Calling all .41 Magnum guru’s

[The Mighty S&W]

Some time ago, I picked up a model 57 in .41 Magnum with a 6 inch barrel, and it has quickly become my favorite revolver. It is such a beautiful gun, and I enjoy shooting it a lot due to its accuracy and overall balance in my hands.

My question relates to ammunition, particularly factory ammunition. You see, I am always reading about how the .41 Magnum exhibits less felt recoil than the .44 Magnum, but as a guy who has owned a few .44 Magnums over the years, I’m just not quite sure that I would agree with that statement. Perhaps it is just the fact that the ammo I shoot is loaded hot, but I really don’t notice any difference in recoil between the two cartridges at all.

For a point of reference, the ammo I shoot in my model 57 has been mostly an Underwood XTP hollow point loaded to 1560fps and 1135 lb ft, but I have also fired a fair amount of Hornady’s own XTP which isn’t loaded much lighter, and also some old Speer Gold Dot 210 grain rounds, and even they seem to thump about the same although their performance numbers aren’t quite as impressive.

Now, I do have a set of dies for .41 Magnum, and I know that I could roll my own to whatever power level I wanted. But, I have gotten the impression that a lot of these comments about recoil have been from guys shooting factory ammo. And, I’d like to know what they’re shooting that gives a noticeable difference in felt recoil when compared to .44 Magnum. I really don’t mind the hot loads, and I’ve got several hundred each of the Underwood and Hornady rounds on hand. Still, I’d be interested in knowing what factory ammo guys are shooting that has lower recoil. From what I’ve seen, all of the factory stuff is pretty close to one another in terms of recoil, and it is all pretty stout.

 

[Drm50]

I’ve always thought the recoil between 41 and 44 is BS. Firing same weight bullets at same velocity it would have to be same or similar recoil. Assuming fired from similar guns m29 vs M57. Comparing anything else is pure BS. That’s why although I’ve owned many S&W and Ruger 41mag I never saw the need for them. The 16gauge of revolver cartridges. Nothing wrong with them, just not necessary. Especially if you have 357s & 44s.

 

[Model19man]

The 41 Magnum revolvers are a bit heavier due to the smaller holes in the barrel and cylinder. So felt recoil would be a (tiny) bit less. Maybe imperceptible though.

 

[Skeet 028]

Kind of asubjective point. I like the 41 more than the 44. Magnums... I never thought the 41 was loaded quite as heavily as the 44. Felt pressure wave is less too. My load for bear country is not all that hot either. A 245 gr WFNGC at about 1150 FPS. It was worked well for everything I shot with it. Will shoot through an animal completely front to back end. What nore do you need?? My 41 is not carried for a carry gun. just a hunter and fun gun shooting light loads with RD GD and Unique/ Herco. I shot one deer with the light 170 gr loaded at under 1000FPS. Lightning bolt! at 90 ft. BTW if I am shooting at game etc...I never feel the recoil

 

[The Mighty S&W]

I’ve always thought the recoil between 41 and 44 is BS. Firing same weight bullets at same velocity it would have to be same or similar recoil. Assuming fired from similar guns m29 vs M57. Comparing anything else is pure BS. That’s why although I’ve owned many S&W and Ruger 41mag I never saw the need for them. The 16gauge of revolver cartridges. Nothing wrong with them, just not necessary. Especially if you have 357s & 44s.

That’s what I’m saying in terms of felt recoil. I really DO like the .41 Magnum, and will definitely be keeping it. But, only because I no longer own a .44 Magnum. I really don’t see any major difference between the two cartridges aside from availability and variety of factory loads. Power levels are pretty much the same. Recoil is pretty much the same. There’s not a big enough difference in diameter to be worth worrying about (.410 vs .429). Yes, the .44 Magnum can run away with the show if you want to go really heavy, but I can’t say that I’ve ever fired anything in .44 Magnum that was heavier than you can go in a .41 Magnum, and that’s after owning several .44’s.

I really am a fan of my model 57, and enjoy shooting it a lot. It’s just that when I hear many claims of the .41 Magnum having “less felt recoil” than the .44 Magnum, I’d like to see someone point out which loads they are comparing. I am aware of the underpowered and now discontinued Winchester Silvertip load, but surely guys wouldn’t be comparing that anemic offering to a factory .44 Magnum. And, if we are talking about handloads, it seems to me that the argument makes no sense as people can load just about anything to as hot or mild as they’d like.

Factory load compared to factory load, I’d like to know what rounds are lighter recoiling in the .41 than they are in the .44 because in my experience… my .41 Magnum hits my hand just as hard as any .44 Magnum I’ve ever owned. As I previously acknowledged, my preferred ammo for the gun is really hot stuff, so I don’t expect it to be mild recoiling. Still, you’d think someone could point us all to something in a factory offering that demonstrates the frequently repeated claim of reduced recoil compared to a .44 Magnum.

