OT: Where's the love for the .41 magnum

[336A]

It seems when ever a discussion comes up for revolver rounds a lot of folks are quick to dismiss the .41 in favor of other cartridges. The main complaint is that it is expensive or uncommon and to that I say horse pucky. Common it ain't so no need lookin' at Wally World, but then again I've never seen .44 SPL, .45 Colt, .454 Casull, .460 S&W or .500 S&W sold there either. The other common complaint is that it is expensive. The last time I bought factory ammo for my .41 mag (210gr Speer DCHP) it was cheaper than the Speer DCHP 240gr .44 mag offering. The other cartridges that garner a lot of respect (those already mentioned) are not what I'd call cheap either. Even reloading supplies such as brass and bullets are cheaper than the larger calibers which the .41 often compared to.

So why the lack of love for the .41 magnum.

[COSteve]

To me, the 41 mag is neither fish nor fowl. In a levergun, both the 357mag and 44mag can be loaded hot to levels that are truly impressive which diminishes the niche for a caliber between the two; the very thing that Keith and Jordon were looking to do when they developed it in '63. Its not as cheap as the 357mag to plink with which can be hotroded for deer hunting, nor is it as large or as powerful as the 44mag.

It was developed to address perceived shortcomings in the 357mag and 44mag; that the .357 Magnum suffered from restricted terminal ballistic effectiveness in the early 1960s, as jacketed hollow point bullets were not yet commonly available, and the manufacturer's standard loadings consisted of simple lead bullets and that the powerful .44 Magnum, primarily a heavy hunting round, was considered overkill for police use, generating too much recoil for control under rapid fire.

However, with modern HP bullet designs the 357mag and 44mag's performance, especially out of a rifle, are dramatically enhanced. In addition, the recoil issue with the 44mag is mitigated because it is fired from a rifle. I believe that both of these developments reduce the perceived need for something 'in between.' Add to that the cost of the 41mag is close to the cost of 44mag and you can see why the case for 'in between' is weak.

[jerry b]

Beats me. Since I don't buy factory cartridges, there would be no difference in price compared with other cartridges. Maybe a bit less, the way it looks in perusing vendors. Oh, lack of a multitude of available bullets? How many different do you need? Heck, in my 27 years of association with the .44 magnum, I used two different bullets. Two. And I shot thousands of them. I didn't know you were supposed to experiment forever. Now that I shoot .45 Colt, I use....two different bullets.

I think it lacks a guru. Cartridges need gurus to bring the masses into enlightenment.

The cartridge is a good one on its own merits. Lots of velocity, easy to load up or down, generally accurate, bigger than the .357 stuff for hunting and such. What's not to love? I muse about one all the time. It would be my high velocity sixgun while the .45 Colt would be my moderate velocity heavy. There would, then, be no need for that "in between" .430" bore stuff
What I lack is inclination to buy anything.

[Don McDowell]

If they would of changed the script of Dirty Harry just a tiny bit and had him carrying a model 57....

Anyway the 41 is sorta misunderstood by alot of folks. It was basically a 38-40 with modern bling for all intents and purposes. It fills that niche quite well and then some.
I really like my 41, but I must confess I dont' shoot it nearly as much as my 44 specials or 45 colts.

[madman4570]

Kinda like driving a V6 Dodge Dakota.
Doesn't get the fuel economy of the 2.3 Ford Ranger and doesn't have the power of the 4.8 Chevy (but sucks as much gas)

[2ndovc]

I keep buying .41s and then selling them off.

I want to "Feel it" but just can't see any real advantage over my .44 Spl/Mag.
The .41 kicks just as much in heavy loads and don't see any difference when loaded down Vs. the
.44 Spl.

And I'm all for being different, but just can't get into the .41

jb

[buckeyeshooter]

I have 3 smith and wesson 57's, 2 blue 6 1/2 inch and a 4 inch nickel. I only shoot the 4 inch and frankly---very, very rarely. I would much rather carry and shoot a 44 magnum. Or if I'm looking for something smaller a 27 in .357. The reason I have no love is that the 44 magnum does everything as well or better and componets and/or ammo are much more available. Frankly, the 41 should have been dead and buried a long time ago. You hard core lovers of the 41 are the only thing keeping it on CPR.

