This question has most likely been beaten to death, but my search of the forum was unsuccessful. Can someone direct me to a discussion of the relative merits of the .41 mag vs. the .44 mag for deer hunting? I have compared the ballistics for similar commercial bullets and they appear to be identical out to about 125 yards. Can one of you enlighten me? Thanks for the help!
Dave

__________________
mr mom
Fire Chief, Retired

I load for the two cartridges. I have not killed any game with them. I have loaded for the .44 Magnum since 1974 and the .41 Magnum since about 1990.

I have at least 30, or more, reloading manuals. I have followed many discussions here about the subject from those who have used one or the other; or both.

It appears that both cartridges, properly loaded with good "deer" bullets will kill equally well.

Elmer Keith reported ages ago that he "felt" (or maybe "knew") that the .41 Magnum shot flatter, but the .44 Magnum hit harder. But...and I risk serious nastyiness from fellow members here...I do also believe that Elmer was long on .44 magnum use and very prone to actually not utilizing solid testing methods. He would shoot a .41 Magnum and say that he did not have to hold up as much front sight. It may have worked for him, but not very scientific.

If there was to be a "downside" to a .41 Magnum it may possible that it is less capable of handling heavy-than-normal bullets weights whereas some .44 Magnums can shoot heavier bullets.

You can also go to Shop Shooting Supplies | Reloading | Gunsmithing | Hunting gear — MidwayUSA and check out the .41 and .44 Magnum bullets offered for reloading. With each bullet is a "comments" section. There should be a good cross section of reports from each bullet on it "killing abilities". They probably also have the same for loaded ammunition they sell.

BUT...if you want to deserve the title of "gun nut" you will have to own one of each and preferrabely "many" of each.............

__________________
Have guns...will shoot'em.

You're talking .410 dia. vs. .429. dia. I doubt a deer would be able to tell the difference.

I've shot wild hogs with 41 mag. hard cast SWC and it will go thru from side to side or end to end. Never shot big game with the 44 mag.

The difference that would count to me is availability of ammunition. Lots more 44 magnum loads available. If you reload it's not a big issue. My subjective impression was the 41 didn't recoil as sharply and would still put down deer or hogs. Caution: My advice is worth every dime you paid for it. Others with more experience may feel differently.

I've killed several deer with a 44 magnum, don't own a 41 magnum
and never will. I fail to see any grounds for a rational debate over the
choice between the two. Of course the 41 magnum revolver will kill a
deer but unless you already own one you want to use what possible
reason could there be for choosing to buy one instead of a 44? A slight
trajectory advantage at 125 yds is meaningless because very few
hunters will ever kill a deer at 125 yds with an iron sighted revolver
despite the writings of the "exalted legends" The average hunter
needs to deal with reality and the 44 offers more power for what is
a marginal deer gun, the iron sighted revolver.

Apples and oranges. I load and shoot both, and have identical guns to compare - a 29 and a 57, both nickel 8 3/8 inch. I've taken hogs with the 57. If you choose the ammo carefully, either one is more than capable of filling the need. Personally I prefer shooting the 41, probably because it's "different". After all, EVERYONE has a 44, don't they?

.41 mag does shoot a bit flatter,less recoil, more expensive to shoot factory ammo,.44 has a bit more ft. lbs. and wider selection of bullets.
Why not one of each, or no wait 3 or 4 of each, and a few .357's and .45 long Colts, after all one never has too many S&W's..

You have a much greater selection of commercial ammunition and reloading components with .44 M. You can also get a carbine (e.g., Marlin 1894) that shoots the same ammunition, with ballistics close to 30-30.

The .41M was introduced as a choice for law enforcement with almost .44M performance with manageable recoil. The "almost" is a giveaway. The .41M isn't even on my long list, but I may change my mind.

If you dont load your own ammo buy the 44, all kinds of ammo availble everywhere and it makes slightly bigger holes. The deer will never know the difference.

the 41 mag.is a fine caliber....more medicine than you will need for deer

__________________
SWCA#2208
KK4EMO

Since I own several .357 magnum and .44 magnum revolvers, I never felt the need for a .41 magnum. The factory .41 magnum ammo seems harder to find and more expensive.

I do own a Glock G20SF 10mm. With hot Buffalo Bore or Underwood ammo, it falls betweent the .357 magnum and .41 magnum in ballistics. You could call it a .40 magnum with 15+1 in a semi-auto pistol.

