It’s no secret, I like revolvers. I also like competitive shooting. So when I got a chance to get my hands on a 929, I didn’t hesitate. It made sense. An eight-shot, 9mm revolver, touched up by the Smith & Wesson Performance Center, carrying Jerry Miculek’s signature, couldn’t be wrong. Or could it?
There is a lot going on here. The 929 is absolutely built for competition. However, I think it missed the marks several ways. There is a good chance that my opinion is based on the activities that I commonly participate in and expected the 929 to be ready for. Don’t get me wrong, the 929 is an excellent 9mm wheel gun. It’s also a fantastic foundation for what I would like to do with a competition revolver, but that’s where it stops. It just doesn’t seem ready to take first place on the podium without a little extra tender loving care and a few adjustments. Nevertheless, it’s a fast, fun, and friendly wheel gun that is sure to bring joy to the shooter.
The 929 has been around for good while now and has an MSRP of $1,469. Street price is just below that at around $1,360 but generally not advertised below MSRP which is common for Smith & Wesson revolvers. While I wouldn’t consider this to be an inexpensive handgun, it’s not an outrageously expensive revolver and pretty much inline for what one would pay on the low end for a competitive competition pistol (like a CZ Shadow 2 for instance).
So what does one get for roughly $1,400?
- A gray Performance Center S&W had-sided foam-padded case,
- A manual,
- A cable lock,
- Two (2) S&W internal revolver lock keys,
- A non-ported muzzle cap with an appropriate sized Allen key,
- Three (3) moon clips,
- The wheelgun itself.
The 44 oz N-frame revolver has an overall length of 12.3″, an overall height of 6.1″, and measures 1.7″ at its widest point which is, of course, the titanium cylinder. It’s a big revolver with a fair bit of heft to it which soaks up a ton of the 9mm recoil which isn’t much to begin with. This makes the revolver relatively easy to shoot and the return to target is exceptionally quick. That’s pretty much what one is looking for in a competition firearm. While it is a pretty impressive revolver out of the box, there are a couple of features that I would have liked to have been executed differently. I’ll get to those as we walk the revolver from muzzle to stock.
On the business end of the revolver we start with the ported muzzle cap. To be honest, I haven’t shot the revolver with the ported muzzle cap yet. In fact, the very first thing I did when I got it was replace the ported cap with the included non-ported one. Why did I do this? Well, ports and compensators aren’t allowed in either the USPSA Revolver (REV) division or the Steel Challenge Iron Sight Revolver (ISR) division which are the two divisions I intended to shoot this revolver in. As a matter of fact, I’m not aware of any competition that allows ports or compensators in iron sighted revolver divisions. That doesn’t mean a sport and division that allows them doesn’t exist. I’m just not aware of one which makes the installed and advertised ported muzzle device seem more of a marketing gimmick than anything else to me. Perhaps my opinion on this will change once I do shoot the revolver with the ported muzzle cap which I expect to function as a compensator. I also hope the “compensator” is effective at mitigating muzzle rise and flip, but unfortunately I can’t speak to that right now.
Under the cap we find the muzzle of the 6.5″ stainless steel barrel that is enclosed by a full length barrel shroud. The long barrel does a couple of things for us. First, it provides ample time to allow virtually all of the 9mm cartridge’s powder to burn and get the most velocity out of it. This matters to competitors who hand load their very own low recoil bunny fart loads to make power factor requirements at competitions. It also allows for a generously long sight radius which aids in shooting the revolver precisely.
The front of the barrel shroud is adorned by the all black serrated patridge front sight. I’m not a fan of it at all. I think a high visibility fiber optic front sight would have been a much better option for a competition revolver. This is something that I will very likely change in the near future should I decide to campaign in iron sighted revolver competitions.
The top top the barrel shroud is serrated which is intended to reduce glare. I’m not certain it’s needed given the matte finish, but it’s a nice touch nevertheless.
Next up we have the N-frame. This size frame is large and most commonly used for revolvers chambered for large magnum cartridges such as the 44 Magnum. Smith & Wesson does have one larger frame size, the X-frame, which is reserved for the largest and most powerful magnum cartridges. The use of this frame on a 9mm might seem kind of silly given that it is definitely nowhere near the same neighborhood as those large magnums in terms of power and recoil, but it works very well for competitive applications as the frame provides plenty of real estate to grip the revolver while the additional weight minimizes recoil induced movement.
The top of the frame is adorned with a fully adjustable all black serrated rear sight. Unlike the front sight, I’m quite happy with the rear sight as it works well and would pair beautifully with a high-visibility fiber-optic front sight.
