Post by HeadHunter on Oct 20, 2021 15:55:21 GMT
Disclaimer
In all fairness and in the interests of complete honesty, I cannot state that this review will be a totally unbiased opinion of the gun. My undying passion as a CO2 replica collector is definitely for shell loading replica revolvers and that passion is sent into overdrive when the gun in question is a copy of a fairly modern magnum revolver, but I will try my very upmost to give you an honest and forthright opinion of it.
A little back story
Every gun has a story and for any good review you need to give at least a speck of context and history of the said handgun, not just because we are all replica handgun collectors and we like to know such things but more importantly to show that handgun's own place in history and what factors instigated it's birth.
So with that being said lets start at the very beginning, the .44 magnum cartridge was born in 1955, the offspring of Elmer Keith, S&W and Remington. Elmer Keith, the Godfather of the Magnum cartridge had been continually developing and improving 'hot' rounds for his Colt SAA for decades. He wanted a cartridge that could, with one well placed shot, kill any and all game in North America, from Polar bear to grizzly, from elk to moose and ultimately he created what was for many, many years seen as the only true man stopper, the .44 magnum cartridge. It was a labour of love for our Mr.Keith, continually bending the ears of gun manufacturers at every convention since 1935 about this incredible new .44 wildcat cartridge that he had developed and ultimately his hard work paid off. Remington started making the cartridges and S&W manufactured the very first .44 magnum handgun for them to be fired in, the now legendary model 29 with much of the iconic status granted to it coming via the 'Dirty Harry' series of films, where the handgun actually became just as much of a star of the film as Clint Eastwood did himself.
So it seemed only appropriate that when S&W managed to work out the metallurgy needed to make a stainless steel version of the .44 magnum handgun that it should justifiably be a stainless steel version of the model 29, but this time with a '6' prefix to denote it's manufacture from stainless steel, so the '29' became the '629'. So just as the model 29 was the very first .44 magnum handgun in the world, the model 629 was the very first stainless steel .44 magnum handgun in the world too. Originally released by S&W in 1957, the very first version was just a complete stainless steel copy of the model 29. The successive iterations of the gun (from S&W 29-1 onwards) had a few minor changes at every step of the way. They've released various dedicated versions over time including the '629 Classic' (and the 629 Classic DX version).
Bullet time
To conclude the back story we need to at least briefly mention the power of the .44 magnum cartridge and the best way to do this is in a comparison to the ubiquitous 9mm Luger cartridge which is used extensively by Military and Police services the whole world over. The 9mm Luger generally has a bullet that weighs 115 grains whereas the .44 magnum has one that weighs around the 240 grain mark, the energy imparted by a 9mm Luger is roughly 330 fpe and the .44 magnum is slightly under four times that amount at 1230 fpe. So you can see that any gun that's going to handle that sort of cartridge has to be strong, well made and heavy, which in layman's terms generally means 'bigger'.
Now what has this got to do with the replica ? I hear you ask, well the replica has to somehow portray these traits; solid, heavy and large, otherwise it fails to meet the obvious expectations set for it. When you pick it up you should feel that you have a 'big' gun in your hands and the 'feel' is everything when it comes to replicas. Sometimes we can't even explain to others why you love a certain gun so much, it could be the ergonomics, the quality of workmanship or even just the weight, but it all flows into that hard to explain 'feel' category.
Above - The Real Steel S&W 629-3 Classic.
So now that we've got to know the gun, seen what it's supposed to look like and more importantly, we've got a good idea of how it's supposed to feel in the hand too, let's quickly move onto the real 'meat' of this review; the Umarex S&W 629 Classic replica revolver.
Initial thoughts
As soon as you open the box your eyes widen as you're taken by it's overall size and shape, it looks very much like a perfect copy of the RS and the high shine silver finish is certainly eye catching and one that makes the gun highly desirable, well to me at least. But the real test for any replica is it's 'feel' in the hand and once I removed it from it's box I was shocked by the solid and weighty feel that it had to it. Definitely the largest and heaviest revolver that I have in my collection but at the same time it feels very well balanced, the 6½" barrel with it's full under barrel lug doesn't make it barrel heavy in the slightest, which I put down the the extra weight in the N sized frame counteracting the barrel perfectly. The cylinder lock up is nice and tight, in fact to the point where it feels locked solid when closed and cocked into single action. The trigger has an unusually wide face to it, like it's got a competition trigger shoe fitted to it, and as a result has a lightness to it when used in double action but is especially obvious when using it in SA.
Overall, the feeling that I got when I initially held the gun was one of surprise, It certainly both looks and feels the way it should and the balance seems to be just perfect with the 6½" barrel, it was at that exact moment that I took my cash out of my wallet and threw it at Alex stating,"Ring it up buddy, I'm taking this home".
Above - These are the very first pictures that I actually took of the gun, go ahead, compare it against the pictures of the real steel version.
A deeper delve
Once I got home from the RFD with my new purchase, I set about taking a deeper and more critical look at it, it's okay to be smitten by certain aspects but there's always going to be positives and negatives to be had with any replica and the 629 is no exception to this unwritten rule.
Negative, the screws for the side plate are posidrive/philips headed where they should be slotted, I don't understand why manufacturers use these screws when they are so obviously wrong but unfortunately they do. I've seen this countless times before on replica guns, the worst offender being hex headed screws on an 1895 Nagant revolver but I replaced them and will eventually do the same with these.
Positive, the fore sight has been fitted with a red plastic insert just like the RS version. This makes sight acquisition very easy and lends itself to a better sight picture overall. I, like most shooters, focus on the front sight when shooting so having the red insert helps with that tremendously and I can attest to it's positive function after I finished doing some quick target shooting with the gun. The rear sight is fully adjustable for both windage and elevation via a simple slotted screw adjustment and seems to be secure and tight, so that should prevent loosening off once the gun is zero'ed in.
