.41 mag secondary hunting weapon barrel length?

[horsey300]

According to Ruger's website, a blued New Model Blackhawk in .41 Mag with a 4.62" barrel weighs in at 38oz.

Sounds like that's a great option.

ETA: At an MSRP of $669 you could probably find one for about $550 new if you shopped around.

$530

 

[WrongHanded]

$530

Sounds like the perfect solution to your .41 Magnum problem.

 

[Confederate]

Also, not a debate over design, sa or da, just wanted a general consensus on ideal lengths. I've got da and sa revolvers, this is not my first gun, long or short, so I appreciate the helpful intent, but I really didn't absorb anything useful. Since you prefer a .41 in sa, what barrel length can YOU use quickly and accurately from a secondary position?

I'm not talking about caliber. I'm talking gun type. Single action might get my nod regardless of caliber, but since you haven't mentioned whether weight's an issue, you'll have to make that decision yourself.

Weight and balance both come into play. Do you want a gun that's of a particular weight? The Ruger SA (or any SA) would be my choice. The N-frame S&W might be too large and bulky in longer barrel lengths, but what gun isn't at that caliber? That means roughly 50 ounces of cold steel riding with you as a secondary hunting companion. Even the .357 numbers are a bit of a burden, and I'm amazed that the single action was eight ounces heavier than the double action. Thus, to stay with the .41, you're locking yourself into some pretty heavy numbers. The N-frame stainless may be the best weightwise, but the SA might give you a little more weight, but better balance.

So what about a .41 with a SA revolver with a 4.5-inch barrel? You'll be carrying it more than using it, so you'll have to be proficient enough to be a good shot with such a setup. The N-frame DA pistol in very short barrels might work for you but they recoil a great deal and may not humanly kill the animals (I don't know what velocity drops to in short barreled powerhouses); nevertheless, it's an option. It's easy to get to, easy to raise up to position and shoot. The recoil would be awful, but it would be over. And your gun would fit in a nice paddle-type holster holding it high and against your body.

On the SA gun, I'd probably do some weight research on various guns available, then decide on that and see if I could find a way to haul a longer barrel with me, if you want a longer barrel. The balance on the SA guns are great (for me), and the barrels aren't overly heavy.

If you could find a mint Astra .41 stainless in a good barrel length, that might be a good option. I had a .44 Magnum stainless and it was a bit lighter in the frame than the S&W. I had a 6-inch barrel and it was a beautiful gun.


Astra .44 Magnum

..

 

[Jack B.]

I carry a pistol with a 6 inch barrel in a belt holster and I guess I'm used to it as it's not to heavy or in my way at all. For hunting I believe barrel length should be as long as possible. I have several pistols with 7.5 inch barrels but I find them to big and heavy for carrying all day.

 

[horsey300]

I'm not talking about caliber. I'm talking gun type. Single action might get my nod regardless of caliber, but since you haven't mentioned whether weight's an issue, you'll have to make that decision yourself.

Weight and balance both come into play. Do you want a gun that's of a particular weight? The Ruger SA (or any SA) would be my choice. The N-frame S&W might be too large and bulky in longer barrel lengths, but what gun isn't at that caliber? That means roughly 50 ounces of cold steel riding with you as a secondary hunting companion. Even the .357 numbers are a bit of a burden, and I'm amazed that the single action was eight ounces heavier than the double action. Thus, to stay with the .41, you're locking yourself into some pretty heavy numbers. The N-frame stainless may be the best weightwise, but the SA might give you a little more weight, but better balance.

So what about a .41 with a SA revolver with a 4.5-inch barrel? You'll be carrying it more than using it, so you'll have to be proficient enough to be a good shot with such a setup. The N-frame DA pistol in very short barrels might work for you but they recoil a great deal and may not humanly kill the animals (I don't know what velocity drops to in short barreled powerhouses); nevertheless, it's an option. It's easy to get to, easy to raise up to position and shoot. The recoil would be awful, but it would be over. And your gun would fit in a nice paddle-type holster holding it high and against your body.

On the SA gun, I'd probably do some weight research on various guns available, then decide on that and see if I could find a way to haul a longer barrel with me, if you want a longer barrel. The balance on the SA guns are great (for me), and the barrels aren't overly heavy.

If you could find a mint Astra .41 stainless in a good barrel length, that might be a good option. I had a .44 Magnum stainless and it was a bit lighter in the frame than the S&W. I had a 6-inch barrel and it was a beautiful gun.

View attachment 758630
Astra .44 Magnum

..

Stalking plains and rocky Mountain game during the fall and winter months will negate keeping the gun close to my body if it is to be of any use at all. With this in mind, I rule out any weapon with a barrel shorter than 4", though I'm not saying that the lil jframe .357 hasn't come in handy before but it IS outside the clothing. I am confident with both the lil jframe and the 6" .45 lc ruger. Weight, for now, is a non issue. I'm in good enough shape to not be so concerned. For some hunts, I utilize horses, others dictate slow moving anyway, so I'm less concerned with overall weight than I am a barrel long enough to be useful farther away than the reach of the morning coffee, and yet short enough to not encumber movements through timber, drawing, and of course dressing game from either a bandier or belt. Sa or da balance makes little difference as I plan on practicing with it until it's as natural as loading, chambering, and firing any other weapon I own. Obviously, if I just can't stand the way it feels, then I won't take it home, but if experienced folks recommend the 4" da then it does warrant a look. I doubt very much many people here would lie about the effectiveness of their choices in their situations so I trust they know what they're saying and then weigh that against how relative it is to my style. From what I've gathered, as a secondary, anything over 6" will be a waste of my time. Finding a .41 tracker will be a chore, but I'm intrigued enough for the pursuit. If I find a s&w that really trips my trigger in 6" enough to take it over the 4.62" blackhawk, then it shall have a new home posthaste.

 

[dawei]

I can only relate my personal experience with 41 Magnum handguns. I have the following...
• Taurus® Mdl 425SS4CP 4" barrel TRACKER™
• Ruger® Model 0406 Blackawk® 6½" Barrel

The Taurus® TRACKER™ is the gun I carry whenever I am in the woods. I carry it OWB at 3 o'clock. This is my "Critter Defense" gun. The Blackhawk® OTOH is my hunting handgun. As it has a 6½" barrel I carry it cross draw at 2 o'clock.

Staying within the parameters the OP outlined I would recommend he find a used 41 Magnum TRACKER™ AND a Ruger® Blackhawk® with a 4⅝" barrel.

 

[CraigC]

4 5/8" SA

4" DA

The Security-Six has all the best traits of a SA...

Uh, what???

They do have an audible "click" when the hammer is cocked and that may spook some animals.

Anything with an exposed hammer is going to have an audible click when cocked. This has yet to be a problem for me but is easily alleviated by pressing the trigger while cocking the hammer but you cannot avoid the click when the cylinder advances and locks into position.

But I just checked and the spec sheets at Sturm Ruger show the GP-100 4-inch at 40 ounces. Amazingly, the .357 Magnum Blackhawk shows the 5-inch weighing in at 48 ounces! In my opinion, the balance of the Blackhawk is better, but these guns are just too heavy in my book.

Going to be hard pressed to find a serviceable .357 much lighter than 40oz. Even the old mid-frame Blackhawks with aluminum grip frame are 40oz.

 

[Confederate]

If I find a s&w that really trips my trigger in 6" enough to take it over the 4.62" blackhawk, then it shall have a new home posthaste.

I wish I lived out West (though I never mastered horses). I have a friend in Utah who was checking fence posts for his father-in-law. He saw something big fall out of a tree and it started for him. As it got closer, he saw it was a cougar and it was heading right at him. He had a Dan Wesson .357 with a 4-inch barrel in a shoulder holster and he barely got it out in time. He fired once and he felled it. He said it was the most beautiful animal he ever saw. He put on some rubber gloves, cut it's head off and sent it to the CDC (standard procedure) in Denver. About a week later he got a phone call and learned it was rabid. "I wasn't surprised," he said. "It was the middle of the day and those cats don't usually attack people, especially from the front." They'll go after the occasional jogger, he added, especially when their running triggers a predatory response.

