Why not - 41 Magnum Revolver

L

ligonierbill

New member
Was thinking about this simply because I don't have one. Trouble is, I seem to have only 2 choices: Ruger Blackhawk or S & W Model 57. Have a 45 Colt BH, load everything from cowboy to bear busters, like it. Other than just different, I can't see one in another caliber. The Smith is a 'N' frame, yes? Big for my hands shooting DA, and why not just get a 44? So why not a 41 Magnum on the 'L' frame or the GP-100 frame? After all, the old Colt medium frame was called the '41'. I like those choices. Yes, I know Colt was referring to the 41LC, but with modern materials, it could work. I'd buy one.
 
I have a 696 (L-Frame .44 Special.). However, it is a five-shot from which I draw the inference that the cylinder on an L-frame my not have a large enough circumference to house a six-shot .41 magnum. It could be that for a .41 magnum to be safe, it would need the size of an N-frame for a six-shot cylinder. But, if you would be happy with a five-shooter, the L-frame may be feasible. As for an N-frame not being comfortable shooting double action, I have had several N-frames, have very small hands, but had no problem shooting them double-action given the right grips...those over-size target grips that used to come on them were not conducive to double-action shooting with small hands...found Hogue mono-grips (as in the picture) the ticket for me.

001_zpse2e55cca.jpg
 
Last edited:
I have a s&w .41 magnum revolver & it's one of my favorite guns to shoot. It's very easy to shoot accurately too.
 
I was thinking about this the other day. S&W now makes a 44 mag 5 shot L frame (model 69). I would think a 5 shot 41 mag would be a piece of cake. Possibly even a 6 shot. I held a model 69 a few weeks ago and I am now in the process of selling a few guns I don't use to come up with the $$$ to get one. I also have the problem of the N frame being to large for my hands.
 
They are interesting but for me it would be another brass pile and another set of reloading dies and there are other handguns I want more in calibers I already have.
 
The problem is, it's not dimensionally a '44' it's a '43' (0.429) vs. a true '41' (0.410), too little difference to really change the frame size. That's why Elmer wanted a '41 Special'. Gets me back to "may as well get a 44". Maybe I will, but I sure like the idea of a smaller frame 41.
 
The .41 is actually a good cartridge and a powerful and flexible caliber. Unfortunately, it is something of an orphan. If one is willing to put up with several problems in getting ammo, it will reward the user with a good gun. FWIW, I prefer the S&W to the Ruger, though.

Jim
 
I have always felt the 41 Magnum doesn't really serve any particular purpose. It's so close to the 44 Magnum that it isn't needed. Also the 44Magnum has more factory ammo and more bullets for reloading available. The 44 will do anything the 41 can do but about 15% better.

Having said that I admit to owning a pair of 41s. Both S&Ws. Around 1989 I picked up a retired cop M58 for $189. This gun is a curiosity to me. A failure in the market there really isn't anything about it that can't be done better by another revolver.

standard.jpg



About 10 years ago I saw this nickel 41 on Gunbroker. I'm a sucker for shiny guns. Bagged it for the starting price ($325) as nobody else was interested.

standard.jpg



If you just "want a 41" then by all means buy yourself one. Lord knows I have had no more justification than that on a lot of my gun purchases.
 
Saxonpig: You stole that 58 and 57! Nice nice nice!! :)


OP: I have a pair of 357's (m19-3, and 28-2), a pair of 44's (m29-2 and 629-6) and a 460V. Despite all of the reasons the 44 "made it" and the 41 really kind of petered out, I want a 41 particularly a Smith m57 in 4" or 6" quite badly.

I just have a thing for wanting to sort of collect Smith magnums.

But I think those who gave the reason of lack of demand for lack of options for a 41 mag platform are correct. The 44 and 357 just seem to keep chugging along while the 41 is stuck in that little space in the middle. I have fired a 4" Smith m57 and found it to be quite nice to shoot. It's my brother in laws revolver and they were his handloads, so I don't know how hot they were loaded. He likes to play with cast so I suspect they weren't hot-rodding too much.

Other made mention of the L-frame being a nice platform to offer in 41 mag.. I agree. The m69 seems to be getting good reviews from alot of customers. I got to handle one at my LGS shortly after they were released and liked it alot. I think it would make an excellent "smaller than an N-frame" 41 mag... It's just a matter of convincing S&W to do it up in that caliber. If that frame and cyl can handle 5 rds of 44mag, I see no earthly reason it couldn't handle 5 or maybe even 6 41's. Maybe call it the model 70?? (if that model number hasn't been previously used)
 
the 44Magnum has more factory ammo and more bullets for reloading available. The 44 will do anything the 41 can do but about 15% better.
Click to expand...
And will do it with 15% more recoil.
Aside from that, I have owned, shot, cast for both .44 Magnum and .41 Magnums since the early seventies. I developed a particular preference for the .41 when hand loading. For some reason, the slightly smaller case diameter seemed to allow me to manipulate the cases faster in and out of a single-stage press and later into a Dillon 550b. The .44 seemed clumsy to handle in comparison (as were .45 Colts).
In the .41 I have had a model 58, model 57 with 8-3/8 barrel, model 657 with 6 inch barrel, and a 3-screw Blackhawk with 5 inch barrel. The .41 is my favorite "deer-sized", shooting calibers.
Some of my .41's never saw a factory round or bullet, so "hard to find ammo" was not ever a consideration, nor should it be with any true hand-gunner.
 