Negative, the barrel shroud was ever so slightly loose in the frame. I don't think that the average shooter would even had noticed but it was only just perceivable when you held the muzzle end of the barrel and tried to wiggle it, just a minuscule amount of play but I sorted that out very quickly with a couple of aluminium shims. It's not a difficult job, punch out the two drift pins, remove the barrel shroud and inner barrel assembly (the smooth bore barrel, a spring and the forcing cone), fit the shims and then re-assemble, a five minute job that resulted in the barrel being solidly locked in place to the frame. Again this is a common fault with a few replica revolvers from Umarex, they either come this way or end up going that way over time, so shimming the barrel on replica revolvers has unfortunately become something of a normal practise. If you decide to buy one of these you may find that your barrel is solid or it might be loose, I personally feel that mine is not an indication that ALL 629s will have a loose barrel.
Positive, the finish on my gun is perfect, no flaws in it and the S&W engraving on the side plate is very well done, in fact when compared to the real handgun I personally think that it's better as the RS has an etched rather than engraved trademark. Also the 'F' mark and 4.5mm calibre designation is discreetly hidden underneath the barrel, nicely out of sight but legally still there, that's a nice touch and one that's appreciated by me. Also, there are no garish warnings or 'Please read manual' plastered over the gun which is another big positive for me. Some people might think of this type of finish as a negative, which is down to personal preference, but it definitely is (as with all highly polished silver finished guns) a finger print magnet.
Negative, the two screws in the rear sight (the adjustment and retaining screws) had been so over tightened that it failed to function correctly when zeroing in the gun. The retaining screw needs to be loosened, not by much, just to allow the rear sight to function correctly. Whether this was done to combat against it working loose in transit I don't know but it did give me a head scratching moment when I attempted to zero the gun in until I realised what they had done.
Positive, as already mentioned, the cylinder lock up is one of the best I've seen and compares favourably against such guns as the Webley mkVI (which has an incredibly strong bolt to cylinder lock up), there's only a slight amount of play in the cylinder on the crane arm which is only noticeable when the cylinder has been unlocked and swung out from the frame.
Negative, the damned safety ! Why do manufacturers feel the need to include something that isn't on the original RS is beyond me. The safety is built into the cylinder latch (just like on the Dan Wesson gen I and Umarex Legends revolvers), where if you push it forward it unlocks the crane to allow the cylinder to swing out and if you pull it backwards it locks the action up tightly. I would have preferred to have the small discreetly placed switch behind the hammer as seen on ASG's DW715 and Schofield revolvers or hidden underneath, just forward of the trigger guard like on Umarex's Colt SAA revolvers. The problem I have is not so much with there being a safety on a gun that doesn't need one but the engraving of 'S' & 'F' and a double ended arrow on the frame underneath the bloody cylinder latch, that really irks me.
Positive, the action is smooth in DA and light in SA, whether that's because the trigger is wider with vertical serrations on the trigger face I really don't know. The DA pull through is silky smooth and can be staged quite well (where you pull the trigger just enough to rotate the cylinder and engage the cylinder bolt) but at the same time pulling through the whole action quickly is not mechanically 'clunky' at all. The single action function feels incredibly light and crisp.
Negative, the smoothbore barrel ! For the money that you pay for one of these you would expect it to come with a rifled barrel as standard, especially as I like to fire pellets rather than BBs in my revolvers. But we'll reserve full judgement until after the accuracy test as I've been surprised before by firing pellets down a smoothbore barrel, especially when I consider how accurate shooting pellets through a Colt SAA smoothbore barrelled gun can be.
Positive, the gun's frame and cylinder is definitely larger than all my other modern revolver replicas, which is as it should be as it's a .44 magnum gun, as all my other revolver replicas are either .357 magnum sized guns or smaller (eg,. the Nagant). The whole weight of the gun is heavier than even my DW715-6" too. Although, I have never fired or even held a 'N' frame S&W revolver before so I cannot truthfully compare it, I do honestly think that it feels right within the general area.
Above - The S&W 629 Classic 6½" in a direct comparison to the Dan Wesson 715-6". Notice the enlarged cylinder and extra 'meat' to the frame.
Negative, the cartridges should have been modelled on the .44 magnum cartridge, just to drive home the differences between this gun and all that has come before in the field of shell loading replica revolvers, but.....
Positive, the cartridges ! Seeing as how they are just standard Colt SAA shells, anyone who has a 'few' of these shells in their collection is going to be happy that 'straight off the bat' they already have enough shells for a decent plinking session with this gun.
Negative, I'm struggling to think of anything......
Positive, the grips are superb. They're very similar to the DW715 grips with a metal frame covered in a rubberised material that lock well into the frame, where the left hand side grip securely clips on and off to allow the CO2 to be inserted, it also has the very helpful feature of having a built in allen key for using with the CO2 capsule. As the grips are the main point of contact for any shooter, a lot of the feel of the gun is generally ascertained from the guns grips, so it's great to see some good quality grips on this replica as it adds to the very positive overall feel of the gun. It would have been nice to have a set of S&W grip medallions in them like the RS versions have but they have gone down the same route as the DW715 with the company logo being detailed into the actual grips themselves, not a deal breaker but the medallions would have been a nice touch.
Negative, okay, I give up ! I can't find anymore.....
Positive, the barrel's engraved markings are absolutely spot on when compared to the RS version, with the left side carrying the '.44 Magnum' and the right side having the '629 Classic' on it. Both are done in an identical typeface to the original RS version and are deeply engraved rather than just cheaply etched on.
Negative, .....
