41mag vs 44mag

[ElToro]

i have multiple .44 mags. also rifles are chambered in it save the occasional marlin 1894.

factory ammo is severely limited in 41. so 44 is the way to go for me. also the fact that 41s are few and far between around here. so thats the way it is.

i wont pass judgement on the ballistics as they appear to very similar. so the availabilty tilts favor to .44

 

[Titegroups]

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.

No substitute for cubic inches. 16in. battleship guns don't have the flatest trajectory either.

 

[bluetopper]

Wasn't the 41 Magnum originally called the 41 Police? Or maybe they just wanted to call it that? I've read this somewhere in the past I know

 

[336A]

I too am a .41 mag fanatic and feel that it is a better fit in the N frames than the .44 is; and a better cartridge for all around use. The .41 mag has quite a unique history behind it which makes it even more fascinating, at least to me anyway. As most of us know it was Keith and Jordan that are mostly responsible for it being brought out, as they wanted a better police cartridge and thought that .40 cal would be ideal. Most of the ground work was put down by Cyril (unsure of spelling) "POP" Eimer, and Gordon Boser. Both produced powerful .400/.401 widcats that were close to .41 mag performance, even Colt almost brought forth a .40 caliber cartridge. For whatever reason Colt was to slow to introduce their .400 Colt allowing S&W to get the drop on them when they unveiled the .41 Magnum. Both Eimer and Boser used cut down .401 WSL cases however 2400 wasn't around yet (1920's) when Eimer was producing his widlcat .400/.401Eimer SPL. When Boser took up the reigns (1930's) 2400 was available at this time. Then came Herter's .401 PowerMag which Herter's brought out in in 1961 3 years before the debut of the .41 S&W Magnum. This cartridge was probably more responsible for S&W bringing forth the .41 mag than any other. It was Doug Hellstrom of S&W however that decided the new cartridge would be a true .41 and not a .40". That little nugget of info can be found here on pg 25 http://www.elmerkeithshoot.org/GA/1969_01_Elmer_Keith_Favorite_Load.pdf

Heavy weights for the .41 mag can be found for the .41 mag if one looks around. Penn bullets makes a 295gr SSK and Beartooth bullets makes a 300gr SSK bullet as well. Whether or not your revolver will shoot these well is gun specific just as is any firearm when it comes to what it likes or dislikes. So the .41 is certainly versatile but I think that the .41 mag is at it's best with bullets up to 265gr. There is a fella in Idaho that uses .41 mag quite often. He used a .41 mag with enough Unique to launch a 250gr WFN out of his 5 1/2" Ruger to 1100fps. When he turned that load loose on a elk from about 40-50 yards it sailed through both sides easily, the elk got real sick and fell over within 10yds. This same fella's main load that he's used for about 30 yrs on game from deer through moose; is a 230gr SWC over 18gr of 2400 with the same results. With performance like that one has to ask themselves just how much do you really need?

Another point that endears me to the .41 mag is the cylinder throats and barrels have always had good tolerances. Where as .44's can and have ranged anywhere from .429" - .432". This accounts for the reason that .41's have always had a good reputation for being accurate.

However If ones feels they must launch 300gr plus bullets on a frequent basis then the .44 mag is the better vehicle. However the .41 mag will get the same job done with less fuss and recoil. If it can't be done with a .41 mag then it probably can't be done with a .44 mag either. By that time you should have had a proper long gun for the task in the first place.

 

[FordTruckGuy]

Thanks for the info 336.

 

[336A]

No problem FordTruckGuy. BTW the .41 Magnum was unveiled in 1964; as Herter's .401 PowerMag was released in 1961 3years before the debut .41 Magnum.

 

[mkk41]

I own , shoot , and enjoy my .41s because , like me , they're a bit of an oddball. While everybody has heard of the mighty .44 mag , I've had people tell me they've ''never heard of the .41 mag'' , to ''there's no such thing as a .41 mag''.

The 41 mag is often called a 'cult' cartridge. It's owners are happy to own something a little bit different.

I have owned .44 magnums and still own an Old Model Ruger Super Blackhawk. But I own a dozen .41 magnums. I also own a .401 Herters PowerMag.

And when it comes down to it , all other things being equal (or close) , if any critter , 4-leg or 2 can tell the difference between a hit with a 210gr .41 bullet and a 240gr .44 bullet , I shoulda used a rifle.