 

[Hair Trigger]

Some time ago, I picked up a model 57 in .41 Magnum with a 6 inch barrel, and it has quickly become my favorite revolver. It is such a beautiful gun, and I enjoy shooting it a lot due to its accuracy and overall balance in my hands.

For a point of reference, the ammo I shoot in my model 57 has been mostly an Underwood XTP hollow point loaded to 1560fps and 1135 lb ft, but I have also fired a fair amount of Hornady’s own XTP which isn’t loaded much lighter, and also some old Speer Gold Dot 210 grain rounds, and even they seem to thump about the same although their performance numbers aren’t quite as impressive.

Now, I do have a set of dies for .41 Magnum, and I know that I could roll my own to whatever power level I wanted. But, I have gotten the impression that a lot of these comments about recoil have been from guys shooting factory ammo. And, I’d like to know what they’re shooting that gives a noticeable difference in felt recoil when compared to .44 Magnum. I really don’t mind the hot loads, and I’ve got several hundred each of the Underwood and Hornady rounds on hand. Still, I’d be interested in knowing what factory ammo guys are shooting that has lower recoil. From what I’ve seen, all of the factory stuff is pretty close to one another in terms of recoil, and it is all pretty stout.

Are you actually chronographing the 1560 fps value, or going by what's on the ammo box or something else? The Hornady Tenth Edition manual gives 1400 fps as their max safe load data for the powders they list (AA7, AA9, Win296 and H110) using a 210 grain XTP. They used a 6" M57 to test those loads. I've loaded to those levels a few times and consider them as far as I'd want to go in either my M57 or M58, and I think you'll get a longer life out of your revolver if you'd drop those loads back a bit.

I don't understand the thoughts behind loading to the max levels or seeing just how far you can go, you're doing the gun no favors and for target shooting it's ridiculous. You want higher velocities, get a .460 and have at it, or get a Redhawk or Contender. I can understand why you see little difference between .41 and .44 at those levels; after a couple of cylinder loads, your hand is numb anyway.

I keep my .41M loads around 1250-1300 fps. They don't hurt my hand or the gun, and for me are just as accurate or more so than the heavy loads. I don't shoot factory ammo at all, it's more expensive and harder to find.

 

[The Mighty S&W]

Are you actually chronographing the 1560 fps value, or going by what's on the ammo box or something else? The Hornady Tenth Edition manual gives 1400 fps as their max safe load data for the powders they list (AA7, AA9, Win296 and H110) using a 210 grain XTP. They used a 6" M57 to test those loads. I've loaded to those levels a few times and consider them as far as I'd want to go in either my M57 or M58, and I think you'll get a longer life out of your revolver if you'd drop those loads back a bit.

I don't understand the thoughts behind loading to the max levels or seeing just how far you can go, you're doing the gun no favors and for target shooting it's ridiculous. You want higher velocities, get a .460 and have at it, or get a Redhawk or Contender. I can understand why you see little difference between .41 and .44 at those levels; after a couple of cylinder loads, your hand is numb anyway.

I keep my .41M loads around 1250-1300 fps. They don't hurt my hand or the gun, and for me are just as accurate or more so than the heavy loads. I don't shoot factory ammo at all, it's more expensive and harder to find.

Although I have not personally chronographed the Underwood load, there are people who have and they say that it gets what they claim from a 6 inch barrel like mine. There is one YouTube video in which guys test the same load using a 10 inch TC Contender, and they get close to 1900fps from the same ammo, so I don’t think 1560 from a six incher would be a stretch. It is HOT ammo, and it recoils pretty hard. Not unbearable mind you, but it definitely gets your attention.

I have to assume that the power levels are “safe” considering that Underwood isn’t exactly a fly-by-night outfit, and because Hornady’s own XTP load in .41 Magnum isn’t that far under them in terms of power. I just dragged out one of my boxes of those and using the same projectile they claim 1545fps which comes out to 1113 lb ft of energy at the muzzle. They “feel” about the same to me as the Underwood offering. I have fired at least 300 rounds of these two loads combined through my model 57, and the gun shows no signs of wear beyond those seen on any used revolver.

I’m just not aware of a factory load that comes in significantly lower, and I’m curious if all the claims of reduced recoil aren’t just from guys rolling underpowered handloads. I’m a believer in energy on target being important, and also of training with what you intend to use for hunting or defensive use. I like my .41 Magnum a lot BECAUSE it is powerful. To me, that makes it both fun to shoot, and comforting as both a hunting piece and as a bump in the night gun. 1135 lb ft of energy is pretty awesome. If I backed it down too much, I’d feel like I might as well be shooting one of my 9mm or .357 Magnums, and that’s not what I bought it for.