Positive, I know I've previously mentioned this in the initial thoughts section but it does bear repeating, the guns balance is just about perfect with the 6½" barrel. Whether that is because the larger frame size helps to keep the centre of gravity nearer to the cylinder or not I don't know but it just feels so well balanced. This was a complete surprise to me as I wasn't expecting that to be the case, originally I was going to get the 5" version of this replica but my RFD only managed to get the 6½" from John Rothery (Umarex's official UK distributor) but I am so glad that they did.
NOTE - When I was handling the gun during the chronograph tests I noticed that the balance point for the gun is exactly where you put your trigger finger, the gun actually balances perfectly at that point when you have a CO2 capsule fitted (empty or full), so that goes a long way to explain it's well balanced feel in the hand.
Negative,.....
Positive, the cylinder rotation is correct, whereas Colt and Dan Wesson cylinders generally turn clockwise, S&W cylinders generally turn anti clockwise and this is the case with the RS 629 and this 629 replica rotates correctly. Might seem a little pedantic but that's how it's supposed to be, so that's how I want my replica to be too. While I'm at it, the side plate is in the right place too, so gaining entry into the internal hidden workings is accomplished in the exact same manner as with the RS, although with the replica there is one extra screw to undo.
So, even after a much deeper inspection with a more critical eye it came out very positive overall, okay there are a few minor negatives with the main one for me being the safety switch and it's markings on the frame but apart from that it's a very good quality replica of the RS version. The main thing for me is the 'feel' of the gun, for me that's an extremely important aspect of replica ownership and should never be underrated. I can forgive a few minor 'niggles' if the gun just feels so right when it's in your hand and this gun definitely has that feeling and then some. I should point out that I haven't got overly large hands or tiny child's hands either, I'm firmly in the middle ground, I'm definitely Mr. Average when it comes to hand size but the gun does sit well in my hand, it's no more cumbersome to hold than the DW715 or the Colt Python despite it's slightly larger frame size.
When I add up all the positives (the replica realism, the action, the 'feel', the quality, the weight, etc.) it does out weigh the negatives by a considerable amount. So far so good, it certainly looks and feels the part, but what about it's performance ? So lets move swiftly onto the chronograph and accuracy tests.
Chronograph testing
For the chronograph test I used RWS meisterkugeln 4.49mm 7 grain pellets and only used the cartridge shells that came with the gun (to replicate a new owner who hasn't got a box load of spare Colt SAA shells), so I would fire six shots and then open the cylinder, reload them in situ and then fire them off, I did this until the fps was so low that there seemed to be no point in continuing with the test. The ambient temperature was a cool 15C, so the results will be a little on the low side compared to a warm summer's shooting.
The gun gave a fairly consistent 72 shot string before the fps fell so low as to be inefficient to carry on, in general most (if not all) of my revolvers have a 72 shot limit for well powered, viable shots, so it was no shock to see the 629 perform in the same manner.
Highest fps - shot #1 @ 365fps (2.80J/2.07fpe)
Lowest fps - shot #60 @ 274fps (1.58J/1.16fpe)
Average fps over the 72 shot string = 307.1fps (1.98J/1.46fpe)
NB. Shot #60 had an unusually low fps when compared to the previous and successive shots, seemed to be a bit out of place. So I'm wondering whether that pellet was a badly oversized one (>4.49mm <4.54mm) or well over 7 grains ? Or just a combination of both ?
The first time I did the tests the results were 10-20fps lower on most shots and after I removed the CO2 I could see that the capsule had not been fully pierced. When you tighten the capsule up you don't get any piercing sound (the 'hiss of happiness' as Giles puts it, lol) so you don't know whether it's pierced or not. I've found that tightening the CO2 screw up as far as you can gives the best result as it punctures the capsule correctly. A word of warning - the gun is quite loud, my ears were ringing as soon as I started the test and continued to ring for the rest of the bloody day.
I can honestly say that I'm a little disappointed with the results, I was hoping for a much higher average fps (around the 335-350 mark) and also the gun emptied the CO2 completely by about shot #84 (the velocity of that shot was just 67 fps), so there's certainly not a lot left in the 'tank' so to speak. I'm at a loss to explain the lack of power versus the CO2 usage but it may well be one of things that I take a look at once I've got under the hood and stripped it down.
An interesting point that I think I should mention was that I occasionally felt a little bit of recoil with a few of the shots when doing the test (No, I'm not kidding), it would happen and I'd be asking myself, "Did that just recoil sightly ?", so I would carefully 'feel' the next few shots and as soon as I gave up (thinking that I must have imagined it) it would suddenly happen again. It seemed to happen as the pellet left the muzzle, the only thing that I could think of was that even the 4.49mm pellets that I was using are still too large for the bore of the barrel and they were creating a build up of pressure behind the pellet which was being released the moment the pellet left the muzzle, which in turn was causing the slight recoil. It was a very weird feeling to have one of my CO2 revolvers recoil. So as a result of this peculiar effect I am going to repeat the chronograph test again but this time with steel BBs (which are notoriously smaller in diameter) and see what the fps and fpe comes in at and then compare them against the Joules & fpe from the first set of results that I've just got.
For the second chronograph test I used Umarex 5.4 grain BBs, the temperature was a touch warmer at 17C and I was using the same format as before (reloading the one set of shells as I go).
Highest fps - #2 @ 389fps (2.45J/1.81fpe)
Lowest fps - #60 @275fps (1.22J/0.90fpe)
Average fps over the 72 shot string = 317.6fps (1.63J/1.20fpe)
For the record I should state that the CO2 capsule was pierced perfectly when I removed it, with a large clear punctured hole.
