From reading this post, a lot of folks don’t understand the concept of the .41 Special. It’s not about recoil. It’s not about a smaller gun with reduced capacity. The L frame is S&W’s “.41
Frame”. Essentially the same size as Colt’s .41 frame which is used for the Python. The Ruger GP 100 is essentially the same size also. Ok, why not just chamber these guns for the .41 Mag? Real simply put, they won’t handle it. Back in the day, Pythons were rechambered to .41 Mag. Colt warned against the conversation, probably with good reason. There is no spec for the .41 Special, as there is no factory loading. The general consensus is that you move the 210gr slug at 900-1000 FPS, vs 1300-1500 for the mag. The “wimpy” police load was loaded to about 900-950 as i recall. Folks like Jordan, Kieth, Skelton, Et al claimed it to be the perfect police load. The formula was something on the order of .40 caliber at 900 FPS or so. Well, how come this wasn’t the rage in the M57 and M58? Both are built on the N frame. The guns are big and heavy. The L frame is just about as heavy but not quite as large. There is a reason that S&W retained the dimensions of the K frame grip in the L frame. Many users find the K/L grip dimensions a perfect size. The .40 S&W M646 was not successful, despite being a L frame nd chambered for a very popular cartridge (at that time). This same basic gun could be chambered for 10mm and shoot both the 10 and the .40 with moon clips. About as much chance of that happening as Smith chambering a L frame for the .41 Special. But then again, Ruger is doing just that with the GP 100. I’m divesting my firearm accumulation rather than adding to it. I would probably make an exception if S&W were to resurrect the 646 in a 10 mm version. The 610 is out of production, but it too is a N frame. Some of my all time favorites have been N frames but I’d still like to see a six shot L frame in a caliber starting in “4”. I’m not a especially GP100 fan, but if I ran across one in 10mm at a good price I could be tempted.