 

[Claymore33]

I load both .44 and .41 to 950fps-1000fps. That will kill anything in TEXAS.
When going to ride in the BEARTOOTH WILDERNESS, I use factory MAGNUMS at full power.

 

[kaaskop49]

Originally, R-P also produced a reduced velocity 210 gr SWC load, running about 950fps in 4". This was for LE use, one of the reasons behind the development of this ctge. Eventually, W-W also picked up this lead load. Both loads are VERY smoky when fired, I'm guessing, from the wax coating on the bullets.

Kaaskop49
Shield #5103

 

[kingrj]

Momentum don't care what the calilber is...MV is MV...My fav hunting load is a 215 grain cast SWC at a chronographed 1430 fps from a 5 1/2" Readhawk. So 1500 fps in a 8" barrel seems doable...especially with WW296 or H110...I don't think I would use this load in a M57...but shoots just fine out of the Redhawk.

 

[Hair Trigger]

There is one YouTube video in which guys test the same load using a 10 inch TC Contender, and they get close to 1900fps from the same ammo, so I don’t think 1560 from a six incher would be a stretch. It is HOT ammo, and it recoils pretty hard.

I have to assume that the power levels are “safe” considering that Underwood isn’t exactly a fly-by-night outfit, and because Hornady’s own XTP load in .41 Magnum isn’t that far under them in terms of power.

I like my .41 Magnum a lot BECAUSE it is powerful. If I backed it down too much, I’d feel like I might as well be shooting one of my 9mm or .357 Magnums, and that’s not what I bought it for.

A difference of 160 fps at that level is significant. It may be safe for a heavier built gun like a Redhawk or Contender, but IMO is a bit on the wild side for a M57 if you want the gun to last long-term. Even a down-loaded .41 Magnum is going to carry a great deal more energy than full power .357 Magnums, and 9mm isn't even on the same page as either of the magnums in terms of downrange energy. The M57 is built to the same level of "toughness" as the M29, and even S&W felt that gun was not up to hot .44M loads and came out with an "Endurance" package on the dash-3 and later to make it survive the hot hunting loads.

 

[The Mighty S&W]

A difference of 160 fps at that level is significant. It may be safe for a heavier built gun like a Redhawk or Contender, but IMO is a bit on the wild side for a M57 if you want the gun to last long-term. Even a down-loaded .41 Magnum is going to carry a great deal more energy than full power .357 Magnums, and 9mm isn't even on the same page as either of the magnums in terms of downrange energy. The M57 is built to the same level of "toughness" as the M29, and even S&W felt that gun was not up to hot .44M loads and came out with an "Endurance" package on the dash-3 and later to make it survive the hot hunting loads.

Are there any currently produced, factory loads that are significantly less potent? Everything I see is either a lead cowboy load (I don’t like to shoot lead if I can keep from it, and prefer jacketed bullets), or is something loaded really hot. It seems all of the lower velocity offerings have been discontinued.

 

[Hair Trigger]

Are there any currently produced, factory loads that are significantly less potent? Everything I see is either a lead cowboy load (I don’t like to shoot lead if I can keep from it, and prefer jacketed bullets), or is something loaded really hot. It seems all of the lower velocity offerings have been discontinued.

That's one of the issues with shooting .41 Magnum. It's been "orphaned" for the most part by ammunition manufacturers, IMO because it isn't economically feasible to make a varied selection of loads for it because not enough people shoot it. Even handloading has a limited selection of bullet weights available (Hornady only has ONE bullet available, a 210 JHP), and only a few companies make brass for it.

I like .41M mainly because it's "off the beaten path", and will never sell my M57 or M58, and will shoot them as long as I can cobble up loads and find the materials.

 

[The Mighty S&W]

That's one of the issues with shooting .41 Magnum. It's been "orphaned" for the most part by ammunition manufacturers, IMO because it isn't economically feasible to make a varied selection of loads for it because not enough people shoot it. Even handloading has a limited selection of bullet weights available (Hornady only has ONE bullet available, a 210 JHP), and only a few companies make brass for it.

I like .41M mainly because it's "off the beaten path", and will never sell my M57 or M58, and will shoot them as long as I can cobble up loads and find the materials.

That’s pretty much what I am seeing with the cartridge as well. I like it well enough, and will likely just keep running the hot factory ammo through it, keeping an eye out for any signs of excessive wear. I might at some point decide to handload for it, but time will tell. I’m pretty content with it being my hand cannon of the collection.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

Unfortunately when the .41 Magnum was introduced with law enforcement in mind it was a victim of bad timing. It was a good idea to give the police more power than the .357 Magnum but so many departments, especially the smaller ones, had a lot of money invested 38/357 revolvers and ammo, they probably didn't want to incur the costs of changing in the early 70's. Then in 1990 the slow move to semi-autos started to happen putting even more pressure on the 41 Magnum revolver and revolvers in general. Because the .41 didn't have 100 years plus of existence it did become an orphan to many, if not all ammo companies.