So, whats the takeaway from the two tests ? Well the pellets average fps over a 72 shot string was 307fps and with the Umarex BBs they only manged to better that by 10fps over the same 72 shot string ! The highest Joule rating came from the highest recorded pellet shot and that came in at 2.8J, and as Umarex claim a 3J rating for this gun then they must have been using pellets to set that on a very warm day. Using BBs didn't make that much of a difference to the power (even with it being +2C warmer for the BB test) and I'm shocked that they didn't perform better. The variation in fps between shots when using BBs was far greater than I saw with the pellets, they lacked consistency of power which I feel would add to greater inaccuracy when shooting with them. In my opinion, pellets are a far better choice to be used with this gun especially when it comes to power performance.
EDIT (18/11/21) - Since this review I've managed to replace the barrel with a rifled version (courtesy of Modski66 ) and then 'fettled' the ports on the valve stem (enlarged slightly with a diamond tipped rotary tool) and have retested the gun again.
Information on the latest chronograph results,
Highest 426fps
Lowest 361fps
Average 388fps 3.17 Joules or 2.34fpe (over the course of 72 shots)
So, that's a huge increase in the fps for this gun ! Porting the valve gave the biggest increase (+56fps) over fitting the rifled barrel (+25fps) but in combination that was overall increase of 81fps. More information can be found on these modifications further down this thread, so just scroll down if you want to learn more.
Next up, the all important 'Will it hit a tin can at 7-10 metres ?' question.....
Accuracy tests
For the accuracy tests I've chosen to use the RWS MeisterKugeln 4.49mm 7 grain pellets. I'm shooting at the standard 14cm x 14cm paper targets at a distance of roughly 5m, semi rested (sat on the floor, resting both hands on my knees and firing in single action). Unfortunately the weather has precluded me from doing outdoor 10m accuracy tests, so I'm just limited to my small indoor range for the moment.
After zeroing the sights in, which was easy enough to do, I spent some very rewarding time doing some six shoot groups.
Above - Results of two six shot groups using the RWS MK pellets.
I decided to try the H&N Econ II pellets (7.25 grain), which I'd previously ran through a 4.50mm pellet sizer. These pellets are about half the price of the RWS MK's and I predominantly use these for plinking with my DW715s and my Colt Pythons. These gave surprisingly good results when compared to the RWS MKs.
Above - The results of two six shot groups using the H&N Econ IIs.
The accuracy at 5m seems more than adequate and better than most replicas, the groups were fairly tight with only the odd occasional 'flyer'. I'm very happy with the results as these guns are not really designed to be 'competition target' pistols. The CO2 seal has eased off slightly now, meaning that I can actually hear the hiss as it pierces the capsule and then just tighten up as normal, the puncture hole is cleanly through the top and with a good rounded shape.
I took the opportunity to take a good few shots at my electric moving target and it performed really well, hitting an average of 5 out of 6 of the targets in quick succession, so again I'm very happy with it's performance and I have no doubt that it will easily take out tin cans at 7-10m.
Conclusion
During the course of this review I've realised how much I really love this gun, to be totally honest I didn't buy this gun on a whim, it was a predetermined purchase from the very onset when Umarex announced it's future release, I knew at that very moment that I would have to add one to my collection. But just adding another handgun to my ever burgeoning collection of replicas doesn't automatically make it a great gun or even just a good gun and as we have seen too many times before, certain replicas have fallen very short of their intended target.
So does the S&W 629 Classic tick all my boxes ? Well it certainly both looks and feels the part, I cannot emphasise enough just how good it actually feels in the hand, the weight, the balance and more importantly, that quintessential 'feel' once you've got it secured in a firm grip and you're pointing down range at your target. The grin factor is enormous with this gun, but it's not just a great gun to look at and hold, it's internal action is top draw, both in DA and SA it's so very, very nice and equally as slick. This CO2 replica handgun replicates the RS version perfectly and as such, on that alone, should deserve a place in any good collection of replicas.
On the power side, well I would've liked to have a higher fps, more wallop for metering out justice the tin can gang but what it lacks in power it certainly makes up for in accuracy. So irrespective of the slightly lower than the expected power output I'm happy with it, I could of been happier but I'm not really too upset either. Which brings us neatly to one of the larger negatives, re: The smoothbore barrel, if the accuracy results have proved just one thing then it's the fact that the barrel is more than adequate for some reasonably accurate plinking. There may also be room for further power improvements with some future minor fettling and porting of the valve stem for some minor fps performance increases and personally I've already got a replacement rifled barrel lined up to be fitted the next week or two courtesy of Modski66 which will improve the accuracy slightly and hopefully may improve the power output too.
Personally for me, I adore the gun, it's positives far out weigh any negatives and it's a definite keeper, not just as a collection piece but actively shooting it too. It doesn't just look the part, it damn well acts the part too, it's accuracy is good and considering it has a smoothbore barrel then that makes it fairly amazing ! This is definitely a replica that deserves to be held, fondled and more importantly shot.
If it fails on any one point I think that it is without doubt the price, mine cost me £215 from Redbeck Shooting Supplies and I think that for a smoothbore barrel that is a tad expensive but then again, when you factor in the quality of the replica itself I do think that it does merit a higher than standard retail price, maybe something just shy of the £200 mark seems more appropriate. But would I let the extra £15 deter me from buying one ? NO, definitely not !
My final thoughts ? If you're looking for a good quality CO2 revolver replica, something that's going to bring the joy of ownership to a new level and a gun that shoots just as good as it looks then your search is over, the S&W 629 Classic is definitely the gun you've been looking for. It's accuracy makes it a great plinking gun and the feel of the gun is even a larger positive, it's very hard to quantify exactly just how good it feels in the hand without seeming to be 'gushing' over it but if you ever get the chance to handle one at your RFD then just be prepared to have the necessary cash in your pocket, as you'll definitely not want to give it back !
