41 mag verses 44 mag

[Gerald]

What would be the advantage of having a 41 mag rifle verses a 44 mag that can shoot 44 specials too.
Is there a big ballistic difference, flatter trajectory?
Appreciate anyone giving me some feed back...
Gerald

[runfiverun]

flatter trajectory has pretty much been why the 41 mag stays in favor.
it will also shoot the 41 specials
which star-line is making brass for right now.

[stubert]

44 mag. has the advantage when it comes to component selection and availability of ammo.

[dancingbear41]

Since this is a cast bullet forum, there are plenty of moulds available for the .41 magnum. MP Molds make scaled down versions of their .44 moulds. So the only component they don't share is the case. If you have and love the .41 then you will know why!!

[Rick Hodges]

I see no advantage in the 41 over the 44. At practical hunting ranges with a lever action rifle the difference in trajectory is negligible. The 41 does nothing better than the 44 other than stroke ones need to be different.
I could make the same argument for the 41, that over practical hunting ranges the 41 does everything that a 44 can too.
We are arguing over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. My vote would be for the 44 because of the ease of component availability.

[Mica_Hiebert]

The main advantage would be if you had a 41 pistol and wanted ammo/component interchangability otherwise you have MORE options for guns other than Henry or paying a premium for a now collector item marlin... I personally have a hard time paying collector price for a working gun.

[44man]

I never wanted a .41 long ago because of lack of stuff and bullet/boolit selection. Better today. Works as good as a .44 with just a little tail drag with boolit weights.
I have shot many and most .41 revolvers have smaller frames, think .357. Recoil can be harsher then a .44. A rifle will have more weight, smaller bore.
I still have no real use for one.
However, the .41 in a lever gun might have a better twist rate then a .44 so you need to look, I never did.
Freedoms have a 1 in 14" rate and Ruger has 1 in 20". No Idea what a lever gun has.

[Clay M]

I never wanted a .41 long ago because of lack of stuff and bullet/boolit selection. Better today. Works as good as a .44 with just a little tail drag with boolit weights.
I have shot many and most .41 revolvers have smaller frames, think .357. Recoil can be harsher then a .44. A rifle will have more weight, smaller bore.
I still have no real use for one.
However, the .41 in a lever gun might have a better twist rate then a .44 so you need to look, I never did.
Freedoms have a 1 in 14" rate and Ruger has 1 in 20". No Idea what a lever gun has.

The twist rate in the new Henry is 1 in 18.75"

In revolvers, I have always been able to get great accuracy with the .41 mag. The recoil of the .41 mag is closer to the .44 than to the .357

In a hunting rifle I believe the differences would be negligible.

I would much rather have the new Winchester 92 in .44 magnum.
It has a twist rate of 1in 26"

At the current extortion rate of the Henry's the price is not much different.

[44man]

The twist rate in the new Henry is 1 in 18.75"

In revolvers, I have always been able to get great accuracy with the .41 mag. The recoil of the .41 mag is closer to the .44 than to the .357

In a hunting rifle I believe the differences would be negligible.
That should be a winner. Never had a problem with accuracy but I just like a heavier boolit for deer.

[ReloaderFred]

I carried a S&W Model 57 as my duty weapon for many, many years, so it was natural that I buy a Marlin 1894 in .41 Magnum when they came out. I missed the first issue, but bought a second issue, a third issue, and a special edition in .41. My second issue Marlin is the most accurate of all my Marlins in any caliber out to 100 yards, which is as far as I've put it on paper. You just put the front bead on what you want to hit and squeeze the trigger.

I have .44 Magnums in Marlin and Winchester, and neither of them is as accurate as my .41 Magnum Marlin. I just like that little carbine!

Hope this helps.

Fred

[JSH]

If I had shot a 41 magnum before I did the 44, I would have looked no further. The 41 mag specs may have stayed as good as they are just because it did take a back seat to the 44.
I now have two 41's they have both been a pleasure to work with for the most part. No funky chamber of bore sizes.
YMMV
jeff

[Tatume]

We are arguing over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

Which book and verse is that?

