What is the point of the .41 mag?
- Thread starter kahrma
- Start date
One of the things that consistently amuses me is the logic applied to this debate. Many of the people who tout the 41 mag as being superior to the 44 mag completely throw that argument aside when they compare the 44 mag to 45 Colt. 41 is held up as the superior penetrator. To a degree, this makes sense. A 200 grain .410 bullet does have superior sectional density over a 200 grain .429 bullet, this is not in dispute. And even if the 44 mag with that bullet weight is loaded to higher velocity than the same 41 mag, the 41 could still penetrate as much as, if not moreso than the 44. But here's the thing, the 44 mag was not designed with 200-220 grain bullets in mind. It was designed with 240-300 grainers in mind. Which brings me to the 45 Colt. A 300 grain .429 bullet has better SD than a 300 grain .452 bullet. So what gives? True, the 45 Colt does what it does at lower pressure than the 44 mag...but so what? 44 Mag brass, as well as the handguns chambered for it are designed to handle high pressure. To me, the pressure comparison is a non-issue between the 44 mag and 45 Colt. When comparatively loaded, the 45 Colt doesn't recoil as bad as the 44 mag. But I would say that the 45 Colt doesn't penetrate as well as the 44, nor does it have the 44's trajectory, for the same exact reasons the 41 is supposedly better than the 44. Look, we all have our favorites. I like all the big bore rounds for different reasons. All three of these rounds get the job done. I really don't see any real world advantage than any one of them has over the other, given the hunting scenarios that 99.9% of us will ever be in.
I hate to say it but I remain unconvinced by the arguments in favor of the .41 mag.
Flatter shooting? Debatable.
Less recoil? Get real! You can download a .44 mag real easy, you just use a little less powder, duh!
More penetration than a .44 mag? Again this is a matter for debate but often the .44 mag had TOO much penetration for certain tasks.
No one has validated the existance of the .41 mag as yet. I am still not saying that it shouldn't exist, I am in favor of varitiy of cals and people to choose what they want.
My real question was meant to be, why would someone choose a .41 mag over either a .357 or a .44 mag? This is not meant to be a caliber war! I was just trying to get some info on a topic that has confused me for some time. I didn't think that people were going to get all emotional and sensitive over this!
Forget it, consider this matter closed! I guess people can't ask questions that may upset people's fragile egos
I thought this room was populated by adults
Flatter shooting? Debatable.
Less recoil? Get real! You can download a .44 mag real easy, you just use a little less powder, duh!
More penetration than a .44 mag? Again this is a matter for debate but often the .44 mag had TOO much penetration for certain tasks.
No one has validated the existance of the .41 mag as yet. I am still not saying that it shouldn't exist, I am in favor of varitiy of cals and people to choose what they want.
My real question was meant to be, why would someone choose a .41 mag over either a .357 or a .44 mag? This is not meant to be a caliber war! I was just trying to get some info on a topic that has confused me for some time. I didn't think that people were going to get all emotional and sensitive over this!
Forget it, consider this matter closed! I guess people can't ask questions that may upset people's fragile egos
I thought this room was populated by adultsRadicalcleric
New member
Tamara- Keith may have urged the development of the .41 but from what I recall he was disappointed with the result. I believe that he (like the others) envisioned something between the .38 and the .45 Colt, but what was delivered was a cartridge only 10% or so behind the .44 Magnum in energy. I think he implied "what's the point of having 90% of a .44 when you can have 100%?" I think what he expected was about 70% of a .44 that would be a more easily controlled round for combat use in a DA revolver. The .41 simply did not turn out as he and others thought it would because the ammo makers could not refrain from going full-throttle.
Kahrma- I am not arguing that the .41 is superior to the .44 because it is not. However, some shooters are fond of it for their own reasons and I think it is impolite to keep asking for justification. A man's choice of arms is his to make, and we should not question the selection. How many guns are in YOUR safe that are there simply because you wanted to have them? Most of my guns fall in that category.
PS: You seem surprised that some folks get defensive when you question their wisdom in picking out a caliber. If you don't want to stir the pot, then don't be grabbin' the spoon. If, as you say, you still don't understand some people's affection for the .41, then maybe you weren't meant to understand and you should avoid the .41 caliber. To each his own and more power to you.
Kahrma- I am not arguing that the .41 is superior to the .44 because it is not. However, some shooters are fond of it for their own reasons and I think it is impolite to keep asking for justification. A man's choice of arms is his to make, and we should not question the selection. How many guns are in YOUR safe that are there simply because you wanted to have them? Most of my guns fall in that category.
PS: You seem surprised that some folks get defensive when you question their wisdom in picking out a caliber. If you don't want to stir the pot, then don't be grabbin' the spoon. If, as you say, you still don't understand some people's affection for the .41, then maybe you weren't meant to understand and you should avoid the .41 caliber. To each his own and more power to you.