[Hobie]

I have a .41 Mag 16" barrel for the Contender. 210 gr. at 1800 fps isn't anything to be sneezed at. It actually beats some Winchester factory .35 Rem ammo albeit with a bullet with a lower BC. It is comfortable to shoot and works. I also have a OM Ruger Blackhawk. It shoots well, too. That said, I can't remember the last time I had either to the field.

[Loke]

I like my 41 because it is different. It will do everything that a 44 will. Yes, I said that. It will do everything that a 44 will. Two hundredths of an inch of bullet diameter isn't enough to matter in the real world. With comparable bullets, the 41 will kill anything that the 44 will. I like my 41 for the same reason that I like my 32 H&R Magnums. They are fun to shoot, and not everyone has one. I also hunt with a Chessie, not a Lab. I just like to be different.

[rjohns94]

I don't think I have ever seen one in a store, and I have never owned one. Seems it fits in between the .357 and the .44mag. They happen to be my favorites (along with the .45acp) so I guess I never saw a need. would not turn one away.

[yooper2]

I also love my 41 mag. It's a model 58 Smith, the ugly sister of fixed sight N-frames. With the Kieth 220 gr it will shoot point of aim with loads ranging from 950 fps-1300fps. I carry it for work and whenever I feel like just messing around in the woods. I've taken a good amount of game with it as well. The 41 mag is probably my favorite revolver cartridge at the moment and would like a Blackhawk in it (although the new 44 specials look really cool too). All that being said, I also like the 16 gauge, 50-70, and 222 so take it with a grain of salt.

Eric

[336A]

I like my 41 because it is different. It will do everything that a 44 will. Yes, I said that. It will do everything that a 44 will. Two hundredths of an inch of bullet diameter isn't enough to matter in the real world. With comparable bullets, the 41 will kill anything that the 44 will. I like my 41 for the same reason that I like my 32 H&R Magnums. They are fun to shoot, and not everyone has one. I also hunt with a Chessie, not a Lab. I just like to be different.

Loke your opinions regarding the .41 mag mirror mine. I also like that it is more economical in the powder consumption department. I'll admit that the .41 does buck a bit with full house loads, even though I'm sure it's not as heavy as full house .44.

[rangerider7]

Years ago I had both. They seemed to be about alike to me. I kept the 44 mag because I can shoot 44 specials in it also.

[AJMD429]

I think it's somewhat due to TIMING...

IF the cartridges we now call .32-20 Winchester, .41 Magnum, and .454 Casull had all been developed before the .357 Mag, .44 Mag, and .45 Colt, we'd be wondering why the .357, .44, and .45 Colt were necessary.

Think about it - if you had the .41 Magnum, the next major step-up would be the 'king' of handgun rounds, the .454 Casull, and the next major step-down would be the wonderfully quiet, low-recoil .32-20 (or .327 FedMag, if you want to stay 'modern'), and you'd pretty much have ALL the bases well-covered...

[Don McDowell]

It's true when loaded to full power loads there's little difference in felt recoil between the 41 and 44.
The 41 really shines when you load a 210ish gr cast bullet (keith style) to around 900 fps. Comfortable to shoot all day accurate as can be , and will penetrate like bunker buster bomb.

[woods-walker]

I have found the .41 Magnum loaded with 220 gr. H&G Keith designed bullet over 7.5 grains of Unique duplicates a similar load in the .44 Special with better accuracy from a factory revolver. I grew up carrying a Ruger Blackhawk .41 with a 4 5/8" barrel. Easy to pack and this load will take care of anything I have ever come across. I have great admiration and respect for the .44 Special but when I was growing up the .41 Magnum Blackhawk was readily available over the counter and carries better than a Flattop or Super. Of course the Keith load is a reloaders proposition so this may be the defining issue as to who appreciates a .41 Remington Magnum.

This question has raged for years and always resurfaces, making for good discussion. Where you live your terrain may dictate a different caliber. I have found that I cannot get by with just one caliber, but need several to suit my needs. Lately a Les Baer 1911 seems to be pretty useful and as no surprise the .45 acp round performance is in the same camp as the .44 Special or the Keith load for the .41.

[Don McDowell]

I think it's somewhat due to TIMING...

IF the cartridges we now call .32-20 Winchester, .41 Magnum, and .454 Casull had all been developed before the .357 Mag, .44 Mag, and .45 Colt, we'd be wondering why those cartridges were even necessary.

