41 magnum out of a 2.5 inch barrel-is there any point to this?

Tropical Z · May 13, 2002, 10:43 AM

I have never fired 41 mag so i know nothing about it,but have seen these Taurus 2.5" ported barrel revolvers.What can you expect from this round out of this barrel,and will you be deaf afterwards?

mdlowry · May 13, 2002, 11:01 AM

I don't have one (yet

). I know that the Winchester silvertips out of my .41 tracker are fairly mild. I think that they would do just fine in the 415. I wouldn't want to put any of my hot handloads though it though. I don't think I would get the titanium version myself.

May 13, 2002, 11:19 AM

Silvertips out of the 415 are easy to handle.
Depends what you want.
I have tried the full Remington out of the 415 and it is not fun. Like full .357 mag. out of a J-frame snub.
How about the 3" 44 mag?

Erich · May 13, 2002, 11:58 AM

Personally, I think shooting magnum loads out of snubbies (regardless of caliber) is sort of wasteful and inefficient. All that powder burning out in the air in front of your barrel.

Do what you want, it's a free country. But I want my .357s to have at least a 4" tube, and I suppose I feel the same way about my .41s.

I've held a 3" .44 mag, btw. Seemed pretty silly to me.

brianm_14 · May 13, 2002, 01:04 PM

Oh yes, there is definitely a point and advantage to a smaller .41 mag.

I have been shooting .41 Magnum for many years, using out of a Ruger Blackhawk with a six-inch barrel or S&W Mountain Gun with a four-inch tube.

I picked up a Taurus .41 mag with the 2-1/2" barrel because i like the cartridge but wanted a lighter gun (30 ounces) for CCW and sometimes for backpacking. I think the frame size and reduction to a five-shot cylinder gave me most of that, and I would I have liked a three or four-inch barrel. (Even with a small-frame .38, I like the longer barrel and the extra two inches hardly detract from concealability; barrel length is a poorly-thought out bug-a-boo - I've carried 6" K-frames concealed, and it was the frame size that made for difficulty, not the barrel!)

That said, this Taurus delivers good performance - i can't lay my hands on the chronograph results at the moment (I will look), but the velocities were still good and made me feel I was getting good performance with full expectation of expansion with any good bullet. While the shorter (2 inch) barrel .357 mags barely give more than a hot .38 special gives out of a 6-inch barrel, the .41 Magnum offers more to begin with and thus continues to deliver more.

If you don't need to be concerned about weight or size, small magnum revolvers don't make much sense. But if I am going for a snubby, I'll go for the .41 over the .357 any day. It is as easy to carry as my m65 S&W with a 3" barrel.

If one can get the velocity, why is a smaller magnum carry gun silly? Inefficent use of powder, yes. But still they perform. At the very least, this Taurus will give something a bit better than a .40 S&W gives out of a semi-auto. Are they silly?

The Taurus also offers more - porting for excellent control, great recoil-soaking grips, and reasonable size. I can control it well with any load.

C.R.Sam · May 13, 2002, 01:19 PM

.41mag from 2½" tube....
beats .357mag from 2½"tube
which beats .38spec from 2½" tube.

Don't know bout 41 but .44mag with NO barrel beats .357mag from 2½" tube. Accuracy kinda sucky tho.

Sam

Erich · May 13, 2002, 01:22 PM

You're right, "silly" was a poor word for me to use. My apologies for having made my remark sound patronizing (and thanks for the graciousness with which you pointed out my poor word choice).

"Not for me," was what I meant, for the reasons I gave earlier. A .357 outperforms a .38 spl out of a 2" bbl, but I use a 9x19 snub because it's more efficient (admittedly probably still not as hot as a .357) and less of a flamethrower at the bullet weights I need.

C.R.Sam · May 13, 2002, 01:30 PM

No problem Eric.
I too prefer longer barrels, but also have some snubs for social occaisions. In my pocket right now is a 2½" Model 19, round butt .357.

A blown fuel funny car gets lousy mileage, but gets down the track rather rapidly.

Sam

Tamara · May 13, 2002, 02:30 PM

Quote:

I've held a 3" .44 mag, btw. Seemed pretty silly to me.

Really?

Held one?

**Mike Irwin** · May 13, 2002, 02:39 PM

Remington 210-gr. JSP isn't exactly pleasant out of a 4" Model 58, either. Definitely has some boom to it.

brianm_14 · May 13, 2002, 03:15 PM

Erich:

Oh words, words, words - get us in trouble all the time. Been there, done that <g> so I always pray, "Lord, make these words tender in case I have to eat them . . "

>"Not for me," was what I meant, for the reasons I gave earlier. A .357 outperforms a .38 spl out of a 2" bbl, but I use a 9x19 snub because it's more efficient (admittedly probably still not as hot as a .357) and less of a flamethrower at the bullet weights I >need.

Oh, I do like your choice of 9x19! - my chronograph keeps telling me this cartridge is underestimated as a short-barrel performer. I want one of these in my future - it rates above a .38 snubbie any day. I think the 9 shines in this application is widely underestimated.

Erich · May 13, 2002, 04:02 PM

Yeah, Tamara, I managed a gun store for 2 years between college and law school in '88-'90. We got in one of those Lew Horton S&W specials, a 629 Mountain Gun variant with the 3" tube. It didn't exactly fly out the door. I never fired it because it was a new gun (so we kept it that way) but it didn't really "grab" me anyway (I was much more into semiautos and sporting clay guns at the time) and it seemed like it was taking the short barrel thing a little far for that round. Shortest .44 I fired was another "Mountain Gun", don't really remember anything about how it did (it's been years) or what the blast was like. I like a Redhawk better than an N-frame for the .44 anyway.

Brian, Sam, thx! Brian, I wish I'd run across a 3" bbl'd 940.

Mike - I've got a 4 5/8" Blackhawk that makes that load (the very one I carry on the trails hereabouts) a whole lot more pleasant than a 4" tube does - funny the difference a half inch can make. I'd like to try it in a 5" N-frame 57 or a 5.5" Redhawk, but I sure can't criticize your choice of a 58! As I've recently posted over on GT, L. Neil Smith had me wanting a 58 ever since I read The Probability Broach in my otherwise-misspent youth.

J. Parker · May 13, 2002, 04:05 PM

As lightweight, powerful "woods" guns the Taurus model 415 and the model 425 Tracker excel very nicely thank you. I'll carry a powerful 28oz revolver but not a 49oz Redhawk.

RogerC · May 13, 2002, 05:47 PM

If the bad guy didn't already have enough problems with a hole or two in him, he will also BE ON FIRE!!!!!!!!!

mdlowry · May 13, 2002, 07:19 PM

Quote:

Remington 210-gr. JSP isn't exactly pleasant out of a 4" Model 58, either. Definitely has some boom to it.

Mike,
Got a chance to chrono some of my handloads over the weekend. 215gr SWC doing 1530fps or so out of a 7.5" redhawk. Also put a few through the 58. It kicked a bit.

Aren't those Remington load about 1300fps?

MADISON · May 13, 2002, 07:50 PM

Assume the 41 Mag.Winchester silvertip has a velocity of 1200 fps. Assume the load was figured out of a 6 inch barrel. Subtract 33 feet per second for each inch shorter than 6 inches. The answer I get a velocity of 1,084. That is "close" to the OLD POLICE LOAD. Yes a 2.5 or 3 inch barrel .41 Magnum is worth it!
MADISON

KEN CHAVEZ · May 13, 2002, 07:55 PM

Quote:

Don't know bout 41 but .44mag with NO barrel beats .357mag from 2 1/2" tube. Accuracy kinda sucky tho.

I would think that any gun without a barrel(regardless of caliber) would have very bad accuracy?

Tamara · May 13, 2002, 08:48 PM

Big bore snubbies; either ya love 'em or ya don't.

(I love mine...

; it may not have as much velocity as it does out of a 6" tube, but I assure you that Georgia Arms 240gr Gold Dots still pack a wallop out of that 3" MagNaPorted barrel!

)

If you liked The Probability Broach, read the sequel, The American Zone; Win Bear & his M58 are back.

