41 Mag vs. 44 Mag

A link to the site where .41 Special brass is sold would end that argument.
Click to expand...
http://www.midwayusa.com/product/856186


In context, fourbore is entirely correct.
Click to expand...
I never said it was commercially available, either as loaded ammunition or factory made guns. It was said that it doesn't exist and that is patently false, in any context. It has existed since Hamilton Bowen first chambered a custom 5.5" Colt Single Action Army in the cartridge, long before Starline made brass for it. Yes, it is relatively obscure and not many people know about it but to say that "it doesn't exist" is simply wrong. You of all people should agree, since you actually own a 41 Special.

I'd be fairly certain that any 41 Magnum lever rifle will digest 41 Special. It would seem to me that the scarcity of rifles capable of firing 41 Special is equal to those capable of firing 41 Magnum.
 
I've always been attracted to unusual calibers. My friend who runs a gun shop told me he hadn't seen a 41 mag in forever, they're definitely not common. Ammo for it is like 50-60 bucks for 50 rounds.

I've always been curious how a 41 would compare to a 357 or a 44 special. Bet it would be a sweet spot.
 
Hated the one d/a .44Mag I owned & didn't much care for the other I shot. Couple that with my aversion to all the recoil & unnecessary sturm & drang of the .44 & the .41 is my "Goldilocks" chambering.

Expensive ammo? Sure, if you only shoot store-bought & what serious shooter doesn't roll his own? I can load 200rds of 215gr Keiths at 1350fps (chrony'd) for the cost of 20rds of Win's 175 Silvertips at 1250fps (claimed).

'N why do you need a .41Spcl? Just load some 215gr LSWCs over 8gr or Unique & call it good. Want more? Shouldn't be too hard to duplicate Buffalo Bore's 230gr at 1450fps; they even offer a 265gr load at 1350fps. I've got a 500 box of 240gr Keiths that I plan on running at ~1100fps from me Bisley SBH Hunter & just found out my LGS not only casts boolits, but also has a set of .411 275gr LWFN molds that I'd like to play with.

IMO, the .41 is easier shooting than a .44 & does 95% of what a .44 does but without all the drama.

I know, opinions are like rectums- everyone has one & most of 'em stink. For my purposes, the .41 gives up nothing, in real terms, to the .44. Not hating on the .44, it's just not for me.

'N if I want more than I can coax outta my .41s, I'll go .45LC or .480 Ruger.
 
I find the recoil of .41 and .44 magnum to be about the same. .44 might be a little harder but to me it wasn't enough to know I wasn't just imagining the difference.
 
Wow, an old necro thread that died, got revived, then died again, and is back in full swing.

Actually, there's some interesting and relevant back-n-forth here, so I'll add my .02-cents.

I'm a 10mm guy in autos, but the .41 Mag cartridge in revolvers is somewhat similar due to its versatility of use. Hunting, self-defense, or Sunday afternoon fun at the range blasting away on bowling pins with hardcast loads, all without the excessive recoil and abuse of the .44 (at least over extended shooting sessions).

However, unlike the 10mm, which has a huge range of bullet-weights & styles to draw on, whether in factory ammo or for handloading, the .41 is stymied by a relatively small selection of bullet-weights and styles.

Not so for the .44. Projectiles are available in a huge array of weights and configurations, and are cheaper to purchase in volume.

As a "woods walking/boonie-packing gun" in the lower 48, the .41 & .44 are tied. If I was living in Alaska, or up there on vacation, say, to go fishing for salmon off the river banks, and couldn't take my 10mm G20, I'd pack something in .44Mag like one of the old S&W Mountain 4" wheelies or a 4.2" Ruger RedHawk, either one being carried in a shoulder or center-chest holster.

As far as shooting the "Special" versions of each of these magnum cartridges, it's a wash. Take your pick: 44mag/.44Special, .41mag/.41Spec., .357mag/.38Spec ---> 10mm AUTO/.40S&W (i.e., in a S&W 610).

You can either download the magnum cartridge itself, and skip shooting its little-brother (Special) altogether, ... or you can buy or reload the Special-version of the cartridge. Either way, none of these has an advantage over the others in that regard.

All that said, I still like odd balls, whether in handguns or long guns. And I've always had a fondness for the .41Magnum. So I reload hardcast boolits for mine at "police load" velocities, and just enjoy the range time with it.

Obligatory pic: S&W Model 58 - shown with the 210gn lead FN police load x 6, a/k/a "thug thumpers."

 
Last edited:
This post has died 3 times...

Can or do any of you actually READ before you respond?:eek:

Guess if you want you can keep kicking a dead dog, why noy start a NEW thread?:rolleyes:

T.
 
Why? So we can enjoy the litany of "use the search function" & the "BTDT. Why do we need another thread on this?" responses?
 
'N why do you need a .41Spcl?
Click to expand...
Because it fits into smaller guns. The smallest being the Single Six.


However, unlike the 10mm, which has a huge range of bullet-weights & styles to draw on
Click to expand...
Never heard that before. Always thought the 10mm was severely lacking in bullet selection.
 
Never heard that before. Always thought the 10mm was severely lacking in bullet selection.
Click to expand...

Where've you been, Jack? :rolleyes:

The 10mm's selection of bullet-weights runs the gamut (in grains) from 135, 150, 155, 165, 170, 175, 180 (pretty ubiquitous, this weight), 190, 200, and in hardcast, 210, 215, 220, and (more rare) 230, although 220gns seems to be the 10mm's "sweet spot" in hardcast weights.

