.41 Magnum vs .44 Magnum

Status
Not open for further replies.
As Springer99 stated, I too used a 41 Magnum NMBH or S&W 57 to shoot IHMSA production back in the early 80's. And for a nice size shooter I have two Bowen conversions on OMBH's to 41 Special, one plow handle and one Bisley. Nice!
 
But why the .41 Magnum over the .44 Magnum?
I seem to get marginally better accuracy out of my .41s than the .44s overall.
I will admit my Dan Wesson .44Mag is extremely accurate but it is quite heavy.
To be honest, the difference in weight and accuracy is probably of little import as it is negligible.
Accuracy is noticeable of the bench but probably doesn't translate into any noticeable difference offhand at living targets out to 75yds.
 
I like the 41 mag for the fact that it is mostly forgotten by the general public I also like the 44 magjust not as much,I really wish I could get S&W to make the L frame model 69 in 41 mag. I think it would make a perfect packing pistol to steal the phrase!
 
I have S&W N frame revolvers, both 4 inch barrels, in .41 Magnum and .44 Magnum (as well as .357 Magnum, .44 Spl., and .45 ACP. And I have a crying need for a .45 Long Colt N frame... yea right.

I use a 629-1 4 inch .44 for all my N frame needs cause it does quite fine. I could use .41 or .357 or even my 625 3 inch .45 ACP, but really they all make a huge hole and such.

Anyway, the rest are picked up as 'investments' when I get way down the geezer road.

My .44 is plenty. Ammo is easy to get. And gun is light enough to lug around. Good enough.

Deaf
 
We haven't had a good caliber war in a while. So, .41 vs .44 - which do you prefer for what purpose and why?
I am able to shoot 41 Mag in a Ruger Flat Top, which I can't do in 44 Mag in a model that indexes on the loading gate. My love for 44 Mag relies on DA guns.

Buying ammo or reloading components and equipment has not been a roadblock at all, but I would say this is not the cartridge for someone who relies on purchased ammo.

I went a step further and had a 41 Special converted. Even there, as an oddity, Starline provided brass for it, and I developed a reloading solution without custom dies.

I really like shooting both 41 and 44 Mags. I can stand to shoot more robust loads in the 41 but not so much in the 44. The only scoped revolver I have is an 8 3/8 Smith 657 (41 Mag). My 44 Mags are paired with a Marlin lever gun in 44. I don't have a 41 rifle and chose not to afford one of the few I have seen for sale.
 
In the early 1970s, the San Francisco Police Department specified the S&W Model 57 for uniformed officers in the Patrol Bureau. The guys I worked with howled at having to retire their Pythons and Model 28s. It was never clear to me why that move happened.
I wonder if they were comparing kinetic energies in reference to stopping power. In the end, the bigger frame and heavier load to carry would have been its undoing, I expect.
 
Last edited:
I no longer have a .41 magnum. It went when I started consolidating cartridges to reload for. Have several .44s. BUT, and as I have posted before, if Ruger would put a five-shot .41 magnum cylinder in a 3-inch GP100 frame, I'd be all over it like white on rice!
My 41 Special is a GP100 conversion holding 6 rounds. My understanding is that the GP100 is not stout enough to be a 41 Magnum, at least in Ruger's view. I believe they would be thinking Redhawk, which is too big a gun to be a practical carry except maybe for hunting.
 
I had two 41 Magnums Ruger Blackhawks in the mid-eighties. I love them. but there's nothing that 41 can do better than my 44.
So I wound up trading them off for something else but the 41 is a nice caliber I just prefer the 44
Actually, my 41 Mag NMBH Flat Top indexes on the loading gate, but I know of nothing comparable in 44 Mag.
 
Last edited:
A 41 Magnum is on the list sometime down the road but mostly for having fun working with a new cartridge. Since most 41 Magnums are built on a 44 Magnum frame, there really is not much advantage.

A 41 Magnum S&W L frame would be interesting and might have some advantages over the Model 69 44 Magnum.
Not much advantage in a S&W context, but Ruger is a different story. My Flat Top NM Blackhawk 41 is unique.
 
I don't really consider indexing on the loading gate to be much to get excited about. I suppose it is convenient, but it would not factor into my choice of either gun or caliber.
 
I don't really consider indexing on the loading gate to be much to get excited about. I suppose it is convenient, but it would not factor into my choice of either gun or caliber.
What other design flaws get a pass? This loading gate issue became critical with the Ruger Single Seven with such a small loading gate developed for 22 LR serving for 32 caliber. The Flat Tops and Vaqueros index properly but not the rest. Imagine a SAA gun that didn't index properly. I think Ruger knows it is an issue of controversy.
 
What other design flaws get a pass?

Ones that don't pose any trouble to me. Maybe some are more dexterous than others? I don't know. Pretty much a nonissue though. I don't index against the pawl.

This loading gate issue became critical with the Ruger Single Seven with such a small loading gate developed for 22 LR serving for 32 caliber.

Thought we were talking about .41 magnum vs .44 magnum, not small bores?
 
Ones that don't pose any trouble to me. Maybe some are more dexterous than others? I don't know. Pretty much a nonissue though. I don't index against the pawl.



Thought we were talking about .41 magnum vs .44 magnum, not small bores?
Actually we were talking about sensitivity to loading gate indexing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top