Lipsey & Ruger…ask for a GP100 in 41 Magnum!!!

For most of us, the "big" game we most often hunt is "deer" and perhaps hogs.
Also a majority of hunters, hunt with some form of long gun,
Handgun hunters are a minority.
My deer gun a revolver.
Over time have used 357 mag, 41 mag, 44 mag, 45 Colt and 454;
Among these, my preference is 41 mag, but have used 45 Colt for a longer timeframe.
Some years ago, a lot of gun writer ink was spilled about the effectiveness of a 250 gr
43 cal bullet at 1200 fps. This load, in my experience, is about the max that is truly
Comfortable to shoot. 250 gr at 1200 fps is an easy load in 41 mag, that is why I favor
The 41. A dozen or so years ago, when I acquired a FA83 in 41 mag, the dealer asked
Why I wanted 41. He was shooting a FA in 454, but admitted he could only go a couple
Cylinders. Before I could get my answer out, another guy talked about how enjoyable
The 41 is, especially compared go 454.
For me, 41 mag, is the right balance of power and shootability.
Other cartridges are nice choices, I think if a handgun hunter is
Really honest with her/himself, they too will find the 41 mag to be optimal.

PS, slightly off topic - another highly effective and shootable deer load
Is 255 gr SWC in 45 Colt at 950 fps.

 

The same can be said about any caliber, I've read all the stories of people buying Tokarevs because the ammo was cheap and then promptly sold those Toks as soon as the cheap ammo dried up. Didn't care a lick about the potential of the cartridge, how high velocity it was, just that it was cheap.

The ammo makers are never going to make .41 Mag in the same quantities they make 10mm or .357, not unless in the next John Wick movie he starts blasting gangsters with a .41 Mag and looks straight into the camera and says "Being that this here is a .41 Magnum, the most practically powerful revolver in the world capable of blowing your head CLEAN off..."

Dude, the 10mm has had such a resurgence in the past few years that finding ammo online for $18 a box was easy. Last year before Brandon "won" I was able to get some Federal 10mm for $21 a box at an lgs while 9mm was double the price.

If you still think 10mm isn't being asked for then why did S&W just announce a 10mm M&P and why do they and Ruger make 10mm revolvers? People are buying them and the ammo not costing $35 a box is a big factor. Back in the day you bought a .357 instead of a .41, today people are buying 10mm instead of a .41

 

Yep, you reflect the opinion of us who have or had 41 Magnums. And shoot them! Contrary to that, those who never pulled the trigger on one are the most vocal telling us how "useless" and "unnecessary" 41 Magnum is.

As for GP100 in 41 Magnum. First, there is no 10 mm magnum rimmed. Well, use to be Herter's .401 Powermag, unfortunately Starline, as the last resource for old and odd brass, doesn't list it any more. However, 41 Magnum is there, as well as 41 Special and 414 Super Mag https://www.starlinebrass.com/pistol-brass/ . Obviously, there is interest and market for 41s. Of course, not as big as for 357, 44 and 45, but enough to keep various 41 brass listed. The advantage of GP100 in 41 Magnum is that this will be revolver in fairly powerful cartridge, yet same weight and size as 357. I wouldn't go and shoot from it 100+ rounds, even [email protected] fps, however, for outdoorsman, or hunter where 41 Magnum is enough, this revolver will be top choice.

@TTv2, as for your statement that "Fact is the overwhelming majority of people don't reload", c'mon, go on ranges and see the facts by yourself. I bet that of all revolver ammo fired, at least 80% are reloads, and active revolvers' shooters will overwhelmingly tell you that at least 98% of ammo they use are reloads. Last time I fired 357 factory load was more than 15 years ago, form friend's S&W 66, while I visited him. He doesn't reload, and in 5-6 years he had that revolver, no more than one box was fired from it. Last time factory 44 Magnum ammo was fired from my revolver was about 20 years by friend's daughter (19 at that time), just to show her how it feels to shoot full power 44 Magnum.

 

Okay, now I know you're joking. You got me.

 

I've been a big bore handgunner for almost 50 years, and the 41 magnum just works. It has at least 90% of the power of the 44 magnum, with 20-25% less felt recoil. Every 41 magnum revolver I've owned has been dead nuts accurate, easy to load for, and with power to spare. As NeroM said, it easily covers the threshold of comfortable recoil with enough power for any usage in the lower 48. Elmer's original idea for the 44 mag was a 250 at 1200, and that still works today.

To be honest, in order to split the difference between the 357 and 44 mags, they should have made a 39 magnum, with .395 caliber bullets. But the 41 Colt was already there, and even though the 38 special was misnamed, a 39 cal would seem redundant to many shooters. A 10 mm rimmed cartridge would be about as close as we'd ever come to a 39 magnum, and I'd love to see it in an L-framed revolver, but I'm not holding my breath.

 

Funny how people get trying to defend their choice of caliber. Why not spend time shooting it instead of trying to justify it. Shoot what you like and like what you shoot...Carry on...

 

Same applies in opposite direction. The difference is that some defend cartridge and revolver they know, have experience, and were able to compare with other cartridges/revolvers.

At the same time others, instead of spending time on shooting, bashing that same revolver in caliber on which they never pulled the trigger, never mind owned, reloaded and fired at least several hundred rounds.

