New .41 Mags from S&W?

B

BillCA

New member
Just visited the S&W website and they are showing 2 new models for the .41 Magnum cartridge! (See photos attached).

A Lightweight Medium Frame .41 Magnum!
S&W Model 357PD - SKU 160230

It's a 6-shot, 4" barreled Medium Scandium Alloy Frame, Titanium cylinder, black stainless steel barrel revolver that weighs 27.5 oz.

Purists Take Heart! The Model 57 is back!

Model 57 Mountain Gun - SKU 161300

The classic look of the older 4" Model 57's, without the red ramp front sight or white-outline rear sight. Six shots, blued carbon steel. These will be a limited availablity run. I may order mine next week! :D
 

Attachments

  • 160230_large.jpg
    160230_large.jpg
    20.2 KB · Views: 60
  • 161300_large.jpg
    161300_large.jpg
    24.2 KB · Views: 54
I may just have to check out the Model 57 Mountain gun. Almost bought the 44 mag mountain gun years ago, but I am a big fan of the 41 mag.
 
Even though I'm a big fan of the M57 I will have to wait untill I see one of the M57 MG and the pricetag they hang on it. I tried the M29-8 MG when it came out and wasn't really impressed and traded it off.
 
be very interested in the m57 if I can afford it. I assume it wont be on a shelf at my local gun store anytime soon as its a limited run. if price isn't outrageous I'd deffinetly have to consider ordering one though.
 
Are my eyes deceiving me?

Or does that new Model 57 picture just not show the key lock pimple above the cylinder latch? :eek:

If it's not there, then cool!
 
The picture is nothing more than a computer graphic. It even has something like a 4.5" to 5" bbl. The real thing will have the lock and a 4" tube.

And I don't think they can make a two piece Mtn Gun bbl without making it a bull bbl.

Still, pretty guns. Who here pays MSRP?
 
Speaking of Model 57's without the lock...
Vintage 1981 model with a more carry-friendly buddy.

SM57M42_0767.jpg
 
.41 Magnum

Unless I read it wrong, the S&W 2005 Catalog did not list any .41 Magnums.
This is excellent news. Now, what about a 3 inch barrel?
 
As much as I still despise S&W for the sellout, I love the 41mag. I have a Taurus tracker 4in ported and love it. I have been a 41 mag fan since I started shooting, I owned a Dan Wesson 41 mag years ago and still wish I had it. I could hit gallon jug at 100yds offhand easily with that gun and miss it sorely. I may just have too bury the hatchet with S&W after seeing the new 41's if they dont over price them.
 
I don't mean to piss anyone off here, but what's the deal with chambering magnums, especially big bore magnums, in scandium frames? People buy them because they think they're cool and they're getting something for free (namely, it's easy to carry around and they won't have to give up much comfort). Then they come back crying about the recoil and how uncontrollable the thing is after shooting 6 rounds, then go on a crusade telling everyone how horrible magnums are and they're going back to their 9mm. I don't get it. I thought everyone knew magnums kick (at both ends, which is why people like them), and a lightweight gun in a heavy caliber is a bad idea?

This is WHY the Mountain guns exist -- they're right at the limit of most people's recoil tolerance, and still pack well (good call on their part bringing out a 4" .41 MG BTW).

Now, I will be on the lookout for the MG, just because a 4" .41 is both a great backpacking gun and a great carry gun.
 
Thanks! My question was going to be "how does the SC frames handle magnum loads?"...I would lean to the MG for sure.
 
The Scandium framed .41 Mag was bound to come out once they produced the .44 magnum in that same alloy.

The market for this gun would, IMO, be for those folks who are already used to shooting the .41/.44/.45LC rounds for hunting, but are looking for a major power gun that can be carried afield all day and not fired a great deal.

For someone in Alaska this would be a great guide's gun to serve as a backup to the rifle or shotgun. For the handgun hunter who tracks his game it's a full pound less of weight than the mountain gun.

There will be someone who carries it for CCW too, though it's a tad large for most of us. Loaded with either 175gr Silvertips or a slower 210gr LSWC it'd be controllable enough for that job. Double-taps wouldn't be very fast however!
 
I feel these lightweight guns are meant more for concealed carry and occasional shooting, this makes more sense for the guns development. I see no problem with these guns if used for this purpose, too many people leave their gun home due to weight after carrying it a few times. I have seen it too many times, I would rather have a gun that recoils more than no gun at all. I have a lightweight taurus 41 mag and find it is not that bad at all, I have shot 100 rounds in one session when finding the best load, and my hand didnt hurt after and I didnt have any objections. Also when shooting in a life threatening scenerio recoil isnt usually even acknowledeged by the shooter. I agree the mountain gun is a better choice for the shooter who likes to use their gun alot but for the ocassional shooter who just wants a light gun to carry comfortably all day and wants a magnum these fit the bill. I think the biggest problem is newbies who dont know what to expect and gun dealers who dont tell the customers about the heavy recoil of a lightweight magnum. The Keltec 380,s also sting the hand due to light weight and are hard to control also, but people buy them and use them. I believe there are cases where people as said complain, but I think its due more to ignorance than anything else, and there are those who just want to bash a certain product, or are just professional complainers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top