I am trying to choose between two 44 mag revolvers that were made available to me from two different people interested in trading me for a rifle that I am selling. The first is a Smith and Wesson 629-6 stainless with 6 inch barrel, partial underlug, made around mid 2000s or newer with s/n CLZ24** and has 300-400 rounds thru it. Comes with factory plastic case.
The second is a Taurus Raging Bull blued 8 3/8 barrel made the first year (1999) with 40 rounds fired. It comes with a Taurus rail, cheap $70 Tasco red dot, soft case, and a couple boxes of ammo.
The respective owners have priced the S&W at $800 and Taurus at $700. I will be trading a rifle, and getting cash back in either of these deals, so the prices are not the biggest concern. The revolver will not be a daily carry weapon, not planning on keeping it in a vehicle, and mainly used for hunting and practice as needed. I have not handled either one in person yet, but will have to decide to take one or the other, or pass on both in the next couple days.

Anyone have some experience and educated opinions between the two?
Anyone hunt with a six inch Smith with half underlug?
I know a well built Smith will always have value, and it can be used for more than just hunting. The Taurus is the first year made, and good quality, plus it is designed for hunting.

I have a 629-1 and I'm a big fan. For only $100 difference, my opinion is get the 629 without even thinking based on resale alone.

Have to recommend the Smith for those prices.

Sw

Having owned both, the S&W by a mile. The Taurus I owned was very roughly machined in non critical areas, and the action was not as smooth.

That's a no brainier. S&w

Tell you what. Get the S&W and I'll trade you my Taurus for it.

No-brainer. S&W.

That's not much of a choice, SW without a doubt

I have a 629 Classic 7.5" and it's a danged hawg leg. Get the Smith.

SW

If it were $250 difference the options become a choice.

I'm going to stick my neck out here, and say that there appears to be a trend in favor of the Smith & Wesson.

Hands down, the S & W

^^^ This. I'm a wheel gun guy and don't always like S&W, but for a $100 difference......

Smith for sure.

I have owned almost every brand of pistol in 44 magnum over the years, and the only one I still own is my Taurus Raging Bull. It's the best shooting 44 that I've ever had.
S&W and Colt are too over rated. The only ones I wish I still had are my Dan Wesson convertible set, and Desert Eagle.

Will never own a Taurus again. Once you deal with cylinder timing off and bloody face and then wait 7 months for warranty and finally settle on a shorter Raging Bull you will never own a Taurus either!!!!!

Ruger RedHawk or Super redhawk

Of those two, we have had far fewer problems with Taurus than Smith... Honestly in that type gun, I'd go Ruger, don't ever remember a problem with Ruger DA Revolvers, but then we've only been in business 30 years in March

I've got a S&W model 69 and like it a lot.

Although I am a big S & W fan, My Tuarus Ranging Bull was a heck of a shooter.

Smith and Wesson has by far the best trigger from the factory, much better than Ruger and Taurus. A good trigger is very important in handgun hunting, so I vote for the S&W!!

this

and this