22-rimfire
New member
If you get a 41 mag, please don't shoot it because you may end up like me getting rid of the 44 mags.
.41 magnum bullet - what happened?
- Thread starter chrisintexas
- Start date
buck460XVR
New member
The .41 like it's siblings the .357 and .44 are all easily handloaded for and all can be loaded light or hot. Fact is tho, the majority of folks that own handguns, outside of this forum, do not handload. Those folks favor those guns that have a wide variety of ammo options available. With the increased interest in reloading, there has been an increase interest in calibers like the .41 and .45Colt where factory ammo options are limited and pricey.
This has probably been pointed out already... I haven't read thru all the posts. The true diameter of a 41mag bullet is .41inch. The true diameter of a 44mag bullet is .429inch. The 44 mag lovers aren't shooting a 44.
So the difference in bullet diameter is only .19 inches, not 3/100 that might otherwise be attributed. Seems the slightly smaller diameter of the 41mag leaves a little more metal in the cylinder between charge holes making for a slightly stronger revolver especially in the S&W 57s/58s.
Count me as a big fan of the 41magnum. I own at least 6 S&Ws in that caliber.
So the difference in bullet diameter is only .19 inches, not 3/100 that might otherwise be attributed. Seems the slightly smaller diameter of the 41mag leaves a little more metal in the cylinder between charge holes making for a slightly stronger revolver especially in the S&W 57s/58s.
Count me as a big fan of the 41magnum. I own at least 6 S&Ws in that caliber.
I own all three; .357, .41mag., and .44mag. I will take my .41 for accuracy any day. My .41mag using my cast target reloads will knock out the 10 ring at 25 yards with no problem, and drop a deer in it's tracks with my HP/XTP reloads.
Those never experiencing the fun of owning this fine caliber is missing out.
Eric
Those never experiencing the fun of owning this fine caliber is missing out.
Eric
orionengnr
New member
Back before I handloaded, I owned .38, .357 and .44 revolvers.
Since I started handloading, the .44s went away. Likewise the .38s (although just recently, I bought another). I added .45LC and .41...and ever since, shoot one of those two almost exclusively when I shoot a revolver.
If I had to pick between the two, it would be very difficult. But I don't think I'd be disappointed either way.
"What happened?"
Some very knowledgeable and discerning shooters and loaders discovered the best-kept secret in revolverdom.
The great unwashed masses have yet to learn what we discovered some time ago..sorry about that.
Since I started handloading, the .44s went away. Likewise the .38s (although just recently, I bought another). I added .45LC and .41...and ever since, shoot one of those two almost exclusively when I shoot a revolver.
If I had to pick between the two, it would be very difficult. But I don't think I'd be disappointed either way.
"What happened?"
Some very knowledgeable and discerning shooters and loaders discovered the best-kept secret in revolverdom.
The great unwashed masses have yet to learn what we discovered some time ago..sorry about that.
That is why handloaders are also known as "shooters", whereas those who do not handload are known as, "gun owners". Save for the wealthy, handgun owners who do not handload (and cast bullets), cannot afford to shoot much and do not actually shoot as much as they think that they do.
The .41 is an excellent vehicle for cast lead bullets, albeit the mould choices are much less than for the .44.
With a .44 Magnum or a .357 Magnum you get 2, yes 2, two guns in one! You don't get that with a .41 Magnum. You only get 1 gun. A .41 Special should have been introduced at the same time as the Magnum round, and sold at a price competitive with .38 and .44 Special loads. Winchester, Marlin and Rossi should have introduced lever guns at the same time the revolvers were made. Any new caliber should be introduced as a complete package, with all the bases covered. As it is, regardless of its merits, the .41 Magnum is the answer to a question very few asked.
Remington introduced the .41 Magnum cartridge in cooperation with S&W. They had no control or influence with Winchester, Marlin and Rossi in regard to what the chamberings were offered in their products. Aside from that, the .41 was envisioned as a more effective police revolver weapon first and one that could be used to shoot game.
Lite/Hot
And I've loaded light and hot for all three. The .41 just seems to adapt well to varying velocity and pressure levels. Sometimes I've had to work for an accurate load for the other two. With the .41, I find that I have to work at finding a load/power level that it won't shoot well in any of the several revolvers I've owned.
There's somethin' about mating a 4.62 inch Blackhawk and the .41 Magnum cartridge that makes the whole greater than the sum of its parts.
