
There will be some increase in noise and recoil between the 3" M629 and the M629 MG, but not great. There really isn't a lot of weight difference between the two. I have a M29-3 in 3" and while it's a handful with full power loads you can still control it. The M29-8 MG that I sold really wasn't that much better than the 3 incher IMO. Both are great with the .44 spl, but with full power magnums I don't want to spend a day at the range shooting neither one.
I used to own a 3" 657(41Magnum), wish I had kept it for the collector value. Besides the incredible noise and HUGE muzzle flash, it wasn't all that accurate. I think a lot of it had to do with recoil on the shorter barrel.
Click to expand...
I also have one of the 3" M657s. Mine is quite accurate like most other .41 magnum revolvers you find. Recoil seldom have any accuracy effect on a firearm. It does rattle a lot of shooters though.
 
A

azredhawk44

Moderator
For a barrel below the 6-inch level, I would suggest loading with Unique, Titegroup or some other faster burning powder.

Stay away from 296 or H110 or 2400. Aside from blinding yourself with muzzleflash, you will get more complete burn and more consistent shots from a short barrel with a faster powder. 2400 might be alright from a 4" barrel since it burns faster than 296 or H110, but that would be pushing it.

I experimented with this idea with my Ruger sp101 3" 357. I found it more accurate with faster powders. It never gets loaded with 296 or H110 now.
 
G

gak

New member
Definitely 4" ...the more metal you can have down the barrel the better, within your objective of course, i.e., balancing carryability vs optimal hunting, etc. = 4" as best compromisen IMO. Three inches in my mind falls too far the other direction out of a range that would (other than carry concerns) suggest 6". In the single action world, although I'd prefer a 6.5" (which would have to be Blackhawk since no such length exists for Vaquero) for optimal hunting, I chose a 5-1/2" Vaquero as the ultimate compromise for overall use. However, it can be a handful depending on load - and there've been a lot of times I'd wished for just that extra 1".
 
Last edited:
B

Beartrack

New member
I have a 4" nickel 29-2. I had a professional trigger job done, hogue rubber grips & magnaporting done. It is controlable w/ 300 Hornady XTP factory loads (albeit, it is a handful), but much more accurate than +p 38 in some of the ultralite snub guns. 240 handloads are very controlable & accurate and 240 lead SWC loaded down to about 850 are just plain pleasant to shoot.

Having said all that, it's a great carry gun for backwoods, but unneeded for two legged varmits (glock 19 is better). It gets carried a lot, but shot little. For general use, something longer is better. Since a back injury has ended by backpacking, I'm thinking about trading it for something longer.
 
S

shooter429

Moderator
Do what I do, get one of each :)

The 3"guns and 4" Mguns are not worlds apart. In fact, they are very close. If this is a do- it -all kinda 1 gun question than a 4" BBL makes the most sense. You will have a bit more sight radius, and forward weight (an oz. or so, I think) On the other hand, the extra inch of tube tends to protrude a bit more easily. Right now, I wanted a do-it-all kinda .44 and bought one. It has a 4" SS BBL weighs 2 Lbs loaded and holstered on the belt and is a real monster on both ends. For a long while there was a 4" minimum BBL length requirement for hunting, which I thought prudent. That law was overturned and now anything goes in our state.

If you have a N-frame already and are comfortable firing it, neither gun is going to be hard to handle, so get whichever has the best price or trigger or whatever. If you carry strong side like me, finding the right leather and outerware will make more difference than 1" of tube. BTW, if you are thinking of anything lighter than the M gun, you might want to shoot it first cuz a pound does make a difference. :)

Shooter429
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top