Here's my roomie's answer to the same question, a custom 4" 57:

mdlowry · May 13, 2002, 08:59 PM

Tamara,

I don't remember speer making a 240gr gold dot .41 bullet. I assume this is for you .44.

BTW, wasn't there another sequal to the The Probability Broach?

Tamara · May 13, 2002, 09:52 PM

Si, the 240gr is for the 3" 629 I was referencing.

Tom Paine Maru is also a sort of sequel; set in the same world, anyway.

C.R.Sam · May 13, 2002, 11:53 PM

Loud snubs have a certain cool factor. Specially when folks see you hitting things with em.

Sam

jack pringle · May 14, 2002, 12:13 AM

think RogerC is right about bg ON FIRE.

have had a 415 for a few months now and it has become my
favorite booger gun.

if you like snubbie magnums, you gotta love this one. would
surely hate to fire it without muffs, but, would if the ocassion demanded. if a couple rounds didn't get him, the blast and flame should

am not dissing 38 spec. have those pocket types too and feel well protected from two leggers. the 41 is great fun and a magnificient caliber.

hos

Erich · May 14, 2002, 09:02 AM

Tam,

Got The American Zone when L. Neil released it last year. Do you get The Libertarian Enterprise?

There are lots of books that hook up in L. Neil's multiverse. The Venus Belt was the first direct sequel and The Nagasaki Vector and The Gallatin Divergence hook in, but theres a big ol' pile of other ones. Some are great. If anyone wants a list, check out L.Neil's site: http://www.lneilsmith.com/

PM me if you want to borrow any of the out-of-print ones.

brianm_14 · May 14, 2002, 10:00 AM

Years ago - I think it was in a book published in 1968, The Complete Book of Shooting - Jeff Cooper wrote something I've always remebered in a book on shooting edited by Jack O'Conner. (This was before Cooper was beatified in the shooting world.) He said the minimum specs for a really serious handgun cartridge were nothing less than 40 caliber, 200 grains and 1000 fps. It is a handy and valid formula. I know my snubby Taurus .41 meets these criteria, with some room to spare on the velocity.

>Erich wrote: I wish I'd run across a 3" bbl'd 940

This, in my humble opinion, is the ultimate answer in a CCW revolver. It is what I want, too.

This is a great use of 9mm for CCW, a significant step up from .38 Special but still more controllable and pleasant than .357 Mag. To my thinking, it is close to perfect answer in terms of controllability, concealability, power and proven terminal performance. I'd like to see a series of special 9mm bullets/loads developed for the revolver - since feeding is no longer a reliability issue, the bullet profile could be modified solely for terminal performance. Maybe a HP with a semi-wadcutter (vs round nose) profile, or a cup-shaped cavity in a JHP.

>Tamara wrote: Here's my roomie's answer to the same >question, a custom 4" 57:

Tamara, this is like a blue version of my .41 Mountain Gun. I love it. What are those beautiful grips he has on that honey of a .41?

Brian

RogerC · May 14, 2002, 10:05 AM

Intersting how many of L.Neil's "visions" have come to pass....

Fall of the USSR? The Internet? Terrorist attack on skyscraper?

I wonder what it would be like it congress hadn't met in 30 years?

Better get some gun content in....

The only downside I can see to any 41 magnum is ammo choices. There just aren't many.

May 13, 2002, 10:43 AM	#1
Tropical Z Senior Member Join Date: September 6, 2000 Location: Atlantis Posts: 1,683	41 magnum out of a 2.5 inch barrel-is there any point to this? I have never fired 41 mag so i know nothing about it,but have seen these Taurus 2.5" ported barrel revolvers.What can you expect from this round out of this barrel,and will you be deaf afterwards? __________________ FREEDOM IS NEVER FREE!!!!!!!