I suspect that the match was ordained or somethin'. Just one of those things that was meant to be.
We really oughta have a secret handshake and a "sign" so we can spot each other from a distance.
And I've loaded light and hot for all three. The .41 just seems to adapt well to varying velocity and pressure levels. Sometimes I've had to work for an accurate load for the other two. With the .41, I find that I have to work at finding a load/power level that it won't shoot well in any of the several revolvers I've owned.
There's somethin' about mating a 4.62 inch Blackhawk and the .41 Magnum cartridge that makes the whole greater than the sum of its parts.
I suspect that the match was ordained or somethin'. Just one of those things that was meant to be.
We really oughta have a secret handshake and a "sign" so we can spot each other from a distance.
Last edited:
That mirrors the experiences I had with the .41's I have owned. I had a M58, The Ruger 3-screw, a 657 six-inch and a M57 eight and three-eights inch. I notice that when I used a plain-base cast bullet in both the M58 and the 657 with Unique powder, I could load down as far as 6.5 grains for fast double-action work and they would both shoot that load accurately and hotter loads accurately by just arbitrarily (not worked up or down to find the sweet-spot) selecting the weight of the powder...6.5, 7, 7.5, 8, etc. Those two guns especially, did not seem to care where I settled the load of Unique. For hunting loads then, using the gas checked 212 grain Lyman bullet, and Blue Dot (years before Alliant issued its warning about the .41 Alliant Blue Dot in the .41 mag.), all four did not seem to be picky with that powder either.
Another thing I liked about the .41 is that it seemed to be just the right size for manipulating with my fingers when hand loading. 9MM-way to small in length and diameter, 38-357 too small in diameter, 44 spl and Mag, .45 Colt, all to big in diameter. However, the .41 seemed to have just the right size to rapidly insert in a shell holder (for years I used a single stage) and remove it quickly. It was not as evident in my Dillion 550b, but still was fast to grab out of the container and get it into the shell plate. Likewise the .41 cast bullets were quicker to get in and out of my Lyman bullet size/lube press also. That became apparent to me when using the old punch-press technique of placing a bullet into the die with my left hand, sizing and lubing it, removing it with my right hand while picking up another bullet to be sized with my left...using both hands in the process for speed. The ease of handling will become apparent if one compares the .41 size/lube process with that of the those "cone shaped" 9MM lead bullets... I hated having to work with them.
.41
I've wondered why that seems to be the rule rather than the exception with the cartridge, and whether it simply comes down to the ratio of case capacity to caliber...length to diameter. Everything just seems to have fallen into place with the .41 because it's not sensitive to pressure levels and load density.
Purposeful engineering or happy coincidence? Don't know/don't care. I'll always have a .41 as long as I have a say in the matter.
I've wondered why that seems to be the rule rather than the exception with the cartridge, and whether it simply comes down to the ratio of case capacity to caliber...length to diameter. Everything just seems to have fallen into place with the .41 because it's not sensitive to pressure levels and load density.
Purposeful engineering or happy coincidence? Don't know/don't care. I'll always have a .41 as long as I have a say in the matter.
The .41 Magnum is a classic example of a fine cartridge that just never quite caught on. The reasons are numerous, and fairly clear in hindsight, like a lot of things.
There was a failure in the gun community to have a unified vision of what the round ought to be, and because of it, neither camp got the success they envisioned.
For quite some time the major gun writers of the era (and especially those who had been lawmen) had been writing about what would be the perfect police revolver. In general they felt it ought to be a .40 or .41 caliber, shooting a 200/210gr bullet at 950-1000fps or so. They felt that would be the best blend of size, weight and power.
Guns were made, and marketed, and so was ammo. But what was specifically made, and when played a big part in public acceptance and popularity. S&W made a top of the line gun for sporting use, and a fixed sight "duty" model intended for the police. Quite a few guns were bought by the police for testing.
The trouble at the time was, that for reasons known only to the folks at Remington, they concentrated on producing the magnum ammo first, and didn't get supplies of the lower velocity "police" load ammo on the market until well after many police agencies had tested the .41 (with magnum ammo) and decided it wasn't for them. And since the police weren't wanting them, not many other folks did, either.