I don't know if I could be that cool under stress, but sometimes a shorter barrel might be easier to get out and point. A 6-inch barrel in a SA configuration would be on my upper limit. I've been told by a number of people I respect that most magnum rounds really begin to shine at 6-inches.

 

[horsey300]

I wish I lived out West (though I never mastered horses). I have a friend in Utah who was checking fence posts for his father-in-law. He saw something big fall out of a tree and it started for him. As it got closer, he saw it was a cougar and it was heading right at him. He had a Dan Wesson .357 with a 4-inch barrel in a shoulder holster and he barely got it out in time. He fired once and he felled it. He said it was the most beautiful animal he ever saw. He put on some rubber gloves, cut it's head off and sent it to the CDC (standard procedure) in Denver. About a week later he got a phone call and learned it was rabid. "I wasn't surprised," he said. "It was the middle of the day and those cats don't usually attack people, especially from the front." They'll go after the occasional jogger, he added, especially when their running triggers a predatory response.

I don't know if I could be that cool under stress, but sometimes a shorter barrel might be easier to get out and point. A 6-inch barrel in a SA configuration would be on my upper limit. I've been told by a number of people I respect that most magnum rounds really begin to shine at 6-inches.

Growing up being charged and pummeled by animals exponentially larger than you will help temper both the nerves AND reflexes, I won't go into all the details but I once found the limits on just how fast a Henry lever .22 can be worked before it fails to function when a bull puts you AND your horse under him. Adrenaline is a heckuva drug. Still have the Henry for a momento.... crazy things happen all the time no matter the location, and since I'm not getting any younger, I think that one of these revolvers might tag along anytime I'm out doing ranch work too.

 

[LoonWulf]

I just got my first revolver, so its all a little new lol.
Id probably go with 4-6" barrel, the 7.5 on my 44SBH makes shooting it pretty easy, but i could see drawing it discreetly or quickly being hard.

Out here its an either or, cant carry two guns, so the revolvers my primary hunting handgun at this point.

Closest thing ive got to an emergency gun is my .45 super, which i what ive taken last couple times i went pig hunting with my buddy. Ive been run over by a 200lb sow, and had a boar spin and tear a dog open inches from my hand as i was about to flip him.
Now even if weve got a pile of dogs i take a gun.
Im thinking a 4-6" 41 would be perfect for the job.

 

[jmr40]

If it were the primary gun, then 6" minimum. But as a secondary gun carried in addition to a rifle, then 4" or as close as possible to that.

I like 41 mag. In the real world it'll do anything the 44 will do and an argument can be made that it is better. My 1st centerfire revolver was a 41 mag Blackhawk with a 6.5" barrel. The gun was cheap, but I couldn't afford to shoot it. I was a 21 year old college student back in the late 1970's and 41 mag ammo was costing me $30/box then. I let it go simply for economic reasons and just never came back to it. I like the round though.

 

[CraigC]

I've been told by a number of people I respect that most magnum rounds really begin to shine at 6-inches.

I wouldn't draw that line. All a 6" really has over a 4" is sight radius.

In the real world it'll do anything the 44 will do and an argument can be made that it is better.

In the real world the .44 is a bigger hammer with better, larger and heavier bullets at its disposal. For deer sized game, there is little difference but on larger game, it is significant.

 

[Sunray]

"...carried second to a rifle..." You have a rifle. Why do you think you need a handgun too? If the rifle is damaged you'll be heading for home anyway.
However, forget the 2.625" altogether. Nearly 500 FPS slower that a 4" .41 Mag. Almost 700 FPS slower than a 6". Weight difference between a 4" Blackhawk and a 6" is a whole 3 ounces. Use the firearm you can shoot best.
http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/index.html

 

[CraigC]

"...carried second to a rifle..." You have a rifle. Why do you think you need a handgun too? If the rifle is damaged you'll be heading for home anyway.
However, forget the 2.625" altogether. Nearly 500 FPS slower that a 4" .41 Mag. Almost 700 FPS slower than a 6". Weight difference between a 4" Blackhawk and a 6" is a whole 3 ounces. Use the firearm you can shoot best.
http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/index.html

I don't know what you're looking at but that just isn't true. You don't even gain that much with a rifle.