Just behind the rear sight we have the spurred hammer. The hammer spur has been textured to allow for confident and consistent cocking manipulation. It’s a nice touch, but not a feature I will like to make much use out of given the style of practical performance shooting competitions I participate in. I may actually change out the hammer with a spurless competition hammer, but that’s just me. I suspect that folks who regularly manipulate the hammer will likely be happy with how it was executed.
Below the rear sight and in the center of the frame we find the eight chamber titanium cylinder. I would have liked to see the cylinder chamfered. I get that would add manufacturing complexity and drive the cost up, but it would have been a nice touch that would make moon clip reloads smoother and faster. I guess this is as good of a time as any to mention that I was disappointed by the number of included moon clips. Three (3) moon clips isn’t enough to have sufficient reloads to finish a USPSA long course stage. Four (4) would be the minimum for that but wouldn’t allow for any make up shots. I think five (5) would have been the magic number for a competition revolver which would coincide with the minimum needed to participate in Steel Challenge. I highly doubt that including an additional two moon clips would impact the margin on this revolver. To address this shortcoming, I ended up picking up a 100-pack of moon clips from Speed Beez.
The cylinder lock up is strong and tight. So tight that it requires a little extra elbow grease to open and close the cylinder as the revolver starts getting dirty. This is easily mitigated by brushing out the chambers and behind the extractor star between stages making the inclusion of an inexpensive chamber brush a little detail that would have been nice to see added to the package.
Just behind the cylinder on the left side of the frame we find the standard Smith & Wesson push forward style cylinder release and internal lock. No one likes the internal lock, but it’s standard on all new Smith & Wesson revolvers now with only a couple of exceptions. Nothing new or out of the ordinary here.
I like the finger-grooved textured synthetic grip that surrounds the stock of the revolver a lot. It has a sticky rubber feel to it that I find easy to hang on to. A lot of folks aren’t fans of the finger grooves and prefer different materials and textures. Thankfully there is strong aftermarket support for Smith & Wesson N-frame revolver grips. It’s an easy and relatively inexpensive customization that anyone can take on.
The final thing we have left to talk about is the Performance Center tuned action and trigger. I’m honestly not that impressed with it. This is the second Performance Center revolver I spent time with, the first being the Performance Center Model 640, and I don’t feel a noteworthy difference between the Performance Center tuned actions and the standard actions. That’s not to say there isn’t a difference. I’m just saying that I don’t feel much of one. The double action on the Model 929 feels about the same as the double action on the other Smith & Wesson Model 329PD (which is also an N-frame revolver). The double action trigger pull weight feels the same. I could make the argument that 929 double action is a little more smooth, but not enough to make a difference when shooting either revolver aggressively or at speed. The single action on the 929 feels just a tad lighter and has a little less post break travel. Overall, the Performance Center action is nice and very usable. I simply don’t think the difference between the tuned action and the standard action is something I would write home about.
I do wish the double action trigger pull was lighter. While it’s smooth, it’s heavy. Far heavier than I would like on a competition revolver. It’s so heavy that I can’t get a reading on the Wheeler digital trigger pull gauge which maxes out at 12 lbs. The single action pull averages right around 3.75 lbs which is pretty nice. Ideally, I’d like to see a double action trigger pull weight between 6 lbs to 8 lbs. I don’t know if that’s possible and it’s heavily influenced by the double action trigger pull on the CZ Shadow 2 after Cajun Gun Works put their voodoo on it. However, I don’t think it’s too much to ask for a less than 10 lbs double action trigger pull.
Overall the Performance Center Model 929 is a nice revolver. It’s reliable. It shoots very well. I’d go so far as to say that it’s a great foundation for a competition revolver. However, it leaves a little to be desired and it’s going to take some tweaking to get it how I want it for the types of competitions I’ve shot with it and plan to continue to do so from time to time. Perhaps this was Smith & Wesson’s intention, to offer a revolver that can be customized for different types of competitions. If that was the intention, then they hit the nail on the head. It is entirely possible that I expected too much from it. After all, I do love the CZ Shadow 2 for competition and I’ve come to terms with the fact that customization is something that naturally follows. The difference is that aftermarket support for the 929, while it exists, doesn’t appear to be nearly as strong as the aftermarket support for the Shadow 2. Maybe that’s just the nature of things. After all, there are those who would argue that revolvers are relics of the past. Whatever the case, I’m currently looking into some of the gunsmithing services TK Custom offers for the 929 and there is a good chance I will have them work this 929 over sometime relatively soon.