On the sporting side of the house, the .41 was accurate, and had a flatter long range trajectory than the .44 Magnum, some people took to it right away. Others didn't, because the guns were the same as the .44 Mag, and the .41 was "15% less". And even though the .41 was "15% less" many people couldn't really tell much difference in recoil, and when Dirty Harry came out just a few years after the .41 mag, the .44 fever that swept the nation's shooters just made double sure the .41 never got the limelight.
Its not dead, the .41 Mag lives as a niche round, keeping enough sales to stay, if only barely. Well loved by the people who know it well, and mostly ignored by everyone else.
There was a failure in the gun community to have a unified vision of what the round ought to be, and because of it, neither camp got the success they envisioned.
For quite some time the major gun writers of the era (and especially those who had been lawmen) had been writing about what would be the perfect police revolver. In general they felt it ought to be a .40 or .41 caliber, shooting a 200/210gr bullet at 950-1000fps or so. They felt that would be the best blend of size, weight and power.
Guns were made, and marketed, and so was ammo. But what was specifically made, and when played a big part in public acceptance and popularity. S&W made a top of the line gun for sporting use, and a fixed sight "duty" model intended for the police. Quite a few guns were bought by the police for testing.
The trouble at the time was, that for reasons known only to the folks at Remington, they concentrated on producing the magnum ammo first, and didn't get supplies of the lower velocity "police" load ammo on the market until well after many police agencies had tested the .41 (with magnum ammo) and decided it wasn't for them. And since the police weren't wanting them, not many other folks did, either.
On the sporting side of the house, the .41 was accurate, and had a flatter long range trajectory than the .44 Magnum, some people took to it right away. Others didn't, because the guns were the same as the .44 Mag, and the .41 was "15% less". And even though the .41 was "15% less" many people couldn't really tell much difference in recoil, and when Dirty Harry came out just a few years after the .41 mag, the .44 fever that swept the nation's shooters just made double sure the .41 never got the limelight.
Its not dead, the .41 Mag lives as a niche round, keeping enough sales to stay, if only barely. Well loved by the people who know it well, and mostly ignored by everyone else.
olderndirt
Inactive
41 Mag
I love the 41 mag. and have been shooting and hunting with it since the late seventies. I have a Smith Model 57 in 6" that I use for shooting paper and carry a Ruger 4 5/8 when hunting. Shoots light and heave bullets really good.
I also carry a 1894 Marlin a lot of the time. I never want to be without this round.
I love the 41 mag. and have been shooting and hunting with it since the late seventies. I have a Smith Model 57 in 6" that I use for shooting paper and carry a Ruger 4 5/8 when hunting. Shoots light and heave bullets really good.
I also carry a 1894 Marlin a lot of the time. I never want to be without this round.
.41 mag- what happened to what?
"Never caught on" Every time I hear that expression, it makes me laugh! It caught on with me the first time I shot it! It caught on to those that liked it! I owned and shot a Ruger Redhawk in .44 caliber and it always felt too big to carry and kicked quite a bit! In 1984, I sold my .44 and bought a .41. Every time I fire it, it feels like a potent revolver should. Bottom line is both the 44 and the 41 are potent rounds and both caught on with shooters. Who cares how many? A hit with a .41 is better than a miss with .454! Try both! The biggest difference between a .44 and a .41 is in the mind of the shooter!
"Never caught on" Every time I hear that expression, it makes me laugh! It caught on with me the first time I shot it! It caught on to those that liked it! I owned and shot a Ruger Redhawk in .44 caliber and it always felt too big to carry and kicked quite a bit! In 1984, I sold my .44 and bought a .41. Every time I fire it, it feels like a potent revolver should. Bottom line is both the 44 and the 41 are potent rounds and both caught on with shooters. Who cares how many? A hit with a .41 is better than a miss with .454! Try both! The biggest difference between a .44 and a .41 is in the mind of the shooter!
Tom Matiska
New member
+1 on the need for a companion 41 special.
A 40 Mag(and Special) would have been more interesting. The 41 is so close to the 44 Mag(more like 42 or 43 Mag) that it's offerings differ little. Something closer to the middle of the 38 to 44 gap leaves more room for cylinder wall thickness in smaller frames.
A 40 Mag(and Special) would have been more interesting. The 41 is so close to the 44 Mag(more like 42 or 43 Mag) that it's offerings differ little. Something closer to the middle of the 38 to 44 gap leaves more room for cylinder wall thickness in smaller frames.