May 13, 2002, 11:01 AM	#2
mdlowry Senior Member Join Date: December 15, 2001 Location: New Hampshire Posts: 417	I don't have one (yet ). I know that the Winchester silvertips out of my .41 tracker are fairly mild. I think that they would do just fine in the 415. I wouldn't want to put any of my hot handloads though it though. I don't think I would get the titanium version myself. __________________ My PGP key

May 13, 2002, 02:39 PM	#10
Mike Irwin Staff Join Date: April 13, 2000 Location: Northern Virginia Posts: 41,390	Remington 210-gr. JSP isn't exactly pleasant out of a 4" Model 58, either. Definitely has some boom to it. __________________ "The gift which I am sending you is called a dog, and is in fact the most precious and valuable possession of mankind" -Theodorus Gaza Baby Jesus cries when the fat redneck doesn't have military-grade firepower.

May 13, 2002, 07:50 PM	#16
MADISON Senior Member Join Date: January 1, 2000 Location: Roanoke, Virginia Posts: 2,678	Firing a 41 out of a 2.5 inch barrel? Assume the 41 Mag.Winchester silvertip has a velocity of 1200 fps. Assume the load was figured out of a 6 inch barrel. Subtract 33 feet per second for each inch shorter than 6 inches. The answer I get a velocity of 1,084. That is "close" to the OLD POLICE LOAD. Yes a 2.5 or 3 inch barrel .41 Magnum is worth it! MADISON

May 13, 2002, 08:48 PM	#18
Tamara Moderator Emeritus Join Date: March 11, 2000 Location: Indianapolis, IN Posts: 16,002	Erich, Big bore snubbies; either ya love 'em or ya don't. (I love mine... ; it may not have as much velocity as it does out of a 6" tube, but I assure you that Georgia Arms 240gr Gold Dots still pack a wallop out of that 3" MagNaPorted barrel! ) If you liked The Probability Broach, read the sequel, The American Zone; Win Bear & his M58 are back. Here's my roomie's answer to the same question, a custom 4" 57: __________________ MOLON LABE! 2% Unobtainium, 98% Hypetanium. The Arms Room: An Online Museum.

May 13, 2002, 11:19 AM	#3
M58 Guest Posts: n/a	Silvertips out of the 415 are easy to handle. Depends what you want. I have tried the full Remington out of the 415 and it is not fun. Like full .357 mag. out of a J-frame snub. How about the 3" 44 mag?

May 13, 2002, 11:58 AM	#4
Erich Senior Member Join Date: January 8, 1999 Location: Albuquerque, NM, USA Posts: 2,543	Personally, I think shooting magnum loads out of snubbies (regardless of caliber) is sort of wasteful and inefficient. All that powder burning out in the air in front of your barrel. Do what you want, it's a free country. But I want my .357s to have at least a 4" tube, and I suppose I feel the same way about my .41s. I've held a 3" .44 mag, btw. Seemed pretty silly to me.

May 13, 2002, 01:04 PM	#5
brianm_14 Member Join Date: April 13, 2002 Location: Aiken, SC Posts: 22	Oh yes, there is definitely a point and advantage to a smaller .41 mag. I have been shooting .41 Magnum for many years, using out of a Ruger Blackhawk with a six-inch barrel or S&W Mountain Gun with a four-inch tube. I picked up a Taurus .41 mag with the 2-1/2" barrel because i like the cartridge but wanted a lighter gun (30 ounces) for CCW and sometimes for backpacking. I think the frame size and reduction to a five-shot cylinder gave me most of that, and I would I have liked a three or four-inch barrel. (Even with a small-frame .38, I like the longer barrel and the extra two inches hardly detract from concealability; barrel length is a poorly-thought out bug-a-boo - I've carried 6" K-frames concealed, and it was the frame size that made for difficulty, not the barrel!) That said, this Taurus delivers good performance - i can't lay my hands on the chronograph results at the moment (I will look), but the velocities were still good and made me feel I was getting good performance with full expectation of expansion with any good bullet. While the shorter (2 inch) barrel .357 mags barely give more than a hot .38 special gives out of a 6-inch barrel, the .41 Magnum offers more to begin with and thus continues to deliver more. If you don't need to be concerned about weight or size, small magnum revolvers don't make much sense. But if I am going for a snubby, I'll go for the .41 over the .357 any day. It is as easy to carry as my m65 S&W with a 3" barrel. If one can get the velocity, why is a smaller magnum carry gun silly? Inefficent use of powder, yes. But still they perform. At the very least, this Taurus will give something a bit better than a .40 S&W gives out of a semi-auto. Are they silly? The Taurus also offers more - porting for excellent control, great recoil-soaking grips, and reasonable size. I can control it well with any load.