 

A cast frame the size of the GP100 in .44 Mag does not give me confidence and Ruger apparently agrees because if they could make a 5 shot .44 Mag GP100 why didn't they do it when they made the .44 Spl? If the frame was so strong you'd think we'd have seen custom GP100's made by gunsmiths, especially after the .44 Spl model was made and yet we didn't.

The answer is obvious: the GP100 cannot handle .44 Magnum.

 

Whatever the case is with the GP100 it can't handle .44 Mag without changes that Ruger doesn't care to make. Ruger is more likely to make a .41 Mag in the GP than .44 Mag, yet they don't and instead make a 10mm.

 

True, but there are likely reasons and I find it odd how Ruger's biggest competitors in S&W and Taurus offer a 5 shot .44 Mag on smaller frame and Ruger has always been about getting market share.

That said, when Ruger does introduce a new revolver design like the LCR, they take a long time to do it to make sure it's not just worth doing, but also done right and it shows as the QC on the LCR's seems like out of box you've got a guaranteed to work revolver while the SP101 and GP100 have been... disappointing lately.

 

You missed the point...Go out and shoot instead of sitting around on a forum and trying to shoot down everything being said against your favorite cartridge...

 

while everyones at it, can you PS a New Vaq in 10mm/40s/w as a regular production? Maybe decent Roper grips for the GP as well. Bring back the Standard model too. My wish list is too long isnt it?

 

I remember as a kid in the sixties, fondly ogling those West German made revolvers in the perennial Herter's catalogs that came to our house(back when you could still mail order a gun). Still have few items ordered from them, like my first Lee Loader and a "Sporter" stock I custom carved for my ol' M1917 ought-six. Gun rags praised it's power in the Whitetail woods and it was those articles that ignited in me the desire to hunt deer with a revolver. Just hearing it's name ".401 Power-Mag" still makes the hair on the back of my neck stand.

 

.401 PowerMag doesn't have the same name recognition like 10mm Magnum or 10mm Auto Magnum would have.

 

This might help:

401 Powermag Case Forming https://singleactions.proboards.com/thread/1394/401-powermag-case-forming

 

Kindness is required here
regarding those who wish
for and want various .41
Magnum firearms.

As children, they were sweet
little creatures but different
than their playmates. They
always seemed to wander.

Now as adults, they are fine
folks but they still want to
wander and they retain the
innocence of the sweet
little creatures they used to
be.

They are so few and really
pose no dangers to others.
Let them have their dreams
and hopes.

 

Could you (and others) try any harder to hijack this thread to be about your interest in 10mm Mag chambered for a revolver?

 

Just thinking about the .41LC and its history I can't help but think the .41 was kind of cursed from the beginning. The .41 Magnum came out when most large police departments were having public relations issues and avoiding the "magnum" name, movies were in the theaters featuring rogue "hero" cops toting massive magnum revolvers and the market for hunting just wasn't there. In 1960, most handgun hunters were more interested in the .44 than the .41. And, having the option of shelf-stock ammo in .44Spl for lighter game and plinking was darned attractive, even then. If it ever catches a break, some marketing genius may find a way to popularize it - like someone said, if John Wick blows away a bunch of gangsters with a .41 and Keanu Reeves can manage to utter some unforgettable line about the gun, maybe. That depends on Keanu Reeves managing to emote. Good luck.

 

I don't remember those movies until the early 70s.

No one was interested in the .41 Mag in 1960 because it didn't exist then. The first .41 magnum was the S&W Model 58 which was introduced in 1964.
Disclaimer: I am not a .41 Magnum fanboy. As I said in a previous post I have only one. It's the only one I've ever had, and I've never fired it. I do find a certain "romance" about the caliber as I think it came about, as I stated earlier, as a result in an error in reasoning.
Does it have its place? Yes. If it doesn't than neither does the .44 Mag (a .454 Casul will do everything it does); neither does the 9mm (the .38 Super will do everything it does); neither does the .40 S&W (the 10mm will do everything it does) Okay, the principle should be evident by now. (I won't even discuss the .45 GAP )
My point is that everything has its place, even if that place is to amuse and satisfy the owner in some way.
I could argue all day long that the ONLY necessary handgun caliber is . 357 Magnum. (But I wont. )

 

Please delete, double post, problem with internet

 

Considering my experience with 41 Bisley, and reports from gun writers who own S&W 57/657, I think you are correct. I had a reasonably good accuracy even when using some iffy bullets. I didn't cast, and local supplier had SWC with very short and undersized front driving band. Seems to me that 41 Magnum isn't finicky regarding bullets' quality. I cannot say that for 357 Magnums revolvers I had.

I found in several instances statements (correct or not) from gun writers that one major reason for 41 Magnum accuracy is that it was later than 357 Magnum and 44 Magnum, so SAAMI specification for 41 caliber was done taking in account the best design features of other calibers. Also, production of 41 revolvers was lower than 357, 44 and 45, so tooling was not pushed too far in production of 41 revolvers as it was in production of revolvers in other calibers. Anybody remembered a small army of shooters complaining about undersized chambers on Ruger 45 Colt revolvers, and oversized on Colts and clones? Smiths regularly offer opening cylinders on Ruger 45 revolvers, and some folks even started business doing that.