.41 vs .44
- Thread starter Irish B
- Start date
22-rimfire
New member
My experience is that I much prefer the 41 magnum. My reference point is the traditional factory level and not really very interested in maximum loads or loads under about 900 fps. I shot some of the cowboy ammo and wasn't impressed.
I have owned both 44's and 41's. I shot them and discovered that on average I am a better shooter with the 41 mags. (At the time all were M57's & M29's). I got rid of the 44's. I have a 480 Ruger or 475 Linebaugh when I feel the need for "maximum loads" even though the 480 is sort of a 44 mag on steriods.
I don't think I can convince you to get a 41 mag. You just need to shoot one a bit and see what you think. I prefer them.
Ammo is harder to come by, but with planning, you can keep a good supply on hand. You just can't walk into Walmart and buy some. 41 mag loads at about 1050 to 1100 fps would be about perfect for most uses. But for the most part, you have to load those yourself although GA Arms offers some interesting loads.
I have owned both 44's and 41's. I shot them and discovered that on average I am a better shooter with the 41 mags. (At the time all were M57's & M29's). I got rid of the 44's. I have a 480 Ruger or 475 Linebaugh when I feel the need for "maximum loads" even though the 480 is sort of a 44 mag on steriods.
I don't think I can convince you to get a 41 mag. You just need to shoot one a bit and see what you think. I prefer them.
Ammo is harder to come by, but with planning, you can keep a good supply on hand. You just can't walk into Walmart and buy some. 41 mag loads at about 1050 to 1100 fps would be about perfect for most uses. But for the most part, you have to load those yourself although GA Arms offers some interesting loads.
Last edited:
Super Sneaky Steve
New member
Noobs buy .44's for cheap thrills. Real men get the .41.
black mamba
New member
I have owned and shot both over a 35 year period, and they are both wonderful in the N-frame S&W. I have owned 4, 5, 6, 6-1/2 and 8-3/8 inch barreled N-frames, and the 5" handles the best but is the hardest to come by. I prefer the 4" to the 6", and the 8-3/8" least of all (too muzzle heavy for me).
For a personal defense revolver, the 4" model 57 in 41 mag would be my choice, as it is more packable and has less recoil than the 44.
For hunting or target shooting I would want the 6 or 6-1/2 inch model 629 stainless 44 mag. It is more powerful and the longer barrel will help your velocity and in taming recoil. In either case handloading is nearly a must to get the most shooting enjoyment out of your purchase.
For a personal defense revolver, the 4" model 57 in 41 mag would be my choice, as it is more packable and has less recoil than the 44.
For hunting or target shooting I would want the 6 or 6-1/2 inch model 629 stainless 44 mag. It is more powerful and the longer barrel will help your velocity and in taming recoil. In either case handloading is nearly a must to get the most shooting enjoyment out of your purchase.
spacecoast
New member
I would also like to point out that the .45 ACP revolver is a very pleasing .4x N-frame option, and will be cheaper to shoot than either the .41 or .44 if you don't reload. I love my 5" 625-3, but also love my 629-4 in .44mag.
There is a big difference in recoil between a 44mag in my M629 and 454Casull in my Super Redhawk. Killing power on a deer is very similar.
The 44mag is not a subjective opinion of being the alpha handgun caliber for hunting. The history and the use of the 44 Magnum in handgun hunting is pretty much uncontested by professional handgun hunters, as being the standard in big game hunting.
You're unnecessarily fighting an uphill battle with using the 41 Magnum. There's nothing the 41 magnum does that the 44 Magnum doesn't do much better. If recoils an issue you can shooter 44 special for practice and switch to 44 Magnum for hunting. If you reload, then there's absolutely no contest between the 41 Magnum and the 44 Magnum. There are so many more options with the 44 Mag with bullet selections and loads it's almost silly to even contemplate between the two. Comparing the 41 Magnum to 357 magnum makes much more sense and a easier sell for the 41 Magnum.
You're not comparing beer against beer this is like comparing beer I against whiskey.
The 44mag is not a subjective opinion of being the alpha handgun caliber for hunting. The history and the use of the 44 Magnum in handgun hunting is pretty much uncontested by professional handgun hunters, as being the standard in big game hunting.
You're unnecessarily fighting an uphill battle with using the 41 Magnum. There's nothing the 41 magnum does that the 44 Magnum doesn't do much better. If recoils an issue you can shooter 44 special for practice and switch to 44 Magnum for hunting. If you reload, then there's absolutely no contest between the 41 Magnum and the 44 Magnum. There are so many more options with the 44 Mag with bullet selections and loads it's almost silly to even contemplate between the two. Comparing the 41 Magnum to 357 magnum makes much more sense and a easier sell for the 41 Magnum.
You're not comparing beer against beer this is like comparing beer I against whiskey.
Last edited:
22-rimfire
New member
It comes down to this... do you prefer imported beer or Bud?
It is my belief that the slight difference in diameter of the bullet makes little difference in terms of killing power between the 41 and 44. But you can load or buy loads up to about 300 gr on the 44 mag, which you can't do with a 41 mag. If killing power for hunting big game is your measure, I would move above the 44 mag.
People say that the 41 mag is more ballistically efficient than the 44 mag. People also say that the 41 mag loads tend to be more accurate from load to load until you get into the 250gr size. The 41 is not a 44, but it just depends on what you intend to do with the gun. So, get the one that speaks to you as the previous poster said. The 41 mag speaks to me.
