Smith & Wesson 41 magnum

[BigBill]

Do you think the s&w 41 magnum is more popular from its interdiction into the market and still growing in popularity today?
I wonder what the production numbers are on the m58/m57 till today?

[Dave Lively]

The 41 magnum has its fans but unless it means getting an extra round into the cylinder most people are going to buy a 44 instead.

Nothing wrong with the 41 but the 44 provides a bit heavier bullet, a bit more power and both ammo and reloading components are easier to find.

[robertrwalsh]

My guess, for what that may be worth to you, is that this cartridge will continue to be a niche market item for the forseeable future.

[M29since14]

Yes. I don’t see the .41 ever “taking off.” It’s a “what you see is what you’re going to get” sort of thing, IMO.

[rubiranch]

I'm looking forward to getting my 6" M57 & M58.

I want them just to have them. I'll run a box of ammo threw each and then I have no idea when of if I'll shoot them again unless a friend wants to try them out.

I wanted these two because to me they are "unique".

[AveragEd]

I used to own a 6" Model 57. I can't recall the dash number but I bought it new in the mid-to-late 1990s. It was accurate enough but the gun's barrel looked like a vo-tech body shop student's project - had move ripples and waves over its length than a poorly straightened fender.

But the cartridge is possibly the best-kept secret in the gun business. Remember, the .44 Magnum does not have a 44-caliber bore while the .41 Magnum is a 41-caliber gun. Its .410" bullet diameter is only .019" smaller than the 44's so you really do not lose very much in bullet size.

I think robertwalsh is right on with his assessment of the cartridge. I don't think any deer will be able to tell the difference but the .41 Magnum just lacks the luster and appeal of the .44.

Ed

[Groo01]

Groo here
As shooters get older the 41mag starts looking better.
More than 357 , not as much as a 44mag , very accurate,
and hits hard.
Also shootable in a smaller gun, and makes a goood carbine round[thanks Henry].
But like a 44 , an experenced shooters gun, unlike a 357...

[Stephanie B]

People have been waiting for the .41 to “take off” for 55 years.

[junglefighter]

If I ever found a new or almost new with box M58 at a very low price or if S&W makes a M69 that would be the only way I would buy a 41Mag. Since neither will ever happen,I will stay with 44 Spl./Mag.I do think it is an under rated cartridge for self defense. There just is no ammo demand to make affordable factory ammo.

[smithrjd]

I really like the 41 Mag, took me about a year to find a grail gun for myself, a 357PD, much more pleasant than it's big brother the 44 Mag 329PD. I wonder how many of these were made before they were discontinued.

[gwpercle]

In 1971 I bought a 41 magnum and my best friend bought a 44 magnum. He could never quite get the accuracy he wanted. The 44 wasn't as accurate as the 41 and after a few heavy loads he got the shakes so bad his groups opened up to patterns and he would stop shooting . The 41 magnum just seemed more accurate from the get go....small groups were the norm. I have found few loads that didn't group well . Another thing is all loads, light lead and heavy hunting , seem to group very close to the sights ...Elmer Keith even noticed this and remarked on this pleasant phenomena .

My buddy soon sold the 44 mag. But I still have my 41 magnum , it's my avatar and it's the one that will never be sold...ever !
The 41 magnum and the S&W model 58 are a match made in
heaven .
Gary

[EarlB]

I LOVE my 41 Magnums. I've got blue and nickel 58's and blue and nickel 4" and 6" 57 no dash guns (not big into the longer tubes). It's a far sweeter shooter to me than a 4" .44 Mag but I have to admit it's not an apples to apples comparison. Most of my .44 Mag rounds are full power and my .41 Mags 800-1000fps so it would be more like comparing to a .44 Special. Thus I can see the .41 Magnum had a hurdle to jump that it quite never did - but I still love em!