[Clay M]

Which book and verse is that?

:-P..I like both , so I really don't have to choose.

[Outer Rondacker]

Wait I to be arguing too. 44Mag has more knock down power then the 41 pills. I do not care what ya all say. I would own one of everything if I had the money. They all fill a need some place and some how.

[Scharfschuetze]

I would own one of everything if I had the money.

No truer words were ever spoken...

[MarkP]

I remember several years ago in a engineering class (Dynamics and Controls of Physical Systems) the professor was taking about a luxury car from the 1920' or 30's that had the crank shaft filled with mercury and could idle at an increadileby low rpm.

He asked the class what would be the advantage of having a car that could idle at 400 rpm? Several students provided answers that were incorrect, knowing he had a peculiar sense of humor. I raised my hand with a grin, he called on me and I said so "So you can have the lowest idling car on the block". That's right he said with a laugh.

I have both 41 & 44 mags; if you do not reload a 41 mag would be a huge disadvantage.

[Abenaki]

I admit that I am a 41 mag fan!

I do believe that the 41 is what most people really want, when they buy a 44.
I wish that I had a dollar for every used 44 mag in a gun shop, that only had half of a box of shells ran through it.

[Tatume]

I used to work on a diesel engine that idled at 20 rpm. One thousand one, one thousand two, one thousand three, one revolution!

[osteodoc08]

In practicality, there is no difference in performance. Sure you can show some on paper, but practically, there is none.

There is better component selection for the 43, er, I mean, 44 magnum.

Im a 41 fan, but still have a 629 to play with should the mood strike.

[Geezer in NH]

.019 in diameter to me is meh!

[Four Fingers of Death]

The 41 is the original Dirty Harry gun. I've never seen one in Australia, pistol or carbeen, but am very well served with a swag of 44Mags. Apart from mounting a scope, the 44Mag Rossi 92 is my first choice and occasionally use the H&R Shikari, also in 44Mag.

It is like comparing a 357 and a 41, you'd be hard pressed to tell what you are shooting if you weren't told. I can't imagine there'd be much difference at the target end. Cubic inches count, but both will do plenty damage.

The thing I like about the 44Mag (like the 223, 22/250, 243, 270, 308, 3006 and 300WM) is that I can go into any gunshop or produce store and pick up a packet if I need to.

[osteodoc08]

FFOD is correct. Word has it a model 29 couldn't be found so a model 57 was actually used on the set. Hollywood legend or not, IDK, but makes for an interesting story.

[cainttype]

Bob Milek (I'm sure some older handgunners are familiar with many of Bob's articles and compilations) had a large annual printed by one of the big gun-rag publishers back in 1979, "The Complete Guide to Handgun Hunting". The annual compiled articles covering practically every aspect of handgun hunting.
In the "Cartridge Selection" chapter, while discussing medium game, Bob took a full page detailing why he thought the 357 Mag was marginal, at best... The 41 Mag was covered in a single paragraph by saying there was nothing it could do that "it's big brother, the 44 Mag" couldn't do better. In fact, Ol' Bob predicted it's lack of popularity and mediocre performance would very shortly end production of firearms chambered for the 41 Mag. It was basically dead, you should stay away from it... The 44 Mag took several pages to cover all of it's grand potential. It was obviously the greastest thing ever conceived to be chambered in a revolver... Bob LOVED the 44!

Fast-forward about 10+ years and Bob revisits the 41 Mag in another article, "The 41 Magnum... Everything the 44 Was Meant to Be", or something like that.
Anyway, Bob actually finally gave the 41 a fair trial in the field and couldn't praise it enough as an almost perfect choice, possibly the best ever conceived. There was no better choice as an "all-around" hunting handgun for medium game, opined Bob.