Think about it - if you had the .41 Magnum, the next major step-up would be the 'king' of handgun rounds, the .454 Casull, and the next major step-down would be the wonderfully quiet, low-recoil .32-20 (or .327 FedMag, if you want to stay 'modern'), and you'd pretty much have ALL the bases well-covered...

Actually the 32-20 is nearly the same age as the 45 colt. The 357 came along in 1935, and the 41 less than 10 years younger than the 44 mag...
454 is the answer to a question nobody really asked.. Still tickles me at the number of folks that think a 45-70 with a 300 gr bullet at trapdoor levels is virtually worthless, but think the 454 is the king of kings.

[stretch]

It's true when loaded to full power loads there's little difference in felt recoil between the 41 and 44.
The 41 really shines when you load a 210ish gr cast bullet (keith style) to around 900 fps. Comfortable to shoot all day accurate as can be , and will penetrate like bunker buster bomb.

Quite true. The lighter loads are comfortable to shoot, very
accurate, and plenty for social work. Sub 2-inch groups at 25
yards are the norm - even on a bad day.

The full-house loads do kick a bit. I'm currently loading a 250gr. Cast
Performance LWFNGC over 20 gr. of H110. You know it when it goes
off! I'm able to keep it on a 3x5 card at 25 yards offhand, and 3 or 4
of those are grouping under 2 inches. With more practice I'm certain it will do
better. It's going to be my moose load for shorter ranges, and I am VERY
confident it will do the job if the shooter does his.

Plus, as Loke said, it's a little bit different.
-Stretch

[madman4570]

I like my 41 because it is different. It will do everything that a 44 will. Yes, I said that. It will do everything that a 44 will.

Not knocking a .41mag but when you can shoot 340 gr. L.F.N. - G.C. (1,478 fps/M.E. 1,649 ft. lbs.) loads from a 7" barrel .41mag handgun let me know!
No,it won't do (everything) a .44 mag will.

[336A]

It's true when loaded to full power loads there's little difference in felt recoil between the 41 and 44.
The 41 really shines when you load a 210ish gr cast bullet (keith style) to around 900 fps. Comfortable to shoot all day accurate as can be , and will penetrate like bunker buster bomb.

I haven't had the privilige to take any game with the .41 yet. However I'm planning on changing that this year by turning the .41 mag loose on some hogs. My load is going to be a 215gr SWC over 8.5gr of Unique, this is a very accurate load in my Ruger BH. It may not be a full power loading but it certainly is no weak sister in the power department, I'm positive it will punch through both sides of a hog. Stretch I'll bet that that 250gr load is a handful.

[Don McDowell]

336A , I believe that if you keep the range to 50 yds or so, it'll be a pretty tough deal to keep one of those bullets in a broadside hog. They'll blow thru about 8 inches of chinese elm at 25 yds.

Strectch I liked lilgun with those heavy slugs in the 41, but in the little blackhawk the recoil was just to ruckus. So I reserve the heavy bullet stuff for the 44/5's and keep the 41 at the comfy level.

[336A]

I like my 41 because it is different. It will do everything that a 44 will. Yes, I said that. It will do everything that a 44 will.

Not knocking a .41mag but when you can shoot 340 gr. L.F.N. - G.C. (1,478 fps/M.E. 1,649 ft. lbs.) loads from a 7" barrel .41mag handgun let me know!
No,it won't do (everything) a .44 mag will.

This goes back to the fact that the .44 is more popular. There are no guns being manufactured to house a similar .41 load. If it weren't for the Ruger RH and SRH that load would not exist for the .44 mag either. However the .41 mag can be loaded with a 300gr SSK type bullet which is only 20gr lighter than the .44 version. The .44 mag with the 320gr SSK has taken game all over the planet. I'm sure that the .41 mag with the 300gr SSK bullet would be equally effective.

[336A]

336A , I believe that if you keep the range to 50 yds or so, it'll be a pretty tough deal to keep one of those bullets in a broadside hog. They'll blow thru about 8 inches of chinese elm at 25 yds.

Strectch I liked lilgun with those heavy slugs in the 41, but in the little blackhawk the recoil was just to ruckus. So I reserve the heavy bullet stuff for the 44/5's and keep the 41 at the comfy level.

50 yards is my self impossed max shooting distance with open sights. I feel that if I'm shooting beyond that distance then I need to be using a long gun.

[20cows]

The .41 mag is kinda' like the 32 Winchester Special.

The first handgun I bought myself was a 4 5/8" Blackhawk in 41. I still have it, still love it.