May 13, 2002, 01:19 PM	#6
C.R.Sam Senior Member Join Date: October 29, 1999 Location: Dewey, AZ Posts: 12,858	.41mag from 2½" tube.... beats .357mag from 2½"tube which beats .38spec from 2½" tube. Don't know bout 41 but .44mag with NO barrel beats .357mag from 2½" tube. Accuracy kinda sucky tho. Sam

May 13, 2002, 01:22 PM	#7
Erich Senior Member Join Date: January 8, 1999 Location: Albuquerque, NM, USA Posts: 2,543	You're right, "silly" was a poor word for me to use. My apologies for having made my remark sound patronizing (and thanks for the graciousness with which you pointed out my poor word choice). "Not for me," was what I meant, for the reasons I gave earlier. A .357 outperforms a .38 spl out of a 2" bbl, but I use a 9x19 snub because it's more efficient (admittedly probably still not as hot as a .357) and less of a flamethrower at the bullet weights I need.

May 13, 2002, 01:30 PM	#8
C.R.Sam Senior Member Join Date: October 29, 1999 Location: Dewey, AZ Posts: 12,858	No problem Eric. I too prefer longer barrels, but also have some snubs for social occaisions. In my pocket right now is a 2½" Model 19, round butt .357. A blown fuel funny car gets lousy mileage, but gets down the track rather rapidly. Sam

May 13, 2002, 03:15 PM	#11
brianm_14 Member Join Date: April 13, 2002 Location: Aiken, SC Posts: 22	Erich: Oh words, words, words - get us in trouble all the time. Been there, done that <g> so I always pray, "Lord, make these words tender in case I have to eat them . . " >"Not for me," was what I meant, for the reasons I gave earlier. A .357 outperforms a .38 spl out of a 2" bbl, but I use a 9x19 snub because it's more efficient (admittedly probably still not as hot as a .357) and less of a flamethrower at the bullet weights I >need. Oh, I do like your choice of 9x19! - my chronograph keeps telling me this cartridge is underestimated as a short-barrel performer. I want one of these in my future - it rates above a .38 snubbie any day. I think the 9 shines in this application is widely underestimated.

May 13, 2002, 04:02 PM	#12
Erich Senior Member Join Date: January 8, 1999 Location: Albuquerque, NM, USA Posts: 2,543	Yeah, Tamara, I managed a gun store for 2 years between college and law school in '88-'90. We got in one of those Lew Horton S&W specials, a 629 Mountain Gun variant with the 3" tube. It didn't exactly fly out the door. I never fired it because it was a new gun (so we kept it that way) but it didn't really "grab" me anyway (I was much more into semiautos and sporting clay guns at the time) and it seemed like it was taking the short barrel thing a little far for that round. Shortest .44 I fired was another "Mountain Gun", don't really remember anything about how it did (it's been years) or what the blast was like. I like a Redhawk better than an N-frame for the .44 anyway. Brian, Sam, thx! Brian, I wish I'd run across a 3" bbl'd 940. Mike - I've got a 4 5/8" Blackhawk that makes that load (the very one I carry on the trails hereabouts) a whole lot more pleasant than a 4" tube does - funny the difference a half inch can make. I'd like to try it in a 5" N-frame 57 or a 5.5" Redhawk, but I sure can't criticize your choice of a 58! As I've recently posted over on GT, L. Neil Smith had me wanting a 58 ever since I read The Probability Broach in my otherwise-misspent youth.

May 13, 2002, 04:05 PM	#13
J. Parker Senior Member Join Date: May 12, 2000 Location: Ephrata, wa. USA Posts: 1,338	As lightweight, powerful "woods" guns the Taurus model 415 and the model 425 Tracker excel very nicely thank you. I'll carry a powerful 28oz revolver but not a 49oz Redhawk.

May 13, 2002, 05:47 PM	#14
RogerC Senior Member Join Date: April 10, 2001 Location: Above the fog, and below the snow. Posts: 667	If the bad guy didn't already have enough problems with a hole or two in him, he will also BE ON FIRE!!!!!!!!!

