For a camping/hiking gun in Utah/Idaho potential bear country.

OK...maybe that is just an excuse for wanting a 44 mag, but what do we like, and why ?
Thanks!

S&W 629-4 with 4" barrel. Why? Because it's damn near if not the best ever. Stainless for durability in the elements, -4 because it's got everything you want and nothing you don't, and 4" because it's long enough to achieve good velocity and aim but short enough to carry easily.

quote:

Originally posted by Outnumbered:
S&W 629-4 with 4" barrel.

That's exactly what I've been thinking!

^^^Except I would go with a 6" barrel. I would not consider a Redhawk, I had one and compared to the 629 it weighed a ton, not a hiking/camping pistol.

The one I carried on a couple occasions, Redhawk with 5.5" barrel. It will handle the loads made by companies such as Underwood and Buffalo Bore that a Smith & Wesson can't shoot. In my opinion, none better.




The ammo I would choose.

In the backwoods I carry a .44 Taurus Tracker. 4" barrel. Really really like this gun.

Stock photo:

except for the Redhawk, which is capable of handling all the full-power .44 mag your hands and elbows will stand.

full disclosure - I have a 8 3/8" M29-3, a 7 1/2" Redhawk, and a 7 1/2" Super Blackhawk, and have not managed to break any of them.

quote:

Originally posted by Outnumbered:
S&W 629-4 with 4" barrel. Why? Because it's damn near if not the best ever. Stainless for durability in the elements, -4 because it's got everything you want and nothing you don't, and 4" because it's long enough to achieve good velocity and aim but short enough to carry easily.

"That's all folks" !

For bears, I would prefer to have something more than a .44 magnum.

But if you want a .44, it depends on your use. If you want to shoot tons of full power loads, a Redhawk. There is nothing wrong with a Blackhawk or a Freedom Arms, but they are SA, and less fast to deploy. For more grace and style, and fewer full power loads, a Smith 29.

I love my Super Redhawk, 7 1/2 barrel. I however have not worn it in a shoulder holster all day. Never a problem with the gun.

I've shot 629s, Redhawks and Blackhawks. I am a Ruger guy all the way when it comes to .44. I found the 629 hurt the web of my hand in a way that the Ruger's didn't. And the Smith had rubber grips, where both Rugers had wood. Most comfortable is the Blackhawk, but for DA/SA convenience and quicker reloads, my vote would be the 5.5 inch Redhawk. NOT the Super Redhawk. Super has a larger, heavier frame that extends out over the first 2 inches or so of the barrel, and is not needed for .44.

Fishing in grizzly country I carried a Ruger Super Blackhawk in an Alaska Guide chest holster--in addition to my bear spray. It was loaded with Buffalo Bore 305 gr hardcast bullets. Fortunately, I never had to confirm its adequacy.

The Ruger Alaskan is what I prefer and what I carry in bear country.

.44 magnum is certainly adequate enough for grizzly bear.

I can also carry it all day in a Simply Rugged holster and forget it's even there.

I will tell you what a 629 excels at....snake hunting, specifically, cottonmouths, loaded with a shot shell every other, and a cast Keith to about the speed of sound, nothing can touch it.

I think bear spray has been proven to be more effective than a firearm in stopping a attack by a bear.

S/W 629 my favorite and I also have a 29,with 8 inch barrels.
I have taken deer but the only black bear was taken with an 06,had the 629 with me as a sidearm are as usual but 06 was across my lap and was faster.

Used to have a Dan Wesson SS 44mag. GREAT gun!

A 629 4" on your belt is pretty comfortable for a day in the woods;

the 7 1/2" Redhawk I once owned was heavy enough I preferred a chest carry rig.

My vote is for DA/SA regardless of the SA models with their own virtues; ability to reload rapidly may some day be of concern.

While I much preferred carrying a 3" 629 in reality I was unable to become comfortable enough with the considerable muzzle flash regardless of recipe load, compared to the far more docile and reliable accuracy I could produce at 35 yards. The 6" 629 gives me another step up in ability to make accurate field shots, while the 8 3/8" 629 is simply too bulky in general, despite supreme accuracy compared to the others.

The Ruger Red Hawks handle more like a kindling maul than a splitting axe, if that makes any sense to you.

Thanks! You are all confirming the same models I have been looking at.
The S&W 629-4, 4" seems very attractive to me, but "saving money" is also attractive.
Does anyone have a direct comparison to the Taurus models? Is there a significant difference in function/reliability? because they are obviously only about half the price.

Ruger Super Blackhawk Stainless 4 inch. Carried in a Gunfighters Inc Chest Rig. Underwood 240 Gr. Bonded HP.
It works. All the time.

quote:

Originally posted by Outnumbered:
S&W 629-4 with 4" barrel. Why? Because it's damn near if not the best ever. Stainless for durability in the elements, -4 because it's got everything you want and nothing you don't, and 4" because it's long enough to achieve good velocity and aim but short enough to carry easily.

How about a S&W 629-3 in a 4" barrel?