41mag vs 44mag

[ArchAngelCD]

Like said above, the .41 Magnum was developed for police duty to replace the .357 Magnum with a heavier weapon that didn't have the excessive recoil the .44 Magnum had. From what I understand the .41 Magnum fell victim to the semi-auto changeover. Around the same time the .41 Magnum would have been adopted the move to semi-autos was also beginning. (I think)

Again like said above, limited ammo and bullet selection will hurt any caliber and there is very little to choose from in .41 Magnum...

 

[Kavinsky]

its kind of like the 10mm vs the .40 smith and wesson

you just cant find a box of ammo everywhere for a 10mm like you can with a .40 smith and wesson. ditto with the .41 mag, hence why everyone always defaults to the .44

and until a movie or a tv show gets popular with someone in the title role packing one and the demand for guns and ammo for them goes up of them its probably going to stay that way.

doesnt mean that their not great cartridges and they have their place its just its a pain in the *** to find factory ammo and if you just wanna shoot and not reload it pretty much takes it off the table for that kind of shooting recreation.

Not to mention the added price because of the availability of the cartridge and the guns made for it


also with the .44 mag I wouldnt put anything about 250 grains in mine, the model 29 is already a hopped up N frame to begin with and with anything above 250 they can develop problems from what I understand.

besides it has a very nice dirty harry boom noise to it with the factory remington 180 grain rounds moving at 1600 fps anyways.

 

[GaCop]

To my knowledge, Amarillo Tx. PD was the only agency to actually issue the 41 Mag back in the 70s. I was living in Clovis New Mexico at that time and had a friend on the Amarillo PD. They issued the 41 Mag but officers were allowed to carry whatever they could qualify with.

Tom

 

[Jellybean]

So, i have been doing alot of research on the above 2 cartridges. ...If what I am reading and finding is true, why isn't the 41 more popular?....

Can you tell us what you are getting this information from?

Quoted from GaCop:

To my knowledge, Amarillo Tx. PD was the only agency to actually issue the 41 Mag back in the 70s...

There were more, including one smaller local dept. but it was short lived here. When their "gun expert" found out they offered both a lead SWC and a JSP he chose the jacketed bullet to prevent leading.

 

[snowman]

The .41 magnum has superior ballistics. . .

Could someone take a minute or two and explain this to me? I'm not familiar enough with ballistics to understand how one round can be superior to another.

Thank you.
Andy

 

[Skip Sackett]

The 41Mag didn't have an "Elmer Keith" nor a bunch of years with a previous "special" cartridge behind it.

Bullet selection is a big factor in having a caliber "make it". I can get any shape going in about any weight out there for my 44, not so much for the 41.

I too think it was the semi auto craze that helped with its demise. When the gang banger on the other end of the gun fight has more bullets than you and easier to get more into action, I think that is a bad thing. Since my son is an LEO, I am quite thankful that they give him a 40S&W with a bunch of extra rounds to take with him on patrol.

Our gang bangers 'round here usually have an SKS with 30 rounds or so in them with them as they go about their unwholesome tasks.

FWIW

 

[BearBio]

I'm 62 in 2 months and have had at least 3 41 mags and 3 44 mags (plus a good number of 44 specials). I carried the 41 mag while guiding on hogs in grad school. I switched from a Model 29 to a Ruger 41 Blackhawk because I was getting better penetration with the 41==all things being equal (we handloaded for both).

 

[bmcgilvray]

I've only been on the .41 Magnum bandwagon for a little over a year after being on the .44 Magnum wagon for over 30 years. As much as I admire the .41 Magnum cartridge, and being thrilled to be a newer owner of one, I'm simply not seeing its superior ballistic performance over the chronograph screens to that of the .44 Magnum. It's too easy to run 240 grain .429 bullets faster than 210-220 grain .410 bullets. Superior ballistics can't be claimed by the .41 Magnum.

Going back to the days when published manuals offered real full-powered maximum loads, a peek in the 1978 Sierra manual shows loads for the .41 Magnum and their 170 grain bullet into the 1500 fps range, and loads for their 210 grain bullet into the 1300 fps range. Data for Sierra's .44 Magnum using their maximum loads show their 180 grain bullet reaching into the 1700 fps range and their 240 grain bullet into the 1500 fps range.

I've thoroughly run the .44 Magnum through the wringer and found that these velocities are easily accomplished with several powders. I've only started investigating the .41 Magnum, having tested both 210 and 220 grain bullets, but am finding that the .41 Magnum velocities published in the 1978 Sierra manual are also easily managed by the cartridge.

I used the .44 Magnum for hunter pistol silhouette, shooting for several seasons years ago, and it was used on the 100 yd. rams. I've only shot the .41 Magnum for effect at 100 yards to see if the bullet would get down there. It did. It did not shoot perceptibly flatter nor has it displayed any flatter shooting characteristics in impromptu shooting at targets of opportunity on the 200 yard range at our old home place.