Blaze Glory
Inactive
There is not reason to purchase a .41Magnum over a .44 if one is using it for hunting or silhouette shooting. I feel the .357magnum is okay for deer-sized and smaller game with appropiate loads. In the Smiths, until recently, the .41 could be loaded hotter simply because of the amount of steel in the cylinder. It didn't have the same problems with hot loads the M29 did. Now the problem has been solved. Felt recoil is less to most people shooting equivalent loads. The .41Magnum has taken everything in North America I've shot with it up to and including elk, black bear, and large pigs. Can't see why I should get a .44magnum.
If I need a larger cartridge, I'll go to the .454Casull or a .475Linebaugh. Besides, everybody and their white-haired grandmother has a .44 magnum and I like things that are a little unique. RKBA!I have a .41 Blackhawk because I got it cheap and it is a fun new toy for me to shoot! Plus, it's different! I'm a bit eccentric, anyway...I still shoot my Glock 20 for IPSC!
As for any sort of technical advantage, my .41 recoils less than does my .44 Redhawk. Other than that, there seems to be little difference betwixt the two for me.
It all comes down to what you want, in which case your opinion alone matters.
As for any sort of technical advantage, my .41 recoils less than does my .44 Redhawk. Other than that, there seems to be little difference betwixt the two for me.
It all comes down to what you want, in which case your opinion alone matters.
This sure has turned into a bit of a warm topic! I wont way the .41 is really better than the .44 but it does work just fine for me. What convinced me is my wife shooting the Fed 210 hp load at 1500 fps one handed and saying "more ammo",she wont shoot a model 19 with full house ammo too.
Mike Irwin
Staff
"I wasn't bashing and I wasn't judging, I was really seeking info that I thought I was missing."
I've already posted the logic behind WHY the .41 Mag. was developed, and its intended market -- a cartridge for police applications.
Not certain how else I can put it, other than it was devleoped with the police market in mind. Could another alternative been tried, such, as Frank Barnes states, a heavier bullet in the .357 or a lighter bullet in the .44?
Yes.
But that wasn't what happened.
That's the way these things happen sometimes.
When you get RIGHT down to it, though, every one in this country could be well served by 2, maybe 3 handgun, 2 rifle calibers, and 1 shotgun chambering.
Why, then, are there so many out there, with new ones being developed all the time?
Ever hear of the concept of trying to build the better mousetrap?
I've already posted the logic behind WHY the .41 Mag. was developed, and its intended market -- a cartridge for police applications.
Not certain how else I can put it, other than it was devleoped with the police market in mind. Could another alternative been tried, such, as Frank Barnes states, a heavier bullet in the .357 or a lighter bullet in the .44?
Yes.
But that wasn't what happened.
That's the way these things happen sometimes.
When you get RIGHT down to it, though, every one in this country could be well served by 2, maybe 3 handgun, 2 rifle calibers, and 1 shotgun chambering.
Why, then, are there so many out there, with new ones being developed all the time?
Ever hear of the concept of trying to build the better mousetrap?
One reason they came out with the 41 Mag was there was no cheap model of the S&W 44 Mag. Maybe they wanted to keep it the flagship of the company, I don't know.
In 41 Mag they built a Model 58 with no frills for the police market and a Model 57 for the pride of ownership market.
I've had both Model 57 and Model 29 and was pleased with each. Seemed like the recoil of the 41 was a tad less but the ammo was w-a-a-y more since it wasn't popular.
In 41 Mag they built a Model 58 with no frills for the police market and a Model 57 for the pride of ownership market.
I've had both Model 57 and Model 29 and was pleased with each. Seemed like the recoil of the 41 was a tad less but the ammo was w-a-a-y more since it wasn't popular.
Phil in Seattle
New member
Because if it was around I couldn't have this:
I'm stilll looking for an M57 though. It seems word is out that I want one and the local sellers have all raised their prices. Three at the show yesterday and all near $500 which is very high for this area.
Grrrrrrrrr and I won't pay nearly $700 for an M58, that's just crazy talk!
I'm stilll looking for an M57 though. It seems word is out that I want one and the local sellers have all raised their prices. Three at the show yesterday and all near $500 which is very high for this area.
Grrrrrrrrr and I won't pay nearly $700 for an M58, that's just crazy talk!
Well, if I didn't already have a .44 in 6.5" and 5", I would have bought the M57 I saw yesterday. It was a blue 6" model - I think it was $550. Call these guys if you want it:
www.cccfirearms.com
I had a 8 & 3/8" M57 in college. I was both less skillful and more fickle in those days, so I sold it. That was long before the days of chronos, and before I really learned how to load revolver ammo. I loaded the snot out of it, and then some. It held up, but I never get any accuracy to really suit me. Sold, sorta think it would be fun to have another.
With Lil'Gun around, I'd almost be curious to see what a .41 would do with that powder.
www.cccfirearms.com
I had a 8 & 3/8" M57 in college. I was both less skillful and more fickle in those days, so I sold it. That was long before the days of chronos, and before I really learned how to load revolver ammo. I loaded the snot out of it, and then some. It held up, but I never get any accuracy to really suit me. Sold, sorta think it would be fun to have another.
With Lil'Gun around, I'd almost be curious to see what a .41 would do with that powder.
Blaze Glory
Inactive
Tex_n_Cal go to:http://disc.server.com/discussion.cgi?id=201246;article=4651;date_query=1039574226 for information on Lil Gun in the .41Magnum. RKBA!