And at least the first ten or eleven of those bullet-weights you can buy loaded in factory ammo.

In terms of bullet-configuration, you can get 10mm/.40-cal bullets in JHP, JSP, FMJ-FP, TMC, frangible, or hardcast (coated or uncoated).
 
Last edited:
I have a 44 mag and a 41 mag. Like them both but I reload and I cast bullets. If i did not load, the 44 mag is the more practical choice.
 
OK, I guess this thread is fully back to life so I'll more fully respond than I did in Nov (and it is a good topic I suppose so it makes sense that it fully revived once it got back going).

I definitely like .41mag over .44mag based solely on the shooting characteristics of the gun/chambering. In essentially the same gun, I find the .41mag much more comfortable to shoot. In a 4" S&W N-frame I find most .44mag loadings to be too much to comfortably shoot more than a few cylinders, and if I'm forcing myself to keep shooting that takes a lot of the fun out of it. I can shoot a 4" S&W N-frame .41mag pretty much all day, in fact it is more comfortable to me than a .357mag in a 3" or 4" K-frame (which to me are the sweet spots for a .357mag).

While the .44mag is a bit more powerful, the .41mag is still quite powerful and can do most of the same jobs. In fact, I'm not a hunter, my guns are for target shooting/plinking and for self defense. For those uses, in my book the .41mag is superior. I live on the East Coast so for bear defense I am only likely to encounter black bears, and most likely not a very large one. Bear pepper spray is my first line of defense, and in a gun, .41mag should work as well as anything on those sized bears. So, for me, the extra recoil, blast and overall drama of a .44mag isn't really worth it.

Of course, in the real world, ammo availability is a big issue (and the main reason I don't have a .41mag anymore, though I greatly miss the S&W 57 I used to have). I work a ton of hours, so while I do sometimes reload, if I only shot ammo I loaded myself I wouldn't do much shooting. Many people don't reload (more people do not reload than do). So, ammo availability matters, and there aren't all that many loads out there, and they are expensive. That is mainly why I now own a .45LC (more ammo availability, though cost isn't much better) for the jobs for which I had the .41mag (camping gun, occasional carry, fun at the range) and with its lower blast it is even more suitable for home defense and thus even more versatile than either the .41mag or .44mag.
 
Look at this new Ruger GP-100 in 44 SPL

If the 44 Magnum blast is the issue, a 44 SPL that can handle warm (not .44 Mag) handloads,is an option.
Handy size gun
I'm not sure,but if the GP-100 can handle "level three" loads,we are over 1000 fps with a 250 gr bullet,allowing some for the short bbl.

It matters what your goal is,but between 44 mag and 44 Mag....is an un-mag,44 spl
http://www.goodrichfamilyassoc.org/44_Special_Articles/Brian Pearce on the 44 Special.pdf
 
Last edited:
Were I to buy another big handgun, it'd be a .41 Rem Mag. It bullets' sectional densities are superior to .429 sectional densities.

That's why when I'm fishing in black bear country, I load 180 grain .357 rounds in my gun. I want bone breaking ability and deep penetration. But my first response to black bears is avoidance. I've seen a lot of 'em in the Eastern Sierra. We always give them right-of-way. I don't want to kill a black bear, but I sure as hell ain't about to allow one to even think about harming one of my kids.
 
agtman,
a 1911 in 10MM might just be the best trail gun going.
Click to expand...

True, unless you feel the need for more ammo capacity; then there are the 10mm Glock 20 and Glock 40 MOS, with the latter combing the benefits of a longer barrel/longer sight radius with the option to mount a mini-RDS.

I'm cool with either set-up. :cool:
 
I have a S&W 4" SS "Mountain Gun" in .41 magnum. I reload. I'd take a .41 over a .44 magnum any day. I've taken a few deer with it at under 50 yds. It works great using Hornady XTP bullets in my handloads. If I were to be forced to buy factory ammo to shoot, I guess I'd go with a .45 Colt.
 
The 10mm's selection of bullet-weights runs the gamut (in grains) from 135, 150, 155, 165, 170, 175, 180 (pretty ubiquitous, this weight), 190, 200, and in hardcast, 210, 215, 220, and (more rare) 230, although 220gns seems to be the 10mm's "sweet spot" in hardcast weights.
Click to expand...
99% of which are self defense bullets that are good for little else. The hard cast 220 and 230 bullets are the most useful.
 
99% of which are self defense bullets that are good for little else. The hard cast 220 and 230 bullets are the most useful.
Click to expand...

Jack, your comment referenced the 10mm as "lacking in bullet selection," which is quantitative. "Usefulness" wasn't mentioned.

That said, many 10mm folks who hunt, say, with a 6.5" S&W 610 revolver or, now, the 6" Glock 40 MOS, find the 180gn JSP loads at high velocity quite useful on deer and hogs.

I've even read of coyotes being shot at 50-yds or so with the old Silvertip 175gn HPs. I agree that 10mm bullets under 180gns are generally marketed for home and self-defense, training use, target work, or plinking.

I also agree with you on the hardcast heavies, which I like very much. And If I lived in Alaska, those are the only bullets my 10mms would be loaded with.
 
That said, many 10mm folks who hunt, say, with a 6.5" S&W 610 revolver or, now, the 6" Glock 40 MOS, find the 180gn JSP loads at high velocity quite useful on deer and hogs.
Click to expand...
I find them to open up too quickly.

The 220 and 230 hardcasts are heavy for the 10mm but are not really heavy for their diameter. More comparable to standard weight bullets for revolver cartridges. The 10mm only really becomes useful at 200 grains.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top