__________________
U.S. Navy - U.S. Army, ret

I have two .44 guns and a bunch of .41s. It's been a while since either
.44 was fired. The .41s get shot a lot.

I like guns that are a bit different and the .41 just suits me better than the .44.

There are .41 carbines available on the used market. Marlin made them a couple of times and may make them again someday.

I like my .41's because they're a bit different. I've even had people who consider themselves gun know-it-alls tell me there's no such thing as a .41 magnum. And now I've got some of that Starline special run of .41 Special marked brass for those who want to bet there's no such thing as a .41 Special.

I've been shooting .41's for over 30yrs and scores of thousands of rounds. Maybe 1000 were factory loads. I buy .41 factory ammo when I find it cheap , especially partial boxes in bargain bins or at gunshows. Other than that , it's my hard-cast SWCs.

I do not understand why there is a 41 Magnum Pete

__________________
NRA LIFE 1974

I have hunted for years with the Model 29 and I own a Model 57. I hunt with the 44 because I got it first and learned to love it.

In my opinion either is big enough for any game or situation one might find himself in, in North America anyway, not sure about Africa!

As far as why a person should have a 41 Mag., because Smith & Wesson made some! Enough reason for me!

GM4spd,

I am typing this from memory so some of my comments may be "off" historically.

In about 1962 or 1953 Elmer Keith, Bill Jordan, and Skeeter Skelton were the main gunwriters who were desiring a .41 caliber revolver for police work. They wanted a 210 grain bullet in the velocity area of 800 fps for "street carry" or city carry and a 210 grain jacketed bullet at about 1200 to 1300 fps for the "rural use" and highway patrol duties (to shoot into cars).

Skeeter actually preferred that S&W just continue to produce the .44 Special but with a better load than the only one available then, a 246 grain lead roundnose at about 750 fps.

Elmer was quoted as saying he and Bill Jordan were at a special gathering (NRA annual meeting?) and were badgering the S&W executives at that time for the .41 Magnum.

When it was introduced in 1964 (?) the "police load" was a 210 grain lead bullet at about 1,000 fps. It leaded barrels badly and many police officers could not handle the recoil.

It did see quite a bit of service in San Francisco and San Antonio police departments and others. But it was just too powerful for most officers. It was eventually phased out of most police work.

Us recreational shooters like it because...its another chance to own another S&W!! Or a Ruger.....!

In my case I have a 4 inch and 6 inch M29-2 .44 Magnum in blue and a 4 inch and 6 inch M57 .41 Magnum in nickel. Kind of sorta a matched set of four!

It has a small but dedicated following in the sporting world.

__________________
Have guns...will shoot'em.

Dick Metcalf was/is a big fan of the .41 Magnum and he wrote many articles extolling its virtues. Thus, you might search the archives of Shooting Times magazine, which is, I think, where he published most of those articles.

I own several S&W 29/629s. A hot loaded 357 mag matches a lite 41 mag. A heavy loaded 41 mag matches a lite 44 mag. Why own a 41 mag?

I have picked up 1,000 plus 44 mags as once fired range brass over a 14 month time span. I have found three 41 mag casings. Why own a 41 mag? It is an orphan caliber that is very expensive when buying factory ammo.

Why do you need a Crescent wrench when you own sets of SAE and metric combination wrenches?

__________________
S&WHF 366

Why? My brother has a .41 mag Dan Wesson 8" with a scope that will deliver 2" groups at 100 yards off a rest all day long. 210 grain. Sierra over 21.5 grains of 296.

Way back when I shipped to AK, I traded my .357 Mag Blackhawk for a .41 Mag BH. My hunting buddy carried a .44 BH. Shooting and comparing both, I preferred my .41 to the .44.

I handloaded Speer jacketed SWCs (using Blue Dot at the time) and during un-scientific testing found that my .41 put holes thru the same Birch trees his .44 did, and with less recoil.

True, the .44 has more potential--if one reloads to its full potential--but for the average shooter I feel the accuracy and controlability of the .41 out weighs the .44's benefits. If you really need more power, then jump to the .454 Casal, the .460, or the .500 magnum.

In all practice, a deer or any other medium-sized game isn't going to know the difference in which hit it. If you're only going to shoot commercial rounds, I'd say go with the .44 only for ammo availability sake. If reloading, I'd opt for the .41. Run a box of hot loads thru both and you'll understand why.

