.41 magnum/ .41 fed magnum
- Thread starter dcvyn
- Start date
Mike Irwin
Staff
"I don't shoot such cartridges in my 41 mags."
Chances are that you wouldn't have them in shootable quantities anyway.
I don't know exactly when .41 Short Colt ammunition was dropped from production, but I'm not finding any evidence that it made it past World War I.
.41 Long Colt ammunition seems to have been dropped from production in 1939 in the run up to World War II.
There have been a couple of attempts by handloaders over the years to create a .41 Special cartridge, which is nothing more than a .41 Magnum case shortened with a reduced powder charge.
If you google .41 Special you'll find a number of articles. If you click images you'll see some homegrown projects and at least one chart showing some ballistics data.
Chances are that you wouldn't have them in shootable quantities anyway.
I don't know exactly when .41 Short Colt ammunition was dropped from production, but I'm not finding any evidence that it made it past World War I.
.41 Long Colt ammunition seems to have been dropped from production in 1939 in the run up to World War II.
There have been a couple of attempts by handloaders over the years to create a .41 Special cartridge, which is nothing more than a .41 Magnum case shortened with a reduced powder charge.
If you google .41 Special you'll find a number of articles. If you click images you'll see some homegrown projects and at least one chart showing some ballistics data.
I've had several 41's and 44's and blind folded there would be little chance of me being able to tell the difference in recoil between the two. To me the 41 (.410) and 44 (.429) are very close, except in variety of loaded ammo choices and component choices. If I were a handloader, and I am, I would go either way depending on the particular gun. if I didn't handload, I would go with the 44mag/44spl.
No.
Not in practical terms.
A little stronger? perhaps in absolute terms (but remember you are talking 0.022" difference in the chamber and 0.019" in the barrel) it might make a slight difference in the precise level where the gun blows up (numbers for example only) PERHAPS a .44 might let go at 170,000psi and the .41 at 175,000, but that is so far beyond normal as to make no difference.
On paper, the .41 is 15% less than the .44 for energy (pressures are about the same), so in theory the gun is taking 15% less pounding per round. That might make a difference in the service life, but if it does, I have never heard of anyone proving it, or seeing it happen in real life.
Not in practical terms.
A little stronger? perhaps in absolute terms (but remember you are talking 0.022" difference in the chamber and 0.019" in the barrel) it might make a slight difference in the precise level where the gun blows up (numbers for example only) PERHAPS a .44 might let go at 170,000psi and the .41 at 175,000, but that is so far beyond normal as to make no difference.
On paper, the .41 is 15% less than the .44 for energy (pressures are about the same), so in theory the gun is taking 15% less pounding per round. That might make a difference in the service life, but if it does, I have never heard of anyone proving it, or seeing it happen in real life.
Mike Irwin
Staff
Operating pressure is the factor that causes wear on the gun.
The 15% less is the energy of the bullet, which is a factor of bullet weight and velocity.
The 15% less is the energy of the bullet, which is a factor of bullet weight and velocity.
When buying ammo you have to be very careful. Lots of similar sounding names can cause confusion and even the store clerks will at times give you the wrong ammo. Write down what you want/need and take it with you to the store.
You going to like that 41 magnum Blackhawk. Good shooting
Gary
You going to like that 41 magnum Blackhawk. Good shooting
Gary
41 Special would have been the logical caliber historically, were it not for the timing of both Dirty Harry and LE's interest in higher cap semi-autos. The 41 Special can be suitably converted from sturdier 357 guns like the Ruger GP100.
That leaves the 41 as the largest caliber, medium frame gun with 6 rounds. Those who dress to conceal can carry this gun just like any other 357 designed to support the full up loads.
The advantage of the 41 Special is forgoing all the drama of 357 Magnum, which so many, including ammo manufacturers, load down in performance...a kind of 357 Special, if you will. Others simply substitute 38 S&W Special or the +p loading to get a gun they can manage without flinching or lighting up the area with blinding flash.
All that said, I enjoy my 41 Magnums along side my 44s and 357s. I believe I can tell the difference and sense a progression in force as well as the nature of the shooting experience.
That leaves the 41 as the largest caliber, medium frame gun with 6 rounds. Those who dress to conceal can carry this gun just like any other 357 designed to support the full up loads.
The advantage of the 41 Special is forgoing all the drama of 357 Magnum, which so many, including ammo manufacturers, load down in performance...a kind of 357 Special, if you will. Others simply substitute 38 S&W Special or the +p loading to get a gun they can manage without flinching or lighting up the area with blinding flash.
All that said, I enjoy my 41 Magnums along side my 44s and 357s. I believe I can tell the difference and sense a progression in force as well as the nature of the shooting experience.
Last edited:
OK... you are forcing me to post!
