41 mag......good all around revolver round?

[45dotACP]

I am super ghey for the Smith model 57. The one I own with the 8 3/8 inch barrel is so accurate it's crazy. Unlike many guns, handload development involved just putting 16 grains of 2400 and primer in a case, topping with a 215gr SWC and that's it.

Offhand shots at 20 oz coke bottles 50 yards away are more hit than miss and I'm not even that good of a shot.

Any thoughts as to why the .41 seems so inherently accurate?

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

[Alpha Sierra]

Any thoughts as to why the .41 seems so inherently accurate?

I don't think it's the cartridge. I think it's the handgun. Seriously. I don't know why but a S&W revolver in proper tune and timing is just more accurate than any semi auto handgun costing the same.

[mtnbkr]

Any thoughts as to why the .41 seems so inherently accurate?

I don't think it's the cartridge. I think it's the handgun. Seriously. I don't know why but a S&W revolver in proper tune and timing is just more accurate than any semi auto handgun costing the same.

My view is that the 41mag, being a modern cartridge not carrying the baggage of the BP era, doesn't suffer from the variety of dimensional options that older cartridges seem to have. This is especially noticeable in the 45Colt where you have a somewhat defined bullet diameter of .454, yet guns can have bores or throats all over the place, even up until the 80s. Ruger AND S&W are guilty of this. It's also present, to a lesser degree, in the 38special as exhibited in my 38Special revolvers ranging from from a mid 50s Target Masterpiece to an early 2000s j-frame.

The 41, on the other hand, was developed well past the BP era. Therefore, it stands to reason the specs are better defined and accepted by industry.

Chris

[BillSWPA]

That so?

Let me clarify what he meant:

GJM’s recommendations were based on a great deal of testing as detailed in his thread. While everyone is free to pick whatever they believe works for them, he makes a very good argument for his recommendations that I do not see being effectively countered here.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[willie]

The .41 Magnum hit the market in about 1964 to serve as the ideal police ground. Two versions of the same round were offered. One was a lead bullet load at slower velocity. The other was the full blown magnum version that we see today. The concept, though well intended, fell flat. Compared to cheaper .38 Spl ammo, this caliber was prohibitively expensive. The N frame Smith is heavy. Commercial ammo was infrequently available. Nominal difference in the diameters of the .429 44 round and the .410 round 41 round is slight. Thinking that ballistic concern was the developers' intent is giving them too much credit. Elmer Keith, his grandmother, and everybody else took credit. When shooting the .44 Mag and .41 Mag side by side, for me the two are indistinguishable. I own and like both. The 4 5/8 .41 Mag Ruger Blackhawk may be the world's greatest packing handgun.

[Pistol Pete 10]

.44 is better because of factory loads available. A .357 is better if you must use factory loads. This being said I would buy a 4" S&W in a NY minute if the right deal came along. I do hand load and could set up for it. A 4" .44 would be my first choice unless the 58 was a real bargain.

[Hambo]

Only if you reload, otherwise just skip it and get a .44 Magnum.

In which case you should also reload.

[JAH 3rd]

According to "Dirty Harry" Callahan, he shot a "44 light Special" in his model 29!

[Alpha Sierra]

he makes a very good argument for his recommendations that I do not see being effectively countered here.

It doesn't need to be countered because it's not relevant to anyone except him and anyone who agrees with him on that subject.

[okie john]

Thinking semi-seriously about a "4.2 redhawk in this caliber for woods/trail/camp/fishing and maybe even occasional cold weather carry....

A round that punches above 357mag but handles better than a .44 holds some appeal for me.



So what say ye?

I think it depends on how you define "handles better." A 41 might kick a little less but ammo can be hard to find and expensive. In most guns the 41 will be a bit heavier because the cylinders and barrels are made from the same stock as 44 cylinders and barrels but the holes are smaller.

I prefer the 44 because of its greater versatility and easier logistical support.


Okie John