Jump to content

Talk:Smith & Wesson Model 29

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

NPOV

[edit]

What a way to start a talk page. Okay, the "beautiful art deco styling" part a short ways down. Is there any evidence of such? Pictures, either? --AK-17 21:34, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Images?

[edit]

Anybody? This article has been up for a good while, and the only thing it's really missing is a decent image of the weapon in question. Gamer Junkie 04:51, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See, e.g., this or especially this.

--Ludinom (talk) 05:11, 8 March 2018 (UTC) Ludinom[reply]

Merge

[edit]

The merge tag has been on for a couple weeks, but there is no discussion. All good I suppose if nobody has objections. Affirmative responses not necessarily required. I personally, after having reviewed both articles, favor merging. The 629 article has pretty much nil for content. Soooo... I'll merge the 629 article into this on on Feb. 18th if no objections appear by then. -Thernlund (Talk | Contribs) 19:49, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm... already done. <shrug> —Thernlund (Talk | Contribs) 02:34, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Visually Identical" my shiny white ass.

[edit]

For starters, the barrel is completely different, and the grip is Hogue rubber instead of the wooden one they had for years.

How do I add images? I want to set this guy straight.

67.121.120.210 07:09, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you have a good picture of a 29, please upload it and place it in the article. You can upload images using the upload link to the left. Be sure to cite a proper license or the image will be deleted pretty quick. —Thernlund (Talk | Contribs) 19:21, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I have uploaded and attempted to place a picture of two Model 29.2s. I am unable to use the system to place the pictures in the article but I did put the address in the body of the article. If anyone is interested, it is there.

There is a good image here, but I assume S&W holds the copyright.

--Ludinom (talk) 05:11, 8 March 2018 (UTC) Ludinom[reply]

unsigned comment added by Cumpston (talk • contribs) 04:58, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

.44 Special

[edit]

The .44 magnum is NOT longer to accomodate more powder. The sole reason for the extra length is to prevent users from accidentally loading magnum cartridges into weapons not designed to handle the increased pressures. The earliest handloaded .44 magnum rounds used extra powder packed into the .44 special casing. 24.252.195.3 (talk) 05:50, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]


The present text seems close enough to that. Elmer Keith was asking for a ".44 Special Magnum." with the 250 grain bullets clocking abut 1200 fps. Keith had overloaded the 44 special to that level for a number of years even using the old New Century Tripple Lock with un- heat treated cylinder. He seemed to think this process was alright but did mention making the 44 case a bit longer like they did with the .357 over the 38 special to prevent the high pressure ctgs being loaded in older guns.

Keith's loading of the new .44 magnum was his 250 grain cast semi wadcutter design over 22 grains of Hercules 2400. This was several grains over his top load in the 44 special case with the main feature being that it was a 100 percent density load. The bullet would sit down on the powder column with the crimping groove even with the case mouth. Keith's old .44 special loads were at 100 percent density with 18 grains in the old folded head cases and 17 or 17.5 in the more modern solid head construction.

During the early 1950s, a number of people were experimenting with .44 magnum loads but most were not getting into print like Keith. John Lachuk, another writer, developed a gun/cartridge combination much like the product smith and wesson brought out later. --Mcumpston (talk) 12:07, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"The present text seems close enough to that." -- I'm not going to alter the article, but "the present text" *is* misleading. The loads back in the 50's may have been 100% density, but in these latter decades the longer case serves *only* to prevent the loading of a Magnum cartridge into a Special's cylinder. For example, 10 grains of Unique (www.alliantpowder.com) is an excellent and well-known charge for the .44 Magnum, and it sure leaves plenty of room to spare in the case. - WDG Oct/27/2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.135.193.2 (talk) 20:09, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Dirty Harry" barrel question

[edit]

Naive question here.. I know it was a prop but what was the barrel length of the Dirty Harry example? It looks like the 6 in (153 mm) barrel in the film... --Ragemanchoo (talk) 10:15, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The original 6.5" barrel before the company reduced it to 6" even. In some of the advertising for the movie they used an 8 3/8" for visual impact. At the time the movie was made, Model 29s were in low production and a prominent rumor was that they actually used a .41 magnum N frame for the movie.--Mcumpston (talk) 11:58, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There's a video on youtube of John Milius dispelling the rumor that some gun other than a Model 29 was used in Dirty Harry.--76.115.67.114 (talk) 04:18, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

One of John Taffin's articles is now linked ...