Earl

[joe44va]

I keep hoping SAW comes out with a M69 4.25 in 41 mag with 6 holes in the cylinder; I think they would fit. That would be my new favorite woods gun.

[GypsmJim]

When Dad was getting too frail to carry the ole' Parker afield for deer hunting, he went to the LGS to buy a Model 29. The clerk suggested it was too powerful for him, so he sold him a Model 57. Dad carried that fine gun for the next 7 years, until he had trouble getting up the hill to his stand.

I got both guns when Dad passed, and they both get shot regularly. If I ever have to sell something, they will be the last 2 to go.

[oldman10mm]

The 10mm has had a large resurgence lately and I believe the 41M will also be increasing in popularity. As in the previous post,I'd like to see a 'M69' in 41M and only 5 cylinder chambers would be OK.
I have a M57 6" nickeled.

[Doug627]

I have a 57 no dash 6". It is beautiful and shoots every bit as well as my 29-2. I load both just under max. The 41 mag is faster and I think that makes up for the lighter bullet. 210 gr vs. 240 gr. Not much difference. When shooting at ranges, 44 shooters try my 41 and always say the same thing. "I going to look for one of those." I would never feel under gunned when in the field with a 41 magnum.

[RoyM52]

IF a 41 mag is ever produced again by Smith...the 2.75 inch M69 would likely be the venue. I would also expect it to be a 5 round not 6. But then......who knows. {I'm not sure 6 would even fit} For hand loaders, the M69 has already answered the need for a big bore smaller carry option. A 41 Mag has absolutely no advantage since a hand loader can tailor the ammo for their needs. Costs less to just buy the 44 dies{and quite depending on a factory ammo to do what you want} than wishing for something that may never materialize. {extremely happy with my M 69 2.75}

[dave1918a2]

I have 3 29's. A 4 screw 6.5 inch, a 8.75 inch -2, and a 3.5 inch custom 629-3. I have PC 657 Hunter, a 8.75 inch -2 nickel, a 6 inch -3 blue, a 6 inch -2 nickel, and a custom 2.5 inch -2. The 29's stay in the safe and the 41's g to the range weekly. Gotta love that .41mag.

[RoyM52]

nothing done with a 41 , can't be done with a 44 {43 actual} the bullets are available and that is the real key.{if you don't have a properly designed bullet, the round is defeated} I load 200 grain bullets in my 44, but aren't limited to just 200 if I choose. Re-loading is the real key. If you just wish to be different , wear some argyle socks or a kilt {or some paisley}...the 44 does it all. Sorry , I waited and waited for them to finally make a L frame in a short barrel 44 and never thought it would happen...and finally...Maybe I will be wrong and a 41 will materialize....according to my wife, I'm not perfect.and am wrong on most things.YMMV.

[1-1917]

I'm a big .41 fan but to really enjoy a .41 you have to be a serious DIY kind of guy. I have 9 different .41 bullet moulds. I cast my own and load my own. If I had to rely on a sporting goods department shelf, the .41 would be nothing more than a nice paperweight.

I can load a double ended wadcutter in .41 special brass to a serious 215 gr gas checked bullet and everything in between.

Model 58 is my favorite, 657 next and a Ruger Bisley thrown in just for fun.

[Narragansett]

Well, I might as well add my .02 here. The 41 mag is a fine cartridge. Of course Elmer Kieth and Clint Eastwood attributed to the popularity of the 44 mag, and it does have the ability to shoot the 44 special, which I might bet accounts for over 50 % of what goes down a 44 tube. If the truth of the matter be known, I would be willing to bet that there are a large number of people that have 44's that shouldn't have them, because they don't like them.They might like a 41? But there is the ego thing.

I was in a LGS yesterday, and I was looking in the case at some of what I guess might have been the 460 and 500 S&W caliber handguns, and I wondered who the heck would want these things. They are the size of a 10 pound pot roast, I am sure they cost a lot to shoot, are by no means comfortable, and i bet you have all you can do to give them away on the used market, plus they are ugly( IMO ). But this is America and more and bigger is better.

