.41 magnum vs. .44 magnum

[mr-mom]

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

 

[semperfi71]

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.............

 

[jbinwa]

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.

 

[alwslate]

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.

 

[dirty gary]

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?

 

[silentflyer]

.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..

 

[Neumann]

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.

 

[Titegroups]

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.

 

[kennyb]

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

 

[LimaCharlie]

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.

 

[ACP230]

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.

 

[mkk41]

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.

 

[GM4spd]

I do not understand why there is a 41 Magnum Pete

 

[tx_tsar]

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!

 

[semperfi71]

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.

 

[shawn mccarver]

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

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.

 

[Engineer1911]

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?

 

[silentflyer]

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.

 

[SMSgt]

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.

 

[SMSgt]

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

Because then I only need one wrench?