(Additional note - if the S&W 629 Classic is anything to go by then I'm so looking forward to getting my hands on Dirty Harry's S&W 29-6½")
In all fairness and in the interests of complete honesty, I cannot state that this review will be a totally unbiased opinion of the gun. My undying passion as a CO2 replica collector is definitely for shell loading replica revolvers and that passion is sent into overdrive when the gun in question is a copy of a fairly modern magnum revolver, but I will try my very upmost to give you an honest and forthright opinion of it.
A little back story
Every gun has a story and for any good review you need to give at least a speck of context and history of the said handgun, not just because we are all replica handgun collectors and we like to know such things but more importantly to show that handgun's own place in history and what factors instigated it's birth.
So with that being said lets start at the very beginning, the .44 magnum cartridge was born in 1955, the offspring of Elmer Keith, S&W and Remington. Elmer Keith, the Godfather of the Magnum cartridge had been continually developing and improving 'hot' rounds for his Colt SAA for decades. He wanted a cartridge that could, with one well placed shot, kill any and all game in North America, from Polar bear to grizzly, from elk to moose and ultimately he created what was for many, many years seen as the only true man stopper, the .44 magnum cartridge. It was a labour of love for our Mr.Keith, continually bending the ears of gun manufacturers at every convention since 1935 about this incredible new .44 wildcat cartridge that he had developed and ultimately his hard work paid off. Remington started making the cartridges and S&W manufactured the very first .44 magnum handgun for them to be fired in, the now legendary model 29 with much of the iconic status granted to it coming via the 'Dirty Harry' series of films, where the handgun actually became just as much of a star of the film as Clint Eastwood did himself.
So it seemed only appropriate that when S&W managed to work out the metallurgy needed to make a stainless steel version of the .44 magnum handgun that it should justifiably be a stainless steel version of the model 29, but this time with a '6' prefix to denote it's manufacture from stainless steel, so the '29' became the '629'. So just as the model 29 was the very first .44 magnum handgun in the world, the model 629 was the very first stainless steel .44 magnum handgun in the world too. Originally released by S&W in 1957, the very first version was just a complete stainless steel copy of the model 29. The successive iterations of the gun (from S&W 29-1 onwards) had a few minor changes at every step of the way. They've released various dedicated versions over time including the '629 Classic' (and the 629 Classic DX version).
Bullet time
To conclude the back story we need to at least briefly mention the power of the .44 magnum cartridge and the best way to do this is in a comparison to the ubiquitous 9mm Luger cartridge which is used extensively by Military and Police services the whole world over. The 9mm Luger generally has a bullet that weighs 115 grains whereas the .44 magnum has one that weighs around the 240 grain mark, the energy imparted by a 9mm Luger is roughly 330 fpe and the .44 magnum is slightly under four times that amount at 1230 fpe. So you can see that any gun that's going to handle that sort of cartridge has to be strong, well made and heavy, which in layman's terms generally means 'bigger'.
Now what has this got to do with the replica ? I hear you ask, well the replica has to somehow portray these traits; solid, heavy and large, otherwise it fails to meet the obvious expectations set for it. When you pick it up you should feel that you have a 'big' gun in your hands and the 'feel' is everything when it comes to replicas. Sometimes we can't even explain to others why you love a certain gun so much, it could be the ergonomics, the quality of workmanship or even just the weight, but it all flows into that hard to explain 'feel' category.
Above - The Real Steel S&W 629-3 Classic.
So now that we've got to know the gun, seen what it's supposed to look like and more importantly, we've got a good idea of how it's supposed to feel in the hand too, let's quickly move onto the real 'meat' of this review; the Umarex S&W 629 Classic replica revolver.
Initial thoughts
As soon as you open the box your eyes widen as you're taken by it's overall size and shape, it looks very much like a perfect copy of the RS and the high shine silver finish is certainly eye catching and one that makes the gun highly desirable, well to me at least. But the real test for any replica is it's 'feel' in the hand and once I removed it from it's box I was shocked by the solid and weighty feel that it had to it. Definitely the largest and heaviest revolver that I have in my collection but at the same time it feels very well balanced, the 6½" barrel with it's full under barrel lug doesn't make it barrel heavy in the slightest, which I put down the the extra weight in the N sized frame counteracting the barrel perfectly. The cylinder lock up is nice and tight, in fact to the point where it feels locked solid when closed and cocked into single action. The trigger has an unusually wide face to it, like it's got a competition trigger shoe fitted to it, and as a result has a lightness to it when used in double action but is especially obvious when using it in SA.
Overall, the feeling that I got when I initially held the gun was one of surprise, It certainly both looks and feels the way it should and the balance seems to be just perfect with the 6½" barrel, it was at that exact moment that I took my cash out of my wallet and threw it at Alex stating,"Ring it up buddy, I'm taking this home".
Above - These are the very first pictures that I actually took of the gun, go ahead, compare it against the pictures of the real steel version.
A deeper delve
Once I got home from the RFD with my new purchase, I set about taking a deeper and more critical look at it, it's okay to be smitten by certain aspects but there's always going to be positives and negatives to be had with any replica and the 629 is no exception to this unwritten rule.
Negative, the screws for the side plate are posidrive/philips headed where they should be slotted, I don't understand why manufacturers use these screws when they are so obviously wrong but unfortunately they do. I've seen this countless times before on replica guns, the worst offender being hex headed screws on an 1895 Nagant revolver but I replaced them and will eventually do the same with these.
Positive, the fore sight has been fitted with a red plastic insert just like the RS version. This makes sight acquisition very easy and lends itself to a better sight picture overall. I, like most shooters, focus on the front sight when shooting so having the red insert helps with that tremendously and I can attest to it's positive function after I finished doing some quick target shooting with the gun. The rear sight is fully adjustable for both windage and elevation via a simple slotted screw adjustment and seems to be secure and tight, so that should prevent loosening off once the gun is zero'ed in.
