.41 magnum bullet - what happened?

I'm no expert on the .41 but it seems like a spiffy round. I think earlier posters are correct about the marketing under-serving the product. We saw the same thing more recently with the .327. What's worse is that after the marketing undercut, the low resulting sales caused a market contraction and poisoned the well. It meant distributors cared less and eventually, manufacturers cared less. These blunders have led some excellent rounds to fall short of their full potential. Now they languish in the shadows of the firearms community where more expensive customization takes up where manufacturing leaves off.
 
I am a .41Mag fan.

That said, IMHO part of its downfall is the initial offering in the N frame. That is a big gun for police carry....there is no advantage in a frame big enough to hold a 44Mag.

Conversely, I have a 41Mag Taurus Tracker in a .357Mag frame size. Same smaller size as a 357....considerably more power...what's not to like?
 
Another reason for the 41 mag not being super popular is that it came out in 1964, long after both the 357 magnum (1935) and the 44 magnum (1956). Its a compromise between those 2 cals, which of course can also be achieved by handloading a 44 magnum, and loading it down a little.

That said, IMHO part of its downfall is the initial offering in the N frame. That is a big gun for police carry....there is no advantage in a frame big enough to hold a 44Mag.
Click to expand...

I think its an advantage that a N frame 41 magnum (57, 58, 657) will not blow your hand off. What I mean by that is, when the 41 mag came out, the only S&W frame which could handle it was the N frame. I can acknowledge you saying the N frame is big and heavy, but it was necessary.
 
I have never understood the 41 Magnum. Supposedly meant to fill the gap between the 357 and the 44, the recoil is much closer to the latter than to the former making it too much for many shooters. Many 41 owners brag on their guns, but the truth is there is nothing the 41 can do the 44 doesn't do about 15% better. Meanwhile, 41 ammo is harder to find and 41 bullets for reloading are less comprehensive. The 41 failed as a cop gun (the 58 is a gun that has no real purpose as far as I can tell) due to size, weight and recoil and it couldn't equal the 44 for sporting use. I have no idea why it has survived at all. Except as I said, some guys love it.

Having said all that, I confess to owning a pair of S&Ws in 41 Magnum. Don't ask me why I bought them. The price was right and I wanted it. Explains about 95% of my gun purchases.

Got this in 1988 for $189. Still haven't figured out a use for it. Notice mine has the correct "Modified Magna" stocks. Only the 58 and the 1980 M520 used this style in the N frame line and most 58s are found with incorrect wood.

standard.jpg



Got this off Gunbroker a few years back for $325. It's shiny and I love the shiny guns.

standard.jpg
 
The other primary reason why the round failed to gain popularity with LE was that the initially available guns were all expensive and heavy large-frame revolvers.
Click to expand...
I seem to remember that the cost of a M57 had the same list price as a M29...but could be wrong. In any event the price did no keep me from buying a M58 and a M57.
 
Forty One

Another die-hard .41 Magnum fan here. I consider it to be overall the best heavy revolver round to come down the pike.

I've never thought that the old "Police Load" brought too much recoil to the table, being pretty much equivalent to a 158-grain loading in a K-Frame .357 revolver...but it's no powder puff.

A lot of the reason that it never caught on with its intended LEO market was that it's only chambered in large-framed revolvers. It's big and it's heavy. For some officers with smaller hands, it was hard to manage. For some of smaller stature, it was hard to carry for an entire shift, and even the big guys complained of its weight.
 
I've never thought that the old "Police Load" brought too much recoil to the table, being pretty much equivalent to a 158-grain loading in a K-Frame .357 revolver...but it's no powder puff.
Click to expand...
Nevertheless, I remember articles over the years in the gun rags that stated just that. They maintained that, what was needed to enable the .41 M58's to do the job that they were designed for, was an even milder load than the "police load". Elmer Keith would not have likely agreed with that though.
 
I guess that I am just not all that recoil sensitive, I think that my M29 with a 4" barrel is just fine with 240 grain loads. I just recently acquired a M57 and so far I really like it. I am still in the process of finding the load that I like the best in my gun, but what kind of wimp thinks that the .41 mag kicks too hard?

BTW I am 61 years old and I do have some arthritis in my hands and wrists.
 
...but what kind of wimp thinks that the .41 mag kicks too hard?
Click to expand...
The kind who evaluates from the perspective of a gun intended for police use. You know, where one shoots double-action and has to recover from the recoil and get back on target. Shooting for fun, shooting single-action, hunting deer, etc., then the .41's recoil is not much of a concern.

This is not to disparage the .41's, I have had three and the .41 is my most favorite cartridge. I have used a .41 for local bowling pin competitions and have taken a large White Tail doe shooting double-action. I shot the deer with a moderately heavy load of Blue Dot (before the warning not to use B.D.), under a Lyman 212 gas checked cast bullet. All other shooting, a very light cast bullet load (240 grain, round nose plain base, Saeco mould, over only 6.5 Unique).

