41 magnum Ruger Redhawk??

[kingstrider]

I have a lead on a stainless Redhawk in .41 magnum but don't know a lot about the cartridge. I already have 357s and 44 magnums but the price sounds right and I thought it might be fun to play around with. Does anybody have any experience with the gun and caliber?

[7br]

I like them and mine does well with cast. The 41 redhawks are not that common.

[missionary5155]

Good morning
41 Mag (.41) is that .002 less diameter than the .43 mag (read 44). It will do whatever a "44" will do.
Usually because factories make fewer 41´s they seen to end up better shooters. There are some lemon 41 ´s out there but out of the mnay I have owned I have had just one RBH that was just not up to par. I have DW S&W Ruger Taurus... They all shoot NICELY.
I have never bought a Redhawk Just because I did not like the looks... but everyone I have seen shot well and the intergral scope mount is a GREAT idea.
Get the 240+ molds ... Next mold I get will be 280 or so.
Tell ya what... BUY it.. If you do not like it let me know. I should have a different 41 to play with this time up.
Mike in Peru HE is Risen !!!

[Throwback]

It is a big gun. Enough so that I will not own one in the 7+ barrel lengths. In the 5-ish length it is just tollerable. If yours has a decent price and shows no signs of abuse buy it. It has no special advantage over a .44 and the advantage of the .44 is component availability. This of course is a very solveable issue for the handloader. I really like the .41 (and the .44 for that matter). The Ruger is more than enough gun and will shoot very well if in good condition. Their DA triggers are often quite good.

It is important to look at the crane when buying these (or any other revolver). Some morons copied what they saw on TV and snapped their cylinders shut by flipping the gun. About 10 years or more ago I saw a RH for $200 bucks, a low price even then. Why the dealer hadn't sent the gun to Ruger, I don't know, but its crane was sprung away from the frame by a healthy 16th of an inch. That cylinder on these is beefy and must exert a great deal of force on the crane when the gun is abused in this manner!

Mould number one I would recommend is 410459 220 grains, which can be found used. This may not be a true Keith but it is one accurate bullet. I just got a 260 grain LSWC but I haven't been able to shoot it yet.

[26Charlie]

Yep, buy it - the .41 is a great caliber, will do anything the .44 and the .357 will do - the Redhawk is a heavy gun, and you can use 180's up to 300 gr. bullets with no problems in it. Loads tend to be 2 to 4 gr. less of whatever powder, for a similarly proportioned bullet in the .44. So, for example, where I use a 250 gr. Keith bullet and 22 gr. of H-110 in the .44 Mag, I use a 220 gr. Keith bullet and 19 gr. H-110 in the .41 Mag.

[Three44s]

Priced right ..... you'd have a hard time losing on it.

Ruger did not build very many (they are the scarcest of the series).

The .41 caliber is just that ....... .41 ...... a .44 with it's greater availability of components does the .41 better by .020". The pressures are the same but like it or not, the .44 has an advantage in pure SMUCK by it's larger bore.

Don't get me wrong, I own TWO revolvers in .41 and like them.

My favorite heavy hitter is the Laser Cast 265 gr. Gas Checked with H110.

Three 44s

[Dark Helmet]

I paid something over 500 for my 5.5" SS 41 Redhawk NIB and was happy to get it as they were already discontinued. Hope this helps!

[big dale]

I had a blued 41 Redhawk for about a year back in the late 80's. Loved the thing. I wound up giving it to a friend's father after he moved to New Mexico when he retired and felt that he would enjoy his walks in the morning wearing it just in case since bears were a problem around there and his wife's 380 seemed kind of lite to take on those walks.

I had a Ruger Blackhawk in 41 which I bought soon after the cartridge came out and kept it till it was stolen in 1978. If you get used to the 41, you may have no further need for either a 357 or a 44 Magnums. I had a Lee mould for a 240 grain semi-wadcutter that was only a one cavity mould, but I used up a few 8 pound kegs of Herco shooting that bullet in those two handguns thru the years.

I hope you enjoy your Ruger 41 as much as I enjoyed mine.

Big Dale

[acemedic13]

I have several. I love my new model blackhwaks in .41 mag the best. I have a matched set with a nice custom kirpatrick holster set up for them. The caliber is great. It has enough power to be medicine for just about anything your going to deal with in north america. Mine have incredible accuracy for being 4 5/8. If you get the gun, you will be happy you did........ A Redhawk in 41 mag is a pretty rare find.

[MT Gianni]

Flat shooting cartridge is a plus. It will do most everything a 44 will but not all. Disadvantage is hard to fine components, more molds to get and sizing dies. It is all worth it if you want it.