I find the same discussion concerning the .270 Win vs .280 Rem , or .280 Rem vs 30-06 Springfield. Bigger is always considered better.

Viva le difference!

 

[336A]

mkk41, do you have any .401 ammo to go with the gun? how about a pic or two.

 

[trauma1]

Good replies for and against. I know the history surrounding both cartridges. But in today's "customer is right" mentality I would think the gun makers would perk up a bit! Not sure if there are any current 41mag firearms being made. Maybe the ruger blackhawk? I still think the 41mag is a better round in 210gr vs the 240gr 44mag. But, no animal, 2 or 4 leg, will ever know the difference. Just nice to be one of the enlightened few.

 

[m657]

However many angels can dance on the head of the .429 pin vs the .410 pin depends on who plays the music and which song is requested.

For me, while I *like* 44 mag, the 41 mag gives me generally better accuracy offhand, and considerably more enjoyment.

A few years ago I ran a range test on my clutch of 44 mags, from 3-4-8 3/8" 629s as compared to a 4" 57, a 6" 657, a 4" mtn gun 57; , & a Super Black Hawk Rooger 7.5" with a red dot sight.

Bullet weights ran from 200 to 265 g, with similar charges of a variety of powders. Range distances were from 50' to 50 yards, as my geezer eyes don't work good enough these days to enjoy the 100+ yard open sight targets.

What I found was surprising, so I repeated the test several times.

In *MY* test with bench supported sand bags and mid-week no rush leisurely target busting....there was no significant difference in groups. What was "the best" group one test was not so at the others.

And while the independent co-variables were not precisely controlled, I've done enough IHMSA and bullseye competition over the years, to determine which recipe/gun/caliber/etc is consistently the better performer.

I confirmed that I *prefer* shooting the 41 mag under almost any circumstance, more than the 44 mag. I *prefer* 200-220 gr loafing along at around 1000fps. I *prefer* to have some kind of optic that magnifies the target, rather than the red-dot system. And *NONE* of this data transfers to anyone else, nor were these "hunting loads" by any means.

Pure joy of just of making the little holes as close together as possible, while standing on one's hind feet, continues to give my own preference to the 41 mag, and the 4" Mtn Gun M57 gives far better accuracy that I would have ever expected.

 

[mkk41]

mkk41, do you have any .401 ammo to go with the gun? how about a pic or two.

My pleasure Sir!

When I bought it , it came with a half fired box of original ammo. Probably only ever fired 25 times then. I now have about 300rds 'in use' and probably 250rd/5 boxes of virgin Herters brass(actually made by Norma of Sweden). They're great guns , made by the old world German firm of J.P. Sauer. Easily as strong as a Ruger Blackhawk. They were also available in .357 and .44 magnums. Fun gun to shoot , and always draw interest. Jacketed 10mm bullets work great.(as does a 10mm carbide sizer die!) I occasionally find 180gr JSPs used for .38/40 WCF ammo , but usually stick with hardcast lead. I know others who have had extra cylinders reamed for 38/40 WCF.

 

[SuperMan]

Started out with a .357 Magnum Model 19 in 1970 and then went to a 6.5" 29-2 in 1973....1974 was a Model 58 but didn't get a 57 until about 1978/9. In 1980 I won the Revolver Division in the North Texas Regional IPSC shoot outside Dallas with that 57. I've been nothing but a .41 revolver man since...

Although .44s shot well for me the .41s just shoot a lot better. Even with full loads I can shoot all day long...something that becomes unpleasant with .44s...

These are three different .41 300-305 grain bullets. They get loaded with 19.0 grains of H110 and have been shot in 57s, Blackhawks and a custom Gary Reeder SA.

This was 6 rounds from a 657 using the 305s which is the center rounds... POA for the first round was at the patch and went just over the top of the plate as the gun is sighted in for 220s. The other 5 are using a 6 o'clock hold at 50 yards. About a 4" group...good enough for deer hunting...

No tellin' why the .41 shoots better for me than .44s or .45s so I just stay with that...makes reloading a lot easier...

Bob

 

[SuperMan]

.401 Herters...

Best article I ever saw on this round...a S&W N-frame would have been great....and of course one has to ask why other than ego didn't Smith and Colt chamber this great round....

Herter's .401 PowerMag

 

[SuperMan]

A few more .41 links...

Heavy Bullets in the 41 Mag

41magnum

41 Magnum Data

 

[M29since14]

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...