I found that due to my experience shooting so much double action, than I could get back on track and hit the deer three times more as she ran. Nevertheless, the key word is "experience". I shot that .41 constantly and had years of practice with it, where as the policemen I have know, and observed shooting were not "shooters", despite their occupations. That is the central issue with the .41 comes...did it recoil too much for rapid-fire use by the average policeman? And to that, the gun writers who wrote about why the .41 did not catch on as a police weapon stated, that it recoiled too much to be controlled in rapid fire...even with the police load.
 
It is an inbetweener round that has rounds above and below it that can do any job better. It really does not fill a need better handled by something else.
Marketing gimmik that failed.
 
I think the real reason it didn't take is because both the other magnum rounds were based on a shorter established round, eg the .357 was based on the .38 spl., and the .44 magnum was based on the .44 spl.
This has other advantages, like using .38 spl for practice in a .357 magnum, etc.
 
caz and Rifleman took the words from my mouth for the most part.

Why is the Chevy 350 the most popular small-block V8 engine in the world? Because it has the best bone-stock mix of power and economy of any GM engine ever made for full-size cars and light trucks. The 350 is flat-out the cheapest engine to buy and build fast, partly due to its' being produced by the millions since the late 60s. EVERYONE makes go-fast parts for the 350 and it is NEVER going to go away.

What does a 350 have to do with this discussion? I've found that in any given hobby there's a subset of folks that like to prove conventional wisdom wrong. They like to show that their particular "favorite" is just as good, if not better than whatever is most popular. For whatever reason, they chafe at doing what everyone else is doing and insist on going their own way. Is there anything particularly wrong with that? No, but when they start beating the "mine is better, mine is better nahnahnahnahnahnah" drum, it does get a bit annoying.

Props to the guy that builds a Chevy 283 to have insane power and torque, which I can appreciate but the question remains - why? I know, I know, "because I can." Good for you dude, good for you. And how much pain and effort did you put into finding the right pistons for that? And how much more $$ did you spend per HP than the same operation on a 350? If you're happy with the results, I guess that's all that matters, but please don't pooh-pooh my mildly built 350 that lays down consistent, fast times at the local track just because it's the same size engine "everyone else" has.

I'm sure the .41 Magnum is great. If it works for you, even better. I'll stick with my 357 and 44 magnums, thank you.
 
re:

I'm sure the .41 Magnum is great. If it works for you, even better. I'll stick with my 357 and 44 magnums, thank you.
Click to expand...

Love it!

More .41s for we who know it well enough to understand that it's more than just a "Big .357" or a 'little .44" especially if the revolver is a 4.62-inch Blackhawk. It strikes just the right balance of portability, power, and recoil and if loaded to its full potential, there's little that a .44 can do that a .41 can't. It's also dead simple to load accurate ammunition for it, from 700 fps plinkers to full-bore snot knockers. Use a good bullet and pick a powder.

It has a faithful following for several reasons...none of which include "Because I can" or "Mine is better than yours nanananahhhhh."

For the record, I'll never be without a .357 Magnum revolver as long as I have a say in the matter...but I don't even have a .44 after having owned more than a dozen. For some reason, they always seemed to go away, while the .41s stayed.
 
There was no need to fill so it died on the vine. Nothing wrong with it but the .44 will do anything the .41 will do and more.
 
More .41s for we who know it well enough to understand that it's more than just a "Big .357" or a 'little .44" especially if the revolver is a 4.62-inch Blackhawk...
Click to expand...
Had one of those, a 3-screw Blackhawk. Always carried it when walking along the Pere Marquette River area that was across the road from my land. It was just the "right size". Sold it to a college who liked its effect on Southern Michigan deer. The barrel being the same length as the ejector housing, made it a joy to handle.
 
I think the real reason it didn't take is because both the other magnum rounds were based on a shorter established round, eg the .357 was based on the .38 spl., and the .44 magnum was based on the .44 spl.
This has other advantages, like using .38 spl for practice in a .357 magnum, etc
Click to expand...
And to those of us who hand load (and cast), that is a moot point. Most of the .41 Magnum ammo I shot over the years was very lightly loaded...."41 Specials", sans carbon rings in the chambers from shooting shorter rounds.
 
Before I start I'll apologize for any typos due to being on my phone. Okay now on to the question. Most have already stated why the .41 mag never took off. But one also has to realize that Americans are all about having the biggest or fastest whatever. So to that end the .44 fans will always talk down about the .41 mag. However the reality of it is the .41 will do anything the .44 can when properly loaded.

Then you have the .357 fans who like to talk about having lighter revolvers and the ability to buy ammo for less. To that end I always reply with so what the .41 is a true big bore not a wannabe. Contrary to what some will lead others to believe ammo for the .41 is cheaper than for the .44. The components such as bullets are also cheaper. Folks like to say well the .41 can't throw heavy bullets like the .44. Who really cares? Since when did standard weight big bore bullets stop being enough for game such as deer, pig, and black bear sized game?

They were enough for Elmer and they're still enough today so that excuse doesn't hold any water. Point is the .41 is a fine cartridge but people won't give it a chance except those of us that are in the know.
 
Wow, heated discussion. I like the 350 Chevy comparison. I have a 289, but no 41 magnum, just 44 and 357. maybe I need one? Maybe I need a 350 Chev? Maybe both!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top