I do agree that there's little reason to go with anything shorter than 4" though.

Rifle or not, I don't go to the woods without carrying a pistol. Others may think and choose differently. I can still hunt with a 4" sixgun but not with a rifle wearing a fogged or busted scope.

 

[dawei]

I don't know what you're looking at but that just isn't true. You don't even gain that much with a rifle.

I do agree that there's little reason to go with anything shorter than 4" though.

Rifle or not, I don't go to the woods without carrying a pistol. Others may think and choose differently. I can still hunt with a 4" sixgun but not with a rifle wearing a fogged or busted scope.

Me too!

 

[Confederate]

All a 6" really has over a 4" is sight radius.

... and since I'm not getting any younger, I think that one of these revolvers might tag along anytime I'm out doing ranch work too.

Which brings me to the question of barrel length I've always wondered about.

One problem I have with shooting is that ever since I was a child, I've suffered from a benign tremor. This makes it difficult for me to shoot handguns accurately. (I can shoot accurately enough for defense, but not enough for precision shooting.) This means that I often can shoot 4- and 2.5-inch guns better than 6- and 7.5-inch guns. But my question is this: if one needed a handgun in a hurry, say, to put down an attacking dog or cougar, wouldn't a shorter barrel be easier to track such fast moving animals? Especially if it had an underlug?

 

[horsey300]

Which brings me to the question of barrel length I've always wondered about.

One problem I have with shooting is that ever since I was a child, I've suffered from a benign tremor. This makes it difficult for me to shoot handguns accurately. (I can shoot accurately enough for defense, but not enough for precision shooting.) This means that I often can shoot 4- and 2.5-inch guns better than 6- and 7.5-inch guns. But my question is this: if one needed a handgun in a hurry, say, to put down an attacking dog or cougar, wouldn't a shorter barrel be easier to track such fast moving animals? Especially if it had an underlug?

Faster to draw and track, yes, easier to hit? Maybe, with enough practice, but, for me, in the movement itself, I've found that a shorter sight radius is easier to cant ever so slightly off and cause a not so center shot. The longer radius, once aligned, stays straighter to the target for me. I am not a precision handgun guy, if I can hit minute of pie plate at 50 yds, I'm good. I've also found that for better hits, especially with longer barrels, and preferably with sa, if I draw, cock, aim and fire in a smooth motion I can hit the moving targets better than if I get on target, aim, lead, and fire. It takes a little practice just like anything else, but once I am well acquainted with the sight picture I need before sending that bullet with a good grip, it's very natural. Lots of coyotes in the calving herd contribute to all that practice . I've found that for myself though, the longer I try to maintain the sight picture, the more I waiver and miss. I don't rush, but I don't waste any time either.

 

[horsey300]

"...carried second to a rifle..." You have a rifle. Why do you think you need a handgun too? If the rifle is damaged you'll be heading for home anyway.
However, forget the 2.625" altogether. Nearly 500 FPS slower that a 4" .41 Mag. Almost 700 FPS slower than a 6". Weight difference between a 4" Blackhawk and a 6" is a whole 3 ounces. Use the firearm you can shoot best.
http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/index.html

The hunt isn't over till I tag out or quit. If I'm in the field with the .41 and on my way back with damaged rifle, you better believe I'll still take an animal I've climbed for. If I'm injured in the same fall that damages my rifle, I'm still not helpless. If I put my rifle down to dress out my deer/elk/moose and can fill a tag on a predator that shows up, I don't need to make a dash for the long gun/aim/and hope to hit something, I've even had curious yotes duck out of the corn field 30 yds away to investigate the smell of my doe. And if none of that's good enough, I need it cuz I won't cry myself to sleep at night as I cuddle with it, why DON'T YOU need one?

