just order a G2. how are they compared to the old contender .i have a older frame . thx for any info.

I sold my pre G2 frames as I nearly shot my self with the old one. It is a long story but involves letting the hammer down witout firing. On the old frames that puts the hammer in contact with the firing pin.

I like the new frame better. The grips and fore ends are not interchangable. Barrels are though.
Mine had a pretty heavy trigger. I had it professionally fixed and it's more accurate than I am. I primarily shoot a 14" MGM 357 MAX barrel.
Have one antelope and one mule deer with it.

I have a G2 now, and I had an older "easy open" era Contender. The G2 does not have as nice a factory trigger as the older models, but the firing mechanism is a whole bunch safer as df06 pointed out.

I am not trying to start a flame war on Contender safety. They are all safe, but I appreciate the newer action's features. Specifically I like being able to re-cock the action without having to open it up.

The G2 trigger issues can be worked out. Other than the over-travel adjustment, it will always be non-adjustable except for taking it apart to swap sear springs. You can work on it if you are handy, or you can have a shop do it. Have a look at Mike Bellm TC web pages for more on that TC triggers, headspace, and barrel/frame fit.

One other advantage of the G2 is that it is a stronger frame than the original Contender frames. It has additional reinforcements along the top of the frame and less likely to stretch. I had three different shops who specialize in Contender barrel work confirm that before I moved on to the G2.

The G2 may be stronger, but if you want to use a higher pressure (50k+ psi) cartridge with a large case head you are looking at the Encore. High pressure in a small case head is fine, as is low pressure (40k psi) in a large case head. This is why you will see Contenders chambered in .223 Rem and 30/30 Win, but not say .243 Win or .308 Win.

Hopefully this was not TMI.

Unless you find a original Contender in great shape for an amazing price, I would recommend the G2.

Hi,
If memory serves me right, the hammer can be lowered Safely on a pre G-2 Contender by pulling the trigger guard. It is a little un nerving the first time. But I believe it is the method suggested by T/C

Thanks
Doug

Well, I guess I am old-school and prefer the original Contender over the G2 -- and by a wide margin. Been shooting them for something over 30 years and never, ever encountered a single problem other than perhaps needing to swap locking bolts to achieve proper lock-up and function. My luck with the G2s has not been as good. My very first one required a spring replacement before it could ever fire a shot.

Right now, I have one here that was on a 7-30 Waters barrel. It won't allow the hammer to be brought back into the fire position. And I doubt the action has seen more than 200 rounds.

It should be a simple fix as the action is fairly straight-forward and not at all complicated , but for a few years now I have very limited use of my hands and have a difficult time working with small objects. The frame has been that way since early summer as I keep hoping to be able to get it done, but I guess I need to swallow my pride and just send it in to S&W. That in itself is a bit frustrating because they will return the trigger to original factory specs -- and I'll be relegated to dealing with a 6.5-7 pound trigger again. The trigger isn't exactly optimum right now but is half of what is originally was -- and that's much better for my usage.

Contrary to what some have been told or will tell you, the G2 is not any stronger than the original Contender.

I understand that there are many people who prefer the original Contender over the G2, and for a number of different reasons.

As far as G2 vs. Contender strength goes, I will stick by the statement that the G2 is the stronger frame of the two.

Don't take my word for it though. Call Bellm TC, MGM Machine, or even S&W and have a chat with them about frame strength.

quote:

Don't take my word for it though. Call Bellm TC, MGM Machine, or even S&W and have a chat with them about frame strength.

---

Actually, I have -- long ago. And that includes Bellm and MGM along with Bullberry as well. But the words that carry the most weight on the subject actually came from Ken French, who was more tuned in to the production and intricacies of the Contender and G2 than any of us could ever hope to be.

Ken pointed out that basic design improvement to facilitate more streamlined production and to allow cocking without re-opening the frame were the primary changes with the G2 vs. the Contender. He noted that it did not offer any substantial or notable strength improvement and that the same cartridges the Contender was suitable for would be the same for the G2 as well.

Over the years, some have misinterpreted parts description of being "designed for added strength" to mean the frame is stronger in general, which is not the case. In fact, the same loads that will stretch a Contender frame will compromise the integrity of a G2 as well.

That was not what I was told from the same places we have both listed. I am happy to be wrong if I am wrong, but that is what I was told.

If you have both frames (I no longer have my Contender), it would be interesting to see some comparison frame wall measurements.

Obviously frame measurements are not a definitive answer, however I don't have the depth in higher math to do either a finite element analysis of the frame at ignition or run a fatigue series simulation.

I agree, the same basic range of cartridges apply for one as the other. We are talking about ~5k psi difference in strength.

I understand you feel differently, and your experience and opinion has weight. For me, the cocking alterations, the data I got about strength, and the G2 recommendations were enough to change my mind.

To each their own...that is one of the beauties of the T/C setup.

Web: J. D. Jones also has also stated that the G2 frame is not any stronger than the original Contender frame.