Negative, the barrel shroud was ever so slightly loose in the frame. I don't think that the average shooter would even had noticed but it was only just perceivable when you held the muzzle end of the barrel and tried to wiggle it, just a minuscule amount of play but I sorted that out very quickly with a couple of aluminium shims. It's not a difficult job, punch out the two drift pins, remove the barrel shroud and inner barrel assembly (the smooth bore barrel, a spring and the forcing cone), fit the shims and then re-assemble, a five minute job that resulted in the barrel being solidly locked in place to the frame. Again this is a common fault with a few replica revolvers from Umarex, they either come this way or end up going that way over time, so shimming the barrel on replica revolvers has unfortunately become something of a normal practise. If you decide to buy one of these you may find that your barrel is solid or it might be loose, I personally feel that mine is not an indication that ALL 629s will have a loose barrel.
Positive, the finish on my gun is perfect, no flaws in it and the S&W engraving on the side plate is very well done, in fact when compared to the real handgun I personally think that it's better as the RS has an etched rather than engraved trademark. Also the 'F' mark and 4.5mm calibre designation is discreetly hidden underneath the barrel, nicely out of sight but legally still there, that's a nice touch and one that's appreciated by me. Also, there are no garish warnings or 'Please read manual' plastered over the gun which is another big positive for me. Some people might think of this type of finish as a negative, which is down to personal preference, but it definitely is (as with all highly polished silver finished guns) a finger print magnet.
Negative, the two screws in the rear sight (the adjustment and retaining screws) had been so over tightened that it failed to function correctly when zeroing in the gun. The retaining screw needs to be loosened, not by much, just to allow the rear sight to function correctly. Whether this was done to combat against it working loose in transit I don't know but it did give me a head scratching moment when I attempted to zero the gun in until I realised what they had done.
Positive, as already mentioned, the cylinder lock up is one of the best I've seen and compares favourably against such guns as the Webley mkVI (which has an incredibly strong bolt to cylinder lock up), there's only a slight amount of play in the cylinder on the crane arm which is only noticeable when the cylinder has been unlocked and swung out from the frame.
Negative, the damned safety ! Why do manufacturers feel the need to include something that isn't on the original RS is beyond me. The safety is built into the cylinder latch (just like on the Dan Wesson gen I and Umarex Legends revolvers), where if you push it forward it unlocks the crane to allow the cylinder to swing out and if you pull it backwards it locks the action up tightly. I would have preferred to have the small discreetly placed switch behind the hammer as seen on ASG's DW715 and Schofield revolvers or hidden underneath, just forward of the trigger guard like on Umarex's Colt SAA revolvers. The problem I have is not so much with there being a safety on a gun that doesn't need one but the engraving of 'S' & 'F' and a double ended arrow on the frame underneath the bloody cylinder latch, that really irks me.
Positive, the action is smooth in DA and light in SA, whether that's because the trigger is wider with vertical serrations on the trigger face I really don't know. The DA pull through is silky smooth and can be staged quite well (where you pull the trigger just enough to rotate the cylinder and engage the cylinder bolt) but at the same time pulling through the whole action quickly is not mechanically 'clunky' at all. The single action function feels incredibly light and crisp.
Negative, the smoothbore barrel ! For the money that you pay for one of these you would expect it to come with a rifled barrel as standard, especially as I like to fire pellets rather than BBs in my revolvers. But we'll reserve full judgement until after the accuracy test as I've been surprised before by firing pellets down a smoothbore barrel, especially when I consider how accurate shooting pellets through a Colt SAA smoothbore barrelled gun can be.
Positive, the gun's frame and cylinder is definitely larger than all my other modern revolver replicas, which is as it should be as it's a .44 magnum gun, as all my other revolver replicas are either .357 magnum sized guns or smaller (eg,. the Nagant). The whole weight of the gun is heavier than even my DW715-6" too. Although, I have never fired or even held a 'N' frame S&W revolver before so I cannot truthfully compare it, I do honestly think that it feels right within the general area.
Above - The S&W 629 Classic 6½" in a direct comparison to the Dan Wesson 715-6". Notice the enlarged cylinder and extra 'meat' to the frame.
Negative, the cartridges should have been modelled on the .44 magnum cartridge, just to drive home the differences between this gun and all that has come before in the field of shell loading replica revolvers, but.....
Positive, the cartridges ! Seeing as how they are just standard Colt SAA shells, anyone who has a 'few' of these shells in their collection is going to be happy that 'straight off the bat' they already have enough shells for a decent plinking session with this gun.
Negative, I'm struggling to think of anything......
Positive, the grips are superb. They're very similar to the DW715 grips with a metal frame covered in a rubberised material that lock well into the frame, where the left hand side grip securely clips on and off to allow the CO2 to be inserted, it also has the very helpful feature of having a built in allen key for using with the CO2 capsule. As the grips are the main point of contact for any shooter, a lot of the feel of the gun is generally ascertained from the guns grips, so it's great to see some good quality grips on this replica as it adds to the very positive overall feel of the gun. It would have been nice to have a set of S&W grip medallions in them like the RS versions have but they have gone down the same route as the DW715 with the company logo being detailed into the actual grips themselves, not a deal breaker but the medallions would have been a nice touch.
Negative, okay, I give up ! I can't find anymore.....
Positive, the barrel's engraved markings are absolutely spot on when compared to the RS version, with the left side carrying the '.44 Magnum' and the right side having the '629 Classic' on it. Both are done in an identical typeface to the original RS version and are deeply engraved rather than just cheaply etched on.
Negative, .....
