ChristopherG
Member
I see; I had assumed they were swaged for a 'splat' effect on impact. I've shot moderately hard 215 and 230 cast SWCs through my 657 at around those velocities without much mess.
.41 magnum vs .44 magnum? do you need both calibers?
- Thread starter AirPower
- Start date
- Status
BluesBear
member
The Remington 210 SWC Police load DID use a swaged bullet. Just because a bullet is swaged doesn't mean it's too soft.
While it's true you can cast a harder alloy than you can effectively swage, don't discount the ability of a good swaged bullet to shoot cleanly.
Major ammo companies utilized swaged bullets over cast because swaging is much faster and less labor intensive thereby making them much cheaper to produce in large quantities.
While it's true you can cast a harder alloy than you can effectively swage, don't discount the ability of a good swaged bullet to shoot cleanly.
Major ammo companies utilized swaged bullets over cast because swaging is much faster and less labor intensive thereby making them much cheaper to produce in large quantities.
Hkmp5sd
Member
Why be picky? Get both.
If you want a really SWEET shooting and accurate .41 magnum, get an old 3-screw Ruger Blackhawk. The trigger on it is just about perfect.
If you want a really SWEET shooting and accurate .41 magnum, get an old 3-screw Ruger Blackhawk. The trigger on it is just about perfect.
Yooper
Member
As I understand it, the .41 mag was developed with law enforcement in mind and, due to recoil/frame size considerations, was less than well received. Shooters seem to have kept it alive for some 40 years now, so it probably won't give up the ghost any time soon. The advantage of the .44 over the .41, as I see it, is the availability of a larger number of bullet weights for handloading as well as in factory ammo. If faced with an either/or decision, I would opt for the .44 based upon this. However, if you are a handloader and tinkerer like myself (I'm a hopeless case) you will find ample reason to own both!
Dirty Harry 1971
Hi Guys
A little info about the movie Dirty Harry from a 1971 "Guns" Magazine article I read many years ago.
Two Model 29's were assembled by Smith & Wesson for the movie. Both were blue with 6 1/2" barrels. Upon completion of filming one of the guns was given to John Milius who wrote the screenplay for Dirty Harry. A nickel silver shield was inlaid in the left grip panel that was engraved with the guns history. Who got the other gun is unknown (maybe Clint Eastwood ?).
I also heard the story years ago that a model 57 was used but it's obvious the gun in the film has a 6 1/2" barrel not a 6"
On the DVD you can freeze frame the scene at the end of the movie before Harry shoots Scorpio and see 44 MAGNUM on the barrel.
Hope this helps.
Scott
Hi Guys
A little info about the movie Dirty Harry from a 1971 "Guns" Magazine article I read many years ago.
Two Model 29's were assembled by Smith & Wesson for the movie. Both were blue with 6 1/2" barrels. Upon completion of filming one of the guns was given to John Milius who wrote the screenplay for Dirty Harry. A nickel silver shield was inlaid in the left grip panel that was engraved with the guns history. Who got the other gun is unknown (maybe Clint Eastwood ?).
I also heard the story years ago that a model 57 was used but it's obvious the gun in the film has a 6 1/2" barrel not a 6"
On the DVD you can freeze frame the scene at the end of the movie before Harry shoots Scorpio and see 44 MAGNUM on the barrel.
Hope this helps.
Scott
I have owned just about all magnum and non magnum calibers in handguns. I have hunted and taken animals from javelina to elk sized with the spread and I stayed with the .41 mag for several reasons.
The trajectory is flatter than the others.
The recoil is much more managable than most.
The accuracy I have been able to achieve hsa been better with the .41.
So my favorite is the .41. I am concerned with the deminishing supplies for this load so I buy all that a dealer has, or what I can afford anytime I run across supplies. I have wanted to try my hand at bulletcasting, this just might be the time.
Good luck to all of you that also shoot this great caliber. Its a blue ribbon for sure.
The trajectory is flatter than the others.
The recoil is much more managable than most.
The accuracy I have been able to achieve hsa been better with the .41.
So my favorite is the .41. I am concerned with the deminishing supplies for this load so I buy all that a dealer has, or what I can afford anytime I run across supplies. I have wanted to try my hand at bulletcasting, this just might be the time.
Good luck to all of you that also shoot this great caliber. Its a blue ribbon for sure.