Because then I only need one wrench?

Originally Posted by Engineer1911

"Why do you need a Crescent wrench when you own sets of SAE and metric combination wrenches?"

Because a big enough crescent wrench can also be used as a hammer if you're high enough off the ground and your hammer is waaaay below on the ground.

__________________
Have guns...will shoot'em.

Not that .41mag can't be loaded hot.....
my only reason to prefer the .44mag was a little more
versatility. And the .44mag could be loaded down to the
.41mag.........commercially speaking.

Not that the following is 'gospel'....but,
"The .41 Magnum, released in 1963, was an attempt to reach a middle ground between the .357 and .44 magnums. The .357 Magnum was adequate for hunting deer-sized game, but the limited power meant it needed to be used by a skilled marksman. The .44 Magnum provided far more power, easily taking deer sized game, but recoil and muzzle blast are substantial, at least in the earliest commercial loadings. The .41 Magnum, inspired by the older, obsolete .41 Long Colt cartridge, was intended to provide more power than the .357 Magnum with less recoil and muzzle blast than the .44 Magnum."

As others have noted, the deer or hog will not be able to tell the difference.

If one handloads it matters little... a better deal sometimes surfaces on a good 41 magum though.

If one does not handload, get a 44 magnum. Period.

I love the .41 but you really need to hand load for it. I feel it will give you 95% of what a .44 will do with far less recoil and muzzle flash. It is by far my favorite revolver caliber.

Why ask why?

Variety is the spice of life.

Some call the .41 Magnum a "red-headed step-child".

Well , I was a step-child!

And I love redheads!

Well, check the attached pics and tell me which buck looks deader. The one I took last year with the 6" M29 .44, or two weeks ago with the Ruger Blackhawk .41 (4 5/8"). First one was at ~50 yards, the other about 40.

Attached Images

	IMGP2071EM.jpg (56.6 KB, 429 views)
	tn (1).jpg (48.6 KB, 410 views)

__________________
Ret'd LEO
SWCA #2275

Boy that was an easy question. Just look at the pic of the deer taken
with the 44. Nothing showing but the whites of his eyes. His eyeballs
obviously were spun in his head by the impact of the big 44, his tongue
is hanging loose, obviously much deader!

Realistically, you are unlikely to notice any performance difference between the 41 & 44 mags on deer sized game. I've had both, and sold off and sworn off the 41 because it just had nothing to offer me that I wasn't already getting from the 44 mag, and the 41s were built on the same guns as the 44, which made them slightly heavier. So I dumped the 41 mag & 45 Colt, and made the 44 mag my big bore of choice. Realistically, I should have sworn off the 357 mag, and used the 41 as my middle bore, but once again, the guns are bigger and heavier. The 41 blows the socks off any 357 mag ever made, performancewise...

If you are in doubt, get both!

Providing yer shot is in the vitals , if any critter can tell the diff between being shot with a 210gr .41 mag @ 1350fps vs a 240gr .44 mag @ 1250fps , ya probably shoulda used a rifle!

In my opionion .41mag hits like a .44mag and has the recoil of a .357mag.

I've reloaded and shoot all three. Never killed anything with .41, two deer with .357 and nine deer with .44.

Jerry

This may have been covered already but,

... the 41 mag is cool.


Charlie

Sure the bullet weight and velocity numbers can be juggled around , but whoever thinks the .41 mag splits the diff between the .357 and .44 needs a remedial math course. Yes , the .41 is halfway between the .38 and .44 calibers , (38+3=41 , 44-3=41).

BUT , whereas the .41 is a 41 , the .38 isn't a 38(.357) and the .44 isn't a 44(.430).
And going by actual bullet dia and typical bullet weight circa.1961 , (41-36=5 , 43-41=2) , (240-210=30 , 210-160=50). I rounded the .357 to .36 and 158gr to 160.

And handloading aside , if ya go to the Remington ammo website and do a comparison, you'll find the .41 mag 210 load actually beats their top 240gr .44 mag load.

.357 mag , 158gr , 1235fps , 535ft.lbs
.41 mag , 210gr , 1300fps , 788ft.lbs
.44mag , 240gr , 1180fps , 741ft.lbs

The .357 magnum tops out around 800 ft. lbs. of muzzle energy.
The .41 magnum tops out around 1100 ft. lbs of muzzle energy.
The .44 magnum tops out around 1650 ft. lbs. of muzzle energy.
The .460 S&W magnum tops out over 2800 ft. lbs. of muzzle energy.