So I am interested in what J.D. Jones had to say about the issue of strength.

I have read excerpts of what he has said regarding Contender strength regarding back pressure and locking lugs being limiting factors not barrel OD/ID dimension. I haven't read anything regarding G2 vs. original Contender. Please educate me further if you don't mind.

As I said, I am happy to be wrong, and maybe I will learn something from the discussion.

I can see how Jones' comments could be taken to mean the Contender and G2 are the same strength in regards to lock up as they use the same dimension (or close to it) locking lugs/locking area. Back pressure is back pressure after all, and the same for a given cartridge in either frame.

Specifically I am referring to frame stretching in the original Contender when I am talking about additional strength in the G2. The bolsters at the top of the frame on the G2 would appear to add additional width to that area, the same area I have read and been told that frame stretching occurs.

So, it may come down to what strength we are talking about, and does it meet an individuals needs. Is it overall cartridge suitability for a given frame size, is it overall long term durability, or some other unmentioned factor.

If a prospective buyer is going to shoot standard, low pressure cartridges through both frames, I doubt it makes much difference. That isn't what I was going to do though, and part of why I switched.

Web: My discussion with Mr. Jones was in regard to a Contender carbine 30/30 barrel I wanted rechambered to 308 JDJ. During out phone conversation he stated that he no longer chambers a 308 JDJ in a Contender action. When I said I would use it on a G2 action he replied that the the G2 action and the original Contender action were the same strength and he still would not chamber a Contender barrel in 308 JDJ. He did not elaborate on the specific reason (locking lugs, frame sidewall, etc.). I had Bellm rechamber the barrel to 308 Bellm which saved me the cost of custom dies. Bellm stated that I should keep my loads to 45,000 CUP even if using the G2 action. My conclusion from discussions with Bellm and Jones is that there is very little appreciable difference in receiver strength between the original and G2 action. To be more specific, the difference in strength between the original and G2 action is less than the Maximum Probable Lot Mean for the cartridge being fired.
How much more pressure (CUP or psi) over an original action do you think you can load to in the G2 action? Do you have a piezoelectric transducer to measure such a difference?

My conversations with the various people I mentioned lead me to think that the difference was about 5k psi. Not a whole lot of difference overall, but 5k psi is enough to steer me one direction over another. Whether 5k psi makes a difference to anyone else is up to them.

Editing my post to note that the 5k psi was the chamber pressure gain at one particular case head diameter (.440"). It was not 5k psi across all cartridges/case head sizes.

I could be wrong on this, but this is how I look at the Contender/G2 changes.

Smith and Wesson brought out the Model 29 back in 1955 or 1956 depending on what you count as regular production. As I am sure you all know, since that time they have brought out different models of the 29 including a stainless version called the Model 629.

Now if a person was to shoot heavy 240 or 300 grain loads through a early model 29, it is likely to wear and go out of time faster than a late model 629. Both revolvers will shoot the .44 Magnum, but some of the changes that S&W made over the years (I am not talking about the crappy MIM hammer and trigger additions) increased the long term durability of the product.

Neither of the early or late model 29 or 629 are made to shoot a high pressure revolver load along the lines of a .454 Casull. To do that you would need a different S&W revolver with a more reinforced frame, say something like a X-Frame S&W or to keep the size comparison the same, something like a Ruger Super Redhawk.

If we keep the revolvers to the S&W line, I see the original Contender along the lines of the early to mid Model 29 revolvers. Yes, I know that they are N Frames, but not all N Frames are "magnums" ect, ect. I see the G2 as a late model 29 or 629, and I see the Encore as a X Frame.

There are not vast differences between what a early 29 or a late 629 can shoot, but there are some differences in how long they can shoot it without needing work.

If you put 55k psi loaded .44 Mag cartridges in either one, I am pretty sure that some bad things will happen, perhaps sooner rather then later. After all, they both still have proportionately large frame cutouts for the crane, the crane and cylinder lockups that aren't super strong, and both still have cylinder stop notches over the widest/thinnest point of each chamber.

Obviously you can put 55k psi cartridges in an X Frame revolver, and not have problems with the revolver for years as they were designed to handle cartridges that max out at 65k psi. That a double action revolver can do that is kind of freaky to me, but they can do that. I don't want to be holding one if a case gives, but that is another story.

I think anybody reading this is both knowledgeable and experienced enough to appreciate the points I am trying to get across here so I will stop here.

Thank you all for sharing your experiences with the Contender, and also the information about the .309 JDJ (I assume you meant .309 not .308 JDJ) and the .308 Bellm you ended up with. I worked out the backpressure for the .309 and it is way more than I would have thought a Contender or G2 would take.

I am not surprised that J.D. Jones stopped chambering it for the Contender/G2 frame. Wide case head/rim diameters and high pressures equal a no-no, but I think we covered that subject already earlier in the thread, and I am sure you all know about it already.

Thought about getting a G2 to keep my Encores company.

Steve.........