I like them both, a lot... I shoot them both, a lot... both since the mid-late '70s.
If I had to choose a "favorite", I'd have to pick the 41... glad I don't have to choose.

[lightload]

There is no finer revolver than a Ruger Black Hawk, 4/58, in .41 mag. I do agree, though, that most guys have to own a .41 before they appreciate the caliber. I readily admit that differences between .41 and .44 mags are subjective. Do you need one?
Of course.

[northmn]

The 41 reminds me of my 16 ga shotguns. Great guns but a PITA to actually use. Ammunition is expensive and it needs to be handloaded to get the most out of it. The 41/44 is pretty much in the same category. The 44 is just more versatile as to components and purchased ammunition. I can get 44 ammo at a local hardware store that has a sporting goods dept. Don't see 41 ammo. The 44 selection is also fairly extensive as to choice. As to reloading. 44 can be loaded to any recoil level wanted. The 41 was origianlly loaded at two levels. One for law enforcement and one for hunters. The 57 variations flopped for law enforcement as it took longer to train new officers and the 57's were too large framed and awkward.
Its a good cartridge and if one likes it great, but most practical arguements the 44 has an edge. Very few of us are that practical.

DEP

[cainttype]

I've loaded for both the 41 and 44 for somewhere near 40 years. I've NEVER had any issue with aquiring casings for either, although during more recent "panics" others may have had problems getting either of them. I always have more than I need.
I've cast for both the entire time... There was never a difference there, either. There were always plenty of styles to choose from, and although there were more to choose from in 44 there was always enough to cover anything you might want in 41.
The only meaningful advantage for the 44 was in the availability of factory loaded ammo, both supply and variety.
None of that was a deal-breaker then, and it matters even less today with the new generation of mould manufacturers. YMMV

[slohunter]

Same as Ginger vs Mary-Ann.

[Static line]

I love the 44 mag in revolvers and rifle even if the twist rate is all wrong on the rifle for 44 mag heavy bullets.I still get real good accuracy out of my Henry BBS. I did let a nice Ruger 41 mag get sold before I could make up my mind to buy it and now I am sorry.The 41 mag is a nice round.My friend got many a deer with his Ruger.

[Four Fingers of Death]

Do I need a 41Mag? No, Is it a practical handgun calibre for Australia given the fact that getting brass will be a headache (I can buy brass by the ton, but importing it is a whole different ball game)? No. Will it do anything my 44Mag Gold inlaid 50th Anniversary New Model Super Blackhawk (yes, I am a sinner, I shoot it) or my Ruger Super Redhawk will do? No. Do I need one? No. Will I pull money out of my pocket at the speed of light if I ever see one? Yes! In a heartbeat. Like that PITA 16Ga shotgun I bought and how I keep an eye out for a better one, haha!

[JonB_in_Glencoe]

In practicality, there is no difference in performance. Sure you can show some on paper, but practically, there is none.

There is better component selection for the 43, er, I mean, 44 magnum.

Im a 41 fan, but still have a 629 to play with should the mood strike.
I share osteodoc08's opinion as well...Especially as a Boolit caster in this, the golden age of the Boolit.

Here is my story about choosing between the two (44 and 41).

Last year, I decided to cull my gun collection and related accouterments, while I had a specific financial reason, I did want to simplify my hobby(and life). I chose to eliminate calibers, so I could eliminate molds/dies as well as brass/bullets. One of my big decisions was 44 or 41 ?

I bought my first 44 Mag in the 1980s and have been a fan ever since. 44 is the reason I started reloading (around 1999). 44 was the reason I got into swaging my own projectiles and while the reason was that I got into casting was for making my own cores for swaging...that was also for 44. So a decision to go with 41 was kind of major...and I haven't bought tooling for swaging 41 yet, either.

So, why did I chose 41 and sell each and every one of my 44 guns ?

