41 vs 44

M

m0ntels

New member
Is there any reason to get a 44 magnum if I have a 41 mag already besides the "because I can" reason? The only real difference I seem to see besides the low recoil of the 41 is that the 44 has a wider selection of bullets. Does the 44 have any real advantage over the 41? I reload so ammo availability isnt a problem. Just trying to prioritize my wish list a bit.

Randy
 
"because I can"

That's probably the best reason for adding a .44 to your collection.
If I didn't already have one or the other, I would pick a .44 for the ammo availability and bullet selection reasons you already stated.
Otherwise I think the differences between a .41 and a .44 are pretty small and are primarily theoretical rather than real world practical.
 
The only advantage is the abillity to load a much heavier bullet in the 44. I have both and don't load the super heavy bullets, so don't see much difference.
 
My experiences with the larger magnums have been with my 41 Blackhawk and my dad's 44 Redhawk. They seem to be similar to each other, but even with the SR feeling heavier, there is such a different amount of percieved recoil beween the 2. I have Hogue grips and he has factory wood, but it still feels comfortable just holding it. I wouldnt think that would make the big difference, but why is there such a different feeling between the 2 when the cartridges are so ballistically similar? I dont even think it's my mind playing tricks because I expected the 41 to kick like a mule because I shot the 44 before I ever got the 41. The 41 feels like a 38sp + P to me and I just cant see why the 41 didnt catch on when it seems to be the best of the 44 mixed with the best of the 357.

Every day I get more and more in love with this caliber. I try to learn as much as I can about it and I wish I had more brass so I could shoot more than the 50 rounds at a time that came along with the pistol. I just cant get free brass like I can with all my other pistols...lol. Equipment to start loading 7.5 Swiss is taking priority though right now. I seem to have a thing for obscure calibers. :p

Randy
 
Recoil and the fit/feel of any firearm go hand in hand and is very subjective.
Blackhawks and Redhawks are two distinctly different guns so the feel of the recoil will also be different.
The best way to get a true comparison between a .41 and a .44 would be to fire a Blackhawk like yours in .44.
I like Hogue grips and have them on most of my S&W's mainly because the finger grooves on the stock rubber grips don't even come close to fitting my fingers. They do make a noticeable difference in softening recoil.
I've fired several Blackhawks (mostly .44's) and I find I prefer the Bisley, but not by a wide margin.
 
Since you reload the only reason to get a .44mag is the "Cause I can" option. There are heavy weight bullets up to 300 grains for the .41mag and light weights down to 150 grains. You won't be able to drive them quite as hard as the .44, but sectional density will make up some of that ground.
I have a couple of .44mags just cuz, but my shooting irons are .41mags.
 
Quote : Educate me, what is the best of the 44 and the 357?

The best of the .44 - High Energy

The best of the .357 - Medium frame

The .41 - High energy in a medium frame.
 
The performance differences between the 41 and the 44 arent really worth the small gains you might see. The 44 has more and better factory loadings to suit most any kind of needs while the 41 has maybe a small handful at most. Heavier bullets can be used in the 44 which make it a little more usable for larger game and theirs a MUCH wider variety of types if you do reload. But as for big performance gains...there just not there...sure the 44 still puts out more power than the 41 ever will, but its not a big enough jump to make a dramatic difference. If you need more than a 41, i would go 454 or 500 mag.
 
if you really need something bigger than a 41 mag you really need a rifle. with either factory or reloads you can do anything that needs to be done with a handgun. there are 175 , 210 , 240 & 250 in factory 41 mag loads. for reloads there are bullets from 170 to 290. you are taking advantage of the better sectional density of the 41 mag bullets, regardless of caliber no revolver is more than a 100 yard gun if you are a really good shot and have a scope on it.
 
The best of the .44 - High Energy

The best of the .357 - Medium frame

The .41 - High energy in a medium frame
Click to expand...

Not if we're talking Smith and Wessons. Every Smith .41 I've ever seen (not many admittedly) has been built on the N-frame. Same as the .44 Magnum, .45 Colt, .45 ACP, et al. I've always been told the .41 is noticeably less severe to shoot than the .44, but have never had the chance to see if this is true.
 
There's not a lot of difference between .41 and .44 when one peeks under the covers. If you reload you have a fairly good choice of bullet weights from 170gr to 290gr and there are a slew of powders too. You can expand this if you cast your own bullets by having LSWC available in a broad range of weights.

The .41 is .410 diameter while the .44 is really .429 (i.e. 43 caliber). So bullet size isn't that big of a factor. Yet, when I've tested .41 and .44 rounds of comparable power, the .41 Mag gives better penetration (although sometimes marginally). Given the softer perceived recoil of the .41 I'd opt for it over the .44 every time (but I'm biased too!). :D

.44 Mag fans brag about how superior the .44 is due to a large selection of bullet weights & styles, the power range from mouse-fart loads to full-bore-gonzo Elephant killer magnums. But the .41 Mag is catching up. There are a number of published loads for the .41 -- though most manuals only show the most popular loadings - 175, 210/220 and 240 gr. -- and you can develop your own by careful experimentation. Best of all, you can down-load the round into an effective "light" load for CCW guns like the snubby Taurus 415.

I've heard of, but unable to confirm, some bwana used a .41 Magnum with a 6.5" barrel to bag an African Lion :eek: about 10 years ago or so, using a 220grain solid projectile. Either he has more hangin' than I do, was very lucky, or knew what he was doing.
 