I never really thought much about the 41 Magnum and I don't think I've shot one either. I would but really don't know anyone who as a .41 Mag.

 

[The Mighty S&W]

Unfortunately when the .41 Magnum was introduced with law enforcement in mind it was a victim of bad timing. It was a good idea to give the police more power than the .357 Magnum but so many departments, especially the smaller ones, had a lot of money invested 38/357 revolvers and ammo, they probably didn't want to incur the costs of changing in the early 70's. Then in 1990 the slow move to semi-autos started to happen putting even more pressure on the 41 Magnum revolver and revolvers in general. Because the .41 didn't have 100 years plus of existence it did become an orphan to many, if not all ammo companies.

I never really thought much about the 41 Magnum and I don't think I've shot one either. I would but really don't know anyone who as a .41 Mag.

Even as costly as .41 Magnum ammunition is, every time I take mine to a public range I try to make sure that anyone there who wants to try one gets a chance to fire mine. Most walk away surprised by the power of the thing considering that we’ve all been told that the .41 Magnum is like shooting a 10mm. One round of the Underwood loads I fire makes it crystal clear that the .41 Magnum has a lot more in common with a .44 Magnum than it does a 10mm.

I’d like to see something like a 210 grain SJHP at around 1,200 fps in a factory load for defensive use/plinking, but until then, it’ll be heavy hitters all the time for me. It isn’t like it’s a high volume shooter anyway. Maybe 20-40 rounds every couple of weeks.

 

[Skyhunter]

I’ve been a .41 mag. fan since firing my 1st one back in 1971. Mild to wild, the .41 mag. has handled many of my handgun chores for years (I am still a fan of the .357 mag. as well). I’ve been very happy with my own cast 220 gr. Keith SWC bullets.
My “everyday” ammo is loaded to ~950-1,000 fps. and I’ve never had to shoot something twice to “make it stay down.” That velocity level gives me adequate power and excellent accuracy to handle anything I may encounter in my AO. I do have accuracy loads for ~1,300 fps. with either my cast SWC’s or JSP bullets, but seldom have the need.
Early on, the .44 mag. revolvers didn’t interest me much as they were more on the line of “horse pistols” and way bigger than I wanted to be packing around. The .41’s were on the same frame size as my .357’s and thus easier to carry & shoot. To clarify here, I was shooting Ruger Blackhawks at the time and S&W’s were rare in my AO and very spendy when found. Times and circumstances do change and I acquired the proper S&W / Ruger to experience the .44 mag. and compare them to my .41’s. To me, the full power recoil and muzzle blast were essentially the same, but the .41’s do seem to shoot a bit flatter (but that’s just my opinion).
The .44 mags are gone, but my .41 stable is always open for expansion. Now, if I could just find a “nice” Model 58 I could check one more box on the bucket list!

WYT-P
Skyhunter

 

[Hair Trigger]

we’ve all been told that the .41 Magnum is like shooting a 10mm.

Whoever says that has probably never shot either one.

On its best day, 10mm is maybe equivalent to .357 Magnum. I own all three and I can say for a fact 10mm is nowhere near .41M. Sure, you can put 200 grain bullets downrange with a 10mm, but a hot 200 grain 10mm load is on the very low end of a downloaded .41M in velocity. 155 grain 10mm loads are somewhat similar to 158 grain .357M loads in weight and velocity.

 

[Hair Trigger]

Now, if I could just find a “nice” Model 58 I could check one more box on the bucket list!

Good luck in your quest. I got really lucky when I was looking for one and found an ANIB that had been a safe queen for over 50 years. It's a good range gun, a bit different from my 6" M57 when shooting it. The shorter barrel and slightly less weight makes it a bit "punchier" feeling.

 

[The Mighty S&W]

Whoever says that has probably never shot either one.

On its best day, 10mm is maybe equivalent to .357 Magnum. I own all three and I can say for a fact 10mm is nowhere near .41M. Sure, you can put 200 grain bullets downrange with a 10mm, but a hot 200 grain 10mm load is on the very low end of a downloaded .41M in velocity. 155 grain 10mm loads are somewhat similar to 158 grain .357M loads in weight and velocity.

Absolutely. I was into 10mm for a couple of years back around 2003-2005 or so, and put a lot of rounds through a pair of 1911’s chambered for the cartridge back then. At that time, Double Tap was putting out some hot ammunition in 10mm, and I fired a fair amount of that stuff through my pistols.

Without any question in my mind, the 10mm isn’t even a hair on the back side of a hot .41 Magnum load. Not even close. I have no idea where the comparison of the two cartridges ever gained any momentum.