Haven't shot it much since my brother gave me a Uberti 4 3/4" SAA in 45 Colt, though.

[madman4570]

I like my 41 because it is different. It will do everything that a 44 will. Yes, I said that. It will do everything that a 44 will.

Not knocking a .41mag but when you can shoot 340 gr. L.F.N. - G.C. (1,478 fps/M.E. 1,649 ft. lbs.) loads from a 7" barrel .41mag handgun let me know!
No,it won't do (everything) a .44 mag will.

This goes back to the fact that the .44 is more popular. There are no guns being manufactured to house a similar .41 load. If it weren't for the Ruger RH and SRH that load would not exist for the .44 mag either. However the .41 mag can be loaded with a 300gr SSK type bullet which is only 20gr lighter than the .44 version. The .44 mag with the 320gr SSK has taken game all over the planet. I'm sure that the .41 mag with the 300gr SSK bullet would be equally effective.

Still, At the risk of repeating myself, no it is not (equal) as the 340gr L.F.N. .44 cal at 1478fps
And what velocity does that .41 shoot the 300gr from a 7" handgun.
Where I went to college---kinda close isn't equal!
Also Buffalo Bore's 340gr has proven to have extreme penetration as well.(40 more grains can be a big deal with the right need)

[AJMD429]

Actually the 32-20 is nearly the same age as the 45 colt. The 357 came along in 1935, and the 41 less than 10 years younger than the 44 mag...
454 is the answer to a question nobody really asked.. Still tickles me at the number of folks that think a 45-70 with a 300 gr bullet at trapdoor levels is virtually worthless, but think the 454 is the king of kings.

True. For me, a 'stout' or 'Ruger' .45 Colt load is more than punishing enough and the hottest thing I can shoot worth a darn. I could have used "Ruger-level .45 Colt" instead. With the option of modern-pressure loads, the .45 Colt, while nowhere near the 60k psi .454 loads, is still pretty top-end. Use the .32-20 as your 'bottom end' gun, for loads from .22 Mag level to .30 Carbine level, and the natural 'hole' in the middle would be filled in pretty well with the .41 Magnum.

Of course most of us wind up with a .357 Mag and/or .44 Mag early on, so we've already 'bracketed the middle' pretty narrowly, and the .41 Mag for us is kind of a duplicate. In my case, I expanded 'down' to the .32-20, and 'up' to the .45 Colt, and can shoot much lighter stuff in the .32-20 than the .38/357, although the .45 Colt I've not really used to do anything so far that the .44 Mag couldn't do. IF instead I had no .44 Mag or .357 Mag, but a .41 Mag, the lower 'gap' would be a bit wider (between .32-20 and .41 Mag) but likely coverable with light .41 Mag loads, and the jump 'up' from .41 Mag to .45 Colt would be more noticeable than between .44 Mag and .45 Colt.

[Don McDowell]

AJM it's pretty interesting when you get into the nuts and bolts of real history , just how popular the 32-20 was a peaceofficers handgun, and the 32 longs. The 38-40 had quite a following also, and that's what they tried to originally duplicate with the service loads for the 41, and then it was once again reinvented in the 10mm and 40s&w.
The original and off and on again loaded 40 grs bp load with the 250 gr bullets in the 45 colt is quite a handful and leaves little wonder why it survived from 1873 on thru.

[Ravenman]

I have a few 41 Magnum handguns and would not like missing a single one. Elmer Keith, Bill Jordan and PACO had great respect for the cartridge. See PACO's article "41 MAGNUM.... (SUNDAY’S CHILD)" and you understand, what it is all about the classic 41 Magnum.

http://www.leverguns.com/articles/paco/41magnum.htm

[336A]

madman, here is an article written by Glen Fryxell on the various SSK bullets. The 300gr SSK .41 bullet churned up 1376fps from his 7 1/2" Ruger RH.
http://www.lasc.us/FryxellBulletsOfSSK.htm

[madman4570]

Interesting stuff 336A
Here is the deal, if I had a .41 Mag and it shot good I probably would say (it works for what I want)
Not saying they are bad,just think the 44mag is a little more versatile and easier for ammo and a little more powerful.
Heck,I might love one if I had it.
But, if I had to pick one for defense against a huge bear(which really neither would be my pick with a handgun)I'd choose my .454 Casull,and if I owned a 500 S&W I would pick that over my .454 Casull if it was as reliable and shot as well.
Just saying when the words exact come into play(I guess that strikes my chain)????
Guess its because of myself being a Metrologists as a profession

Anyway,if that 41mag serves your purpose/it shoots great/you like the look/feel and it is a little different than the norm.
Thats------Cool!