The biggest reason was the twist rates of my Marlin leverguns, I had one in 44 as well as 41. The 44 had the 1:38 barrel and wouldn't shoot heavy boolits well. The 41 has a 1:18.5.

The next reason is the fact that SAAMI has different specs for 44 handgun and 44 rifle, and most gun manufactures follow that, but not all. So until you do the research as a buyer, you don't know exactly what you'll get? and if you own a few different 44 guns, and you are a boolit caster, you'll be buying more tooling and such ...as compared to 41 guns. Although, the CON is there is several GC sizes and thicknesses for the 41, luckily custom molds are available, as well as GC makers.

Another reason, maybe this is a stretch, but I've had personal experience... since far fewer 41 guns were/are made, manufacturers tooling is less likely to wear and make guns slightly out of spec, read 1970's S&W production, than popular caliber guns like 44 or 45colt or 357.

Lastly, and I never really took the time to varify this, but I'd think two guns made the same, for instance the Ruger Redhawk, one in 44 and one in 41...With the smaller bore, you'd have more metal on your gun and making it that tiny little bit stronger.
that's my 2¢
Jon

[cavemike]

I just like the .41, I have a S&W no dash 57, a blackhawk in .41, and a Marlin 1894 FG. Now can anyone tell me why I bought a 336 in .35 Remington?

[MT Gianni]

The Marlin 41 Mag is tough to find. The best reason to own one would be to match your Model 58.

[plainsman456]

I have a blackhawk and a marlin in 41 mag,got the pistol first.

As for why there are mot hundreds of bullets choices for the 41,to me is,it does the job with about 4 or 5.
Had a chance to shoot an 8 point several years ago and when the 170 grain hit he dropped so fast that,a bud who had his binos on him thought he ran away.
He was about 125 yards away.

and coyotes don't like them either.

[reivertom]

Same as Ginger vs Mary-Ann.

BINGO! To me the .41 mag is Mary-ann.......they aren't as "Hollywood" and flashy as the .44 (Ginger), but, the .41 still looks just and functions as good with out all the recoil "drama".

[W.R.Buchanan]

I used to work on a diesel engine that idled at 20 rpm. One thousand one, one thousand two, one thousand three, one revolution!

Tom: was that a Fiat Diesel?

We had one out here in the Oilfields of Ventura CA that I got to work on once along time ago. It had a 36" bore and I don't even know the stroke, but it had a 12' diameter Flywheel and ran at 12 RPM's. Ours ran on de-sulfured, heated and filtered Crude.

I was a Millwright at the time and it was a one day job to put in 3 new rings on the piston. I was the one in the hole sanding a crosshatch pattern into the cylinder walls for the new rings seat in.

It was a 4 stroke normally aspirated diesel and it fired once every 10 seconds.

It said Ponk, puckita, puckita, puckita, puckita, puckita, puckita, puckita, puckita, puckita, puckita, Ponk! (Puckita = sound of 12' flywheel turning 1 revolution every 5 seconds. Ponk occurred every 10 seconds.)

It ran a Jack Pump style Single Piston Air Compressor that was pumping air into the formation .

It was undoubtedly the coolest machine I ever worked on as a Millwright and I worked on lots of stuff.

This was in the late 70's early 80's and it is long gone now but it should have been gold plated and set up on display somewhere in Ventura as it had been running in that same place for 40 years. It was a serious piece of history!

Randy

[Gerald]

Same as Ginger vs Mary-Ann.
SLOHUNTER - LMAO That caught me off guard. lol Thanks for the laugh.
I find this topic interesting. I have always wanted a 41 mag. When I was a kid the first revolver I held was a S&W 41 mag in stainless. I held that thing everyday at the store. When it was sold I felt like I lost a good friend. I have never purchased one. So was thinking about it when I asked about the difference of the two rounds.

[Uncle Grinch]

Ok.... My turn.


i think the 41 Mag is a better choice because............... I like it better than the 44 Mag. That's my reason and I'm sticking to it!

[Walkingwolf]

41 mag bullet diameter~~.410
44 mag bullet diameter~~.429

mehh

[jmort]

I never get the .41 Vs. .44 threads. The .44 mag is in different universe. They are not close. That does not mean an individual could prefer the .41 mag, but if it is because they are "close," then the person is delusional.

Heavy .41 Magnum Ammo - 265 gr. L.W.N. (1,350 fps/M.E. 1,072 ft. lbs.)
Check these velocities taken from real guns.
➤ 6.5" Ruger
a. Item #16A - 1379 fps

➤ 4" S&W Mountain Gun
a. Item #16A - 1310 fps

Heavy .44 Magnum +P+ Ammo - 340 gr. L.F.N. - G.C. (1,478 fps/M.E. 1,649 ft. lbs.)

The below velocities with over the counter firearms tell the story.
➤ 1401 fps -- 5.5 inch factory stock Red Hawk
➤ 1478 fps -- 7.5 inch factory stock Red Hawk



The .44 mag has a huge potential that can be tapped, or not. I picked the .357 mag as my revolver/lever gun round and got rid of all my .45 Colt guns. To each their own.

[dnepr]

Ok.... My turn.


i think the 41 Mag is a better choice because............... I like it better than the 44 Mag. That's my reason and I'm sticking to it!

Best answer yet

[TXGunNut]

flatter trajectory has pretty much been why the 41 mag stays in favor.
it will also shoot the 41 specials
which star-line is making brass for right now.

41 Special? Wow, guess it was just a matter of time. I've always liked the 41 Mag, never had one but never pass up a chance to fondle one. Never really liked the 43 Mag, most days won't even remember having one let alone admit it. When you have a few good revolvers chambered for 45 Colt the 41 vs 44 argument seems a bit trivial.:kidding:

[cainttype]

What would be the advantage of having a 41 mag rifle verses a 44 mag that can shoot 44 specials too.
Is there a big ballistic difference, flatter trajectory?
Appreciate anyone giving me some feed back...
Gerald

The OP's question of any "advantage" a 41 rifle might have was answered early on by "trajectory" and "less recoil". You could add that less powder and less alloy is more economical.
He did not question handguns, but to those differences you could add the already mentioned fact that there's more metal in identical frames. Does that make a stronger gun? Probably... Does the slight extra weight reduce recoil even more? Undoubtably.
41s can also be found in smaller, lighter field guns. The Ruger NM Blackwawk compared to the Super Blackhawk is a prime example, if someone is interested in a lighter-weight field gun.

As far as medium game goes (anything up too and including Elk, for instance) the 41 is more than enough, if you do your job right...easily.
If dangerous game were the quarry, real heavies from a 44 would get the nod (of course)... But then again, a good arguement could be easily made for dropping the 44 in favor of heavy 45 Colts and Casulls. That's not mentioning even larger revolvers out there chambering 460 & 500 S&Ws, 45-70s, etc... Personally, I don't care for those extremely large framed handguns. If I can't carry it easily and comfortably in a normal sized holster I have no use for it in the field.

[ironhead7544]

Not much difference between the two. Matching a handgun would be my only reason to get a 41 Magnum rifle.

Back in the "Dirty Harry" days when the M29 was hard to get, the M57 was there. I bought a 6 inch blue M57. One reason some people ended up with the M57 is that it held up better to a lot of heavy loads than the M29. I cant really confirm this as I had both at the same time and did not have a problems with any of them. I will say that the 41M brass lasted longer than the 44M brass.

I would be happy with either one in rifle or pistol.

[Groo]

Groo here
The difference between the 41 and the 44 , is the same as the reason Keith went to the 44 spec from the 45 colt.
More steel !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
When the 41 first came out, it was to exceed the 44 mag in pressure and performance.
The rifle is the same .
As we don't load to extreme levels [ LOL] this should not matter, but in those times those "crazy" hand loaders just had to push everything.