tell me about the .41mag

[chaim]

OK guys I have a question.

I have rented a few .44mags and I find that the recoil is just a little too much for me to shoot comfortably. I don't like to shoot a gun that I don't enjoy shooting and after a few cylinders most .44mags aren't enjoyable for me anymore. I've thought about buying one with porting to see if that makes enough of a difference but I'm not sure how much difference that will make and I'd rather go without porting if that is an option.

I really love my .357mags but I may want something bigger- most of the time just to have it but sometimes when camping it may be nice to have something even more effective should I come across bears. Also, there is a chance I may end up in Alaska next year for grad school where the bears are big and a hot .357 may be too small.

So I was thinking- how about a .41mag as a compromise.

.41mag owners- how does a .41mag compare to a .44mag. Assuming a similar sized gun that weighs about the same I would think the .41 would have lighter recoil. Is this the case? How does it compare to a hot .357? How hard is it to find different loads (or is this one of those calibers that you really need to load your own)? How expensive is the ammo?

Is .41mag a good way to go or should I eventually just get a .44mag with porting? Another option, given how seldomly a larger gun is needed (and should I go to Alaska for grad school and run into some of the bears there not even a .454 would be enough for some of them) should I just stay with my .357s and go with hotter ammo when going into the woods?

 

[Robert inOregon]

There is no compromise. It power factors in the same ballgame as 44 Magnum and 45 Long Colt. Recoil is not much less than a 44 Magnum either. Only feels less because it is the same gun that weighs more due to the smaller bore size. Not a caliber for everyone since it is not very popular and quality factory ammunition is hard to come by. Tends to be more expensive to shoot than a forty-four and not as great a selection. Awesome weapon for the guy that rolls his own and is looking for something a little off beat. Nice caliber that is a favorite to many.

 

[Shane]

Hmm...maybe the .41 Mag I shot (SW 657 7.5" barrel) was really heavy, because to me it felt like it recoiled significantly less than the S&W 629. The .41 mag gives you a good jolt, but at least IMO its not nearly as painful as full house .44 magnum rounds. Some of the recoil is subjective though--for example the .41 Mag I tried had nice aftermarket rubber grips that I'm sure helped dampen recoil.

The .41 magnum uses lighter bullets in general, and at least with the heavier bullets the .44 magnum has a ballistic edge (to my knowledge for example, nothing is even offered in .41 magnum that has 300 grain bullets). 300 grain bullets in .44 magnum is relatively easy to come by, and very effective on large game and dangerous game at close range.


I actually like the .41 magnum a lot, it can do a lot for its size and is suitable for MOST four legged critters in North America, IMO. The only thing that made me chose .44 magnum recently was that ammo is more available in .44. Had the .41 been as popular and easy to come by as a .44, I would have gone with a .41. I chose the .44 simply because of ammo availability, and I'll just have to grim and bear the .44 mag recoil until I get use to it.

 

[M58]

Well .41 is not a cure all.
For me it is a balance of factors.
I can handle more than .357; but not the full .44; so the .41 works.
I reload; factory loads are out there from 170grs. to 250grs.
I had a nice M629 powerport some years ago; just did not enjoy it. Just me.

I know you were asking the guys...but

 

[4thHorseman]

I agree with Robert of Oregon statements. A 44 can do anything a 41 can, and better.
I had a 41 mag. Didn't take long for me to get rid of it.Bullets were hard to come by and always expensive. Very slim choice in bullets. A huge choice in 44 mag bullets.
So now the question is "Why?"
The 41 mag was develope for law enforcement in the 60"s I believe. Maybe 70's. It was suppose to be the ultimate man stopper. It probably is if you can hit anything and do fast follow up shots with it. Most people can't, that is why it has fallen out of favor with the law enforcement.
Try to get rid of one for a average price, good luck, not many people want one. A 44 mag though, almost everyone would like to own one. Maybe if Dirty Harry had a 41 instead of a 44 it might be a little different today......but he didn't.
My advice, go with the 44mag.

 

[JPM70535]

Having shot both 41 and44 mags, (Both S&Ws) I found the recoil difference to be negligible. IMO you would be better off to buy the 44 mag. and either load your own to the power factor you find comfortable or just use 44 specials to practice with.
You can still use the factory 44 mags for serious work.