 

[JD Pinardi]

I bought a 41 mag Blackhawk with a 4 5/8" barrel at a yard sale 40 years ago, since then I've had 3 357 Blackhawks with 6 1/2 barrels, at 20 yds the 41 always has been more accurate, and the "feel and balance" in my hand has always been better. Maybe it's just me or because it's been my second gun on every deer and elk hunt since then.
I've been a 1911 guy for 20 years for truck gun carry gun, but every time I pick up that 4 5/8 Blackhawk I always say.... wow.....it just feels so natural.

I'm sure somethings wrong with me!
JD

 

[horsey300]

I'm sure somethings wrong with me!
JD

There is, it's needingmoreblackhawkinoia

 

[22-rimfire]

If it were the primary gun, then 6" minimum. But as a secondary gun carried in addition to a rifle, then 4" or as close as possible to that.

I like 41 mag. In the real world it'll do anything the 44 will do and an argument can be made that it is better. My 1st centerfire revolver was a 41 mag Blackhawk with a 6.5" barrel. The gun was cheap, but I couldn't afford to shoot it. I was a 21 year old college student back in the late 1970's and 41 mag ammo was costing me $30/box then. I let it go simply for economic reasons and just never came back to it. I like the round though.

But that $30 was for a box of 50 rounds most often. I bought a lot of PMC stuff back in those days and it always worked just fine for me until PMC went belly up (They since reorganized, but no 41 mag last I checked.). That said about ammo cost, it has gotten considerably worse unless your roll your own. I always felt blasting away with just about any centerfire was expensive expensive!

 

[RJM52]

I've got everything .41 from a 2.75" Redhawk to a 10" TC Contender....

If you want to carry it more than shoot it but still want to be able to take game out to 50 yards the 4" DA or 4 5/8" SA are about as all-around as it gets.

Finding a good S&W is somewhat challenging and going to be expensive. A nice shooter grade 57/657 4" will be in the area of a grand. A 657 Mountain Gun $1200.

Ruger has a limited run of 4.2" Redhawks...I bought one and is one of the most shootable .41s I have ever owned... Will be about $850 delivered.

If a SA is ok, probably the best deal going is the Ruger Blackhawk 4 5/8". $450.00 and available most anywhere...never wear it out...

My two favorites for the role you describe are the S&W 657 Mountain Gun and Freedom Arms 97 4.25"....

Bob

 

[SDGlock23]

I'd go either 4.2" Redhawk .41 Mag or 4 5/8" Blackhawk .41 Mag

 

[Sundancer2004]

nothing new here Elmer Keith, Bill Jordan and Skeeter Skelton were proponents of the .41. It was, at the time considered a most accurate versatile handgun for dispatching both four legged and two legged critters deserving of such. Its accuracy remains today. Runner up is the .44 again with the versatility of accuracy with the special and power with the Mag.

 

[RJM52]

horsey...in rereading one of your posts about weight and bulk, two guns that I didn't think about which are hard to find buth worth it when you do:

Ruger Bisley Blackhawk 5.5" stainless....only one run for I believe Ashland Shooting Supply. I see them once in a while on GunBroker...

Ruger Redhawk 5.5" stainless...the original run of .41s had 5.5", 7.5" and 7.5" cut for rings in blue and stainless. The new run are all stainless in 4.2" and 2.75". If you like the feel of the 4.2" but want a little more barrel length they will feel about the same. I had one many years ago sold it, regretted it and bought the 4.2" as soon as they came it...I like it better than the 5.5".

As to the Taurus Tracker...I have three. 4" stainless, 4" titanium and a very rare 6" titanium. Excellent shooters but they run much better with .41 Special velocity loads. I also only use .41 Special brass because the cylinder is shorter and makes ejection much easier. Standard .41 Magnum ammo in these guns, even the stainless one, is NOT pleasant at all. I now use mostly 165-190 grain cast bullets and keep the velocity moderate... Great hiking guns....

Bob