1) True enough, most .41 Magnums are chambered in guns that are also available in .44 Magnum. But many .44 Magnums could also be bought in .45 Colt and then loaded to above .44 Magnum levels. Some of those guns could even be bought in .454 and you could get even hotter loads. At some point, you have to ask "how much is enough" or at least "how much is more than I need or want to tolerate most of the time?" For instance you can enjoy shooting a four inch S&W M29. But that gun with full power .44 Magnums can really start to wear on your hands and wrists and elbows over time. (Ask my permanently aching right elbow.) Change that chambering and have the same gun in .41 Magnum, the M57. The gun will actually be a hair heavier since the holes are a bit smaller, more steel. And the rounds will recoil a bit less. In most cases, doing 100% of what you need done. If you gradually become one of the old guys who prefers something like a hard cast bullet at 1000-1200 fps, the only advantage of using the .44 Magnum is a piddling little bit of bullet diameter. .410 versus .429.
This might even be more true in a NM Ruger Blackhawk. The 4 5/8ths Blackhawk in .41 Magnum is a decent gun. A little bigger and heavier than I would prefer but it handles the cartridge well. Take that same gun and chamber it in .44 Magnum and you quickly realize why Bill created the Super Blackhawk for .44 Magnum. The standard Blackhawk with a short barrel quickly becomes a ".44 Special level" type of gun in my hands.
2) .41 Magnum suffers from the "no Special" issue. If you want to complain about how the original introduction "went wrong," this is the number one place to start. Remington and S&W should have introduced both a .41 Special and a .41 Magnum. Then loaded the .41 Special as the Police load. Even made some slightly smaller and lighter guns purely as .41 Specials. (This is pre-L frame but that size would be perfect for a .41 Special duty gun.) If guys wanted to buy the Magnums for flexibility but normally carry the Specials, that would work. (Same thing many did with .357 Magnum.)
3) You can get a custom gun today made for the wildcat .41 Special. I actually love OM Rugers in .357 Magnum size that have been converted to .44 Special. I have several. I always wanted to get one of the small Blackhawks converted to .41 Special but price and time kept driving me away. I still have an unconverted .357 OM in the safe that I tucked away for just such a project. But just a few months ago, a used OM Ruger came up for sale on the Ruger Forums. It was a custom gun by John Gallagher. Instead of going with .41 Special, he went all the way to .41 Magnum. .44 Magnum would have taken away too much steel... .44 Special would work, obviously. It had real ivory grips... I couldn't turn it down. I plan to shoot hard cast .41 Specials out of it but the capability is there for more. So, just like .44 Special, one of the advantages is that a smaller and lighter gun can be used compared to the larger cartridges.
Gregg
Mike Irwin
Staff
"That leaves the 41 as the largest caliber, medium frame gun with 6 rounds."
I've often said that I would love to have a J-frame sized gun chambered in an updated version of the .41 Logn Colt.
I don't know why it's always interested me so...
I've often said that I would love to have a J-frame sized gun chambered in an updated version of the .41 Logn Colt.
I don't know why it's always interested me so...
Wouldn't you get basically the same thing with .41 Special? Without the heeled bullet, etc.
I'm not a gunsmith and I don't even play one on TV but I don't think a J frame is big enough. A K frame... ok. Those little M19 snubbies always looked nice to me. Chamber that in .41 Special. I know an L frame would work... an M696 type gun but in .41 Special. They really should have done that from the beginning. The problems with that gun were caused by bullet diameter of .44 Special. Led to a forcing cone that was too thin. They are nice little guns but they would be even better in .41 Special.
Hmmm, I guess the problem with converting an M696 is the holes are already too big. Can't just drill it out. You would need to start with something equivalent in .38 Special/.357 Magnum. Or the factory could just make them from scratch. Of course then they would be new guns and have the dreaded hole in the side. So then I couldn't buy one. Sadly! (And the S&W collectors would have your head anyway if they caught you butchering a dash zero M696.)
Gregg
I'm not a gunsmith and I don't even play one on TV but I don't think a J frame is big enough. A K frame... ok. Those little M19 snubbies always looked nice to me. Chamber that in .41 Special. I know an L frame would work... an M696 type gun but in .41 Special. They really should have done that from the beginning. The problems with that gun were caused by bullet diameter of .44 Special. Led to a forcing cone that was too thin. They are nice little guns but they would be even better in .41 Special.
Hmmm, I guess the problem with converting an M696 is the holes are already too big. Can't just drill it out. You would need to start with something equivalent in .38 Special/.357 Magnum. Or the factory could just make them from scratch. Of course then they would be new guns and have the dreaded hole in the side. So then I couldn't buy one. Sadly! (And the S&W collectors would have your head anyway if they caught you butchering a dash zero M696.)
Gregg
Mike Irwin
Staff
No, it would, I believe, have to be in between the size of a J frame and Detective Special.
I'm glad to see this thread....for some reason I got this keen interest in the .41 magnum lately ( partly , because I never owned one I imagine ) ! On paper it seems to make sense for my needs ! I don't need big bear protection ,sounds plenty good for deer at reasonable range / required skill with practice , it won't be used for home or carry protection , and it fits right between the power of my current model 29 & 27 revolvers ! Maybe , this is just an excuse to buy another wheel gun...so be it ! 