Paul "Fitz" Jones
Moderator - Emeritus
41-44
I have read in my Speer manual that the 6 inch 41 is an ounce heavier than the 6 1/2 model 29 and that the 41 has 20% more recoil than a .357 and 20% less recoil than the 44 for full power loads.
You are more likely to see a woman and a serious hunter with a .41 because the recoil of the .44 and the .41 will reload with considerably less expense with the Winchester recommended use of 7.4 grains of WW231 with a 210 gr lead bullet giving 1125 fps. Also cheap with hand cast bullets.
I use 7 grains of WW231 for my hand cast Saeco 220 gr molds which is similar to the loads I carried as an officer in my Smith 58. Carrying and shooting a standard recommended load is good enough for me and I leave experimentation with bullet weights to the younger folks.
Now that surprised me the weapons being within an ounce of each other really making a difference in the felt recoil.
My manual says
.44 11 gr WW321 gives 1285 fps with a 240 gr bullet
That is shy a third more powder for a 30 grain heavier bullet that Speer calls Hand Numbing so the weight of the .41 must make a difference.
No officers of my experience have ever carried a .44mag.
Fitz
I have read in my Speer manual that the 6 inch 41 is an ounce heavier than the 6 1/2 model 29 and that the 41 has 20% more recoil than a .357 and 20% less recoil than the 44 for full power loads.
You are more likely to see a woman and a serious hunter with a .41 because the recoil of the .44 and the .41 will reload with considerably less expense with the Winchester recommended use of 7.4 grains of WW231 with a 210 gr lead bullet giving 1125 fps. Also cheap with hand cast bullets.
I use 7 grains of WW231 for my hand cast Saeco 220 gr molds which is similar to the loads I carried as an officer in my Smith 58. Carrying and shooting a standard recommended load is good enough for me and I leave experimentation with bullet weights to the younger folks.
Now that surprised me the weapons being within an ounce of each other really making a difference in the felt recoil.
My manual says
.44 11 gr WW321 gives 1285 fps with a 240 gr bullet
That is shy a third more powder for a 30 grain heavier bullet that Speer calls Hand Numbing so the weight of the .41 must make a difference.
No officers of my experience have ever carried a .44mag.
Fitz
I guess both!
I have been reloading for and shooting the .41 Mag for a lot of years and I really like the round. I have an old Ruger Blackhawk 4 5/8", A Ruger Redhawk 7.5" and a T/C Contender 10". The one thing I "needed" was a S&W .41 Mag.
After searching gun shops,gun shows,pawn shops,online auctions, and classified sections of the most popular gun forums I never found one that did not require refinancing the house. I was looking for a Mdl 58 or 57 with a 4" barrel in reasonably good shape.
I finally threw up my hands and bought a S&W Mdl 29 4" barrel, like new for $400. I spent $100 on 44 mag dies,bullets and brass and I am ready to go.
I have never owned a 44 mag before and do believe the .41 will do anything you need to it to, with the right handload, of course. But sometimes it doen't hurt to try something new.
I have been reloading for and shooting the .41 Mag for a lot of years and I really like the round. I have an old Ruger Blackhawk 4 5/8", A Ruger Redhawk 7.5" and a T/C Contender 10". The one thing I "needed" was a S&W .41 Mag.
After searching gun shops,gun shows,pawn shops,online auctions, and classified sections of the most popular gun forums I never found one that did not require refinancing the house. I was looking for a Mdl 58 or 57 with a 4" barrel in reasonably good shape.
I finally threw up my hands and bought a S&W Mdl 29 4" barrel, like new for $400. I spent $100 on 44 mag dies,bullets and brass and I am ready to go.
I have never owned a 44 mag before and do believe the .41 will do anything you need to it to, with the right handload, of course. But sometimes it doen't hurt to try something new.
trapshooter
Member
Yooper nailed the truth of it. So did several others regarding the commercially available bullet weights for the .44 Mag over the .41.
Me? I'd take one of each. But then, they'd all be S&W's, as I like 'em. If I had the scratch, I'd have one each, from .22LR to .500.
Unfortunately, my gun guy knows I'm a weak, simple minded fool when it comes to a good S&W revolver.
Me? I'd take one of each. But then, they'd all be S&W's, as I like 'em. If I had the scratch, I'd have one each, from .22LR to .500.
Unfortunately, my gun guy knows I'm a weak, simple minded fool when it comes to a good S&W revolver.