[M. M. Wright]

When I went out as a deputy the .41 mag was one of my favorite cartridges. Had a 58, 57 and Blackhawk and always used the Speer 190 grain HP over XX grains of H110 or WW296 and felt it was a flatter shooting cartridge than the .44 mag.

I could (but won't) tell about the terminal performance on a bad guys carcass. Suffice to say, it was impressive.

Now that I'm mostly a SASS shooter, the .41 mags have turned into 44-40s or other 1st gen Colts.

[J Miller]

Just my story but in my entire life I've fired only one 41 Mag. That was in my early 20s just after I was legal to buy my own short guns. I was at the range one day when the guy next to me was shooting a beautiful S&W Mdl 57 with the 6.5" barrel. He let me shoot it two times. One mild load and one full house load. To say the least I was impressed.
In the years since I've owned and fired many .45 Colts and .357 mags, fired many 44 mags, but never had the chance to shoot another 41 mag.
It's not that I won't, or don't want to, it's that they just are not around when I am.

As for a nice handy big bore magnum single action I really can't see anything more handy than a 4 5/8" Ruger BH in 41 Mag.
Sadly, I haven't shot yet. Only cos I'm holding out for an Old Model

Joe

[Don McDowell]

As for a nice handy big bore magnum single action I really can't see anything more handy than a 4 5/8" Ruger BH in 41 Mag.

Joe

Perzactly

[J Miller]

Joe

[765x53]

I think it's somewhat due to TIMING...

IF the cartridges we now call .32-20 Winchester, .41 Magnum, and .454 Casull had all been developed before the .357 Mag, .44 Mag, and .45 Colt, we'd be wondering why those cartridges were even necessary.

Think about it - if you had the .41 Magnum, the next major step-up would be the 'king' of handgun rounds, the .454 Casull, and the next major step-down would be the wonderfully quiet, low-recoil .32-20 (or .327 FedMag, if you want to stay 'modern'), and you'd pretty much have ALL the bases well-covered...

Actually the 32-20 is nearly the same age as the 45 colt. The 357 came along in 1935, and the 41 less than 10 years younger than the 44 mag...
454 is the answer to a question nobody really asked.. Still tickles me at the number of folks that think a 45-70 with a 300 gr bullet at trapdoor levels is virtually worthless, but think the 454 is the king of kings.

Like wise the 30/30.
Writers who disparage it in a lever gun, WOW! it in a Contender.

[Remington40x]

I've owned six different .41 Mags over the years (2 Ruger Bisleys, an S&W 57, an S&W 58, a Ruger Redhawk blue 5-1/2" and a Freedom Arms 97). I still have the Redhawk and the FA.

I've found that 210-220 grain cast bullets at 975fps are perfect in the FA and the full power loads are quite tolerable in the Redhawk. Never found a reason to own a more powerful handgun and figure that if I cannot solve any problem I have with one of the two, I should have brought a rifle or a shotgun along.

I tend to go for underloved cartridges, having owned at least five .32H&R revolvers, two of which (Ruger Bisley Single Six and SP101 4-inch) I still have as well.

[Loke]

Well Mr. Madman, I think you missed the most important part of my post. The part where I said "With comparable bullets". If you load the 41 and 44 with bullets of the same construction and same sectional density, each will kill anything that the other will. I seriously doubt that any animal that you shoot will notice that one bullet has a 19 thousands of an inch smaller diameter.

By the way, I bought my 41 after owning a 44 for quite a few years. I got it for a really good deal, or I would not have been interested. After all, it isn't a 44. Must not be useful. I found out differently after I got to know it. A Ruger Blackhawk carries a lot easier than a Super Blackhawk, and the gun fits me better. When I am out hunting with just a handgun, I take the Super Blackhawk Hunter. When I want a companion gun on the hip, the 41 goes along. I don't feel under or over gunned by either.

[W.E.G.]

I already had a Model 29 in .44 Mag.

So, when my 41st birthday rolled around, I got myself a nice present.

I just wish I was still 41,... or something close to it.

[stretch]

I just wish I was still 41,... or something close to it.

I hear ya on that.......



-Stretch