[GLynn41]

I have blue and a SS 5.5 --like em both --have taken deer with both easily--do not feel any the less for despite the .43

[kingstrider]

Dang! I missed out on the deal after all. It was at a pawn shop I frequent and the manager was going to let me have the first look at it but someone else sold it before I got there. Oh well, I bought a .357 GP-100 and a Matthews bow for $500 so think I did alright.

[anachronism]

Outside of being a bit scarce, you didn't really miss out on anything. The 44 is a much more practical caliber for many reasons, outlined above. I had a 41 Redhawk & found it to be fussy about ammo. The only reason recoil is lighter is because the bullet weight & powder charges are lighter & I'm amused by the claims that they shoot flatter. At handgun ranges, you really won't see much of a difference. They all drop like bricks.

[GP100man]

you oughtta see a 357 Redhawk same gun with tiny 357 holes drilled into it , a massive tool to behold & the weight of it was it`s demise !
the 41 i owned was a good shooter but ammo & even brass was more $ so i sold it for $150 more than i paid for it & bought a 7.5" 44 with scope mounts.
sorry u missed it but you`ll like the GP100 also to!!

GP100man:castmine:

[Heavy lead]

I would be the bees knees if Ruger would make an eight shot 357 Redhawk IMO, I'd buy one in a minute.

[Cherokee]

Redhawk 8 shot 357 - I want one !!!!

[Dutch4122]

I'd love to see the GP-100 in .41 Magnum, if it were possible.:roll:

[Larry Gibson]

I'm going to offer another opinion concerning the .41 Magnum. I have been shooting it since '75 in numerous revolvers. My current revolver is a Bisley Ruger BH with 7 1/2" barrel. I truely love that revolver and it is now my chosen revolver for big game (deer, elk, bear, pigs) hunting with a handgun here in the lower 48.

I have run the gammit of bullet weights through the .41. It is my opinion if you want to shoot a 240-300+ gr bullet go the extra .002" diameter and use a .44 Magnum as it suffices much better with those bullets than does the .41. The .41 Magnum excells with the 170 to 210 gr bullets that it was designed for. With such it does shoot with less recoil. That makes it more maneageble to a lot more people.

My opinion is there is no real need for the heavier bullets in the .41 Magnum. I also don't have any use for the heavier bullets (300+ gr) in the .44 Magnum. I've yet to see where a 210 gr SWC or a 250 gr SWC in either the .41 or .44 lacked "penetration" in our soft skinned deer and elk. I hear of the "armor plate" that pigs have but I've not killed one yet that a good SWC of normal weight or a good J bullet such as the XTP did not penetrate quite nicely. I do not do Texas heart shots so I'll leave the discussion of that and other back to front severe raking shots to those who do. I respect others opinions but am just offering mine......I'll stick with the regular range of bullet weights for the .41 Magnum as they work just as well thank you.

I've shot numerous critters big and small with those .41s and also with several .44 magnums I've got/had. At practical handgun ranges using cast bullets or jacketed bullets I've not found any difference in "killing" between the two cartridges give similar styles of bullets at equivelent velocities. What I have found is the .41 is more pleasant to shoot and for which reason most can shoot it more accurately if regular weight bullets for the .41 are used.

I will offer also that I have a small hand and shooting most any magnum cartridge more powerful than the .357 in an N frame S&W to be painfull, especially in double action mode. The Ruger RedHawk and the Colt Anaconda's fit my smaller hand and are much more maneageble and comfortable to shoot either single or double action. I find single action revolver grips very comfortable with the heaviest of .41/.44 Magnum loads. I prefer the smaller Ruger grips of the "old models" that emulate Colt SAA grips and of course the Ruger Bisley grip is great for recoil maneagement.

To bad you missed the .41 magnum RedHawk deal. Would have made a very nice hunting revolver.

Larry Gibson

[StarMetal]

I have to agree with Larry. Heavier heavier heavier bullets in revolvers....why? Like he said you really don't need them. Maybe for some big African game yes. If you feel you need a really heavier bullet for your revolver maybe you need a larger caliber. Or is it a macho thing..."Yeah, I shoot 800 grain bullets from my 44 Mag".

What I see some 41 Mag owners try to do is make it a 44 magnum, which it isn't.

Joe

[bisleyfan41]

[QUOTE=kingstrider;547789]Dang! I missed out on the deal after all.QUOTE]

You're in luck. There's one on GB right now if you still got the desire/money.
Never had a RH in 41, but would be interested if a bargain came along.
You'll love the 41 if/when you get one.