Fine Figure of a Man
Member
No, but if you reload and want to shoot bullets under 240 grains there is no reason not to get a 41.
41 magnum, why?
- Thread starter Antihero
- Start date
- Status
silicosys4
Member
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2012
- Messages
- 3,667
I'm of the opinion that the .41 never gained the popularity of the .44 for a reason
that reason being,
the .41 does nothing that the .44 can't do as well or better.
Conceivably, you can go a little lighter in bullet weight with the .41, but you can also go a lot heavier with the .44
that reason being,
the .41 does nothing that the .44 can't do as well or better.
Conceivably, you can go a little lighter in bullet weight with the .41, but you can also go a lot heavier with the .44
ApacheCoTodd
member
Confederate
Member
The question of the .41's relevance has been long debated. My own view is, as you said. Anything the .41 can do, the .44 mag can do and arguably better. How about law enforcement? No, in my opinion, the .357 with 125gr jhps is superior or at least equal to any .41 loading created by man. The .41 is more likely to make a hole going in and one going out, and any energy the round has when exiting a person is wasted. If you reduce its energy, you reduce its stopping power. At 950 fps, you're going to have a bigger gun with a bigger hole, but the .357 will have, by far, better stopping power.
The .44 mag will have slightly better stopping power for game, and the .357 will have significantly better stopping power for humans. What about recoil? The .44 mag will have slightly more, but if you're bothered by recoil, you probably should be using other guns and loads and forget about both the 41/44. Get a .357 and use heavy or light bullets depending on what you want to do. The .44 can be loaded down or up as easily as the .41 so, again, why would you need both? Yes, Skeeter Skelton and other gun writers praised the .41, but remember, they were in the business of selling guns, and many of their firearms were either FREE or heavily discounted.
I can't think of even a single reason a person would be better off with a .41 than a .44, and I've been reading gun magazines since the late 70s. I bought a .44 mag years ago and fired it a few times, then lost the urge. I later got a stainless model because I got the chance, then traded it without ever shooting it. I probably would have kept it, but the price of ammo was just too expensive. The only reasons for having a .41 over a .44 mag are:
The .44 mag will have slightly better stopping power for game, and the .357 will have significantly better stopping power for humans. What about recoil? The .44 mag will have slightly more, but if you're bothered by recoil, you probably should be using other guns and loads and forget about both the 41/44. Get a .357 and use heavy or light bullets depending on what you want to do. The .44 can be loaded down or up as easily as the .41 so, again, why would you need both? Yes, Skeeter Skelton and other gun writers praised the .41, but remember, they were in the business of selling guns, and many of their firearms were either FREE or heavily discounted.
I can't think of even a single reason a person would be better off with a .41 than a .44, and I've been reading gun magazines since the late 70s. I bought a .44 mag years ago and fired it a few times, then lost the urge. I later got a stainless model because I got the chance, then traded it without ever shooting it. I probably would have kept it, but the price of ammo was just too expensive. The only reasons for having a .41 over a .44 mag are:
- It's better for law enforcement/self defense
- It's more powerful
- Ammo is cheaper
- Ammo/components are more widelyavailable
- Ammo is more varied
- Guns are much more widely available
- Guns are lighter to carry
- They recoil less
- It is more versatile
- The ammo is more accurate
- The guns are more durable
silvermane_1
Member
Well "technically" .41 vs. .429/.430-.431 there Blue Brick, and in "metric" terms 10.4mm vs. 10.9mm.
I seriously doubt it is, 2.5l lebaron engine swapped in for one
adcoch1
Member
I always wanted a rampage with a v10 in it just for giggles... But that probably gives away my reason for my 41 mag opinion. There is no replacement for displacement! There is little difference in the majority of loads between 41 and 44 mag, but the ones that are there matter for big critter hunting. If deer are the only thing on the menu, a lot of ammo will work, but while the 41 excells at not overdoing it for deer(and consequently bad guys) the 44 mag gives you that little bit extra for bigger stuff. It isn't a big margin, but why run a big revolver with a smaller than necessary bore size?
silvermane_1
Member
Well on the "Shelby Rampage" topic Dodge did make a "California Special" version that had a Shelby Charger nose on them.
RealGun
Member
Unless they do it in a Redhawk frame and still call it a GP100, a hybrid like the Super GP100, a misnomer really, a 41 Magnum in a GP100 is not going to happen while remaining 6 rounds. I wish that notion would not keep coming up.
RealGun
Member
If you have smaller size on your mind, you probably should avoid both chamberings. The exception would be if you reload and go with 41 Special.