__________________
U.S. Navy - U.S. Army, ret

To everyone who responded, thanks for your ideas, comments and sentiments. It has been interesting, informative and entertaining reading your thoughts. I suspect this exchange could go on for days, months maybe..even years!!?? Might be fun to see where it could go. Everyone has their favoriotes, often for different or specific reasons, and there is no one size fits all. I've some experience with the .44 special and .44 mags, but not the .41 mag. Have a friend who is pretty adamant about the .41 mag and will argue all day long that it shoots flatter and hits as hard as the .44 mag inside 75-100 yards (we don't get many chances for shots at deer over 50-60 yards in these here woods). I've come to the decision making point. Guess I'll just need to have one of each, in order to form my own biases! Thanks guys, I really needed another excuse to feed this sickness......
Dave

__________________
mr mom
Fire Chief, Retired

I prefer the .44 Magnum because I have a Ruger .44 carbine rifle and can use them as partner guns,
The carbine extends range and velocity also adds a scope and shares ammo,
Also the .44 Mag may be a bit more versatile if you handload and own a .44 special because it can shoot both .44 Mag and .44 Special.

I'm guessing the responses aren't balanced. Yes, I own both, probably a few more 44s but it doesn't mean I like them better. About 20 years ago we did some informal testing in scrap lumber including railroad ties. The 41 actually seems to penetrate farther than the 44. As far as handloading, everyone does both. You've got to own a gold mine to shoot factory ammo to any degree of proficiency. If you're downloading the 41, you need to color code the loads. You can seal the primers with different color sealer to ID the light ones. With the 44, you just use special cases for light loads.

Most of us figure more metal = more strength. Both guns have the same OD, its just the 41 has smaller holes and more metal. Want to see a difference with factory loads, obtain one each of the scandium guns, the 329 and 357 (model numbers). The .41 does seem to shoot easier and with less intense pain. I don't know anyone who only owns one of them. Everyone seems to own several of either or both.

Also, a poster above quoted factory energy figures. Don't believe or trust them for a second. Buy yourself a chrono and test your actual loads out of your own revolvers, then calculate the energy on your very own calculator. You'll see the numbers get so confused and close together you'll stop arguing energy figures and get back to the truth. It doesn't matter which you select and those arguing one over the other are only pushing their own preferences.

__________________
Dick Burg

Because you can never have enough crescent wrenches!

In my several failed deer hunting attempts, the only critter I shot was a chipmunk chattering at me as I walked out of the woods. Chippy was standing at the base of a large oak tree. I found a tail attached to the spinal column (no ribs) and the skinless skull. Enough gun with 255 grain gas checked lead bullet.

Three prairie dogs that appeared some what field dressed after coming back down to earth. Too much gun.

No crescent wrenches were used on any hunting trips.

__________________
S&WHF 366

I have (2) 41's and (1) 44. I generally agree with your comment regarding ammo manufacturer's claims. However, the 44 mag load quoted at 1650 ft-lbs is either a Buffalo Bore or Grizzly +P. I have experience with Grizzly and their claims are accurate; Buffalo Bore is probably also. This is not an "ordinary" round by any means and regular use would probably not be recommended.

To elaborate, I contacted Cast Performance/Grizzly for loading information on their 265 grain LWFNGC in my 41. He gave me some info indicating I could probably load it to 1350 fps; they sell it loaded to 1400 fps. I chrono'd it out of my 5-1/2" Redhawk right at 1400 fps.

I have two 41s and have shot several 44s. The 41s are far more comfortable to shoot. Reloading is best but some reasonable ammo using new brass can be obtained from ammo to go dot com for under thrity dollars a box.

Just my .02 Get both shoot them.Deer and hogs will not know what hit them.Does wonders on coyotes also..

I like the 44 because you can use heavier bullets. Hornady XTP's 300 grain Hollow points is my bear load. I use 16 grains of 2400 and it is a deadly hunting round. My shots have been 50 yards or less and this load is a hammer out of my 29 and old model ruger super blackhawk. Recoil is stiff and I only shoot them for Hunting purposes.