USE ENOUGH GUN

 

[WonderNine]

Yes, I agree with JPM. The bullet diameter of the .44 mag is not really that much greater than the .41 magnum. .429 vs. .410 of the .41 magnum. The big difference is in the availability of ammo and the fact that you can load the .44 with specials for LOTS of practice. PRACTICE IS GOOD. I really do like the .41 magnum as a round, but it is so much less versitile and much more expensive to shoot = less practice. I had a .41 magnum in Taurus Titanium in ultralite and THAT is recoil, but I could handle it in rapid fire. I'm sure you could handle a .44 magnum full metal revolver under a stressful situation with the adrenaline pumping.

However the most powerful .41 mags I've ever seen are slightly above the 900 ft/lbs pressure range and the hottest .44's I've seen are slightly above 1400 ft/lbs. That's quite a difference (if you can handle it).

Personally though, I'd prefer neither. I'd want a 45/70 Marlin and a 45/70 Magnum Research revolver as backup in bear (especially Polar/Brown bear country. That's too much for most people though, especially the revolver part....

Good luck.

 

[trapshooter]

The .41 Mag is exactly what it is advertised to be. More than a .357, less than a .44 Mag., in all areas. Velocity, energy, recoil (in same style/size guns), etc.

Never caught on in LE because it recoils more than the .357, and even the .357 recoil is more than most want to deal with on a regular basis. (Does this sound like the 9mm, .40 S&W, 10mm thing?) That's why most practice is/was done with lower oomph .38's, with full power for carry. Plus, lots of folks/depts used the Model 19 S&W, which is less beefy than the N frames, and lighter, so easier on the 'duty-belt loading'. Tended to push for the .38 practice/full bore carry solution. The .41 Mag S&W's were N-frames, heavier, etc. Far less popular. But that's just my (somewhat educated) opinion. The really hard-core shooters liked the .41 Mag, though it never got the acceptance from most everyone else it may have deserved.

The real drawback to the .41, these days, is lack of selection in ammo and components, versus tons of choice in the other two calibers. You are almost forced to reload for it, if you shoot it much. Even then, you are limited.

All in all, it's a good round. But recoil (full power loads) is not
that much less than the .44. I'm not saying it's a waste of time to buy one, but I'd try to shoot one before I did, in your case, to make the best choice for you.

 

[WESHOOT2]

NOT ME

While doing 41 Mag research I came across this interesting observation: 41 Magnum revolvers are often extremely accurate due to low production numbers not wearing out the machine tools as fast.

Hmmm...............

All the 41 Mags I've had experience with showed superb accuracy
with good ammo

My Redhawk is a keeper.

 

[cratz2]

I like the idea of the 41 Magnum. I've shot several, one extensively. With 44 Magnums, obviously the longer barrels and heavier guns take recoil a bit. I'd say that a 5" 41 Magnum is about equal to a 7 1/2" 44 Magnum, most factors being similar. Either way you look at it, the 41 Magnum is closer to the 44 Magnum than to the 357 Magnum. Of course, this is true of killing ability on medium sized game.

The answer could be to start reloading. if you don't shoot a lot, you can get set up for fairly little money. Then you could load a bit milder loads and work your way up if you wanted. Of course, if you're going to handload, you might as well go with the 44 Mag.

You want a big boom that always leaves a bit hole, it's going to kick.

 

[Gmac]

I have a 41 mag. Blackhawk & I love it. That being said if recoil is a problem get a 45 Colt. It will meet or exceed 44 Mag. performance ( with proper ammunition such as Buffalo Bore etc.) with less pressure hence less recoil. Before you guys turn on the flamethrowers that's not just my opinion, it's from John Linebaugh's gun notes.Single Actions forever!

 

[WESHOOT2]

OH YEAH?

I have Redhawks in 44 and 45, and when either launches heavy bullets they feel the same -- WHOA Daddy!

 

[chaim]

So conscensous seems to be that the .41mag is a little lower recoiling but not much. You also lose a little in power (which I knew). Ammo availability isn't all that good so reloading is a must. However, if one reloads then a .44mag can be downloaded to a more comfortable level or a Ruger .45lc can be uploaded to enough strength and both at higher power levels offer much more than .41mag.

So I guess since I'm a revolver guy I figured I'd eventually own a .44mag even if it was a bit much for me. For the same reason a .41mag may be a good addition but it sounds like most of you are saying there isn't much other reason to pick one over a .44mag.