Positive, I know I've previously mentioned this in the initial thoughts section but it does bear repeating, the guns balance is just about perfect with the 6½" barrel. Whether that is because the larger frame size helps to keep the centre of gravity nearer to the cylinder or not I don't know but it just feels so well balanced. This was a complete surprise to me as I wasn't expecting that to be the case, originally I was going to get the 5" version of this replica but my RFD only managed to get the 6½" from John Rothery (Umarex's official UK distributor) but I am so glad that they did.
NOTE - When I was handling the gun during the chronograph tests I noticed that the balance point for the gun is exactly where you put your trigger finger, the gun actually balances perfectly at that point when you have a CO2 capsule fitted (empty or full), so that goes a long way to explain it's well balanced feel in the hand.
Negative,.....
Positive, the cylinder rotation is correct, whereas Colt and Dan Wesson cylinders generally turn clockwise, S&W cylinders generally turn anti clockwise and this is the case with the RS 629 and this 629 replica rotates correctly. Might seem a little pedantic but that's how it's supposed to be, so that's how I want my replica to be too. While I'm at it, the side plate is in the right place too, so gaining entry into the internal hidden workings is accomplished in the exact same manner as with the RS, although with the replica there is one extra screw to undo.
So, even after a much deeper inspection with a more critical eye it came out very positive overall, okay there are a few minor negatives with the main one for me being the safety switch and it's markings on the frame but apart from that it's a very good quality replica of the RS version. The main thing for me is the 'feel' of the gun, for me that's an extremely important aspect of replica ownership and should never be underrated. I can forgive a few minor 'niggles' if the gun just feels so right when it's in your hand and this gun definitely has that feeling and then some. I should point out that I haven't got overly large hands or tiny child's hands either, I'm firmly in the middle ground, I'm definitely Mr. Average when it comes to hand size but the gun does sit well in my hand, it's no more cumbersome to hold than the DW715 or the Colt Python despite it's slightly larger frame size.
When I add up all the positives (the replica realism, the action, the 'feel', the quality, the weight, etc.) it does out weigh the negatives by a considerable amount. So far so good, it certainly looks and feels the part, but what about it's performance ? So lets move swiftly onto the chronograph and accuracy tests.
Chronograph testing
For the chronograph test I used RWS meisterkugeln 4.49mm 7 grain pellets and only used the cartridge shells that came with the gun (to replicate a new owner who hasn't got a box load of spare Colt SAA shells), so I would fire six shots and then open the cylinder, reload them in situ and then fire them off, I did this until the fps was so low that there seemed to be no point in continuing with the test. The ambient temperature was a cool 15C, so the results will be a little on the low side compared to a warm summer's shooting.
The gun gave a fairly consistent 72 shot string before the fps fell so low as to be inefficient to carry on, in general most (if not all) of my revolvers have a 72 shot limit for well powered, viable shots, so it was no shock to see the 629 perform in the same manner.
Highest fps - shot #1 @ 365fps (2.80J/2.07fpe)
Lowest fps - shot #60 @ 274fps (1.58J/1.16fpe)
Average fps over the 72 shot string = 307.1fps (1.98J/1.46fpe)
NB. Shot #60 had an unusually low fps when compared to the previous and successive shots, seemed to be a bit out of place. So I'm wondering whether that pellet was a badly oversized one (>4.49mm <4.54mm) or well over 7 grains ? Or just a combination of both ?
The first time I did the tests the results were 10-20fps lower on most shots and after I removed the CO2 I could see that the capsule had not been fully pierced. When you tighten the capsule up you don't get any piercing sound (the 'hiss of happiness' as Giles puts it, lol) so you don't know whether it's pierced or not. I've found that tightening the CO2 screw up as far as you can gives the best result as it punctures the capsule correctly. A word of warning - the gun is quite loud, my ears were ringing as soon as I started the test and continued to ring for the rest of the bloody day.
I can honestly say that I'm a little disappointed with the results, I was hoping for a much higher average fps (around the 335-350 mark) and also the gun emptied the CO2 completely by about shot #84 (the velocity of that shot was just 67 fps), so there's certainly not a lot left in the 'tank' so to speak. I'm at a loss to explain the lack of power versus the CO2 usage but it may well be one of things that I take a look at once I've got under the hood and stripped it down.
An interesting point that I think I should mention was that I occasionally felt a little bit of recoil with a few of the shots when doing the test (No, I'm not kidding), it would happen and I'd be asking myself, "Did that just recoil sightly ?", so I would carefully 'feel' the next few shots and as soon as I gave up (thinking that I must have imagined it) it would suddenly happen again. It seemed to happen as the pellet left the muzzle, the only thing that I could think of was that even the 4.49mm pellets that I was using are still too large for the bore of the barrel and they were creating a build up of pressure behind the pellet which was being released the moment the pellet left the muzzle, which in turn was causing the slight recoil. It was a very weird feeling to have one of my CO2 revolvers recoil. So as a result of this peculiar effect I am going to repeat the chronograph test again but this time with steel BBs (which are notoriously smaller in diameter) and see what the fps and fpe comes in at and then compare them against the Joules & fpe from the first set of results that I've just got.
For the second chronograph test I used Umarex 5.4 grain BBs, the temperature was a touch warmer at 17C and I was using the same format as before (reloading the one set of shells as I go).
Highest fps - #2 @ 389fps (2.45J/1.81fpe)
Lowest fps - #60 @275fps (1.22J/0.90fpe)
Average fps over the 72 shot string = 317.6fps (1.63J/1.20fpe)
For the record I should state that the CO2 capsule was pierced perfectly when I removed it, with a large clear punctured hole.