So we have the 357 mag that shoots mostly 38 spl, the 44 mag that shoots what would be my guess mostly 44 special, and so maybe we need a 41 special ?

Again my guess would be that the majority off 44mag owners don't enjoy shooting paper targets with them any more than they would enjoy plinking tin cans with a 338 Win mag

[Narragansett]

Originally Posted by rubiranch

I'm looking forward to getting my 6" M57 & M58.

I want them just to have them. I'll run a box of ammo threw each and then I have no idea when of if I'll shoot them again unless a friend wants to try them out.

I wanted these two because to me they are "unique".

I have fired both but never owned a 58. I do like fixed sight guns, but IMO, I would be all over a 57 before a 58. That's just me. I think they are classier. If you want to PM me and stay in touch, I am considering selling a P&R 6" 57 NIB. Just have not quite made up my mind yet

[oysterer]

I just love the 41s I have
58, 57-1 and 657 no dash. Starline has the brass for 41 special and that is what I am loading. About 8.0 gr of HS-6, slightly less than my medium power 44 special load. Case is a little smaller which helps for low to medium power target loads.

My 44s have throats all over the place between .429 and .433 so I need 3-4 different sizes of cast bullets to make them shoot.

Not the fantastic 41. Mine are between mid 1970s and late 1980s, all three guns have throats .410 precisely and with the right .410 Sierra JHC shoot like shining a laser at the target.

First time I tried the M58 I set up at ~7 yards just to see how the sights work. My first 2 shots I ever took went in the same hole...I got lucky and the sights seem very fine.

[Laketime]

I have been buying and shooting .44 magnums forever. But I always owned at least one .41 magnum because of the flatter trajectory over the .44.Also the 57 will hold up better to shooting hot loads than a 29 that does not have the endurance package.

[AveragEd]

As I mentioned in my first post, I sold my Model 57 many years ago. Since then, I have purchased three 44s, a 6" Model 629-2, a 6-1/2" 629-4 Classic and a 5" 629-3 Classic DX. NONE of them are range-shot with anything but a 240-grain cast SWC over 10.0 grains of SR4756. The DX is my hunting revolver and quite fortunately, it shoots Federal 240-grain XTP factory loads to the same 50-yard point of impact as the handloads so I don't bother handloading the few - sometimes zero - hunting rounds I shoot every year. I still think the .41 Magnum is a great cartridge but the 44s are just "easier" somehow.

Ed

[Dave Lively]

Originally Posted by oldman10mm

The 10mm has had a large resurgence lately and I believe the 41M will also be increasing in popularity.

The 10mm round is becoming more popular because it is the most powerful round available for conventional semiautos, not because it is the second most powerful. If a slightly more powerful 11mm cartridge had been introduced before the 10mm and Glock made a pistol for it the 10mm would be a niche cartridge used mostly by a small group on enthusiasts willing to reload for it.

[Narragansett]

Originally Posted by AveragEd

As I mentioned in my first post, I sold my Model 57 many years ago. Since then, I have purchased three 44s, a 6" Model 629-2, a 6-1/2" 629-4 Classic and a 5" 629-3 Classic DX. NONE of them are range-shot with anything but a 240-grain cast SWC over 10.0 grains of SR4756. The DX is my hunting revolver and quite fortunately, it shoots Federal 240-grain XTP factory loads to the same 50-yard point of impact as the handloads so I don't bother handloading the few - sometimes zero - hunting rounds I shoot every year. I still think the .41 Magnum is a great cartridge but the 44s are just "easier" somehow.

