The Ideal Model 58

[BUFF]

When S&W developed the .41 Remington Magnum cartridge and the Models 57 and 58 revolvers in 1963, the primary goal was to provide law enforcement with the ideal revolver for stopping the bad guys, for defeating cover. The feeling was that the .38 Special cartridges available in 1963 weren't powerful enough, the .357 Magnum cartridges didn't reliably expand and the .44 Magnum cartridges generated excessive recoil and penetration for general police use.

Boosters of the concept included Elmer Keith, Bill Jordan and Skeeter Skelton. Skeeter wrote that the law enforcement loading, the 210 grain lead SWC bullet at 950 fps was just about right, if not on the high end by a smidge, and that he felt the 210 grain JSP and JHP loads at 1,500 fps was great for medium-to-large big game hunting, but it was too much for law enforcement, for reasons including excessive recoil and penetration.

Also, what Skeeter had envisioned was a handgun built on an intermediate frame, something smaller and lighter than the current N frame of the .44 Magnum, but bigger and a bit heavier than the K frame of the Model 19 and it's .357 Magnum. When the Model 57 emerged, it was just as big as, and even heavier than the .44 Magnum's Model 29. The new .41 gun and cartridge ended up not offering much of a change to those already willing to carry an N frame.

Skelton wrote that he and his peers were somewhat naïve about the cost and financial risks involved in bringing an entirely new handgun frame, with an entirely new handgun cartridge, to market in 1963.

I have always wondered how the .41 would have varied if S&W had been visionary enough to build the middle-sized L frame in 1963. It would have been plenty strong enough to fire what many refer to as a ".41 Special," the .41 Mag shortened by about a tenth of an inch, using a 200 grain bullet at 950 fps. That would have given shooters the K frame's grip frame, stock size and trigger reach, as many shooters felt those were excessive in the larger N frame.

The .40 S&W Auto cartridge has proven to be nearly ideal for law enforcement and self defense use. I think that round, with a rim on it, chambered in an L frame, would have been just what Skeeter, Elmer and Jordan were conceptualizing, and may have had an actual chance in the law marketplace.

 

[chipking]

Just my personal opinion but as produced it is still one of the best revolver, cartridge combinations ever put together. I have had one close at hand since the mid 60's and have always been 100% confident that it will see me through anything.
As for the L frame concept it was a good idea if produced in a 41, too small for a 6 shot in 44 and up and just 1 and 1/2 ounces lighter than a Highway Patrolman so not really a winner in my book.
Chip King

 

[steelslaver]

While it would be nice I am not sure you could fit 6 41 chambers in a L frame. It is getting skinny with 5 44s. Maybe somebody with a L frame 357 and a caliber will chime in with the thickness between the chambers. If there is enough meat you could make one from a 357. All you need is a small machine shop or a bunch of money.

 

[model70hunter]

One might do a little research on attempts to make a Colt 40 size frame or midsize frame, read Python, in 41, for whatever the reason it did not work. Some were made by shops but I feel the reason it failed was due to not enough cylinder wall thickness for the 41 mag to ensure safety.

However I do like the idea. Now it they would just make an L frame plus size........

 

[BUFF]

A number of custom gunsmiths have made 6 shot .41 Specials using the original cylinders from L frame S&Ws and rebored barrels. S&W made a 6 shot .40 S&W Auto L frame revolver a few years back, the Model 646. It's very doable.

The original advocates for what became the .41 Magnum (Keith, etc.) wrote about wanting a .40 caliber cartridge, a straight-wall, up-dated .38-40 sort of thing. S&W chose the .41 caliber for the gun and cartridge.

I think S&W wanted to start with a clean sheet of paper, cartridge-wise. They wanted something that didn't begin with existing biases and pre-conceptions. I think the full power round was only included to broaden market appeal from just a law enforcement and self-defense base.

The resulting problem with the result was the Model 57/58 didn't do anything that the .44 Magnum didn't already do on the full-power end of things, and most of the people who picked cop guns for their departments then (and probably now) saw the N frames as just too large and heavy compared to what else was already available.

The .41 Magnum is a great round, but it was largely a case of reinventing the wheel.

I would have really liked to have seen the Model 58 produced in other chamberings, like the .45 Colt, .45 ACP, .44 Special and .44 Magnum.

 

[epj]

A L frame .41 special would have been a winner. A rimmed .40 S&W, if you would. One of my very favorite cartridges. To bad it will never become a mainstream offering.

 

[chipking]

I would have really liked to have seen the Model 58 produced in other chamberings, like the .45 Colt, .45 ACP, .44 Special and .44 Magnum.

A big +1 on what BUFF just said. I believe the party line from S&W at the time the Model 58 started was that it was going to be made in all those calibers. Not sure how they would have handled the model # issues but all a mute point now. I know Sebago Son has or has had at least one model 58 that is now in 44 Special and I am pretty sure he is most happy with it.
Chip King

 

[kaaskop49]

It is possible that one of the reasons the 58 was not 'expanded' into other big-bore, fixed-sight models, was that so doing would have cut into sales of adjustable-sight, bright blue finish guns. IIRC, the 57 at one point went for $140 while the 58 sold for $85. My 58, fine gun that it is, is a smidge heavy, IMO, while boring that cylinder size and barrel out to .44 and .45 would have produced very desirable and 'carry-able' service guns.

 

[keithherrington]

Both ends of the spectrum

Pictured is my opinion of both ends of the ultimate fighting handgun spectrum. The Colt New Service is a 38-40 with a 4.5" barrel made in 1918. It is completely factory original and consequently has a very heavy but utterly reliable double action trigger pull. Single action is superb. The other gun is a Model 58 done by Bowen using a Model 57 barrel cut to 4" and the rib contoured to match the original barrel. The front sight is an improved version as well with a steeper rear face. I've had Bowen build me this same gun in every caliber you can think of: 38-40, 44-40, 44 Special, 45 Colt, and 41 Magnum. By far the 41 is the best all around caliber in my opinion. However, I reload, which brings the caliber into a whole different category of performance. To me the ultimate must have the proper balance between, ballistics, weight, balance, accuracy (see targets below shot from a bench at 25 yards) and durability. In my opinion, this Model 58 has it in spades.

 

[Frizzman]

When I started as a Patrolman in the 1970's, I was issued a M10 HB and eighteen cartridges. I was aware of the M58 and would have carried one with enthusiasm but I was interested in guns and a seasoned shooter. As has been said many times, most cops were not that interested in firearms. Many complained about the weight of their Sam Browne belts and attached gear and would have not been happy with a bigger and heavier M58. As many of you know, that harness can get to be a burden after eight plus hours of wear...Bill Jordan and others considered the M19, a .357 magnum in a smaller and lighter form as a great advance for LEO's who had to bear the greater weight to carry the .357. Bigger, slower calibers in bigger, heavier revolvers were not the hot items back then...So, I don't think the .41 ever had much of a chance competing with the .38/.357 as the primary chamberings for uniformed patrol officers...