Waste of Skin... Or Actually Waste of N Frame

N

NE450No2

Member
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
2,095
Reaction score
470
Location
Texas
I have been shooting S&W revolvers since 1970, my first a 6.5" Mod 29.

I had a Mod 41 in 1968 for NRA Bulls Eye Matches...

But back to N Frames....

Since the 44 mag was "invented" why still make 44 Specials???

Now I have shot a BUNCH of 44 Special power loads in my 44 Mags...
MANY with Special brass with no problems, and many in Mag brass at 44 Special power levels...

So why would anyone buy a N frame in 44 Special, when a 44 Mag can do anything that a 44 Special can do AND use 44 mags when needed???

Then there is the 41 Mag... Now I am an Elmer Keithite of the Highest order, but the 41 Mag [and I had and used a Mod 58 for a foul weather work gun], was a TOTAL waste of the N Frame...

What was needed, and would have been better was proper Police loads for the 44 Mag...

I have no problems with 357 Mags in the N Frame, and I am not a 357 Mag kind of guy...

I think the N Frame 45 ACP revolvers are GREAT. And I used one for a work gun for several years...
I have a 325 NG next to me as I type this...

Like wise I think the 45 Colt N Frames are good for a fella that is a Big Colt SAA shooter, and wants a DA Revolver in the same calibre....

If I was President of S&W, there would never have been a 41 Mag, and no 44 Specials after the intoduction of the 44 Mag...

There would not be any "locks" either....
 
Last edited:
Register to hide this ad
The jeep guys have a saying...
"Its a jeep thing, you wouldnt understand."
Its kinda like that with .44 specials.
I have a .44 special pocket gun, .44 magnum would have added size and weight.
Some people just prefer .44 special, and want the pistol chambered for that cartridge.
As to the .41 mag, the police departments had the choice in a a lighter duty load and a heavy hunting load... and a LOT of the time they chose the hunting load... with the greater variety of ammo for the .44 magnum, you think they would have made the right choice?
Hmmmm... lighter loaded .44 magnum, sounds like .44 special to me. :D
Issue the officers .44 specials so they couldnt load up the heavy hunting magnum loads... Sounds like a good usage for an N frame chambered in .44 special to me. ;)


Jim
 
Well, everyone has an opinion and a right to have one too! Im just very glad you are not president of S&W or Ruger as well.
 
NE450No2 said:
Since the 44 mag was "invented" why still make 44 Specials?
Click to expand...

Using that theory of logic....
Why make a .38 special after the .357 was invented ?

My guess is they "supplement" rather than "supplant" eachother.
Greater minds than mine will undoubtedly explain this theory.
Cheers...
 
2rm44yr.gif
 
No .41 mags or .44 specials.........

Do I smell an opinion here..?? After all, they are like ......... and they all stink, right?? Maybe.... I'm not a .41 mag fan or a .44 special fan necessarily, BUT, what if your dad or favorite uncle or Grandfather had shot one and fed you or others? Or made some great shots that the fellas around town still talked about? Or used it like some old beat-up tool and it worked every time-all the time?? My guess is that your opinion would be different. Thank you for making me remember my uncle and his showing me his beat-up old Ruger Blackhawk in .41 mag and that very cool cowboy holster rig he wore. Sprefix
 
The chambering of an N frame or any other hand gun is immaterial. As long as there is a market for that chambering, there is no waste where the purchaser is concerned. Myself, I favor the 10.5 Montenegrin.
Dan
 
Concerning the .41 Magnum, the best analysis I ever read proclaimed it as "The only revolver you'd ever need, if you could only have one. But if you can have more than one, it does nothing that others can't do as well or better." It rivals the .44 Magnum as a hunting sidearm, without all the flash, bang, and recoil, while providing a larger caliber than the .357 Magnum.

And as far as the .44 Special, I own a couple of N frames (M624s in 4" and 6-1/2", and a 6-1/2" M24), and they are nice, accurate target shooters that could easily be used for hunting (do you REALLY think it takes a .44 Magnum to harvest a mule deer?). What makes the .44 Special is the history, and the fact that there are 18oz (M396 Mountain Lite) and 18-1/2oz (M296) .44 Special revolvers available that shoot rather well. Are there any 18oz revolvers in .44 Magnum, .45 Colt, .45ACP, or .41 Magnum? I don't think so.

And finally, can anybody show me a substantive performance difference between the .44 Special and the .45ACP? I can easily handload the .44 Special to match or exceed the performance of a .45ACP, without having to crawl around searching for the brass after a day at the range.