Ed

I have the M29-5 classic DX 5" bbl. Not very forgiving on recoil with those Morado combat grips

[Dave Lively]

Originally Posted by Narragansett

I was in a LGS yesterday, and I was looking in the case at some of what I guess might have been the 460 and 500 S&W caliber handguns, and I wondered who the heck would want these things. They are the size of a 10 pound pot roast, I am sure they cost a lot to shoot, are by no means comfortable, and i bet you have all you can do to give them away on the used market, plus they are ugly( IMO ). But this is America and more and bigger is better.

The X-frame revolvers have always reminded me of the guns used by Yosemite Sam in the old Bugs Bunny cartoon. For the most part I think they are range guns that are not shot often but are a lot of fun for those that enjoy shooting really big handguns. A cylinder or two of full power 44 magnums through my M69 is all I care for in a single range session but I am glad to see S&W is willing to make 500 and 460 handguns for those that enjoy shooting them.

The big X frame revolvers also effectively ended the arms race over who made "the most powerful handgun in the world". When I first started shooting in the 80s I knew people that shot a 44 magnum but really wanted something even more powerful and lusted after 454 Casulls and later on 480 Rugers. Nobody I know has ever shot a 500 and said that while it was a good start they really wish S&W made something bigger.

[AveragEd]

Originally Posted by Narragansett

I have the M29-5 classic DX 5" bbl. Not very forgiving on recoil with those Morado combat grips

That's why I had the Hogue MonoGrip on mine. I recently put a set of Roper knock-offs on it but have yet to shoot it with them in place. In actuality, just about any stock would be comfortable with the usual range loads I use and I'm sure I could stand anything for the few full-power loads it sees.

Ed

[RoyM52]

Thinking about this a little more and realized that to fill in the gaps it is necessary to either create a new rimmed 40 cal or bring back the 41. There needs to be a between revolver {not rimless}round and after developing the m 69, The 41, in a L frame would be a natural. {and fill in the gap}{just like the 40, for auto loaders , filled the gap between the 9mm and the 45.}

[RoyM52]

It's not about competing with the 44 mag. It's about filling the gap between 357 and the 44. {in a rimmed revolver round}

[jcelect]

The 41 Mag is a caliber for the reloader. The factory loading selection of ammo is poor! You must reload to bring out the best of this cartridge. Here is my most favorite of my guns!


I also shoot, and load for, the 44 Mags. I like the longer barrels, and others!

jcelect

[Narragansett]

Originally Posted by AveragEd

That's why I had the Hogue MonoGrip on mine. I recently put a set of Roper knock-offs on it but have yet to shoot it with them in place. In actuality, just about any stock would be comfortable with the usual range loads I use and I'm sure I could stand anything for the few full-power loads it sees.

Ed

The 29-5CDX comes with one piece rubber and the Morado combats

[Seadragon]

Originally Posted by joe44va

I keep hoping SAW comes out with a M69 4.25 in 41 mag with 6 holes in the cylinder; I think they would fit.

I don't think we will see a 6 shot L frame in .41 but it might be close. The rim on 44 brass is 0.514 inch in diameter and on the 41 is 0.492 inch. If you sit five 44 cartridges rim-to-rim in a straight line it will be 2.57 inches long. This closely approximates the circumference of the circle required to accommodate the five 44 cartridges in the cylinder of a M69. (Note this is NOT the circumference of the cylinder.) The straight line rim-to-rim distance of six 41 cartridges is 2.952 inches, or an additional 0.382 inch. While the 41 cartridges could be moved closer to the outside of the M69 cylinder (since they are slightly smaller in diameter than the 44 cartridges), by my calculation this only buys you about 0.070 inch in additional length leaving you about 0.312 inch short of what you would need.

That 0.312 inch might be made up if there is a gap of more than 0.062 inch between the rim of each 44 cartridge in the M69. I don't own a M69 so someone who has one will have to tell us how big a gap exists. For whatever it's worth, the gap between 38/357 cartridges in a K frame cylinder looks to be 0.020 inch.

Doing the same analysis for the 7 shot 357 L frame cylinder comes up closer to what is needed for a 6 shot 41 but still a few mils short so who knows, maybe they can squeeze that sixth 41 round in after all!