Ben Shepherd
Member
As I recently acquired one of Mr. Jones' 41 220kt moulds, I can tell you it is a piece of exceptional quality.
As for the original question: If you handload go 41. Cost difference is a non-issue.
As for oomph: I drive a 220 out of my 7.5" 41 redhawk at 1600, the 44 redhawk I run a 245 at the same speed. The only difference is about 10% more recoil with the 44. (In fact the 41 usually has better penetration).
So: 6 or half a dozen, either will fill the bill well.
As for the original question: If you handload go 41. Cost difference is a non-issue.
As for oomph: I drive a 220 out of my 7.5" 41 redhawk at 1600, the 44 redhawk I run a 245 at the same speed. The only difference is about 10% more recoil with the 44. (In fact the 41 usually has better penetration).
So: 6 or half a dozen, either will fill the bill well.
excerps from Sunday Child by Paco " The 41 mag’s head size just before the rim is .434, the 44 is .457, and the 45 Colt is .480 (parts of an inch). Since the extra thickness of .023 in steel in the 44 Special over the Colt round, allowed Keith to go to 1200 fps with his 250 grain bullet. The old books I have show a pressure of 18,400 psi with 17.5 grains of IMR4227 and 21,500 psi with 17.5 grains of Herc2400 in the 44 Special (these pressure figures are from a time when a pound of powder was only $1.50). So obviously the 41 mag with .023 more thickness over the 44 mag is also going to have more strength.
That’s thicker than it sounds, about the thickness of a strong finger nail. It’s not so much having that extra thickness in the cylinder steel of the 41 mag, but in actually having that extra thickness inside the bolt cut is what counts....because the bottom of the bolt cut is the thinnest area over the chamber. And most times it goes first, and then the rest of the chamber follows when a revolver blows. Also important, it’s extra strength between the chambers another weak area...and it is critical to strong guns".
http://www.sixgunner.com/backissues/paco/mmagnum6.htm
That’s thicker than it sounds, about the thickness of a strong finger nail. It’s not so much having that extra thickness in the cylinder steel of the 41 mag, but in actually having that extra thickness inside the bolt cut is what counts....because the bottom of the bolt cut is the thinnest area over the chamber. And most times it goes first, and then the rest of the chamber follows when a revolver blows. Also important, it’s extra strength between the chambers another weak area...and it is critical to strong guns".
http://www.sixgunner.com/backissues/paco/mmagnum6.htm
S.B.
Member
If you go back to the beginings of the .41 mag, it was designed as a law enforcement tool not primarily as a hunting gun. The loads that followed were more of the hunting design, so here comes the trouble, and the .41 has suffered ever since. I personally like both calibers and would vote to keep them both.
Actually there were two distinctly different loads at first. One a full power load and another reduced power police load. What caused the revolver to suffer in police sales was the very same reason the LEOs were getting away from the M28. They were big, heavy framed revolvers that most officers didn't want to carry all day. The K-frame Combat Magnum (Model 19) made for a better carry revovler and the switch was made to that model by most departments.
S.B.
Member
Majic, don't disagree at all. Maybe I should of elaborated more. Elmer Keith sought a .40 caliber handgun on the N frame for LE, while Bill Jordon and Skeeter Skelton and others sought the lighter K framed guns. I should note here that many others were on both sides of this argument at the time but I've only mentioned the ones who were mostly in print at the time. Keith's vision was to have loads more suited to the police use(I think in the 1000fps range) The K frame guys needed hotter stuff in the lighter caliber, maybe not their wish in the begining but that's what it took to get the job done with this caliber. Now, rumor has it that, Smith will drop the K framed .357 magnums, because of the damage done to the lighter frames with constant use of magnum loads. If memory serves, the heavier of the two .41 mag. loads hit the market way before the somewhat lighter load did. I can remember the first box of the so called police loads I got, I personally didn't see that much reduction in the felt recoil. I think I've still got the box of brass somewhere in the basement shop. This argument was also fought with the semi auto crowd as Jeff Cooper wanted the Bren 10
(what a carnival that was) and S&W later found the recoil to much for police work and shortened it to the .40 S&W.
(what a carnival that was) and S&W later found the recoil to much for police work and shortened it to the .40 S&W.
S.B.
