W
Guess I am curious if they are a desirable gun?
No offense, but with almost 7,500 posts here you certainly don't seem to have been living under a rock. That subject is covered quite often by numerous folks in various threads many times.
It's a "cult" caliber and the 58 is kind of a 'cult' gun. Some will argue it's virtues and some scratch their heads at appeal of the 58.
The strong points of the cartridge is it is a bit flatter shooting than the 44 and supposedly it recoils less, but in comparable performing loads you couldn't prove it by me. On the down side, it's more of a handloader's cartridge than the 44 and even at that the bullet selection is not as broad.
The strong points of the 58 ? It's an N frame S&W ! And some would opine the old saw "everything you need and nothing you don't" while others would argue it was a failure in the market place, too big, kicks too hard for small cops & cop-ettes, and in general is an illegitimate child.
Only my opinion, but I think it does what it was designed for pretty well, even though a model 29 so configured would have done the same. It was intended to be a hip holster carried duty gun of serious power for a police officer designed to be used in the accepted 'gun fight' distances of the day. But the meager factory load offerings at it's inception were too much for many to handle comfortably so it didn't last in that role.
Great hunting cartridge, but, I could just as easily taken everything I've put in the pot with a .41 with a .44.
Had the 58 been offered as a .41 special ( or a 44 special for that matter ) it may have been more accepted. Who knows ? But it was born during the 'magnumizing' of the times and by the time the ammo technology/savvy caught up the po-leece had moved on to semi-autos. We saw what happened when the 10mm was introduced much the same way, except in that case the 40 S&W was the resulting compromise and I don't think many could argue that 'downsizing' was not a success.
YMMV