One negative someone pointed out about the .41mag is lower resale value due to lower demand, but if I buy used that can be a plus. So I guess better deals can be had in the .41mag over a .44mag?

So overall is this one of those 6 of one, half dozen of the other kinda choices? One may offer some minor strengths in one area over the other but the other then offers some strengths in another area?

I'm more confused than before.

 

[Robert inOregon]

One negative someone pointed out about the .41mag is lower resale value due to lower demand, but if I buy used that can be a plus. So I guess better deals can be had in the .41mag over a .44mag?

I hope people selling 41 Magnums are listening to this and lower their prices.

 

[WESHOOT2]

OR

Try a Magna-Ported Pachmayr-Decelerated 5.5" 44 Redhawk and see if that don't offer you a recoil impulse you can handle.

IME the big three feel slightly different when 'steam-rolling', with the 41 version BY FAR offering the lowest felt flinch, er, recoil.

The 44 is the most versatile if buying ammo, and the 45 Colt (in Rugers) offers the highest level of versatility for handloaders.

yeah

 

[chaim]

OK, so the real concensous seems to be that both are great chamberings.

I did plan to eventually buy a .44mag simply because I'm a revolver guy and as such I need to eventually have one (what revolver collection is complete without a .44mag?). However, not having a ton of money these days I was planning on waiting a few years before buying something I wouldn't shoot much (though I guess I could shoot .44spl out of it). I was thinking the .41mag may be a nice compromise for when I need/want more than the .357mag loaded with hot ammo yet mild enough (compared to the .44mag) that I may be more comfortable with it.

Well, I was thinking again...(dangerous I know )

With MD's new built-in lock law most brands and models of semi-autos are now effectively banned in MD (including S&W, the lock is only on their revolvers). S&W and Taurus revolvers are still allowed new (though unfortunately Rugers are not) and of course there are plenty of really nice used guns out there. So I was already planning on this year being a revolver and long-gun year anyway.

Maybe, at least if I go used, I could/should just give up and buy both (or all three and get a .45lc too)?

That does seem to be the concensous- both (or adding the .45lc, all three) are great choices and I should probably eventually have all three. Being a revolver guy that does make some sense.

I already have an L-frame and K-frame .357mag. I didn't like a J-frame (Taurus equivelent) in .357mag. I have one med. framed .38 (a Colt Police Positive Special). Any other .357s I'd buy really would only duplicate a niche I already have filled. I was planning on a M10, a Taurus 450 (.45lc snub) and a Taurus 85UL, but they aren't overly expensive. So adding two, and possibly three, (instead of one) large frame big bores may work out. However, I was thinking about getting a .45acp revolver since I do love this chambering (and if I happen to run into a 9mm snub I will certainly pick one up) and that could put a crimp in this idea.

At any rate (in case it would effect your answers) I should have made clear that I would plan to eventually get both (being into revolvers). Depending upon some other factors I may get both this year or within one or two anyway. So the real question is which should I get first- the .41mag something a bit different that I may be able to shoot more often (since the recoil is less, or so I assumed) or just go ahead and get the .44mag and forget the .41mag (or even get the .45lc first and try it)?

Another monkey wrench to throw into the works here-
What do you guys think of the 10mm revolvers in comparison to the .41mag in power, versatility (esp. since it can be downloaded w/ .40S&W) and recoil? (Maybe that is best suited for a new thread?)

 

[trapshooter]

I'll second what Robertin Oregon said about prices. Good .41 mag guns are very desirable to some people. Those who don't want them don't buy them.

Also, I get the same impression about accuracy of the .41 as Weshoot2 did, although I hadn't come across any specific reason. (There's some logic to his comment about tooling, though).

It's been said before, that though in theory, one caliber should be as accurate as any other, everything else being equal, some cartridge combinations have developed reputations, based on long experience, of being more consistent than others.

I hope I didn't add much to your confusion. Felt recoil is subjective. What I think is too much may be mild to someone else, or the reverse may be true. That's why I recommend you try to shoot a .41 mag. It may be just the ticket. They aren't that easy to come by anymore, so it may not be practical to suggest this, I admit.

 

[chaim]

trapshooter,

No you didn't really add to my confusion. Yours was a really good post actually. It is just that I kinda assumed I'd either get .41mag fans who would say "get the .41mag" or I'd get .44mag fans who would say "just get a .44" and yes I got some of that, but most people seem to be telling me that both are great.

