Posted on: December 27, 2008, 03:53:39 PMPosted by: dbriannelson
Insert Quote
There were never any problems, but there were "improvements." I think the biggest thing was when some silhouette shooters loaded the rounds really hot with heavy bullets to assure knock-downs and sometimes the cylinder lock would jump out of the slot, maybe ramped out by the cylinder itself moving back the length of it's end play (which was caused by the same hot, heavy loads).
As far as I know, that never happened with factory .44 Magnum loads or even handloads out of the manuals. S&W lengthened the locking slots so it wouldn't happen in the -3E or -4 changes.
Not a problem unless you're planning to shoot silhouette.
Most of the other changes were merely ways of lowering production costs by reducing non-essential hand and machine operations. Far as I'm concerned, the older they are, the better they are.
-Don
A whole lot of this is incorrect. There were quite a few problems.
Sometimes the cylinder would come unlatched and fall open under recoil.
The gun would unlock under recoil and rotate backwards so that when cocked again, the empty, previously fired chamber would end up back under the hammer.
The hammer would bounce away from the primer and strike it again, leaving double firing pin indentations.
The trigger would give a kickback feeling to the trigger finger during firing.
The yokes would peen and create excessive endshake earlier than they should.
The fitted yoke sideplate screw would wear and leave yoke endshake (different from cylinder endshake).
The mounting studs that were forged as an intergal part of the frame sideplate would snap off.
S&W started the endurance upgrades with the 29-3E in 1988, with hardening the yoke barrel to prevent endshake. The 29-4 followed in late 1988 with the self adjusting yoke screw, the radiused stud package, and heavier strength cylinder stop springs. The 29-5 came in 1990 and brought the elongated cylinder stop notches, slightly larger cylinder stop and the internal hammer block. These things were all introduced to keep the 29 competitive with the Redhawk and Dan Wesson 44's.
It didn't take "hot" handloads for a lot of these problems tohappen. I had a beautiful 29-3 that never unlocked and came open, or rotated backwards, but it constantly left double firing pin strikes and unless the load was a target load, I would always get the trigger kickback. All my loads were either factory or handloads out of reputable manuals. I never used the 300 grain loads so common today. It is the sole reason I got rid of a gun that I had waited years to get.
The new endurance guns (29-5 and later) are head and shoulder above the older guns in durability, and will handle a steady diet of full power loads. The older guns were fitted better, had much better bluing and are more desirable to collectors. They are also more likely to shoot loose a lot sooner than other 44's.
Brian Pearce in Handloader has written about this in several articles including one dedicated to the 29. John Taffin has written about it in many of his articles and books. It was written up in Shooting Times by Dick Metcalf as well as other writers of the day.