[Warren Sear]

The Colt Python was built on what was called Colt's "41" sized frame. The "Army Special" (later called the "Official Police"), predecessors to the Python, was available in .41 Colt caliber. S&W shamelessly copied the profile and size of the Python when they came out with the "L" frame revolver.

So, based on this, S&W's L framed revolvers should be capable of being chambered in .41 caliber. I would not want a .41 Magnum in a Python/L frame sized gun, but if S&W ever came out with a six shot L frame revolver in .41 Special, I'd be on that like a bum on a baloney sandwich, damn the IL.

[rubiranch]

Originally Posted by Narragansett

I have fired both but never owned a 58. I do like fixed sight guns, but IMO, I would be all over a 57 before a 58. That's just me. I think they are classier. If you want to PM me and stay in touch, I am considering selling a P&R 6" 57 NIB. Just have not quite made up my mind yet

Thanks Pete.

My M57 is a 6" from 1980, N806xxx. Not sure if its P&R or not. Its been nearly a year since the last time I saw it. LOL

The 57 & 58 are like 27s and 28s only in a larger caliber.

I am really looking forward to getting my 58 because I don't have a gun with a 4" barrel and it kind of has the same history as the 28. A stripped down version of the 57 for law enforcement.

Getting more into guns has been a little different than what I thought it was going to be. Not that I ever expected to get into guns. I always thought 4 was plenty.

I wanted a 125th Anniversary 25-3 ever since 1977 and now that I have one I have no interest in it and its going down the road.

Wanted a Dirty Harry 29-2 forever and I'm passing on that one too. .44 Mags don't do anything for me.

I wanted a nice 19 and no longer have an interest in them either.

The first time I saw the .41 Mags I had no interest in them until I learned a little bit more about them and decided that I wanted a 57 & a 58.

I'm happy now. LOL

The only gun I wish I had taken was a 4" pre-28 Highway Patrolman. That one went to a good friend so I'm OK with it.

[rubiranch]

Originally Posted by jcelect

The 41 Mag is a caliber for the reloader.

I've never reloaded one shell. All my .41 Mags are going to have to be store bought.

[rubiranch]

Originally Posted by Narragansett

I was in a LGS yesterday, and I was looking in the case at some of what I guess might have been the 460 and 500 S&W caliber handguns, and I wondered who the heck would want these things. They are the size of a 10 pound pot roast, I am sure they cost a lot to shoot, are by no means comfortable, and i bet you have all you can do to give them away on the used market, plus they are ugly( IMO ). But this is America and more and bigger is better.

I have a 4" 500 Mag, never shot it either.

As soon as the weather clears up and a couple of my buddies get together we're going to go to the range and shoot it. I CAN'T WAIT!!

Then its going down the road too.

[Narragansett]

Originally Posted by rubiranch

I've never reloaded one shell. All my .41 Mags are going to have to be store bought.

Start reloading, why not??

[Narragansett]

Originally Posted by Warren Sear

The Colt Python was built on what was called Colt's "41" sized frame. The "Army Special" (later called the "Official Police"), predecessors to the Python, was available in .41 Colt caliber. S&W shamelessly copied the profile and size of the Python when they came out with the "L" frame revolver.

So, based on this, S&W's L framed revolvers should be capable of being chambered in .41 caliber. I would not want a .41 Magnum in a Python/L frame sized gun, but if S&W ever came out with a six shot L frame revolver in .41 Special, I'd be on that like a bum on a baloney sandwich, damn the IL.

Hmmmm, a case for a 41 special

[Warren Sear]

^^^ That would be a perfect combination, IMHO.

[BigBill]

Well over a decade+++ ago I purchased my new m58 & m 57 in 41 mag. With the mim and loc for $699. Couldn’t pass that up. The salesman told me they have the new 41 mag ammo instock. He hasn’t seen new 41 ammo in a few years. I was buying it on every trip to the LGS. I purchased 1 k of 215 gr swc also and 1 k of new starline brass. I need to stockup on more brass.

