Posted on 09/04/2016 5:45:27 PM PDT by w1n1
Despite hitting harder than the .357 Magnum (with a bigger bore), and shooting flatter (to a slight degree) with less recoil than the .44 Magnum, the .41 Remington Magnum has been unfairly overshadowed since hitting the American landscape back in 1964. But the truth is, it just might be the best of a pretty good bunch.
Let’s be honest. The .44 Magnum is a fraud, being a .429 in true caliber, while the .41 Magnum is the real McCoy. With comparable loads, the .41 Magnum can do anything the .44 Magnum can do, and it is a real survivor.
The popularity of the .41-caliber Magnum seems to ebb and flow, but those who have stuck with it make it as versatile a choice as its siblings. I’ve carried the .41 Magnum for personal protection, killed a couple of deer with it, shot long-range targets (it’s a favorite among silhouette shooters) and had it in the backcountry as a utility gun. Read the rest of the story here.
I had one for a while. I’ll stick with my “fraud” .44 mag.
Author Workman neglects to mention the chief drawback: the 41 magnum was never chambered in a gun sized expressly for it. All those Rugers and S&Ws were built to handle 44 and 45 caliber rounds; the manufacturers simply drilled 41 caliber holes in cylinder and barrel.
Few law enforcement officers wanted to bother with a revolver as big as a 44 and heavier, so it never caught on. The 44’s popularity was upped by the movies, but it was not “the most powerful handgun in the world” and had not been for more than a decade before Clint Eastwood spoke Dirty Harry’s lines.
Hunters swear by the lethality of the 41, but that pretty much marks the beginning and end of today’s market.
The trend in self-defense arms is away from revolvers toward autoloaders and ultra-small concealable guns. The few revolvers still available chamber 357, 38, or 327; firing any magnum out of a short-barrel revolver is not a pleasant experience, as other posters have attested.
On a practical level, 357 is probably the highest power level most users (LEO or civilian) can handle. It also has delivered the highest percentage of one-shot stops.
.327 Federal.
Can’t beat the .460 S&W ring of fire.
https://youtu.be/TPUrCWQ2NYA
I saw a .500 do the same thing, but can’t find the video.
“Fraud?”
I’m intrigued. Got a pic?
“The .44 Magnum is a fraud, being a .429 in true caliber, while the .41 Magnum is the real McCoy. “
OK, but in the math I studied, 0.429 is still bigger than 0.41.
I thought maybe you had an Astra .44 revolver. They were well finished, looked a lot like a model 29 but I certainly would have preferred the S&W.
Mrs. L has a favorite revolver. It’s her 4” Model 629. I load a 210 grain JHP over about 8.5 grains of Bullseye. Hits hard and is very civilized to shoot.
L
Read the article. The author called the .44 Mag a fraud. I think he’s full of it.
“... I’ll stick with my “fraud” .44 mag.”
Author Workman’s “fraud” comment is historically misinformed.
44 was the caliber of Sam Colt’s first serious sidearm - the Walker revolver, velocity leader into the 20th century.
44 “Army” revolvers were the flagship models in every gun maker’s product line, through the end of the cap and ball era (1873).
44 was the caliber of the very first centerfire big-bore revolver cartridge ever made: 44 S&W American, for S&W’s Model 3. Then 44 became immortal twice: Winchester created the 44-40 for its M1873 rifle, and S&W created the 44 Russian for the Model 3 revolvers it sold to Imperial Russia.
Every handgun maker in the world chambered something in 44-40; it came near death around the time of WWII, but has returned to life courtesy of cowboy action shooting, and replica gun enthusiasts. Even in loadings matching original ballistics, it can hold its own against any non-magnum round. Frank Barnes, author of early editions of _Cartridges of the World_, declared the 44-40 to be one of the all-time great American cartridges.
The 44 Russian became the foremost handgun target cartridge of the 19th century, and fathered some notable offspring in the 20th. The 44 Special descended from it in 1907, the 44 Magnum in 1955, and the 444 Marlin in 1962 or so.
If all those are frauds, perhaps we should not ask what truth is.
It certainly isn’t the 45: no one cared about it until the War Dept made it the only military caliber allowed, in 1873. The “timeless” 45 Colt has been made in at least four variations, five if one counts the 45 Schofield, a throwback that saw the light of day only because of political favoritism (inventor George Schofield was a West Pointer, and his brother John - also a West Point graduate - was a high ranker in the post-ACW US Army, whose sayings are still quoted at service academies).
And the 45 ACP was selected only because the cavalry insisted it needed a handgun round powerful enough to let a trooper shoot his own horse; the Philippine Insurgency had nothing to do with it.
No, I have 2 Model 29s. Astra did make good guns, and I considered buying one when I couldn’t find a S&W, but didn’t. The author called the .44 Mag a fraud, not me. Gun writers make their living convincing people to buy the newest gun on the market. Maybe they’re trying to bring back the .41, like the 10mm.
Nice hand cannon. Bullseye has a snappy impulse to it. Use 2400 for that earth shattering kaboom.
Been too long to recall just what it is that starts to give out.
But the biggest bullet I've ever seen for the .41Mag was a 290gr mold from JD Jones. He had a 340gr bullet for the .44Mag.
For really heavy loads, (300gr Speer, and a full case of 296,) in my .44Mag, I would only use my Ruger.
Mark
Around 10-15 years ago, S&W made some minor but apparently important changes to the model 29. This was because they had a bit of a reputation of shooting loose. I have read that they really improved the durability.
I would never have noticed as I hardly ever shoot more than a few thousand rounds through one. Usually even less.
I recall reading some years ago that there were simply no Model 29s available while they were shooting the first movie, but they WERE able to get the Model 57 (.41Mag.) And that's what Eastwood was carrying during filming.
Unless you can get close enough to read the model number, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference between a Model 29 and a Model 57.
Mark
My 5 shot Taurus Tracker is not that big or heavy. I carry it sometimes.
The Model 57 pulls down on my trouser belt too much. It really would be better in a shoulder holster or vest.
Writer didn’t mention it but I think H110 and Win 296 are identical powders.
Don’t like 2400 myself.
I’d say for anyone who acquires a Marlin 41 carbine-—if you could find one-—to not expect good results with lead bullets due to the Microgroove rifling. Jacketed bullets work super. If your into casting I reckon you could get a .407 or .408 mould made for the carbine.
I have a Ruger Super Blackhawk .44 that shoots straight as an arrow. THAT thing holds up great, but it’s single action only. The Ruger Redhawk looks like a steaming pile of used food, IMHO.
The S&W 29 and 629 are just plain purdy.
Yeah, I’m into the looks of the firearm.
The Beretta 92FS is a beautiful Italian piece of art.
That’s my opinion, and I’m sticking to it.
;-)
I once loaded 50 rounds of .44 mag using a 240 gr. jacketed soft point, probably Speer. It was 23 grains of 296.
When I fired them in a Super Blackhawk, the recoil was brutal. Far worse than hot factory loads. I checked the cases and they showed no signs at all of pressure. I went ahead and shot up the whole lot but never tried that load again.
You have to figure S&W would know what to do, just needed the (maybe) loss of market share to Ruger to get the thumb out.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.