I stared off with .44 Magnum in 1973 and ended up selling them all off in fovor of the .41 in the 1980s... The big thing for me was recoil with 4" Ns. Full loads in the .41 were easy to shoot all day...not so with the .44.

As to which kill better, as long as the velocity is the same, the bullet is the same in regards to sectional density and construction there is no difference...

Posted this over on the 58 thread. There is more than enough factory ammo now available. Go into Walmart and look for .44 Special...one will rarely find it...

Factory ammo:


Remington
210 JSP

Wincehster
175 Silvertip
240 Platinum Tip

Speer
210 DeepCurl

Federal
250 CastCore
180 Barnes
210 JHP
210 Fusion
210 Swift A-Frame

CorBon
170 JHC
210 JHC
250 WFN Hardcast
180 Barnes DPX

Buffalo Bore
170 JHC
265 Hardcast
180 Barnes
230 Keith

Hornady
210 FlexTip
210 XTP

Georgia Arms
210 XTP
210 LSWC (Target Load)
200 Remington JHP
210 DeepCurl HP

DoubleTap
210 JHP
180 Barnes
250 Hardcast WFN

HSM
210 SWC
230 Keith GC
210XTP

Barnes
180 HP

Grizzly
250 Hardcast WFN
210 JSP

Bitterroot Valley
210 JHP
210 Cast


Cast bullets are available both commercially and moulds from 175 to 305 grains. Jacketed the same. Some are from custom makers. As to cost of ammo. I went through the Midway catalog and comparing apples to apples there was little difference between .41 Magnum, .44 Special, .44 Magnum and .45 Colt. People hear stuff, accept as fact and then just keep repeating it without checking the facts...

I just found that I could shoot the .41 more accurately than the same gun chambered in .44 and recoil was less....

Bob

I have both and have been loading for both since at least 1976. Have shot several (20+) wild hogs (guided on wild hogs for a while in Cali) with both and one deer with the 44 mag. Shot one hog with the 357 at about 5 feet and it failed to penetrate (needed to kill it with a rifle). Saw several others shot with it also.

The only difference I have found is that, on the gristle collar or plate on a big hog, the 41 will penetrate better. That is using the same bullet at about the same velocity and weight. Similar results on head shots, especially frontal ones. For what it is worth, the 357 almost always failed to penetrate. All three were using heavy-for-caliber loads with heavy constructed bullets. The 44 HP failed several times to penetrate the skull or gristle.

On a deer, I don't expect there would be much difference. BTW, never could tell the difference in recoil between the 41 and 44.

Sounds a bit like the ground squirrels I shot with my .30-06 130 grn HP loads cooking at over 3000 fps. If I was lucky I found bit of hair to prove a hit.

Not a lot to add, but the .41 Mag was promoted as a middle ground gun mainly for cops who felt that the .357 was not enough and the .44 was too much. Nothing really wrong with the .41 for any purpose, but like most compromises, it didn't work out too well in the marketplace. The .40 S&W killed the .41 Mag for any LE use. But of course revolvers for LE use have been pretty much dead for quite awhile anyway. Lots of folks like old, odd, obsolete, and castoff caliber guns, so there will always be a market for .41 Mags. But I personally wouldn't buy one unless it was a screaming giveaway bargain as I already have too many guns in strange calibers and certainly don't need another.

First if you like me love the magnums you have to own a 357mag, a 41mag and a 44mag.

The 41mag, has more penetration over the 44mag I been told here. I find the 41mag very comfortable to shoot over the 44mag and i'm not sure why yet. Maybe my 44mag reloads are too stout. There is no killing difference between the 44mag and the 41mag dead is dead when its used for hunting.

I own two in 41mag(new S&W) and four in 44mag. I reload for everything. The S&W M58 in 41mag is my new CCW gun.

Using Jacketed Hollow Points in thick tough skin will slow down before it really penetrates. This is where a soft point bullet should be used.

My Speer manual #9 tells it this way. Police wanted a little more than a .357 but little less than a .44 mag. The new guns were almost the size and weight to carry as a .44 and not quite as powerful, so it didn't catch on as a police weapon. If it had been adopted as a standard weapon it would have fared better. Wikipedia has some more info that says high power enthusiasts also influenced it's development and the end result didn't satisfy a lot of people. Also, in the 1960s most police were still carrying .38 specials. It seems that it has it's best home with people on this board... as a hunting arm.

If either properly there should not be a big difference.