An old wives' tale, that I tend to agree with, to some extent. I can't say I have the engineering background to pass judgment on the matter, though.

I have found Model 57s less troublesome over the years than 29s. The 57s had the benefit of being able to start with a clean sheet of paper, so to speak. Much that was learned in building the 29 could be incorporated into that gun, with no need to be concerned about existing dimensions that carried over from the 44 Special. That is the main difference I see between the two guns. To say the .41 is a better round seems a bit fanciful. The cartridge is just a 44 Magnum that is a tiny bit smaller. The gun is where I see the difference.

 

[Roadranger]

Here's my chance to speak my mind on this subject. Being 61 years old, I can still remember the introductry ads employed by S&W in Outdoor Life in the spring of 1964 when I was in the 7th grade. A big M57 4" firing a round with sparks flying everywhere. The 41 Magnum was introduced, not to compete with the 44 Magnum, but to replace the 357 Magnum(and more importantly, the 38 Special) in the hands of police officers, deputies and troopers that were on the front lines dealing with criminals in cars and shoot outs. As formerly stated, Keith, Jordan, and even Skeeter, had a hand at convincing Mr. Hellstrom to come out with the M58 as a lawman,s gun which put big medium velocity bullet down range to better the 38 Special and without all of the 357's noise and blast. The 210 gr. lead police load did exactly this. Never mind that the 44 Special and 45 Colt had been doing this for decades. Everyone knew that these were not modern police rounds. The M58 did all of this in a traditional inexpensive package. No, younger readers, it was not the semi auto craze of the late 80's and early 90's that spelled the doom of the 41 Magnum. The 41 Magnum is a professional shooters gun, a gun a trained officer can learn to shoot very effectively if he wants to. Most officers are not shooters and at the time had just fell in love with the petite M19 357, which is and was a fine handgun. Everyone else was fine with a m10 or M15 in 38 special if it was an issue gun. Back in the sixties, departments didn't upgrade guns every 5 years just to have the newest toy. By the time the auto craze came about the 41 magnum was finished as a police round, due to the Magnum loading and the Magnum stigma applied. I've been around 41 Magnums since the mid sixties. A school chum's Dad had a 6 1/2" Blackhawk that we shot with handloads and I've had more S&W's that I can remember. Presently, I have 10 S&W's, 2 Rugers, and a Marlin carbine and have alway been well satisfied with just about any M57. I agree that they are the perfect match, cartridge to frame size. I've never seen an abused M57 and the early guns match any M29 in fit and finish. To me, it boils down to this, the 41 Magnum is just a more user friendly cartridge if one wants a magnum N frame. I prefer a 44 Special for shooting .429 bullets. I just got in 1000 Starline brass(41) today that I ordered last week, so components are not hard to get. Bob!

 

[336A]

Here is some more good reading on the .41 magnum. Take particular notice at the distances these animals were taken at as well as bullet performance. A bigger caliber would have done no better.

RugerForum.com :: View topic - ELK & THE 41 BISLEY

RugerForum.com :: View topic - Bull Moose with the Ruger 41 Magnum

I just got some .41 mag starline brass too roadranger.

SuperMan how well do those SSK bullets shoot through Rugers?

 

[CWH44300]

i like the 44 - heres a crappy pic of one of them - a power mag 44 -

 

[semperfi71]

I wanted blued and nickeled N frame S&Ws in 4 and 6 inch barrel configurations.

So I have blued 4 and 6 inch M29-2s and nickeled 4 and 6 inch M57s..................this gives me an excuse to reload different calibers that probably will do the same thing.

But the guns are purty!!

 

[AKeducator]

.41 vs .44

Wow, what a great question. I have owned 2 .44s and 2 .41s. I live in Alaska so I lean to the heavier loaded .44, but when in bear country while fishing I carry a 12 GA with an 18.5 in barrel and slugs. But the two handguns are remarkable. For recoil the .41 is a tad less out the end of my Blackhawk, but even a little less with my Taurus model 44 in .44 Mag with its ported barrel compared to the Redhawk with no porting. Both are stout kickers, but with the .44 I can also shoot .44 Specials for home defense, and I keep a few bird shot rounds in my backpack just in case I am stranded and need to shoot a grouse or hare and want some meat left to roast, and unless there is a new load I'm not aware of, that isn't possible with the .41. Two great loads, but I think it's the Ford vs Chevy, or picking your favorite team to root for thing - pick the one you choose - both are winners. Great question for this forum.