Shoobee
member
The "44" is really .429 inches, whereas the "41" is really .410 inches.
This difference is 4%.
That means theoretically at some distance downrange the smaller diameter in the same weight bullet will be more efficient and hold its trajectory better due to less atmospheric resistance in flight. That's with respect to the bullet however. It assumes you are firing out of very similar weapons with the same actions and most notably, the same barrel length.
Bottom line, which is best is the same issue as with the rifle debates, and depends on "what do you plan to shoot with it?"
My overall view of all the magnum pistols and revolvers is that they are too powerful for law enforcement or for effective self defense. Thus I conclude that they are hunting guns.
When you hunt, you normally are only going to shoot one round. You don't need to cap off an entire magazine or cylinder, as when you are defending yourself or in a police gunfight.
Thus for hunting, I would rate the hunting guns in the following order:
#1 45-70
#2 454 casul
#3 44 rem mag
#4 500 S&W
You could plug the .41 rem mag someplace near the .44 but it would depend on the barrel length, with a longer barrel being better than a shorter one for hunting. Ergo if your .41 and your .44 are the same size and the same weight and same barrel length, and the bullets and loads are the same weight and same energy, then there would be a slight advantage to the .41, but you would not notice it, and it would be an insignificant difference.
Going with a more popular round ensures availability of bullets and brass, whether you reload or whether you buy retail. But that is a convenience factor, although it has its advantages.
My point being, there are at least 2 better hunting guns than the .44 or the .41 so debating between almost-twin brothers is a bit meaningless.
Hail to the chief:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:BFR_45-70_1.jpg
This difference is 4%.
That means theoretically at some distance downrange the smaller diameter in the same weight bullet will be more efficient and hold its trajectory better due to less atmospheric resistance in flight. That's with respect to the bullet however. It assumes you are firing out of very similar weapons with the same actions and most notably, the same barrel length.
Bottom line, which is best is the same issue as with the rifle debates, and depends on "what do you plan to shoot with it?"
My overall view of all the magnum pistols and revolvers is that they are too powerful for law enforcement or for effective self defense. Thus I conclude that they are hunting guns.
When you hunt, you normally are only going to shoot one round. You don't need to cap off an entire magazine or cylinder, as when you are defending yourself or in a police gunfight.
Thus for hunting, I would rate the hunting guns in the following order:
#1 45-70
#2 454 casul
#3 44 rem mag
#4 500 S&W
You could plug the .41 rem mag someplace near the .44 but it would depend on the barrel length, with a longer barrel being better than a shorter one for hunting. Ergo if your .41 and your .44 are the same size and the same weight and same barrel length, and the bullets and loads are the same weight and same energy, then there would be a slight advantage to the .41, but you would not notice it, and it would be an insignificant difference.
Going with a more popular round ensures availability of bullets and brass, whether you reload or whether you buy retail. But that is a convenience factor, although it has its advantages.
My point being, there are at least 2 better hunting guns than the .44 or the .41 so debating between almost-twin brothers is a bit meaningless.
Hail to the chief:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:BFR_45-70_1.jpg
Last edited:
