The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Handguns: The Revolver Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old October 17, 2018, 12:02 PM   #76
TruthTellers
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 22, 2016
Posts: 2,076
Quote:
Originally Posted by BBarn View Post
The 41 Mag. is a fine cartridge, but so are the 357 Mag. and 44 Mag. If you want something in the middle, I suppose it fills the niche. It might have caught on more if Dirty Harry hadn't made such a splash with the 44 Mag.

Not sure why the writers in the early 60's thought a 44 Special level load in 40 or 41 caliber was just what was needed at the time. But it's clear that the 41 Mag., as released, was generally more than what was suggested.
Pretty sure it had to do with getting a larger caliber in a smaller frame revolver and the simplest way to accomplish more power with a smaller revolver is to find the middle point between .357 and .44 and build a revolver around that middle ground caliber.

At the time the .41 was being pushed, the Charter Arms Bulldog didn't exist. When it finally did get released, the Bulldog was one of, if not the smallest, lightest .44 Special revolver in production and while it was only a 5 shot and with strong loads had a heavy recoil, for the purposes of being a "stopper" it did that well. One selling point to the Bulldog and .44 Special is you can shoot the .44 Special in the .44 Magnum revolvers and rifles many already owned.

The .41 can't compete with that versatility, it couldn't back then and it sure can't do it today.
__________________
Any good revolver > Any good semi auto
TruthTellers is offline  
Old October 18, 2018, 04:25 AM   #77
jetinteriorguy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 28, 2013
Posts: 834
Ya know, some of us just don't follow the crowd.
jetinteriorguy is offline  
Old October 18, 2018, 05:25 AM   #78
saleen322
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 8, 2010
Posts: 715
Another good feature of the 41 mag is accuracy. I have yet to see a 41 magnum that is not accurate.
saleen322 is online now  
Old October 18, 2018, 06:58 AM   #79
Nanuk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 2, 2005
Location: Where the deer and the antelope roam.
Posts: 2,364
Quote:
Holsters for L and N frames are not interchangeable.
?What does that have to do with the price of tea in China?
__________________
Retired Law Enforcement
U. S. Army Veteran
Armorer
My rifle and pistol are tools, I am the weapon.
Nanuk is offline  
Old October 18, 2018, 07:06 AM   #80
Nanuk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 2, 2005
Location: Where the deer and the antelope roam.
Posts: 2,364
Quote:
I'd really like to know if that 135 grain 10mm Mag is specifically built for 1900 fps or if it's just a .40 S&W bullet that's being driven 1000 fps faster than it was designed for.
Where do you get 1000 fps more? Do you think all 40 loads are @ 900 fps?

https://www.nosler.com/sporting-handgun-pistol-bullet/

https://www.underwoodammo.com/collec...=7865910067257

https://www.underwoodammo.com/collec...=7865916260409
__________________
Retired Law Enforcement
U. S. Army Veteran
Armorer
My rifle and pistol are tools, I am the weapon.
Nanuk is offline  
Old October 18, 2018, 07:56 AM   #81
Real Gun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 19, 2004
Location: SC
Posts: 2,515
Quote:
Quote:
Holsters for L and N frames are not interchangeable.
?What does that have to do with the price of tea in China?

It would be more civil and less arrogant to write that you didn't understand. The point was that the guns might have similar weights but are not the same size and equally packable/concealable. L-frame, large caliber magnums only hold 5 rounds.
__________________
Not an expert, just a reporter.

Last edited by Real Gun; Yesterday at 06:39 AM.
Real Gun is offline  
Old October 18, 2018, 08:16 AM   #82
sarge83
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 17, 2000
Posts: 406
I have a Blackhawk I bought like new and have yet to shoot it, shortage of ammo, being the main reason.

I do have an anecdotal about the .41 and stopping power. Back in the early 80's a relative of mine was a new officer and him and his partner were called out to put down a cow that had sort of gone crazy on its owner. My relative being the rookie was told to go out into the cow pasture that was a fenced in area with trails in it and drive the cow towards the other officer and he was going to shoot it. My relative was said okay, but make sure you shoot the damned cow and not me! He went into the grown up pasture and sure enough drove it straight to the waiting officer with his M58 .41 Magnum and he shot it right between the eyes. The cow staggered and shook its head for a few seconds and then bolted right by the shooting officer and out through the fence. The round bounced right off leaving only a bloody spot. A couple of hours later the owner had tracked it down in a neighbors yard and dispatched it with a .12 gauge.
sarge83 is offline  
Old October 18, 2018, 10:26 AM   #83
ligonierbill
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 20, 2007
Posts: 1,518
I guess it makes for a good discussion, but I don't get love or hate when talking about a caliber. Being a "nut", my approach is usually "all of the above", and I do load and shoot .357 mag, .41 mag, .44 mag, and, oh yeah, .45 Colt. For me, it's the combination of revolver, caliber, and the specific load that makes a gun a pleasure or a pain to shoot.

My 44 is a Redhawk, and it is a pleasure to shoot with any load. I wouldn't buy a 41 RH. I have never fired the Super Blackhawk, but I understand Ruger used a steel frame more for the weight than the strength to tame some of the 44 mag recoil. The standard BH is a bit lighter. And I know the standard BH with a thermonuclear 45 load is a knuckle buster. I usually load it lighter, and I have the odd belief that it is sacrilegious to load other than cast in the Colt. The 41 Blackhawk is just right. Full house load of 210 JHP is still fun to shoot, and the pistol is just light enough for me to carry comfortably. So, in combination, I like it.

Regards the "special" rounds, of course 38 and 44 Special pre-date the magnums by several decades. No, there was not a 41 Special back in the day, but there was the .41 Long Colt. Unlike the others, it could not keep going with its choice of heeled or sub-bore hollow base bullets. But Elmer liked it, and in a strong Colt Army Special, it sends 200 cast out at 800 fps.
ligonierbill is offline  
Old October 18, 2018, 10:48 AM   #84
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 18,546
Quote:
Ruger used a steel frame more for the weight than the strength to tame some of the 44 mag recoil. The standard BH is a bit lighter. And I know the standard BH with a thermonuclear 45 load is a knuckle buster.
Yes, the Super Blackhawk uses a steel grip frame for weight, also a non-fluted cylinder, and a steel ejector rod housing. All to add a little more weight to the gun, to help damp felt recoil.

And, with "nuclear loads" they're ALL knuckle busters, with the stock factory grips.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old October 18, 2018, 02:44 PM   #85
gwpercle
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 30, 2012
Location: Baton Rouge, Louisiana
Posts: 774
Quote:
Originally Posted by jetinteriorguy View Post
Ya know, some of us just don't follow the crowd.
Count me in the 41 magnum club also .
Me and my model 58 don't follow the pack either .
Bullet caster and reloader since 1967, I shoot the 41 all I want !
Gary
gwpercle is offline  
Old Yesterday, 12:34 AM   #86
TruthTellers
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 22, 2016
Posts: 2,076
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nanuk View Post
just a velocity I came up with. Still, I'd like to know if those 135 grain bullets are built for the velocities Underwood and Doubletap are claiming.

To me, if they're not, they have over expansion and underpenetration written all over them.
__________________
Any good revolver > Any good semi auto
TruthTellers is offline  
Old Yesterday, 09:20 AM   #87
Charlie_98
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 22, 2011
Location: McKinney, TX
Posts: 755
Quote:
.32 S&W Long was developed in 1896, the .41 Mag in 1964. The Henry .327 rifle is able to shoot .32 S&W Long and feed it from the magazine so long as it's not a wadcutter.
Hmmm... I was thinking .32-20, I always forget about the .32 S&W.

In it's original loading, the 10mm was slightly below the .41... I've never heard of the 10mm Magnum, is that in the same nebulous Never-Neverland as the .41 Special?

EDIT: I'm just funnin' you guys. Truly, I've never heard of the 10MM Mag although I see there were a few factory guns made for it. Even as a .41 fan I don't take the .41SPC seriously out of a .41MAG handgun... why would I fiddle around with a second lot of brass for low-velocity loads when I can just download my .41MAG brass? That is not to say a .41SPC revolver sized for that cartridge wouldn't be neat, but it would be an anomaly... much like the 10mm MAG.

Now, who's going to start the 10MM MAG vs the .44MAG thread???
__________________
Wherever you go, there you are...

Last edited by Charlie_98; Yesterday at 09:30 AM.
Charlie_98 is offline  
Old Yesterday, 09:48 AM   #88
Real Gun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 19, 2004
Location: SC
Posts: 2,515
Quote:
Now, who's going to start the 10MM MAG vs the .44MAG thread???
That topic would probably be hijacked too. When someone subscribes to receiving notices for updates to a 41 thread, I believe they expect that posts will be about or relevant to 41.
__________________
Not an expert, just a reporter.
Real Gun is offline  
Old Yesterday, 09:56 AM   #89
Charlie_98
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 22, 2011
Location: McKinney, TX
Posts: 755
Quote:
...I believe they expect that posts will be about or relevant to 41.
And that's why I suggested a separate thread.
__________________
Wherever you go, there you are...
Charlie_98 is offline  
Old Yesterday, 11:18 AM   #90
Road_Clam
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 21, 2013
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 1,114
You guys whom enjoy the handloading aspect of the .41 mag are making it very difficult for me to logically persuade myself to not buy a .41 mag...
__________________
"To be old an wise you must have been young and stupid"
Road_Clam is offline  
Old Yesterday, 12:53 PM   #91
MarkCO
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 21, 1998
Location: Colorado, USA
Posts: 2,447
Quote:
Originally Posted by Road_Clam View Post
You guys whom enjoy the handloading aspect of the .41 mag are making it very difficult for me to logically persuade myself to not buy a .41 mag...
"Enablers-R-Us"
__________________
Good Shooting, MarkCO
www.CarbonArms.us
MarkCO is offline  
Old Yesterday, 03:52 PM   #92
TruthTellers
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 22, 2016
Posts: 2,076
Quote:
Originally Posted by Real Gun View Post
That topic would probably be hijacked too. When someone subscribes to receiving notices for updates to a 41 thread, I believe they expect that posts will be about or relevant to 41.
I brought up 10mm Mag because it's virtually identical to the .41 Mag and is proven to work fine in medium frame revolvers. 10mm Mag would easily be a very popular middle ground cartridge between .357 and .44 Magnum solely for cheap .40 S&W ammo. Not to mention the 10mm Mag would be a lot more powerful than .357, but far from the heavy recoil of .44 Mag.
__________________
Any good revolver > Any good semi auto
TruthTellers is offline  
Old Yesterday, 05:36 PM   #93
Real Gun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 19, 2004
Location: SC
Posts: 2,515
Quote:
I brought up 10mm Mag because it's virtually identical to the .41 Mag and is proven to work fine in medium frame revolvers. 10mm Mag would easily be a very popular middle ground cartridge between .357 and .44 Magnum solely for cheap .40 S&W ammo. Not to mention the 10mm Mag would be a lot more powerful than .357, but far from the heavy recoil of .44 Mag.
Considering the title of the thread, I don't think the 10 mm Magnum took any "love" away from .41 Magnum...certainly not enough to cause its decline. As a cartridge that head spaces on the rim, I think the 41 adapts equally to single action or double. Single action 10 mm I expect would be a convertible with two cylinders, maybe a third for 40 S&W.
__________________
Not an expert, just a reporter.
Real Gun is offline  
Old Yesterday, 06:46 PM   #94
TruthTellers
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 22, 2016
Posts: 2,076
Quote:
Originally Posted by Real Gun View Post
Considering the title of the thread, I don't think the 10 mm Magnum took any "love" away from .41 Magnum...certainly not enough to cause its decline. As a cartridge that head spaces on the rim, I think the 41 adapts equally to single action or double. Single action 10 mm I expect would be a convertible with two cylinders, maybe a third for 40 S&W.
Yeah, 10mm Mag wouldn't be a good choice for single actions. I was looking at the Ruger Blackhawk in 10mm and was thinking "That's be a great revolver for 10 Mag... oh, but then I can't shoot 10mm Auto anymore."

Wouldn't be a total deal breaker, I'm not sure if I had 10mm Mag if I'd find some niche use for 10mm Auto where 10mm Mag would be a poor choice and .40 would be too weak.

The point I made was if I had the choice of a .41 Mag and a 10mm Mag revolver was I would buy the 10mm Mag in a heartbest given I have several guns in .40 and will likely buy a Glock 20 in the future.
__________________
Any good revolver > Any good semi auto
TruthTellers is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:47 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2018 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.09262 seconds with 10 queries