Any ideas how well the 41 would actually work from the Taurus snubbie, because it did catch my eye. I know the 45acp needs more barrel to build up steam to be of much use according to what I hear. I had started looking at the 9mm one because I could share ammo between guns, but then I noticed the 41 but wasnt sure how well that would work. If it could actually build enough velocity to be effective, it would be kinda interesting.

Randy
 
regardless of caliber no revolver is more than a 100 yard gun if you are a really good shot and have a scope on it.
Click to expand...

For those of you who believe the above statement, I would suggest you read up on Elmer Keith, the man who helped develop both the 41 and the 44. You will find the above statement to be incorrect.

I've heard of, but unable to confirm, some bwana used a .41 Magnum with a 6.5" barrel to bag an African Lion about 10 years ago or so, using a 220grain solid projectile. Either he has more hangin' than I do, was very lucky, or knew what he was doing.
Click to expand...

Just wanted to comment that this isn't too unbelievable, well before the 41 and 44 Magnums, Alaskan guides were killing Polar Bears and Grizzlys with .357 magnums. Of course, that's all that was available to them at the time.

I have found that the 41 magnum is a caliber that has a fanatic following.. I think most people would agree that the 44 magnum does enjoy a much larger range of options, whether that be in handloaded or factory loads.

But the .41 Mag is catching up.
Click to expand...

I just wanted to ask.. can the 41 mag truly ever catch up? I don't mean to be insulting it is just that you are talking about a cartridge with less case volume that takes a longer bullet to equal the same bullet weight as a 44 mag, which translates into even less room for powder as the bullet has to be seated deeper. I believe your intentions were to point out that the 41 magnum is being loaded to all new highs these days. With the difference in case dimensions it seems doubtful that the 41 will ever truly catch up to the 44, the 44 just has more potential.
 
I notice a bit of bias from other 41 mag owners, but unlike some other guns/calibers where everyone jumps on the bandwagon cuz it's a cop/military gun and no other reason, I think the 41 deserves the credit it gets. I went into it with a very open mind because I didnt know hardly anything about it. I've been nothing but completely amazed so far. I realize it isnt a 44, but all I do is punch paper anyway. I might want to try to hunt with it now that I'm learning what it can really do, even though the SA is pretty noisy. I think a 210 LSWCHP would do the trick nicely and save me carrying a couple pounds all day.

I sorta look at it that the 41 is to the 357 and 44 what 40 is to 9mm and the 45cp. It's a solution to a problem that never really existed, but how many 40 owners would change their feelings about it just based on that? I do think it is a reloaders' gun. I'd assume ammo is still available somewhat but I dont see it around here. Every store has 357/44 though. I'm very glad I stumbled into one though, and it's got me trying to learn about other not so popular calibers too. I like being different anyway :p

Randy
 
spare me the details about Elmer Keith. while he was a LOT better shot than the rest of us will ever be , even Elmer admitted that there was some luck involved with some of his shots. he also blew up a number of guns in his experimenting
 
In my opinion, the .44 does offer an ppreciable increase in power and effectiveness over the .41. The difference is even greater when one handloads. With proper bullets and loads, you'll get more hitting power and more penetration.

As for "needing" a .44. . .ask yourself if anything you plan to shoot will notice the difference. Shooting deer-sized game or people (defense)? Doubt the target can tell the difference.

The .41 was developed as an improved police cartridge that offered more power than the .357 and less overkill, and recoil, than the .44 Magnum. IMHO, with proper bullets, the .41 magnum is probably the best revolver cartridge for self-defense. It also makes a dandy hunting cartridge for deer, fairly small hogs (350 pounds and under), javelina, etc.

Unless you need a backup for a Kodiak hunt, or African dangerous game safari, the only "need you have for a .44 (if you have the .41) is "because I wanna".

Which, as any gun nut will tell you, if a perfectly valid reason.
 
I recall that back in the late '70s to '80s, several soft body armor companies explicitly cautioned that their vests would not/might not stop full house factory .41 Mag JSP. The same vests were rated for 12 Gauge Slug & factory 240 JSP/JHP .44 Mag. I dunno...higher velocity combined with better sectional density? I don't know if any current manufacturers even test .41 against their vests.

There was also a good book (forgot author) from the early '70s titled "The Search for an Effective Police Handgun". The author, an academic type criminal justice professor, was taking an early scientific look at combat handguns suitable for police work (as well as an early poke at barrier penetration and "stopping power"). In any event, where the .41 Mag really shone, was in the context of vehicular stops. Better auto body, auto glass, and felon penetration than almost anything else available from a handgun (including .357 & .44). Had a seies of photos showing complete penetration from rear of target car. Thru trunk, thru back seat, thru front seat, thru simulated thick plywood "felon" in drivers seat. Car was a early '70s, 4-door, American Made, Land Battlewagon of heavy metal construction. Several other angle shots taken from side of vehicle. I thought the chapter was interesting and the book a good read. Wish I could find a copy...been out of print for years.

The upshot is that in the self-defence role, the .41 has a place as an excellent car gun (assuming the shooter is equal to the task of a heavy recoiling revolver).

As far as hunting, I've popped whitetail with both. The old 210 Rem JSP vs. 240 Rem JSP. I couldn't tell the difference and neither could the deer. I never used the old lead 210 grain "Police" load for deer. It probably would have worked (with good shot placement) but I worried about inadequate penetration for quartering shots.
 
Well since somwone brought up Elmer Kieth -

The .41 Mag was what Kieth, Wilson, and other great shooting minds of the time suggested as the perfect fighting man's revolver. Right ?

Old Elmer being the 44 fan he was probably would'nt have said it to Smith and Remington if he did'nt mean it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top