Would like to hear your thoughts...41 Magnum for Police.
- Thread starter GRT3031
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2005
- Messages
- 9,262
- Reaction score
- 11,492
Like the .44 magnum, just too much cartridge for law enforcement use except for those who were skilled shooters. Skilled shooters are the only ones that handle heavy recoil and recover quickly from heavy recoil. Few law enforcement officers fall into such a category. The .44 magnum already had a law enforcement following, limited as it may have been.
Why choose a cartridge with lesser ballistics if it recoiled about as heavily as the .44? The lighter cast bullet law enforcement loading (by Remington, I think) was probably too little, too late and most law enforcement by nature will use the hottest ammo available, not the lightest, even if they don't shoot the heavy stuff well.
Why choose a cartridge with lesser ballistics if it recoiled about as heavily as the .44? The lighter cast bullet law enforcement loading (by Remington, I think) was probably too little, too late and most law enforcement by nature will use the hottest ammo available, not the lightest, even if they don't shoot the heavy stuff well.
Loyaljeeper
Member
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2012
- Messages
- 969
- Reaction score
- 1,414
There are many factors, the size of the 57 and 58, the fact it was still a six shooter, the cost involved with something other than a 38 or 357, and the lack of readily accessible ammo. Combine all of that with the trend towards the wonder nines and other autos.
Last edited:
gwpercle
Member
The N frame was a bit heavy for all day belt carry for most officers and the ammo companies loadings were too hot for most cops needs.
My model 58 came from a motorcycle cop, he didn't have to walk a beat and he wanted something he could maybe shoot through a car with or cripple a car's motor with .
Just too much gun and the shift to semi-auto pistols killed it.
A 41 Special on an L-frame was more like what Bill Jordan and Elmer Keith had envisioned ....Elmer was a bit upset with what the 41 magnum turned into for lawmen but did like it as a hunting gun.
Gary
My model 58 came from a motorcycle cop, he didn't have to walk a beat and he wanted something he could maybe shoot through a car with or cripple a car's motor with .
Just too much gun and the shift to semi-auto pistols killed it.
A 41 Special on an L-frame was more like what Bill Jordan and Elmer Keith had envisioned ....Elmer was a bit upset with what the 41 magnum turned into for lawmen but did like it as a hunting gun.
Gary
The the .41 magnum was the 10mm of Police revolvers...............
I remember* there was a lot of "political" debate back in the 60s- early 70s; about the time the .41magnum was introduced....... that "local" police didn't need "magnum revolvers" (mostly .357) just too much power......... so we saw the development of "Law Enforcement" only .38s........ aka..... +P.38 and +P+.38 Specials . Just another .38 to the public and to the Politicians
* While I was only a youth I remember because my Dad's primary duty gun was a 6" .357 Colt New Service.
I remember* there was a lot of "political" debate back in the 60s- early 70s; about the time the .41magnum was introduced....... that "local" police didn't need "magnum revolvers" (mostly .357) just too much power......... so we saw the development of "Law Enforcement" only .38s........ aka..... +P.38 and +P+.38 Specials . Just another .38 to the public and to the Politicians
* While I was only a youth I remember because my Dad's primary duty gun was a 6" .357 Colt New Service.
Last edited:
Because no one made a 41 special round.
I carried an issued model 58 about five years. There were many complaints about the factory 210 JHP loads being too hot and the opposite with the factory SWC loads. Ammunition was expensive, the model 58 was discontinued and the powers to be would never pony up to the cost of the model 57. The department size grew and there were no reasonable options other then trade out into a new gun and the model 66 was adopted. The 66 was a disaster from the start. We got about 100 guns and they were a mess. Myself and a volunteer took all of them to the range and fired for function. We sent about 35 back for repairs. The malfunctions were various and after discussions with S&W, we got the guns repaired and returned in short order and I got a free trip to the factory armorer's school. I kept the 66's going for a number of years before the toll of issues were almost daily. Don't recall any frame cracks but endshake and timing became a major problem. The guys lost confidence and there was an uproar to dump the 66's. We adopted the SIG 226 and never looked back to a revolver. SIG sent two of us to their armorer's school as part of the deal but other then changing a few springs and some minor issues, very little time was spent working on them.
ArchAngelCD
Moderator, SWCA Member, Absent Comrade
Most of the reasons listed above probably had something to do with the.41 Mag not taking hold but IMO the main reason was the start of the changeover to semi-auto pistols by law enforcement. It was a good product introduced at the wrong time.
The 58 was first offered in 1964......... heck; we hadn't even gotten the first stainless revolvers (model 60) yet!
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2005
- Messages
- 9,262
- Reaction score
- 11,492
The .41 Magnum had been around more than twenty years when the big transition to semi-auto 9mm handguns began. The switch to semi-autos had very little, if anything, to do with the lack of popularity of the .41 cartridge and gun.
As for a ".41 Special" load, Remington came out with the "non-magnum" law enforcement loading that used a 210 grain lead bullet at a bit over 1,000 fps. Perhaps that was still too much in the way of recoil.
As for a ".41 Special" load, Remington came out with the "non-magnum" law enforcement loading that used a 210 grain lead bullet at a bit over 1,000 fps. Perhaps that was still too much in the way of recoil.
This is almost exactly on the mark.
Skeeter Skelton, Bill Jordan and Elmer Kieth all got involved in suggesting S&W make a .41 caliber revolver.
However, the original plan was for a cartridge that would launch a 210 gr bullet at about 900 fps - pretty close to modern .40 S&W performance and pretty close to the old .38-40 in a carbine. It's a power level that gets the job done, without being abusive to the shooter.
