I have to wonder:
If the .41 Magnum had caught on as a law enforcement cartridge, just long enough to become popular and see manufacturers build a dedicated frame size specifically for it, would the .357 Magnum still be so popular or considered so "versatile"?
I think that if there were a larger selection of
guns chambered for it, with as many load options available as for .357 Magnum, the .41 Magnum would be the "versatile" revolver cartridge. Bullet weights ranging from 170-180gr HPs to heavier 265gr solids, and of course there's the option to shoot more recently developed .41 Special cartridge in the same guns.
I'm guessing it would still exist in some form, and would likely have a following. Since it evolved from much older cartridges like many revolver cartridges in common usage today, someone at some point would have lengthened a 38 Special case and crammed it into the theoretical dedicated 41 magnum sized frame you describe. Then it would've been put in a J frame, or vice versa. However it's popularity would be diminished I'm guessing compared to the actual reality, and I imagine it sort of having a similar status to 327 Fed Mag. Given that this same "versatility" and appropriate usage debate would of course still exist, one would have to wonder if anyone would have bothered to lengthen a 32 H&R mag case to develop the 32 Fed mag. I find this theoretical pondering in this scenario interesting.
All in all the 41 magnum has a much wider window of effective and appropriate uses than the 357 does. The unfortunate part is the availability of revolver frame sizes. For me, I have a powerful hunger for an L frame 41 magnum, or a slightly larger and beefier framed revolver to house it. I've said this many times but if Ruger could find a safe way to cram 5 rounds of 41 mag into a GP100, I think it would jump to the top of the list for my next purchase. In fact it's probably a gun I'd be willing to sell a 357 magnum to pay for. But I do really like my 357s because they are fun.
If S&W were to put the 41 mag into an L frame, it may be the one situation where I'd be willing to entertain their two piece barrel design.
The Redhawk and N frames are more meat than that particular cartridge needs, and the size difference is the real killer for me. If I'm going to step up to that frame size, then I'm just going to go to a 44 magnum, as the appropriate application window widens even further.
Changing topics:
One aspect of this conversation that I think has been largely ignored in this thread, maybe I missed it, is simply the cost of ammunition. The cost of 357 ammo is quite a bit lower than 44 magnum and certainly 41 mag also. The reality is that in the vast world of handguners out there, many of them will shoot their guns very little, and many will not care about developing any
real shooting skills. If they hit a soda can at 7 yards that'll be good enough for them. So the smaller price tag of the 357 is appealing. There are also a lot of people in the world who live paycheck to paycheck. A LOT of people do this. I recently heard a report on NPR that 40 million Americans don't have even $400 in emergency money saved. I found that startling. I also heard that the average 40 year old American in the workforce has less than $25,000 saved for retirement. Again, that really disturbed me as social security is going to be so heavily taxed in the future, I don't really know that my payments will amount to much.
However, I have no kids, I'm fortunate to have a decent job, and I don't live an extravagant lifestyle. My house is old, small, and wasn't very expensive, but I'm paying a mortgage alone. My truck is 13 years old, and I'm just trying to save for a new one as I'll hit that point of investing in repairs being a poor idea in the not too distant future. I work 7.5 to 10 hours of overtime a week to make extra money and save for retirement and other crap I want to buy. I know a lot of folks in my age range who are living so far outside their means it frightens me. I think I also heard that the average American credit card debt is like $10,000. Really? So my point is I think many folks are very happy with 357 because they can find the ammo, and it isn't costing them an arm and a leg to acquire.
Most shooters out there will never handgun hunt. I think that's a given. Many people out there will never leave the trail when they are in the outdoors, so their chances of encountering large or dangerous animals are diminished, so they see 41 mag and larger as cartridges that are not needed, and it skews their perception of what versatility is.
Most shooters out there will never reload or hand load either. I think this is critical to people's perception of versatility, and reasonable application of a certain cartridge. I started loading a year ago. In that time frame, my perception of versatility has so completely changed due to not being restricted by factory offerings it blows my mind. When you stop looking at what company x offers, and what company y offers, and instead start looking at load data to see what you can put together yourself, seeing the 357 as a versatile cartridge changes. That window narrows a lot, because suddenly you realize that big bore cartridges, especially revolver cartridges, have hugely varying bullet weights and velocities that can be achieved, that frankly the diminished case capacity of the 357 and smaller range of bullet weights just don't allow for. I never considered these things prior to loading my own, because I looked at my needs, what guns I had and what capabilities they had, and what company offers what. I was shooting 45 Colts out of an X frame because I couldn't afford to shoot 460 mags all the time. Now, I see no reason at all to do that, and sacrifice accuracy. I would shoot 360 grain loads from the same gun in 460 mag, and find them largely unpleasant because they were gassed up to high velocity. Guess what, if you aren't hunting big game at long distances, you don't need them gassed up that extreme. In fact now I'm considering 395 gr loads or 460 magnum at moderate velocities, because even if loaded at the low end, a bullet that heavy is likely to pass completely through a large animal.
So my point here is that definitions and perceptions are skewed a great deal based on application, activities, and dedication to the sport.
I agree with the folks asserting that 357 magnum is not terribly versatile, and has rather limited applications that are appropriate. I mean if you look at the numbers involved with load data, the contrast from 357 and larger caliber cartridges is pretty sharp. However, that's based on my interest in the hobby, and my perception. Another person's perception may be much narrower on versatility based on the needs of their particular gun and what it is chambered in. But let's be honest about it too, numbers don't lie, ballistics don't lie, and people who actually use big bores on living creatures are far more educated on the matter than paper punchers who just want a cheap range session.
For the record, I don't hunt............yet. But I do read, and I do consider the words of hunters carefully as their experience is wider than my own.