I'm starting to think that between the .41mag and .44mag, and now adding the .45lc to the mix (as well as maybe a 10mm), I should just get whichever I find the best used value (condition v. price) first.

 

[Guntalk]

New Winchester Load for .41 Mag

The new Winchester load for the .41 Magnum might change the picture. It's a 240-grain Supreme Platinum Tip Hollow Point which leaves the muzzle at 1250 fps and carries 833 ft. lbs. of energy.

That's more than the standard 240-grain .44 Magnum load - in velocity and energy!

 

[Fish Springs]

I have both .41 and .44 Remington Magnums.

My first .41 was an early Blackhawk, 4 5/8" bbl. It has been carried and shot alot all over the west and in Alaska. It worked very well for a varietly of duties from chasing claim jumpers to shooting caribou. Short, easy to carry and plenty of power. It has most often used Remington 210 grain factory loads and a few thousand 215 grain 1000 FPS hard cast handloads. Carried in a shoulder holster it is the right bush-country gun for me.

I also think highly of a S&W Classic Hunter in .41 Mag which followed me home because of the superb, factory trigger pull. With a 6.5 inch barrel it does not get carried nearly as much as the Ruger--but what a smooth, accurate pistol and plenty of power to 100 yards on deer sized animals.

After years of hearing "ya' ought a have a .44 (I got the .41 Ruger, used, while in highschool, for $50) a second S&W Classic Hunter, Rocky Mtn Elk version which came magna ported ended up in the gun locker. Differences: more recoil, a port which is useful if not entertaining, full power ammuntion is more commonly available--Walmart has it. It is finely accurate with 44 S&W rounds when they can be found.

Personally a .41 Rem Mag and factory loads will do anything I'd want to do with a large caliber handgun and do it for a long time. I have no urge to shoot anything larger than a caribou with a handgun and have other firearms for ranges beyond 100 yards. Find the gun which fits your hand, budget and carry requirements--then practice, practice, practice. All three of the pistols in this post are capble of hitting gallon jugs at any distance inside 100 yards when I do my part

Enjoy the decision making and get to the range

BTW the .45 Colt is a neat pistol caliber, if you reload, as it is really limited in OTC ammunition selection. I have started lots of people shooting pistols with a Ruger Bisley .45 Colt and hand loads.

 

[JMLV]

actually I think you hit the nail on the head

with your last post. get the 45 long colt first. It will do anything a 44 will do with proper handloads but factory loads are pussycats to shoot. Get a redhawk and you can even make loads in borderline 454 casull catagory if you want. so a good 45 will do everything you want or need it to do in a bigbore revolver. the 41 & 44 are excellent rounds and should be added to any complete collection. Redhawks(or even the super redhawk) or perhaps bisley models will go a long way in handling the recoil these rounds generate. Used is a good way to go if you can't buy new becouse of MD(HIGHLY UNCONSTITIONAL) laws.

 

[Robert inOregon]

Get a redhawk and you can even make loads in borderline 454 casull catagory if you want.

Those that invented the 45 LC +P concept do not recommend shooting ANY 45 LC gun beyond 32000 CUP without a five shot cylinder conversion.

Not being a handloader can also pose a problem since not every store carries 45 LC +P bullets. They are not cheap either.

 

[JMLV]

First I did say you had to handload

to get the most out of the 45 long colt.
second the cylinder of both the redhawk 7 superredhawk are
THE SAME DIAMENTER. the super redhawk cylinder is made out of a special alloy so as to safely take the proof loads used to test the 454. it was borderlind when made of the std stainless used in the redhawk when used with regular 454 loads. so borderline 454 reloads (this means close to 454 performance but not quite, thus lower pressure) are possible in a redhawk in 45 long colt caliber.
+P 45 long colts are indeed expensive to purchace aprox $50 per box of 50. so reloading is definately the way to go.

 

[M58]

BTW, I have the M610 (10mm) in the 4" barrel.
Great gun and caliber to reload.
Also, there are 5" and 6" barrels out there.

 

[BigG]

I've owned the Mod 57 S&W and Mod 29 S&W. Not that much difference, recoil wise, but quite a bit of difference in price of ammo. 41 quite a bit higher than 44 because there's less demand for it.