[SquarePizza]

I have a taurus 415 with a 2.5" barrel. This is basically a 5 shot L frame gun. I bought it because I wanted to throw a set of boot grips on it and use it as a larger pocket gun. Sadly, it uses the judge grip stud and they don't make a small grip for it.

However, the overall size of the gun was so handy that I considered having a 2.5" 686 converted to 41 mag. If S&W would just do that for me with a new version of the M69 in 41mag, I would be very happy. =)

And as the other have mentioned above, there is something beautifully balanced about the 41 that produces excellent groups. My 657 "bloodwork" is by far my most accurate handgun and ever new load I work up for it still manages to group as good as the previous ones.

[BLUEDOT37]

Originally Posted by Narragansett

Hmmmm, a case for a 41 special

While a 41 Special would be great IF the revolver it was in was shorter/more compact I see no logic for making a 41 Special, using the enhanced M69's L-frame, since it can handle the 41 Magnum's cartridge length. The revolver would be the same size with either cartridge.

And since ammo manufacturers are barely making factory 41 Magnum ammo, I can't see why they'd want to invest in SAAMI standardizing the 41 Special only to provide the same limited variety, & quantity, of ammo for it.

Handloader Magazine (#304 & #305) had a couple of articles on the 41 Special in custom SAA revolvers. They stated that converted 6-shot 586/686's could not handle the loads in the article. (Obviously the re-engineered 5-shot M69 frame wouldn't have that problem.)

Those 41 Special loads max'd at 36K psi, the same as the 41 Magnum. I can't see a SAAMI spec'd 41 Special being loaded to a lower pressure (28K psi, for example) so what would be gained?

As already stated, the 41 Magnum, in it's current state of support, is a handloader's round. I recently added a 4" M57 Classic to go with my 7-1/2" M657 Classic Hunter & my 2-1/2" M357NG. And just like with my 44 Magnum handloads, the overwhelming majority are loaded between 1025fps & 1100fps, which make for easy shooting in either.

.

[jtcarm]

Originally Posted by Warren Sear

The Colt Python was built on what was called Colt's "41" sized frame. The "Army Special" (later called the "Official Police"), predecessors to the Python, was available in .41 Colt caliber. S&W shamelessly copied the profile and size of the Python when they came out with the "L" frame revolver.

So, based on this, S&W's L framed revolvers should be capable of being chambered in .41 caliber. I would not want a .41 Magnum in a Python/L frame sized gun, but if S&W ever came out with a six shot L frame revolver in .41 Special, I'd be on that like a bum on a baloney sandwich, damn the IL.

I’ve seen Pythons converted to 41 magnum. A shop here in Arlington, Texas, did it back in the 80s.

I’d be on an L-frame .41 mag as well.

I’m thinking there must be an obstacle, or else someone would be doing the conversions. Same for the GP100.

Clements was converting the GP to 10mm, before Ruger took it mainstream.

[elktaker]

Sometime along about 1980, I won a Model 57. At that time I didn't even know that there was such a caliber. Well being the person I am I dove into shooting and loading for that gun with everything I had. I shoot some hot factory loads and decided that was not what I wanted to shoot in competition. As soon as I received my Lyman casting dies I poured a couple hundred 200 grain SW bullets. I proceeded to load them over some Unique and shot many matches with that load. I was shooting three combat matches a month and didn't have enough money to buy a dedicated competition gun. That model 57 just ran and shot like a dream. I used this pistol to take my first game animal with a pistol and killed coyote with it out to about 110 yards.
I don't shoot as much as I used to but I have a very fond place in my heart for that gun and caliber. I never fell into the 44 mag ideology but when I started using the 57 I really couldn't understand all the hub bub about the 44.