If Sierra's ballistics tables in the back of their 1978 manual are to be taken at face value then the following may be found.

.41 Magnum
Sierra 170 grain JHC: 1500 fps, 100 yard drop: 9.62 inches
Sierra 210 grain JHC: 1300 fps, 100 yard drop: 11.49 inches

44 Magnum
Sierra 180 grain JHC: 1700 fps, 100 yard drop: 7.41 inches
Sierra 240 grain JHC: 1500 fps, 100 yard drop: 8.89 inches

It ain't much difference but it is in favor of the .44 magnum over the .41 Magnum. There's 4 inches or less difference in drop at 100 yards for all of the above so it's not important.

At 100 yards and longer distances the .44 Magnum shows higher retained velocities and more ft./lbs of energy than the .41 Magnum "according to the charts."

Now one can mix-'n-match different brands of bullets, different bullet weights, or bullet weights not listed and obtain different results but the .44 Magnum would still likely best the .41 Magnum by a bit no matter what combination was chosen. If the .44 Magnum is treated with the right handloaded components it should equal the .41 Magnum in penetration as well.

And yes, higher velocities may be attained than Sierra's quotes. With a grain less than the maximum listed load for their 220 grain .41 Magnum Silhouette bullet using H110, 1362 fps was achieved in the Model 57. This past season a small Texas whitetail doe was taken with this load and it was highly effective.

The highest velocities I've seen in the Model 29 .44 Magnum have been 1812 fps with the Sierra 180 grain bullet and 1550 fps with the Sierra 240 grain bullet.

In years gone by I've taken a couple of deer with the .44 Magnum and it was also highly effective.

Sierra says they used a 6-inch Smith & Wesson Model 57 for their .41 Magnum testing and a 7 1/2-inch Ruger Super Blackhawk for their .44 Magnum testing.

I used a 6-inch Model 57 and an 8 3/8-inch Model 29. Even if the barrel lengths were equal I suspect the nod would still go to the .44 Magnum.

30-something years ago when I had the money burning a hole in my pocket I intended to purchase a .41 Magnum rather than a .44 Magnum. They had no .41 Magnums in stock so I went down the .44 Magnum road and wouldn't take for the ride it's given. I still like the .41 Magnum. I enjoy shooting it a bit more and could live with it rather than a .44 Magnum.

 

[Bush Pilot]

The .44 magnum, for those not man enough to handle the .41 magnum.

 

[358156hp]

I agree that a 45colt in a MODERN frame is vastly superior to both rounds. However, comparing balistics for a 41mag 215-240gr and a 44mag 215-240gr shows a distinct advantage to the 41mag. If you want 265-300gr bullet then the 44mag does have the advantage, bit at the expense of added recoil and muzzle blast. 41mag and 45cLC still win!

Well, that's not the conclusion I reached with my experiments. If you get a moment, would you please explain what I missed? 215 gr bullets are underweight for optimum efficiency in the 44, and at 240 gr, it's just coming into its power band. I normally shoot 255 gr to 300 gr in 44. My 41 magnum Redhawk absolutely hated any bullet over 220 grains, refusing to group them well, and was the most finicky revolver I've ever tried to load for. I did finally find a good load for it, using AA5744 of all things. I talked to a lot of people about the 41 while I was experimenting, and most of them seemed to agree that the 41 was at it's best in the 170 to 220 grain weight range. Some guys got really good results with 250-265 gr LBT LFN, but I wasn't one of them.

 

[fredj338]

I like & shoot the 41mag but it will NEVER be the equal of the 44mag. As in any caliber, the larger the bore size, the faster you can push heavier bullets. Sure, you can run a 240gr bullet in the 41mag, but it's not even kissing the vel of a 240gr in a 44mag. Of course, there is less recoil w/ the 41mag & it's just oddball enough to make me want another one. Superior to a 44mag, hardly. With 250-270gr bullets, the 44mag has few peers for power, portability & shootability. If I could only have one handgun it would be a 4" M29 or M629.

 

[Fishslayer]

The .41 Magnum was more a victim of bad timing than anything else. Fans of the cartridge tend to be serious shootists and tend to really like their .41s.

FWIW the .44 Magnum is really only a .429...

 

[dirt1933]

41 mag

hmmm...cannot agree...the 41 mag.was developed to be the ideal police round...it was first sold as a M57 in 1963..NINE years prior to dirty harry...as we know it did not fare well as a police issue weapon for several reasons..one of which was police agencies of this era were not fond of the word magnum...as to all or part of the dirty harry movie being filmed with a 41 mag......this has been hashed and rehashed here many times...the experts say two M29-2's were used in the movie...eastwood kept one and the other is currently in the NRA museum here in virginia...
don't get me wrong...i love both calibers,reload for both and have a number of 41 and 44 mag.handguns....i have carried a M657 3" for quite awhile....both are super rounds and can be loaded mild to wild...i'm just glad i don't have to buy factory ammo for either...

have had a love affair with 41 mag for years---have a marlin lever gun in 41 as companion piece. Bless reloading my own.