.44 Magnum 250 grain Keith Type, side by side with a .41 Magnum 230 grain Keith Type. Which ones which?
Above: .41 Magnum 210 grain Gold Dot, 230 grain Keith Type handloads and the old Winchester 210 grain LSWC Police Load. It did about 900 fps from a 4" barrel and was considered an improvement over the 158 grain .38 Special LSWC and LRN, back in the early 1960s. Nowadays, my 210 grain Gold Dot load for example, is way more potent than any 10 MM load.
Attachments
Last edited:
Though I treasure my 4" S&W M-57 and have spent many enjoyable hours shooting it and reloading for it-it was10 years before I fired a factory round in it-I recommend the 44 Magnum, fare greater selection of handguns AND longuns for it-try and find one of the Marlim M189s in 41 Magnum.And reloading components. I can't feel the difference in recoil between the two and I suspect most targets-paper, steel ot whatever, can't either.
I wonder your idea of 'Better'. A .41 magnum shooting a 210 grain GDHP at 1200 fps is it really less punishing than a .44 magnum shooting a 210 grain GDHP at 1200 fps ? I doubt it. The main thing I looked at was the .44 magnum can be downloaded to .41 magnum ballistics, but the .41 magnum cannot be uploaded to .44 magnum ballistics.
Strafer Gott
New member
I have a .41 in a model 58 and a .454 SRH. I am not saying the .44magnum is not useful. I just don't need one. I do think the .44 Colt is a little under appreciated by the masses.
Until the .41 Special is invented and becomes popular, the .44 Magnum will always be a more versitile caliber. The .41 is so close to being almost a .44 magnum. 210 and even 180 grain bullets are available for the .44 Magnum.
Remember that the .44Mag/Special is really a .429 caliber gun.
I have even shot .433 roundballs for muzzleloaders out of a .44Mag using light charges of fast burning powder.
Remember that the .44Mag/Special is really a .429 caliber gun.
I have even shot .433 roundballs for muzzleloaders out of a .44Mag using light charges of fast burning powder.
Well, I disagree
. Image that! The .44Mag can be loaded up and down to meet your 'just right'. From light .44Spec loads to hot .44Mag loads. Bullets for the .44Mag/.44Spec range from .41 weights on up to the heavies.... So, you have the FULL range of bullet selection for what you want to shoot. No, there is no reason to own a .41 unless you really just like the round (which is perfectly OK BTW!!! ) . For this reason, I don't own any .41s or .32s as I just to see the need for one when I have .22, .357, .44 Special, .44 Mag, and .45 Colt revolvers. Some say the o' .45 Colt is in same category as a niche caliber, but just really I like it for reasons I won't say here.. just like the .41 people like their caliber .orionengnr
New member
Well...since the ".41" is actually .410 and the ".44" is actually a .429...there is much less difference in bore diameter than is indicated by their name.
If Ford's latest hot-rod Mustang was labeled as a "Boss 429" in order to evoke and capitalize on the nostalgia of the 1969 model...but upon inspection was found to be actually 400 or so cubic inches...would all of the magazines crucify Ford?
Damn right.
The .44 Mag is an anachronism born of the Dirty Harry movies, and appeals to a certain portion of the shooting public.
Today, those same people buy S&W .460s and .500s. Most never carry and only occasionally shoot them.
Ask yourself...am I buying a gun that I want to own and shoot? Or do I want to own a gun that fires the biggest, baddest cartridge around? BT, DT, a long time ago.
The .41 Mag is the thinking man's Magnum. I didn't buy it to impress anyone but me.
All are handloaders' cartridges. Try as many as you like, and make up your own mind.
I have.
Edited to add: the 10mm and the .41 are perfect partners. Both are under-appreciated, but both are very fine cartridges.
No accounting for tastes.
If Ford's latest hot-rod Mustang was labeled as a "Boss 429" in order to evoke and capitalize on the nostalgia of the 1969 model...but upon inspection was found to be actually 400 or so cubic inches...would all of the magazines crucify Ford?
Damn right.
The .44 Mag is an anachronism born of the Dirty Harry movies, and appeals to a certain portion of the shooting public.
Today, those same people buy S&W .460s and .500s. Most never carry and only occasionally shoot them.
Ask yourself...am I buying a gun that I want to own and shoot? Or do I want to own a gun that fires the biggest, baddest cartridge around? BT, DT, a long time ago.
The .41 Mag is the thinking man's Magnum. I didn't buy it to impress anyone but me.
All are handloaders' cartridges. Try as many as you like, and make up your own mind.
I have.
Edited to add: the 10mm and the .41 are perfect partners. Both are under-appreciated, but both are very fine cartridges.
No accounting for tastes.
Last edited:
I dunno, my Kawasaki ZRX1200R motorcycle actually displaces 1164 cc and I don't recall any motorcycle magazines "crucifying" Kawasaki over that fact.
Contrary to popular belief, Dirty Harry did not invent the .44 Magnum, the .44Magunum predates the Dirty Harry movie by nearly two decades,1955-1971.
It's really a .429 because the .44 Special was really a .429. The .44 Special was really a .429 because the .44 Russian was really a .429. The .44 Russian was really a .429 because it used an inside lubricated bullet instead of the .44 S&W American's outside lubricated heeled bullet which had the same diameter as the outside of the case, like the modern .22 long rifle.