May 13, 2002, 08:59 PM	#19
mdlowry Senior Member Join Date: December 15, 2001 Location: New Hampshire Posts: 417	Tamara, I don't remember speer making a 240gr gold dot .41 bullet. I assume this is for you .44. BTW, wasn't there another sequal to the The Probability Broach? __________________ My PGP key

May 13, 2002, 09:52 PM	#20
Tamara Moderator Emeritus Join Date: March 11, 2000 Location: Indianapolis, IN Posts: 16,002	Si, the 240gr is for the 3" 629 I was referencing. Tom Paine Maru is also a sort of sequel; set in the same world, anyway. __________________ MOLON LABE! 2% Unobtainium, 98% Hypetanium. The Arms Room: An Online Museum.

May 13, 2002, 11:53 PM	#21
C.R.Sam Senior Member Join Date: October 29, 1999 Location: Dewey, AZ Posts: 12,858	Loud snubs have a certain cool factor. Specially when folks see you hitting things with em. Sam

May 14, 2002, 12:13 AM	#22
jack pringle Senior Member Join Date: February 27, 2002 Location: west coast of arkansas, near the beach Posts: 123	think RogerC is right about bg ON FIRE. have had a 415 for a few months now and it has become my favorite booger gun. if you like snubbie magnums, you gotta love this one. would surely hate to fire it without muffs, but, would if the ocassion demanded. if a couple rounds didn't get him, the blast and flame should am not dissing 38 spec. have those pocket types too and feel well protected from two leggers. the 41 is great fun and a magnificient caliber. hos

May 14, 2002, 09:02 AM	#23
Erich Senior Member Join Date: January 8, 1999 Location: Albuquerque, NM, USA Posts: 2,543	Tam, Got The American Zone when L. Neil released it last year. Do you get The Libertarian Enterprise? There are lots of books that hook up in L. Neil's multiverse. The Venus Belt was the first direct sequel and The Nagasaki Vector and The Gallatin Divergence hook in, but theres a big ol' pile of other ones. Some are great. If anyone wants a list, check out L.Neil's site: http://www.lneilsmith.com/ PM me if you want to borrow any of the out-of-print ones.

May 14, 2002, 10:00 AM	#24
brianm_14 Member Join Date: April 13, 2002 Location: Aiken, SC Posts: 22	Years ago - I think it was in a book published in 1968, The Complete Book of Shooting - Jeff Cooper wrote something I've always remebered in a book on shooting edited by Jack O'Conner. (This was before Cooper was beatified in the shooting world.) He said the minimum specs for a really serious handgun cartridge were nothing less than 40 caliber, 200 grains and 1000 fps. It is a handy and valid formula. I know my snubby Taurus .41 meets these criteria, with some room to spare on the velocity. >Erich wrote: I wish I'd run across a 3" bbl'd 940 This, in my humble opinion, is the ultimate answer in a CCW revolver. It is what I want, too. This is a great use of 9mm for CCW, a significant step up from .38 Special but still more controllable and pleasant than .357 Mag. To my thinking, it is close to perfect answer in terms of controllability, concealability, power and proven terminal performance. I'd like to see a series of special 9mm bullets/loads developed for the revolver - since feeding is no longer a reliability issue, the bullet profile could be modified solely for terminal performance. Maybe a HP with a semi-wadcutter (vs round nose) profile, or a cup-shaped cavity in a JHP. >Tamara wrote: Here's my roomie's answer to the same >question, a custom 4" 57: Tamara, this is like a blue version of my .41 Mountain Gun. I love it. What are those beautiful grips he has on that honey of a .41? Brian

May 14, 2002, 10:05 AM	#25
RogerC Senior Member Join Date: April 10, 2001 Location: Above the fog, and below the snow. Posts: 667	Intersting how many of L.Neil's "visions" have come to pass.... Fall of the USSR? The Internet? Terrorist attack on skyscraper? I wonder what it would be like it congress hadn't met in 30 years? Better get some gun content in.... The only downside I can see to any 41 magnum is ammo choices. There just aren't many.