 

[GF1]

The .41 Magnum is my favorite handgun cartridge, and I have alot of experience with both the .44 and .357. In terms of the .44 vs. .41 debate, I just say that I wore out a Model 29-2 on about 20,000 rounds of hard cast linotype bullets in the late 70s. It was accurate and I loved it. It shot loose, and I just didn't want to have it refurbed, so I sold it...right after I got my first Model 57 (have three now, including the original I mention here).

The .44 Magnum is more powerful, period. Just not by so much as many would have you believe. With the larger bullets, it will penetrate as deep as similarly shaped and constructed bullets (same S.D.) in the .41. It's also nearly identical in trajectory (210 vs 240 or similar comparisons); the swamp gas that the .41 shoots flatter is just that. Run the ballistics.

The real kicker for me in the discussion/argument is that .41 caliber is the perfect size for the N frame Smith. The .44 (or really, .429) Magnum is oversize for that revolver, IMO. Let's not even speak of the Model 25 chambered for 45 LC (better load down to Colt SAA pressures, as there's not much steel in those cylinders).

That's the real picture, for me. It's not trajectory, not recoil (if you don't like the .44, you won't like the .41 either), but simply the ideal fit for a real magnum cartridge loaded repeatably to magnum pressures. The Model 57 will take it; the Model 29 will not.

Here's my 4" no dash Model 57 (bought new for $300 quite a few years ago):

 

[TAROMAN]

Both great rounds. I invested early in .44. Later shot a friend's 57. Liked it a lot. if I had had a mulligan, I'd have gone wth the 41.
Hunting and silhouette were the missions. Either can do the deal.

 

[jackcachenc]

Shot my first .41 Mag over forty years ago. My farther was Highway Patrolman. He was one of 25 or so selected to test the Model 58. He liked the caliber so muck he bought a Ruger Blackhawk in .41 Mag. We spent many hours reloading for it. He was 6ft 5, around 235 so he did not mind carrying the N frame, but most of the other testers did not like it because of the side. Issue round was Remington-Peters 210 gr Police Load. Normally they could buy there issue guns but since it was a test they where returned to S&W after the test.

During the S&W Model 29 Dirty Harry drought I was stationed in Germany. Home on leave I went to see the movie. I was a member of the Rod and Gun Club on post. I walked in one day and a 29 Dirty Harry gun was in the display case. Price was $325 and they were going a lot higher in the states. I no longer shoot it, I lean to my .41s

Still have the Ruger, also have a Model 57 and 2 Model 58s. Shoot the 57 the most but shooting one of the 58s brings back fond memories of shooting with my Dad.. Guess thats why I love the .41 Mag.

 

[trauma1]

bullet for bullet the 41 can do everything the 44 can upt to a point. the 44 has the advantage in heavier wts and no argument there. my initial point was/is, the 41 is still the better round up to 215gr or so.

 

[trauma1]

Can you tell us what you are getting this information from?

Quoted from GaCop:

There were more, including one smaller local dept. but it was short lived here. When their "gun expert" found out they offered both a lead SWC and a JSP he chose the jacketed bullet to prevent leading.

hodgdon reloading manual.

 

[Stainless44]

All this talk makes me want to go shooting. I've got a few hundred 44 and 41's loaded up and I'm going to the farm tomorrow for some fishing and coyote hunting...I think plinking just made the schedule too.

 

[nframes4me]

The 44 and 41 mags compare much in the same way the 30-06 and the 308 do. with 150 grain bullets both 30 calibers are similar, but increase bullet weight to 180 grains and that's where the added case capacity of the 'ought-six makes the difference.

Cartridges are in fact internal combustion devices. Like an engine, a 30-06 has the same "bore" as a 308 but a longer stroke. The 41 and 44 mags have the same "stroke" (case length) but different size bores and as a result the 44 has greater case capacity and just like the difference between the 30-06 and the 308, the cartridge with greatest case capacity can propel heavier bullets faster.

For hunting large game animals the 300 grain bullets that can be loaded in the 44 have much greater effectiveness than the more common 240 grain bullets. The 44 magnum is almost a different cartridge loaded with these heavy, hard-hiting, deep-penetrating bullets.

I've had a couple of Ruger blackhawks in both 44 and 41 mag and liked the 41 better. but after that I had a 29 "Classic" with the 6 1/2" barrel and the unfluted cylinder and the factory hogue grips and like that better than either of the Rugers.

I have a model 58 and I like that but shoot reloads only in it because I don't like the recoil of full-power loads with the Magna grips and don't like how the gun looks without them.

Now I need to get a model 57 for shooting full power ammo and would love to find one with an 8 3/8ths inch barrel. Both the 41 and 44 mags are gerat cartriges for those of us who reload.