Last edited:
I've come to like a 5-shot, Taurus Model 415 revolver, chambered in .41 Magnum that I've had for the past twelve years. It is the all s/s version (they made a light-weight variant of this revolver). Size-wise, it seems to fall somewhere in-between the Smith K and L frames. Mine has a 2 1/2" ported barrel; has been 100% reliable and is surprisingly easy to control when firing quick, repeat shots.
 
The Smith is a 'N' frame, yes? Big for my hands shooting DA, and why not just get a 44?
Click to expand...

I can't provide you with any practical justification for owning a .41 Magnum revolver instead of one in .44 Magnum. The .41 Magnum is just one of those cartridges that either grabs you or does little or nothing for you -- in my case, the former. My two S&W Model 57 no-dashes are among my favorites to shoot.

My suggested solution to this conundrum would be to get something in both calibers. :)
 
I've never owned a 41, why, I do not have a clue other then the fact that I don't want another cartridge to handload for.

I have shot several different ones that friends own, enjoyed shooting them very much.

All my friends that own 41's love them and prefer them over other calibers they own.

I do believe an L frame 5 shot S&W with a 5 inch barrel would be a heck of a nice revolver; may even tempt me into owning a 41.

Best Regards
Bob Hunter
 
I've owned a 57 in 6" and 8", 657 in 3", 6", and 8". Currently have a 4" 657 and a 7.5" Ruger Bisley. I've loaded more 41s over the years than my 357, 44spl, Mag, and 45 Colt. It gives more performance for the amount of recoil than any of the others I've loaded. Cast 215s at 1000 or Jacketed 210s at 1400, it's just a pleasure to shoot.
 
The .41 Magnum's biggest problem is that it's always lived in the shadow of the .44 Magnum and is thus compared to its older, larger sibling. The .41 is actually a very good cartridge that can stand on its own merits. The .41 Magnum can very comfortably deliver a 240-250 gr bullet at 1200+ fps which is something which I find to be very useful (honestly, though I could go hotter, this is about how I load my .44 Magnum ammo because I just really don't see a need for more). Had the .41 Magnum come out first, I honestly think it would probably be the dominant handgun hunting cartridge and the .44 Magnum would occupy the same market share as cartridge like .454 Casull. The only place that I see the ballistics of the .44 Magnum offering more than what one can reasonably get from a .41 Magnum is at the very top-end of the .44's ballistics window; a place that I think very few shooters really have much need to go.

That being said, while I own and enjoy a .41 Magnum (8 3/8" S&W M57), I would not choose it as my only bigbore revolver. Because of the .44 Magnum's popularity, the price and availability of both factory ammunition and reloading components is much better than those for the .41 Magnum. Quite honestly, were I not a handloader, I probably wouldn't own a .41 Magnum as I wouldn't be able to afford to shoot it. Likewise, if one is restricted to factory ammo the .44 Magnum is a better choice because .44 Special ammunition is available as a low-recoil sub-load while .41 Special is a wildcat cartridge only offered by a few boutique ammo makers.
 
The 41 has always intrigued me. I have shot my dad's Blackhawk, but that was many years ago, so I don't remember what it was like.

Some day I'm going to buy a Freedom Arms revolver, and when I do, it very well may be a 41.
 
Until I finally landed my 25-5 4" .45 Long Colt, my Model 58 in .41 was my favorite big bore, even more so that my 24-3 .44 Special.

I have less than zero interest in the .44 Magnum, and doubt if I'll ever end up with one unless I get a screaming deal.

I load primarily lead in my .41, lately a 215 LSWC to about 1,200 fps with Accurate 7. It's a relatively easy load to shoot well but still churns out more than enough power for just about anything I could conceivably use it for.
 
Once I got a .41 Magnum, I sold my .44s. A 58 and a 657 along with a .414SuperMag bill my big bore revolver needs. Unfortunately, the cartridge just was not used in a cult following movie. :(

I roll my own and one thing I do like about the .41 Magnum that the .44 can't do as well is shot shells. .410 stumpbuster wads, lead shot and some overshot cards make a pretty potent small game/snake load.
 
Did not intend to reignite the 41 magnum discussion, but that's fine. If I really get the itch to add yet another caliber to my bench, I'll just find a good BH 41. I was unaware of the Smith 69. I see a bunch on GB, and I notice they label it "combat magnum". I was thinking "woods gun". Interesting piece, though. I would love to see a Ruger version, but they sell every GP-100 they make now. How do you think the Smith 5-shooter will hold up?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top