The .44 Special can do 99% of what I need done with a handgun. That it dates back to 1907 just adds flavor. If I need 15+1 rounds in a handgun (I guess that's the other 1% of what I need done), then the 9mm Luger is there, and it dates back to 1902!
 
Being a "Certified Old Fart", I was THERE with the .44 Special and later the .44 Magnum. I have several copies of both. In fact, just recently, I bought both the new Ruger .44 Lipsey Special Flattop and a Ruger 50th
Anniversary .44 Magnum.

The S&W Model 624 (I have a Model 24 6½", a 4" 624 and a 6½" 624) is a half pound lighter than a comparable Model 29 or 629. The extra weight is really needed in the heavier loaded .44 Magnum. When you carry a revolver all day, the lighter weight (but still perfectly controllable) .44 Special is a definite advantage. On the other hand, the 629 works quite well when big game is the target.

Today, it's simply, "Horses for courses". There is absolutely NOTHING better than an appropriately loaded .44 Special when woods rambling (unless you are in Big Bear areas). I have taken a goodly number of edible small game with the .44 Special (targets of opportunity) and used appropriately, there is little meat damage, yet instant stoppers regarding the feared RABBIT. There is little damage with a shot through the "slats" and that is a high percentage shot. On the other hand, occasionally one meets unsavory characters in the wilds and the .44 Special is quite comforting when that occurs. There is NO better self defense load than a good Keith bullet ahead of 7.5 grs of Unique (the famed "Skeeter" load).

I have done extensive back packing in areas where you COULD stumble onto a marijuana patch and that can be BAD business. Naturally, anyone with any sense will try to avoid such areas but since they are "secret" it can be accidental.

The .44 Special has a lot of that "just enough" character to make it a viable choice of caliber. Used in a "made for the cartridge" revolver, it can be a "perfect packing pistol" (thanks, John Taffin, for that phrase) compared to the considerably heavier .44 Magnums.

Simply put, you just cannot beat a 4" Model 624 or a 4 3/4"-5½" Single Action when "packing"...

There are certainly other viable choices, but for me, the .44 Special is the best of all.

Dale53
 
If they didn't keep selling them why would S&W and Ruger keep re-introducing them? To make money, why else. And people keep buying them.

One of my favorite Smith's is my 24-3 3".
 
Engine49guy said:
Using that theory of logic....
Why make a .38 special after the .357 was invented ?

My guess is they "supplement" rather than "supplant" eachother.
Greater minds than mine will undoubtedly explain this theory.
Cheers...
Click to expand...


good point...add to it...why make a 44 or 460 after the 500 came out?personally i LOVE a 41 mag.:rolleyes:
 
I just bought a 44 Special. A 696 in L-frame. IF one wants a big dia.,fast heavy bullet in a smaller revolver frame this is the need for a .44 Special. You can say that about a lot of calibers. A need for .300 RUM when you have a 300 Weatherby,etc,etc. Gun makers do this or they would die on the vine. Do we really need a GMC truck when the Chevie truck is exactly the same,etc,etc
 
Smith & L/H used to make a 3" 24/624. Tapered bbl, shorter cylinder, and round butt features made it a neat "little" carry gun compared to the mighty mag. You can load those 44's with a 240 grain bullet at 11-1200 fps. I really don't need the recoil of magnum loads out of a gun that small, since you could get all the performance you needed in a special. Not to mention the cool L frames they made.
 
I am suddenly consumed with a burning desire for an N frame chambered for .41 special .
 
m657 said:
41 Mag proves there is a kind and loving god.
Click to expand...

Thank you. My 6" 57 has 37 deer to it's name over the years. They did not seem to notice the difference between a .429 or a true .410 bullet. I'll take it over a .44 or .357 mag any day of the week for a do everything caliber!
 
I don't presently own a .41 magnum, just never been a fan myself
but, I'm not offended if somebody does like it. Heck I liked the
.357 maximum and look what happened to it. Just be thankful there
is a following for a given caliber.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
New To Me Model 24-3 61/2"
Replies
7
Views
835
Pizza Bob
Pizza Bob
45NUTT
Model 29 or 24??
Replies
16
Views
838
Nightowl
Nightowl
S
L- Frame 41 Magnum?
2
Replies
20
Views
2K
ko41
ko41
M
Let's talk 1970s K frame magnums
2 3
Replies
47
Views
3K
Riposte1
R
G
  • Locked
FS: Model 642 PC, Model 625-8 JM 4” (sold), Model 15-2 4” (sold), Model 340PD (sold)
Replies
3
Views
2K
mike56
M

Latest posts

Back
Top