[edit]

... under external links. It is an expert and concise summary of the 29's sub-types over the years. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.188.233.66 (talk) 00:05, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What do the names mean?

[edit]

An elephant gun is used for shooting elephants. A duck gun for shooting duck. Is a Mountain gun used when out hunting for mountains? Is a trail boss for disaffected cowboys to create a promotion opportunity?

These pet names presumably have some meaning, but you'd never know from the article. Can someone who understands these things please expand on the conventions underlying the names. 125.134.236.241 (talk) 16:59, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you climb a mountain you want to carry reduced weight, thus 'mountain gun'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:65:EC3A:BF00:CCB7:2752:8BAA:2CBB (talk) 14:09, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sledge Hammer

[edit]

According to the wiki entrance for short-lived, yet popular TV-show Sledge Hammer!, the main character of the same name used this model gun throughout the show.

Considering Hammers' near-intimate relationship with the gun, as well as its center-stage position in the opening credits (first 38 out of 54 seconds), it might be considered as much a trade-mark of the show as the over-the-top main character himself.

If somebody could fact-check the model, it might make a fine bit of 'trivia' / 'in popular culture'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xigan (talk • contribs) 23:58, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a photo of the gun. I'll leave it to the experts, although it does look like a Model 29. This is not surprising, because there is a large element of parody of Dirty Harry in the show.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 06:57, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Update: According to imfdb (internet movie firearms database), Hammers' gun is a Model 629. http://www.imfdb.org/wiki/Sledge_Hammer!

[edit]

As well as Dirty Harry, this was used on the back of Warren Zevon's Excitable Boy. See, e.g., [this] from [this page.

--Ludinom (talk) 05:11, 8 March 2018 (UTC) Ludinom[reply]

Orphaned references in Smith & Wesson Model 29

[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Smith & Wesson Model 29's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "Jones":

  • From .38 Special: Jones, Richard (2009). Jane's Infantry Weapons 2009–2010. Jane's Information Group. p. 621. ISBN 978-0-7106-2869-5.
  • From Malta: Jones, Huw R. (1973). "Modern emigration from Malta". Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers. 60 (60): 101–119. doi:10.2307/621508. JSTOR 621508.
  • From Pakistan: Adam Jones (2004). Genocide: A Comprehensive Introduction. Routledge. p. 420. ISBN 978-0-415-35384-7.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 10:52, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in Smith & Wesson Model 29

[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Smith & Wesson Model 29's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "auto":

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 16:11, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in Smith & Wesson Model 29

[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Smith & Wesson Model 29's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "EG":

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 13:54, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:38, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Citation suggestion from COI

[edit]

I'm suggesting this change with citation here as I have a COI (see my page).

Suggest the addition of information & citation under ==History==, paragraph 2:

"S&W's production of a large N-frame revolver in .44 Magnum began in 1955; the Model 29 designation was applied in 1957. Prior to 1957, it was simply known as the .44 Magnum. After the Model 29 designation, models manufactured prior to 1957 have since been known as Pre Model 29s.[1][2]"

  1. ^ Taffin, John (November 13, 2006). Gun Digest Book of the .44. pp. 147–150. ISBN 0-89689-416-9.
  2. ^ Rackley, Paul. "Rare Guns: 1956 Smith & Wesson Pre Model 29 (Five Screw)". GunBroker.com. Retrieved 2024-02-19.

LoVeloDogs (talk) 23:52, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Revolvers are no longer in use on the us military

[edit]

Revolvers are no longer in use on the us military. Space772 (talk) 05:35, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Smith_%26_Wesson_Model_29&oldid=1213114865"