S&W introduced the .41 Magnum in the adjustable sighted Model 57 and in the fixed sighted Model 58.
Remington introduced the cartridge as the .41 Magnum, rather than the .41 Police that Joran had preferred, as a marketing ploy after the success of the .44 Magnum.
Unfortunately, the Model 57 and Model 58 were indeed fairly popular with outdoorsman who liked magnum loads such as a 210 gr bullet at 1400 fps.
That was excessive for law enforcement use from a recoil perspective. Worse, many departments felt that even the 210 gr bullet at 900 fps produced too much recoil. Not surprisingly we're seeing the same response to day with departments moving back to 9mm pistols as some of their officers have difficulty qualifying with a .40 S&W.
The Model 58 with a 4" barrel was also considered to be heavy, but as I recall it was still only around 40 oz unloaded - about the same as a 1911 and no one whined about the 1911 being too heavy.
The Model 57 was introduced in 1964 and the .41 magnum as a police revolver was a concept that was dead and gone before semi-auto pistol became a common trend in US law enforcement.
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2005
- Messages
- 9,262
- Reaction score
- 11,492
Maybe it also has something to do with a general lack of acceptance for cartridges that use a bullet of approximately .40 caliber.
I had been handloading for years when the 10MM and .40 S&W were introduced. I know little of these cartridges; never had a gun chambered for either one.
Did these cartridges ever really take off? That's not a criticism as both may be fine indeed. I did know one fellow handloader who had a Colt 10mm. It just seemed they offered little not already available in a .45 ACP with a light (185-200 gr.) bullet and probably at lower chamber pressures. Again, that's a very cursory opinion from someone with no experience with any such cartridge. Perhaps the .41 Magnum traveled in the same circles.
I had been handloading for years when the 10MM and .40 S&W were introduced. I know little of these cartridges; never had a gun chambered for either one.
Did these cartridges ever really take off? That's not a criticism as both may be fine indeed. I did know one fellow handloader who had a Colt 10mm. It just seemed they offered little not already available in a .45 ACP with a light (185-200 gr.) bullet and probably at lower chamber pressures. Again, that's a very cursory opinion from someone with no experience with any such cartridge. Perhaps the .41 Magnum traveled in the same circles.
Loyaljeeper
Member
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2012
- Messages
- 969
- Reaction score
- 1,414
No doubt that is an accurate statement, but the autos were still to blame in many areas. I grew up with a grandfather in LE with lots of LE friends. I was born in 80 and can always remember grandpa and his friends talking about S&W first gen autos. If they wanted them and could afford them they could carry them. I have grandpa's 10-6 he bought in 69 or 70 just before going to an auto. Many cops were dreaming of wonder nines by 1970.
Highhawk1948
Member
Same reason the military dropped the .45 ACP. Too many people couldn't handle it.
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2007
- Messages
- 27,669
- Reaction score
- 21,359
As I recall, both San Francisco and San Antonio PD issued/used the model 58. The full hunting load was not user-friendly (as noted above) and the 210 gr SWCs were soft and had a reputation for leading barrels badly. A great concept, just needed another 20 years and a semi-auto platform to make good on it...
.41 Magnum. Too Much, Too late.
These threads share one fault: they begin and end with horsepower. Overlooked is whether or not the average officer, now including women and men of smaller stature, can maintain proficiency with a service arm having substantial recoil, even in a reduced "police" load. Second, consider the physical size of the gun itself as measured against those who must use and carry it.
Is the gun and or caliber suitable for off-duty use? What affect will shooting duty loads in a smaller gun have on proficiency?
The .41 Magnum was the last hurrah of the police service revolver. Whether using a .41 or .38 SPL, six rounds is six rounds and there are many instances of officers losing their lives who couldn't reload in time. So, the last fault of the revolver in any caliber is a lack of firepower and they were slow to reload.
These threads share one fault: they begin and end with horsepower. Overlooked is whether or not the average officer, now including women and men of smaller stature, can maintain proficiency with a service arm having substantial recoil, even in a reduced "police" load. Second, consider the physical size of the gun itself as measured against those who must use and carry it.
Is the gun and or caliber suitable for off-duty use? What affect will shooting duty loads in a smaller gun have on proficiency?
The .41 Magnum was the last hurrah of the police service revolver. Whether using a .41 or .38 SPL, six rounds is six rounds and there are many instances of officers losing their lives who couldn't reload in time. So, the last fault of the revolver in any caliber is a lack of firepower and they were slow to reload.
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2005
- Messages
- 9,262
- Reaction score
- 11,492
federali- "Average officer..." was not overlooked, it was addressed in #3.
Off-duty use? Pretty much understood; only one frame size (and it wasn't small) available. You have a huge revolver that is not easy to conceal, regardless of barrel length.
Hard to agree that six rounds constitutes a lack of firepower if the user is a remotely competent shooter. As for a "last hurrah", revolvers remained the mainstay of police weaponry long after the .41 was introduced and failed to gain acceptance. The widespread semi-auto transition didn't even begin until years later. Another point covered in other posts.
Off-duty use? Pretty much understood; only one frame size (and it wasn't small) available. You have a huge revolver that is not easy to conceal, regardless of barrel length.
Hard to agree that six rounds constitutes a lack of firepower if the user is a remotely competent shooter. As for a "last hurrah", revolvers remained the mainstay of police weaponry long after the .41 was introduced and failed to gain acceptance. The widespread semi-auto transition didn't even begin until years later. Another point covered in other posts.
Similar threads