Ben Shepherd
New member
It was developed for police applications, as posted earlier.
But think of it this way:
If it falls right in between 357 and 44 both caliber and power, and you can handload it any way you want..........
Then you can go down to 38 special velocity/power levels for plinking, and up to just shy of standard 44 mag loads when you need to. If I could only have one gun/caliber this might be it.
It's just one of those calibers that hasn't caught on. Partially due to general perceptions like yours(no flame intended).
I think there's a generalization out there along the following lines:
357 is excellent for a SD/human target situation, but if I want a REAL magnum 44 or nothing.
Plus, they are a joy to shoot.
Have you ever shot one?
But think of it this way:
If it falls right in between 357 and 44 both caliber and power, and you can handload it any way you want..........
Then you can go down to 38 special velocity/power levels for plinking, and up to just shy of standard 44 mag loads when you need to. If I could only have one gun/caliber this might be it.
It's just one of those calibers that hasn't caught on. Partially due to general perceptions like yours(no flame intended).
I think there's a generalization out there along the following lines:
357 is excellent for a SD/human target situation, but if I want a REAL magnum 44 or nothing.
Plus, they are a joy to shoot.
Have you ever shot one?
Mike Irwin
Staff
"but if I want a REAL magnum 44 or nothing."
What a wimply little chumpchange cartridge...
My .88 Blaztumflazonazz Ubermagnum will eat your .44 for breakfast...
What a wimply little chumpchange cartridge...
My .88 Blaztumflazonazz Ubermagnum will eat your .44 for breakfast...
Actually, they are a joy to shoot at power factors just above factory .357 Mag.
Typical factory load for .357 is a 158 gr at 1250 FPS (PF 197.5). The .41 Mag Win 175 gr Silvertip at 1250 (PF 218) is a comfortable load with just a bit more recoil. It handles well and would make a good PD load. You can always bump it up to 210 gr XTP at 1400 (PF 294) if you want a "real magnum."
In .44 Mag my favorite plinking load is 240 gr LSWC at 1000. I've also shot a bunch of 240's at 1250 (PF 300) and they're not comfortable; just a couple cylinders makes you sweat. A good PD load for me is a 200 gr XTP or Gold Dot at 1100 FPS (PF 220). I just don't need any more than that.
For me, both the .41 and .44 Magnums can be loaded with good JHP's at comfortable levels or heavier bullets at very uncomfortable levels that I would never want to shoot. IMO, a PF of 220 is about right for a good PD load.
Is the .41 Mag redundant? Maybe but it's a nice bridge caliber for the area between .357 and .44 Magnums. Hot .44 Specials can also fill this niche, but the .41 has some nice attributes.
Note: All recoil comparisons are with N-Frame S&W revo's.
Typical factory load for .357 is a 158 gr at 1250 FPS (PF 197.5). The .41 Mag Win 175 gr Silvertip at 1250 (PF 218) is a comfortable load with just a bit more recoil. It handles well and would make a good PD load. You can always bump it up to 210 gr XTP at 1400 (PF 294) if you want a "real magnum."
In .44 Mag my favorite plinking load is 240 gr LSWC at 1000. I've also shot a bunch of 240's at 1250 (PF 300) and they're not comfortable; just a couple cylinders makes you sweat. A good PD load for me is a 200 gr XTP or Gold Dot at 1100 FPS (PF 220). I just don't need any more than that.
For me, both the .41 and .44 Magnums can be loaded with good JHP's at comfortable levels or heavier bullets at very uncomfortable levels that I would never want to shoot. IMO, a PF of 220 is about right for a good PD load.
Is the .41 Mag redundant? Maybe but it's a nice bridge caliber for the area between .357 and .44 Magnums. Hot .44 Specials can also fill this niche, but the .41 has some nice attributes.
Note: All recoil comparisons are with N-Frame S&W revo's.
Unfortunately, none of these are popular. I can't speak for the 10mm or the .41 maggie, but my .32 magnum snubbie is a great shooter and definitely fills a void.
BTW, isn't is strange how the 10mm and .41 mag are so similar in ballistics and yet neither have caught on? Maybe someone needs to re-market these calibers under new names. Knowing the gun-crowd's enthusiasm for new cartridges, I would bet they would fly off shelves.
New name
Or you could look at how the .40 S&W has caught on.
And remember the history of the 10mm -- there was a lot of trouble with early guns after a while. Many of them weren't quite up to the strain. (Neither were the shooters).
This seems to suggest that there's some sort of a steep slope in the demand curve between the .357 and .40 S&W, both quite popular, and the .41 Mag and 10mm, neither terribly popular (but both well-loved by those who do).
Or you could look at how the .40 S&W has caught on.
And remember the history of the 10mm -- there was a lot of trouble with early guns after a while. Many of them weren't quite up to the strain. (Neither were the shooters).
This seems to suggest that there's some sort of a steep slope in the demand curve between the .357 and .40 S&W, both quite popular, and the .41 Mag and 10mm, neither terribly popular (but both well-loved by those who do).