I like the 41 well enough, my 1st centerfire revolver was a used Ruger Blackhawk in 41 mag. After buying the gun and trying to find ammo I found out why the gun was so cheap. This was the late 1970's, I was still in college with very little spare money for ammo. The last box of ammo I bought for it cost me $30, which was a ton of money back then. Ammo, and prices for 41 has gotten better, but it is still best left for reloaders.
From a performance perspective it doesn't do anything you can't do as well, if not slightly better with a 357 or 44 mag. But at the same time I'd not feel the least bit handicapped with a 41. At the end of the day the only real reason to own one is to be different. And that is reason enough if that is what someone wants.
From a performance perspective it doesn't do anything you can't do as well, if not slightly better with a 357 or 44 mag. But at the same time I'd not feel the least bit handicapped with a 41. At the end of the day the only real reason to own one is to be different. And that is reason enough if that is what someone wants.
RealGun
Member
I think a 357 might approach the performance but would require a large frame gun model to be anything one would want to shoot regularly. The 41 then would be a bit lighter in the same pIatform. I would leave it that 41 is significantly above 357 and below 44, right where the numbers suggest.
Here ya go read this thread and you can go over all the stuff over and over and over again!
https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...-sheer-buffoonery.859794/page-4#post-11308362
mcb
Member
This is a fairly silly reason but none the less the reason I don't own a 41 Mag is the same reason I don't own a 20 Gauge shotgun. Nearly all the 20 gauge shotguns are built on 12 gauge frames and all the 41 mags are built on 44 mag frames. Very few maker scale the frame to match the 20 Ga or 41 Mag. This is also my objection to most 9mm revolvers for CCW despite my love of moonclips and rimless revolvers. YMMV
RealGun
Member
Charlie98
Member
Then there is your answer! Just remember, if you ever get tired of it, there is a pretty healthy resale potential right here at THR...
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
It's probably generally a better choice for deer sized game. Since it's built on the same sized platforms, the guns are a little heavier and the cartridge a little lighter, which results in less beating up of the shooter.The .44 isn't going to kill deer any deader. Where the .44 really shines is with heavier bullets and virtually everything on the planet has been taken with it.
Generally speaking, you're really better off handloading for any of them. That said, you'll have a lot more factory AND handloading options for the .44 than the .41. It simply hasn't seen the development that the .44 has.
I don't own a .41Mag (finally!) because it does anything better than anything else. I own one, with more surely to come, because I'm a revolver loony and feel the unrelenting urge to own them all.
Generally speaking, you're really better off handloading for any of them. That said, you'll have a lot more factory AND handloading options for the .44 than the .41. It simply hasn't seen the development that the .44 has.
I don't own a .41Mag (finally!) because it does anything better than anything else. I own one, with more surely to come, because I'm a revolver loony and feel the unrelenting urge to own them all.
Fine Figure of a Man
Member
Zaydok Allen
Member
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2011
- Messages
- 13,274
I think folks have pretty well covered the plusses and minuses of the ballistic capability. I agree with mcb that it falls a little bit in a hole. If you aren't able to afford, or don't care to own a bunch of big bore revolvers, there's virtually no real reason to own a 41 over a 44 mag. If you can afford it, and you load your own ammo, I don't know why you wouldn't want one though.
Really to me, the 41 magnum is a cartridge that has never been brought to it's potential by manufacturers. If S&W can put a 44 mag in an L frame, they could sure do it with a 41 mag. The safety margin would be bigger, and honestly I think it'd be a lot more appropriate cartridge to put in that frame size. I'd love to see Ruger do it with the GP100, and I'm guessing if they can do it with 10mm, the 41 wouldn't be too hard either. If either company ever does, I will likely sell a 357 magnum or two to fund one. It would just be a better option for a woods walking gun, and loading it appropriately would be fun.
Really to me, the 41 magnum is a cartridge that has never been brought to it's potential by manufacturers. If S&W can put a 44 mag in an L frame, they could sure do it with a 41 mag. The safety margin would be bigger, and honestly I think it'd be a lot more appropriate cartridge to put in that frame size. I'd love to see Ruger do it with the GP100, and I'm guessing if they can do it with 10mm, the 41 wouldn't be too hard either. If either company ever does, I will likely sell a 357 magnum or two to fund one. It would just be a better option for a woods walking gun, and loading it appropriately would be fun.
jaguarxk120
Member
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2011
- Messages
- 1,373
I have both O/U's and pump guns made on their own 20 gauge frame. All handle well
being sized to the cartridge.
being sized to the cartridge.
mcb
Member
Yes unfortunately, a relatively modern Model 10.
Yeah I probably should not have said "nearly all". But a moderate number are and it seems a bit silly to me. If I was to buy a 20 gauge it would be on a properly scaled frame.
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
That's a stipulation I have when I buy something other than a 12ga. It must be scaled to the cartridge.
mcb
Member
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