Member
Majic
Senior Member
Registered: May 2003
Location: Virginia
Posts: 2747
ChristopherG,
The bullets used were a soft cast not swaged. A pure lead swaged bullet would lead at those velocities unless a scraper is attached to the base, but a cast bullet can be driven up to 2200fps with miminal leading if done right.
Majic,
In my own experience, swaged bullets are no better than cast and all will lead a bore if fired over about 1000 fps. I am a firm believer that the condition of the bore affects leading more than any other condition of the gun. Even with a gas check at 2200 fps., I'd guarentee leading, with either cast or swaged.
Senior Member
Registered: May 2003
Location: Virginia
Posts: 2747
ChristopherG,
The bullets used were a soft cast not swaged. A pure lead swaged bullet would lead at those velocities unless a scraper is attached to the base, but a cast bullet can be driven up to 2200fps with miminal leading if done right.
Majic,
In my own experience, swaged bullets are no better than cast and all will lead a bore if fired over about 1000 fps. I am a firm believer that the condition of the bore affects leading more than any other condition of the gun. Even with a gas check at 2200 fps., I'd guarentee leading, with either cast or swaged.
BluesBear
member
Majic, he was simply clarifying his opinion of cast vs swaged bullets and demonstrating his lack of knowledge of how to properly cut and paste a quote.
By the way...
SB Welcome Aboardâ„¢
By the way...
SB Welcome Aboardâ„¢
S.B.
Member
Thanks,BluesBear. Sometimes us ignorant people can't seem to get it right.
Majic, meant no evil towards you sir, just not as computer literate as some.
Majic, meant no evil towards you sir, just not as computer literate as some.
I traded an old dirt bike for a pristine-condition S&W 629 with a 8 3/8" barrel. It was a blast to shoot and blow up stuff out in the desert. WIth the extra-long barrel, the recoil wasn't bad at all. It was fun to shoot, but it didn't seem very practical. So I found a 4" barreled S&W Mtn Gun at a pawn shop and traded the longer-barreled 629 straight across. It seemed more practical to carry in woods, but the recoil was hellacious to say the least so it didn't go with me much on shoot-n-fun days. So I sold it and bought a GLock 29 for backwoods protection (my job takes me in the wilderness quite often). It's a tool that works quite well. But nothing was so much fun as the oriiginal 629 .44 magwith that gangly barrel. Wish I had her back.
surfinUSA
Member
I'm a real believer that the 41 will do everything a 44 will do. However, I don't reload and have no desire to. For me the 44 makes a lot more sense. I can get ammo anywhere at a reasonable price from specials (not so reasonably priced) to heavy magnums.
Its a shame that the 41 didn't also come as a special. They asked for a police load using a 200 gr bullet @ 1000 fps (Sounds like the 40 S&W 180 gr load) and got a a 210 gr bullet @ 1200 fps (sounds like the original 180 gr 10mm load) plus the 1400 FPS load (great for hunting). A special would have been great, maybe it would have made it like the 40 S&W as opposed to the 10mm, another great round that was just a little too powerfull and required a gun a little too big for mainstream police work.
The bottom line though is that for many like myself the 44 mag has too many practical advantages to ignore and buy a 41 that is only practical if you reload.
Its a shame that the 41 didn't also come as a special. They asked for a police load using a 200 gr bullet @ 1000 fps (Sounds like the 40 S&W 180 gr load) and got a a 210 gr bullet @ 1200 fps (sounds like the original 180 gr 10mm load) plus the 1400 FPS load (great for hunting). A special would have been great, maybe it would have made it like the 40 S&W as opposed to the 10mm, another great round that was just a little too powerfull and required a gun a little too big for mainstream police work.
The bottom line though is that for many like myself the 44 mag has too many practical advantages to ignore and buy a 41 that is only practical if you reload.
unspellable
Member
41 vs 44 etc.
The 41 Special exists. At present it is a wild cat, but it does exist.
You guys are asking the wrong question with the 41 vs 44 thing. The real question is, after you have both, do you want to go for a 42 mag wild cat?
The 41 Special exists. At present it is a wild cat, but it does exist.
You guys are asking the wrong question with the 41 vs 44 thing. The real question is, after you have both, do you want to go for a 42 mag wild cat?
Brian Williams
Moderator Emeritus
Why not go with a 45 Colt????
Said while thinking, I should buy a S&W 58...
Said while thinking, I should buy a S&W 58...
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked