I've got nothing against the .41 magnum, but it strikes me as the 16 gauge of handgun cartridges.

The 16 gauge is a good enough shotgun. But if you have a 12 and a 20, what do you need it for?

Funny you should say that because just like the .41 mag is my favorite sixgun cartridge , the 16ga is my favorite shotgun.

My first shotgun received at 15 was a Remington 870 in 16ga. At 52 , I still have it. I was strictly a small game and occasional clay bird shooter. I've since acquired several other classic 16ga guns. Other than shells being hard to find at times , the 16ga does all I need it to do.

Me too regarding the 16ga shotgun; and, the 41 Remington® Magnum®.

__________________
David
CW3 USA (Ret) 1968-1990

And do you have a good supply of ammo? I live in a reasonably large city, and 16 ga & 41 mag ammo are pretty rare things, and stupidly expensive when I do see them. As a result, I have 12 ga shotguns, and 44 mag revolvers.

I find more new/old boxes of 16ga shells at flea markets , gun shows and on the pre-owned shelves at gun shops than I see new stuff. Usually for $5 a box.

A few years ago , Walmart had a sale on target/field load shotgun shells for something like $4.77 a box. They had a full pallet of 12 , a full pallet of 20 and only a few cases of 16ga , 1oz of #7 1/2 shot. I stocked up buying them all.

As for feeding my .41 mags , I probably have about 1000rds of factory ammo , 2000rd of handloads , 500 empties waiting to load and another 2000rds of fresh new Starline brass packed away. Got a few 5gal buckets of wheelweights since I cast my own bullets.

I believe that the .41 magnum is a better balanced cartridge than either the .357 mag or the .44 mag. It is not found to be lacking in performance where the .357 sometimes can, nor is it abusive as I believe the .44 is or can be. The .41 mag can be used on any game where one would use a .44. A 250gr bullet at 1100 from a .41 mag will pass through both shoulders of a 500 pound elk at 60 yards and keep going. A 220gr Keith bullet at 1400fps has hit a bull moose through the brisket at 70 yards, lacerating the liver in it's travel not to be found found later upon dressing. In each case the animal only covered a short distance and fell over. A .44 magnum will do no better than that.

Yes ammo is hard to find and there are not as many bullet weights commonly available as there are for the other two magnums. If it were more popular than it is this would not be the case, it is a clear case of supply versus demand. Ammo may be hard to find but I find it no more expensive than .44 mag ammo. The last box of factory ammo that I bought (Speer Gold Dot) was actually cheaper than their .44 mag 240gr version. The sole exception to this rule is the Rem 210gr JSP, I believe it is so expensive because it is only produced on a seasonal basis. Ammo is certainly less expensive than any .454 Casull, .460 S&W, .500 S&W ammo that all the "HE MEN" think they must own. I don't care for grossly over weight bullets in cartridges that seem to be all the rage anymore. When this topic arises some folks like to espouse how the .44 mag can throw a 340gr bullet, big deal so what. Who needs it when in the examples provided above clearly shows a heavier bullet is often times not needed or warranted.

Another quality I like in the .41 mag is it's more economical powder consumption in relation to the performance you get. For a full up magnum load it eats a full 2gr less powder than the .44 mag. A Max .44 mag load with 2400 and a 240gr bullet is 21gr, for the .41 210gr combo it's 19gr of the same powder. I've tried Keiths' load of 19gr 2400 with a Montana Bullet Works 220gr Keith Bullet in my Ruger BH. It is all I ever care to shoot out of that gun. It is scary accurate and packs more than enough muzzle thump for any task that I'm likely to tackle.

The .44 mag is for noobs seeking cheap thrills, where as the .41 mag is for real men , just kidding, just pick the one you like best and have fun. Either way you may want to look into reloading because their both expensive to shoot.

If the .41 Mag had been introduced in 1955 and the .44 in 1964, we'd be talking about what to do with the orphan .44.

Sometimes, timing is everything.

What do you recommend for components and molds for the 41 if you are into reloading and casting.

__________________
Existimo ergo sum armis

You guys are making me want a .41 pretty bad.

If you can find it , the discontinued Lyman 410459 is my favorite and I have 4-cavity mold.

The RCBS 41-210-SWC would be my next choice of readily available molds.

Blue Dot is my favorite powder , but Unique , 2400 , H-110 and W-296 are good too.

I plan on getting set up to cast my own once I don't have to worry about moving every couple of years courtesy of Uncle Sam. I've looked into the various molds available for the .41 magnum and the prices that they are listed at. I haven't found any that really tickles my fancy. So when I do get set up for casting my own, I'm going to have a true keith mold made by these guys Mountain Molds Cast Bullet Molds

For powders I really like Unique and 2400.

I own both and have for many years. I like both, but the .41 has less felt recoil and is not as punishing in 5" to 7.5" barrel length. I have an S&W model 657 round butt, with a 3" barrel. In that, the .41 is punishing.
As for deer, the last one I took down was an avg. sized doe, neck shot at 22 yards with a Glock 17 using FMJ bullets. It dropped dead without taking a step.

This thread is interesting to me, being a non-hunter.

Hunters understand something that the self-defense and law-enforcement crowd consistently get wrong. This thread taps into the essence of that. It boils down to: "The deer, hog, etc. won't know the difference between a .410 bullet and a .429 bullet, all else being more or less equal." And this is quite true, and hunters know this, because they, unlike the self-defense and law enforcement crowd, kill many animals and see many animals killed.

Whereas the self-defense and law enforcement crowd will argue endlessly over the lifesaving advantage a .452 bullet, or a .400 bullet, will give you over a .356 bullet.

Most of the hunters I know aren't really gun-men. That is, some of them are good woodsmen, good hunters, good shots, but they don't delve into how firearms and cartridges work, don't load their own ammo. But the truth in this thread, they empirically grasp, much better than the self-defense people.

I load my 44's down for most shooting. Some shooters load their 41's up. our recoil can be about the same.....but when I am in some small town and need some ammo. I will probably be able to get some, since the 44 mag is a common round. This is one of the reasons that I never went with the 454 when it came out. Everything is fine while at home and by your supply, but go somewhere and a gun without ammo is like a car without gas.

Well.....I did all the experimentation and research with both, quite a few years ago.
The N frame 6" 57 and the 8" Dan Wesson handled like I was shootin' a.38 special. With big bullets, little bullets mild loads or ones going warp 9; the 41.mag was sweet as honey and just as smooth. I even assembled a factory duplication load from the DuPont powder book that was rated at 1650 fps with a 210 gr. Nosler JHP. Same thing. Easy to shoot, easy to hit with.
The N frame .44 mag was nowhere near in terms of ease of handling. A Super Bblackhawk was even more cantankerous.
A Dan Wesson 6" PowerPort was good, but not like the .41. The best .44 mag was a 6" Anaconda, and I would put it on par with the .41 mag.
I should add, an N frame 45 colt, stoked to sufficiently stiff power levels was better than the .44 mag. also.
After that, I got away from large bore revolvers, but if I go back, it will be with a .41 mag, or a .44 special.
It was a long term process, and it was expensive, but I got an education I would not have had otherwise.
Downrange power is meaningless if the round handles poorly.
One good hit is worth any number of misses.
If you have not shot .41 mag, you really should.



,

..another .41 Zombie thread...like the round, keeps rising from the dead...

There is even more factory ammo available now than in 2012 when this thread ended and now .41 Special ammo can even been had from several specialty makers thanks to STARLINE for making the caliber one of their standard offerings...

Since the thread ended Ruger has made several special runs of:
4.2" Redhawk
2.75" Redhawk
Blackhawk Stainless in 4 5/8" and 6.5"
Bisley Blackhawk 5.5" stainless
Super Redhawk 6.5"
Flat Top 4 5/8" and 6.5"

...but go and try and find any of them now...

And Henry is now making lever action carbines in 16.5 and 20" models..

But handgun wise right now the new gun picture is bleak...
Ruger Blackhawk 4 5/8" and 6.5"
Freedom Arms 97 and 83
S&W Classic 6"
...I think that is it....like I said...bleak...

Bob

The .44 has more thumping factor but the .41 has less flipback. Both are good choices.

Mr-Mom,

Is your reason for asking because you are going to buy one or the other? Simple solution, (you know you want to hear), get one of each, that is what I did. 29 and 57.

Bob

__________________
Sag Harbor & Manhattan, N.Y.

The 44 IS a great round..I do carry the 41( 4 inch) loaded to a bit more than 1000 FPS with a hard cast SWC...240 gr..H&G 258...supposed to be 210 but it throws much heavier. It will shoot completely through a large hog end to end...and a fair size grizzly end to end. I also own a couple or 3 44 mags...and I am certain they will do the same. That being said I like to shoot the 41 as it has a bit less recoil and the older I get the less I like recoil. I shoot skeet and don't shoot the 12 ga cause I shoot the 20 ga as well as or better than the 12 ga...Recoil again. My wife likes shooting her(my) 3 screw SBH..but I think she likes pain. As far as buying a 41 cheaper than a 44, in some cases that is true. I got a nice 57 in a presentation box that was unfired for a pre 27 6 inch gun and the fellow gave me a fair amount to boot... Anyway...takes yer pick as there is not much difference in 'em, As for me I'll take the 41 mag and live with my choice. Happened that way in 67 and hope I don't have to use it again in the same manner .

I'm trying to decide whether I need a Henry to match my 57 and 58; I have a Marlin to match my 29.

I have a Ruger to match my 29, but no rifle in .41.

Bob

__________________
Sag Harbor & Manhattan, N.Y.

I preferred the 41 Magnum. Had at one time 4 5/8 in and 6.5 inch Ruger Blackhawks. Used Unique and 2400 powder with Keith SWC 220 gr and 215 gr BB SWCs. Has all the power for game intended and is less punishing than full 44 Magnum loads. In my opinion, the 41 Magnum to the 44 Magnum is what the 38-44 is to a 357 Magnum.

Since when did most of us buy another gun because we need it! I have over 25 shotguns and even shooting registered skeet, I need a 12/20/28 and .410, though I could shoot every event with a .410 if I was that good (which I am not), many shoot the 12 and 20 gauge events with a 20 gauge, BUT I still have 16 gauge shotguns including O/U, SxS, Pump, Semi-Auto and Single Shot. I am still in the market for a Bolt action one and a lever action one. I certainly DO NOT have a need for either of those except that I want one of each.

Bob

__________________
Sag Harbor & Manhattan, N.Y.

For a general purpose , plinking and target shooting cast bullet bullet , take a long hard look at NOE's wadcutter mould ,
#413-215-WC (413432) it is a creation of Lymans 358432 in .41 cal. in 215 grs. and a real accuracy winner ... the wadcutter design hits hard and can be hollow pointed for even more effect .

If you would like a more traditional SWC mould NOE has recreated
Elmer Keiths design #412-237-SWC (Keith) , the 237 grain SWC is a faithful recreation of his 237 grain version of the Lyman #
410032 Keith designed mould .
Both moulds are excellent for the 41 magnum , the heavier 237 gr. SWC would be a good hunting bullet the lighter 215 WC is my pick for everything else . The model 58 in my avatar shoots the WC exactly to it's fixed sights and likes to shoot clover leaf groups ...a real winner in my book !
Check them out at the NOE website, www.noebulletmoulds.com
Gary

__________________
Certified Cajun
NRA Member

Groo here
Much depends on what platform you shoot.
The S&W N frame is a bit small for heavy 44 mag shooting [ redhawk,
super redhawk, big colt, or DW being more the thing]
Have talked to more than a few 44mag shooters that wore out a M-29,
Have yet to find a worn out M-57.[that little more steel makes a difference]
The 44mag would be better at close range [like a SD woods gun]
The 41 at longer ranges or armored targets [going deeper]
AND I have yet to find a 41 that did not shoot well.[unlike some 44s]
Shot deer with both ,at close range, the 44 did the job, the 41
went where I wanted with out thinking...
PS. Henry makes 41's.but if the Alaskan take down came in 41,,,,
I would need to sell some stuff!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Second one looks “deader”. The first one looks, to quote a line from the movie, “The Princess Bride”, mostly dead!
MTCW

The brass frame on your BH .41 is, no pun intended, "KILLER!"

357 Magnum will take anything that breathes without armor. Either 41 or 44 will do fine for deer.

I have shot some buck's with a 41 Magnum & a 44 Magnum.
The one that was the most reviling was the one shot with the S&W 500
Magnum!

__________________
Only difference Fool/Mule-ears

I understand it was originally intended for law enforcement but the recoil was too much for some officers, so it never really got
off the ground. Handgun hunters stumbled upon it and it has gained a cult following. As someone mentioned above, it does shoot a bit flatter with a bit less recoil than the .44. Factory ammo is pretty costly however.

I was out in the grudge trying to get some room for a car and while looking through stuff I found a hundred or so bullets for the 41..Just perfect for the B'ar loads I have made. Still about 1000 fps out of a 4 inch 57 with a 255 gr FNGC cast bullet made by a (now defunct??) company in Montana called Going Ballistic. Less recoil with that bullet?? Doubt you could tell if it does have less...but it shoots good. And as far as some have stated...what is the need for a 41? Shoot y'all know shooters are an innovative bunch..what was the need for a 357 mag 44 mag 454 Casull and so many others?? Cause the ones who saw a NEED for them did the work and voila' we had 'em. Now though so many of the new calibers are rehashes of old ballistically identical rounds...and designed because there seems to be a need for new stuff to sell. Is the 6.5 Creedmore better ballistically than the 260 Rem or the old 6.5 x 55 Swede..practically of course... no. Talk the word cult and that one pops out all over the place. at least the 41 mag was not a twin of any older cartridge.. Yeah...I know..let the flames burn bright.

I was looking for a revolver to take as a back up gun hunting in Colorado. At that time, the Ruger Blackhawk was available in 41 mag. The 44 mag was only available in the Super Blackhawk 7 1/2 inch barrel. I wanted something a little lighter and shorter than the Super Blackhawk. I found a used 41 mag Blackhawk with a short barrel. I think it was 4 3/4 inch or so. It worked out great. S&W made the 41 M&P. It was a little lighter than the 44 plus it had fixed sights which are nice for not tearing up the lining inside a coat or jacket. There was a time in law enforcement where if you carried a 44 Magnum, you would get all kinds of comments about trying to be Dirty Harry, it is too powerful, nobody can shoot 44 fast or accurate. 44 and 357 were originally intended to be hunting cartridges, not self defense cartridges. The 41 was one of the few cartridges that was intended to be for law enforcement from the get go. The load intended for police use was the 210 or. Semi-wadcutter at medium velocity. Some people didn't know this and some thought it was too mild so they went with the full power 210 or soft point. Recoil was impressive in the light for calibre Model 58. A few agencies adopted the Model 58. San Francisco, San Antonio and Amarillo come to mind. The size, weight, recoil and muzzle blast were not perfect for officers of smaller stature or with small hands. So with most of the drawbacks of 44 Magnum but none of the Dirty Harry popularity, it faded out of law enforcement use after a few years. The swing to semi-auto handgun in law enforcement in the 1980s pretty much eliminated it all together.
If I was wanting a handgun to carry in grizzly country, I would choose the 44 with heavier bullets. For everything else, the 41 will do every thing that needs doing.