So, whats the takeaway from the two tests ? Well the pellets average fps over a 72 shot string was 307fps and with the Umarex BBs they only manged to better that by 10fps over the same 72 shot string ! The highest Joule rating came from the highest recorded pellet shot and that came in at 2.8J, and as Umarex claim a 3J rating for this gun then they must have been using pellets to set that on a very warm day. Using BBs didn't make that much of a difference to the power (even with it being +2C warmer for the BB test) and I'm shocked that they didn't perform better. The variation in fps between shots when using BBs was far greater than I saw with the pellets, they lacked consistency of power which I feel would add to greater inaccuracy when shooting with them. In my opinion, pellets are a far better choice to be used with this gun especially when it comes to power performance.
EDIT (18/11/21) - Since this review I've managed to replace the barrel with a rifled version (courtesy of Modski66 ) and then 'fettled' the ports on the valve stem (enlarged slightly with a diamond tipped rotary tool) and have retested the gun again.
Information on the latest chronograph results,
Highest 426fps
Lowest 361fps
Average 388fps 3.17 Joules or 2.34fpe (over the course of 72 shots)
So, that's a huge increase in the fps for this gun ! Porting the valve gave the biggest increase (+56fps) over fitting the rifled barrel (+25fps) but in combination that was overall increase of 81fps. More information can be found on these modifications further down this thread, so just scroll down if you want to learn more.
Next up, the all important 'Will it hit a tin can at 7-10 metres ?' question.....
Accuracy tests
For the accuracy tests I've chosen to use the RWS MeisterKugeln 4.49mm 7 grain pellets. I'm shooting at the standard 14cm x 14cm paper targets at a distance of roughly 5m, semi rested (sat on the floor, resting both hands on my knees and firing in single action). Unfortunately the weather has precluded me from doing outdoor 10m accuracy tests, so I'm just limited to my small indoor range for the moment.
After zeroing the sights in, which was easy enough to do, I spent some very rewarding time doing some six shoot groups.
Above - Results of two six shot groups using the RWS MK pellets.
I decided to try the H&N Econ II pellets (7.25 grain), which I'd previously ran through a 4.50mm pellet sizer. These pellets are about half the price of the RWS MK's and I predominantly use these for plinking with my DW715s and my Colt Pythons. These gave surprisingly good results when compared to the RWS MKs.
Above - The results of two six shot groups using the H&N Econ IIs.
The accuracy at 5m seems more than adequate and better than most replicas, the groups were fairly tight with only the odd occasional 'flyer'. I'm very happy with the results as these guns are not really designed to be 'competition target' pistols. The CO2 seal has eased off slightly now, meaning that I can actually hear the hiss as it pierces the capsule and then just tighten up as normal, the puncture hole is cleanly through the top and with a good rounded shape.
I took the opportunity to take a good few shots at my electric moving target and it performed really well, hitting an average of 5 out of 6 of the targets in quick succession, so again I'm very happy with it's performance and I have no doubt that it will easily take out tin cans at 7-10m.
Conclusion
During the course of this review I've realised how much I really love this gun, to be totally honest I didn't buy this gun on a whim, it was a predetermined purchase from the very onset when Umarex announced it's future release, I knew at that very moment that I would have to add one to my collection. But just adding another handgun to my ever burgeoning collection of replicas doesn't automatically make it a great gun or even just a good gun and as we have seen too many times before, certain replicas have fallen very short of their intended target.
So does the S&W 629 Classic tick all my boxes ? Well it certainly both looks and feels the part, I cannot emphasise enough just how good it actually feels in the hand, the weight, the balance and more importantly, that quintessential 'feel' once you've got it secured in a firm grip and you're pointing down range at your target. The grin factor is enormous with this gun, but it's not just a great gun to look at and hold, it's internal action is top draw, both in DA and SA it's so very, very nice and equally as slick. This CO2 replica handgun replicates the RS version perfectly and as such, on that alone, should deserve a place in any good collection of replicas.
On the power side, well I would've liked to have a higher fps, more wallop for metering out justice the tin can gang but what it lacks in power it certainly makes up for in accuracy. So irrespective of the slightly lower than the expected power output I'm happy with it, I could of been happier but I'm not really too upset either. Which brings us neatly to one of the larger negatives, re: The smoothbore barrel, if the accuracy results have proved just one thing then it's the fact that the barrel is more than adequate for some reasonably accurate plinking. There may also be room for further power improvements with some future minor fettling and porting of the valve stem for some minor fps performance increases and personally I've already got a replacement rifled barrel lined up to be fitted the next week or two courtesy of Modski66 which will improve the accuracy slightly and hopefully may improve the power output too.
Personally for me, I adore the gun, it's positives far out weigh any negatives and it's a definite keeper, not just as a collection piece but actively shooting it too. It doesn't just look the part, it damn well acts the part too, it's accuracy is good and considering it has a smoothbore barrel then that makes it fairly amazing ! This is definitely a replica that deserves to be held, fondled and more importantly shot.
If it fails on any one point I think that it is without doubt the price, mine cost me £215 from Redbeck Shooting Supplies and I think that for a smoothbore barrel that is a tad expensive but then again, when you factor in the quality of the replica itself I do think that it does merit a higher than standard retail price, maybe something just shy of the £200 mark seems more appropriate. But would I let the extra £15 deter me from buying one ? NO, definitely not !
My final thoughts ? If you're looking for a good quality CO2 revolver replica, something that's going to bring the joy of ownership to a new level and a gun that shoots just as good as it looks then your search is over, the S&W 629 Classic is definitely the gun you've been looking for. It's accuracy makes it a great plinking gun and the feel of the gun is even a larger positive, it's very hard to quantify exactly just how good it feels in the hand without seeming to be 'gushing' over it but if you ever get the chance to handle one at your RFD then just be prepared to have the necessary cash in your pocket, as you'll definitely not want to give it back !
(Additional note - if the S&W 629 Classic is anything to go by then I'm so looking forward to getting my hands on Dirty Harry's S&W 29-6½")
