[GlockerBill]

I archery hunt in Grizzly country with an older S&W 629 4” mountain gun. It weighs 40 oz. It’s a solid backup weapon but the recoil is pretty stout, particularly with my hot 310 grain Garrett loads. I’m thinking of switching for one of two different .44 choices:
1. S&W 629 v-comp, 4 inch bbl, 44 oz.
2. Ruger Redhawk 4.2 inch bbl, 47 oz.
Questions:
1. For those of you that have shot the v-comp, does it actually reduce the recoil? Have you shot it with and without the compensator to compare? How do you like it?
2. The Ruger is 3 oz heavier than S&W V-comp. Will this extra weight get me as much recoil reduction as the v-comp?
3. Will I notice the recoil reduction in either of these vs. the 40 oz mountain gun?

 

[Mayhem like Me]

I have shot them all and you will notice a difference, it is most felt with lighter faster loads but you will still see improvement with the Vcomp, and you will feel less whip with a 6 inch barrel. The ruger design and stock grip will hit your hand less than the vcomp but the comp is flatter and feels fine, I like the Decelerator Pachmyer grips on an N frame they help as well.

 

[Nick B]

If your 629 has the round butt grip frame then put the rubber .500 grips on it .
Makes a big difference on felt recoil to the hand .

 

[DrewBone]

Below is a viable option/possible solution in .44mag; you need large hands to wield it, but to me the recoil it generates feels no worse than shooting a compact sized all metal 9mm auto pistol thanks to it's heft and gas operated rotating bolt design. I have 10" barrels for this model and my other DE pistol, a Mark VII in .41mag, which help them both deliver even better ballistic performance if need be:

 

[skyfall]

Ruger Alaskan.Heavy,carries well in Galco Chest Rig and will absorb recoil better than anything else(IMHO).Even with the hottest loads,you can fire all 6 rds. quickly and accurately.

 

[RandomGuy]

I put a pair of the Hogue X-frame grips on my 629 Backpacker (3”) and they helped take the sting out a bit as they cover the back strap and have a recoil absorbing insert that really does help. That said, physics is against us with these lighter revolvers. I’ve shot a MagNaPort version of your Mountain Gun and, while it did moderate muzzle flip, the recoil was still enthusiastic.

 

[Planetcat]

That’s a nice bear gun. I’d put the s&w 500 grips on it and consider magna-port. I also carry .44 mag in bear country, but don’t even try to shoot heavy, hot loads anymore. Standard 240 grain hard cast is my pill of choice.

 

[ronin.45]

I think the Ruger SRH is much nicer to shoot heavy loads out of than the 629. The exposed steel backstrap of the S&W can be brutal. I wish they made the SRH Toklat in 44mag. I think it's the best all around platform for predator defense or hunting.

 

[Cambo]

Below is a viable option/possible solution in .44mag; you need large hands to wield it, but to me the recoil it generates feels no worse than shooting a compact sized all metal 9mm auto pistol thanks to it's heft and gas operated rotating bolt design. I have 10" barrels for this model and my other DE pistol, a Mark VII in .41mag, which help them both deliver even better ballistic performance if need be:

View attachment 702552

I second this. I had a DE in .44 mag at awhile back, and it was not harsh to shoot.

 

[ronin.45]

That’s a nice bear gun. I’d put the s&w 500 grips on it and consider magna-port. I also carry .44 mag in bear country, but don’t even try to shoot heavy, hot loads anymore. Standard 240 grain hard cast is my pill of choice.

That's another good solution. Sometimes the heaviest/hottest load isn't ideal. Find a slightly lighter or slower load that you can control better. I'd rather have 6 265gr/1250fps rounds that I can get on target fast and accurate than 310gr/1325fps rounds that hurt to shoot and I can't control.

 

[GlockerBill]

I have shot them all and you will notice a difference, it is most felt with lighter faster loads but you will still see improvement with the Vcomp, and you will feel less whip with a 6 inch barrel. The ruger design and stock grip will hit your hand less than the vcomp but the comp is flatter and feels fine, I like the Decelerator Pachmyer grips on an N frame they help as well.

OK thanks. So have you actually taken the comp off and compared the recoil on the same gun? Just want to make sure it works and is not some kind of marketing gimmick.

 

[GlockerBill]

I think the Ruger SRH is much nicer to shoot heavy loads out of than the 629. The exposed steel backstrap of the S&W can be brutal. I wish they made the SRH Toklat in 44mag. I think it's the best all around platform for predator defense or hunting.

Yeah, it looks solid but I was trying to stay away from the longer barrels... I believe the SRH is at least 7.5 inches

 

[skyfall]

The Alaskan is 2 1/2" bbl. Look it up,you might be surprised.

 

[Borg Warner]

I archery hunt in Grizzly country with an older S&W 629 4” mountain gun. It weighs 40 oz. It’s a solid backup weapon but the recoil is pretty stout, particularly with my hot 310 grain Garrett loads. I’m thinking of switching for one of two different .44 choices:
1. S&W 629 v-comp, 4 inch bbl, 44 oz.
2. Ruger Redhawk 4.2 inch bbl, 47 oz.
Questions:
1. For those of you that have shot the v-comp, does it actually reduce the recoil? Have you shot it with and without the compensator to compare? How do you like it?
2. The Ruger is 3 oz heavier than S&W V-comp. Will this extra weight get me as much recoil reduction as the v-comp?
3. Will I notice the recoil reduction in either of these vs. the 40 oz mountain gun?

Go with a Ruger Redhog and Hogue grips.

 

[ronin.45]

Yeah, it looks solid but I was trying to stay away from the longer barrels... I believe the SRH is at least 7.5 inches

That's why I like the Toklat. It's a 5.5". I'm not sure why they go from the useless Alaskan straight to a 7.5". Too short or too long is not a great choice.

 

[skyfall]

I would not call the Alaskan useless.As a protection heavy caliber revolver it is very good.

 

[GlockerBill]

The Alaskan is 2 1/2" bbl. Look it up,you might be surprised.

yeah... i just thought the 2.5 inch would be too small... (enough length for powder burn, loudness, etc.) i like my current mountain gun at 4 inches. The Alaskan is bad-ass looking though.

 

[bluebanana]

Reality is that you won't even notice the recoil when you have a bear coming at you. Just shoot what you have.

 

[ronin.45]

Reality is that you won't even notice the recoil when you have a bear coming at you. Just shoot what you have.

It doesn't matter if you notice the recoil or not. It's there either way. If the gun ends up pointed at the sky after you shoot, it's no longer pointed at the bear.
I have the same discussion when someone suggests a single action revolver for defense. Too slow to recover and get multiple shots off.

 

[GlockerBill]

Reality is that you won't even notice the recoil when you have a bear coming at you. Just shoot what you have.

That is so true. My son got charged two years ago. It happened so quick and out of no where... my son took a step back and reached for his pistol... tripped over a deadfall and was barely able to clear his holster when the bear turned at 10 feet. I doubt he would have even been able to get a shot off in time were it not for the bluff charge. He could have been shooting a 45-70 pistol and would not have noticed any recoil under the circumstances. But I'm simply thinking the less recoil, the better chance for a follow up shot. Plus, I don't like ruining my day at the range with a beating.