Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns Old Hunter, New to Handguns

I have been hunting a long time, and have taken 109 whitetails over the years. I took my first with a handgun this year. I borrowed a friends 629 classic in an 8-3/8", as it had a holosight on it, and loved it. I have a 657 Classic Hunter with a 6.5 in barrel. I would like to put a holosight on it, but really, other than sight radius, am I loosing much by sticking with my .41 mag with the 6.5" over the 44 with an 8-3/8"? Same frame, and since I'm using a cheater, because I can't see the sights well, I'm wondering if I have much to gain, if I choose to go with the .44? I did like that revolver though. I need some technical advice. The 657 Classic Hunter .41 is a real shooter, and is balanced, but I did like the feel and fit of the 629 Classic .44 also. I'm at a crossroad............

If you can't kill it with a 41 mag, the 44 mag isn't the answer.

I prefer shorter barrels as they balance better, the velocity drop is negligable.

I'd stick with the 41 Mag.

With those accolades, I suggest you keep it.

I've killed a couple of medium sized Mule deer with my S&W 57 6" bbl., they went down without any problem whatsoever. With a 6" or 6 1/2" barrel, the 57 is easy to carry.

A friend and hunting partner of mine had a S&W 29 8 3/8" barrel he carried for three seasons, found it awkward, so sold it and bought a 6" S&W 629. He enjoyed toting that more than the longer barrel revolver.

There is so little difference in out-in-the-field "killing" power between the .410 and .429 that it is unnoticable, in my opinion.

Good luck.

L.W.

Good news and bad news:

Good: If you're going to take a deer with a handgun there is no better choice than the M657 and the .41 Mag - just different choices.

Bad: Taking a deer with a rifle will never be the same.

+1.... A deer hit in the same place on the same day with a .41 or a .44 will never know the difference... You will however.. The .41 is much more "shooter friendly" in the recoil department.

Bob

Well,
Thanks guys, I really like my 657 Classic Hunter, and as stated, shoots better than I can shoot it. I've had it for about 10 years, carried it lots, but always waited for the "perfect" shot. I'm not knocking the break action handguns, but I guess growing up with all the westerns, a handgun to me has always been a revolver. I did get a kick out of taking the deer with a handgun, and am sure I'll take it more seriously now. I'll keep the .41, but an excuse to look for another gun............sounds like a plan. Thanks again for helping me make up my mind. Don

Eh, if you grew up on westerns, you wouldn't be shootin' them thar new fangled double action guns ... nor anything but fixed iron sights.

I shot scoped handguns a lot in my first years of handgun hunting. The last 10 I've gone back to iron sights. I don't think the benefits of optics are enough to offset the negatives including a more awkward, bulky, heavy gun that's slower to get on target. Most of my handgun hunting doesn't crowd the practical limits of iron sights, so I'm not giving up anything by choosing them. What I can tell you for sure is with iron sights I prefer barrels from 6-1/2 to 8-1/2 inches long, 7-1/2 is my favorite (though I carry a 4-5/8" barreled Ruger single action a lot too), but with scoped handguns I prefer a couple inches less barrel. Getting rid of the weight at the muzzle at least somewhat offsets the weight of optics 'n' mounts. Not completely, but it makes it less bad. Once you switch to a scope, I haven't found any mechanical accuracy advantage to a longer barrel, it's just the longer sight radius helping and of course scopes don't have sight radiuses.

As far as caliber, well of course, .41 sucks! ( Any .41 shooters want to take a swing at me, my name is Jeff O and ... ... sorry Jeff, I hadta do it!) No, truthfully I like .41 a lot, it could possibly be a better deer caliber than .44. I've stated, calling it "Tom's Law", "at least .40 caliber, blunt and at least 200 grains, and at least 1100 fps" followed by ""more" just means more recoil, not more effective." It was true 20 years ago, it's true now, at least when it comes to deer.

Last time I owned a .41 the Hornady XTPs had just come out. Both of my blackhawks like them over a max load of Win 296. That's good, 'cause I might sell out my .44 for a .41 but you'll have to pry my 296 out of my cold dead hands. Today I'd sure give the 210 grain gold dot a try. I wish Nosler would offer a .41 caliber handgun partition.

If you decide you have to change calibers for some reason, don't just grab a .44 magnum. Do some research into .45 colt. In some of the heavier framed guns, it'll do everything the .44 mag will do but do it at a lower pressure. It's not painless, but to my ears a shot without hearing protection from a stouted up .45 colt is not as uncomfortable as a load from a .44 mag, or worse, .41 mag, developing the same energy because of that lower pressure and the accompanying less-sharp shock wave. It ain't good, mind you, but it's a lesser degree of bad. There are a lot of real interesting .45 caliber bullets suitable for deer hunting.

If you do want a .44 magnum, take a look at Ruger's Bisley version of the Super Blackhawk hunter. It's a good package, good features. Tempted to buy one myself .. not that I don't have enough .44s already. If you want to stick with .41 but want another gun, Ruger made some of that package in .41 mag for Davidsons. Maybe a dealer still has one in stock. For .45, I'd consider a Ruger Super Redhawk in .454 Casull but loaded to less than max. I'm not a huge fan of S&W revolvers, they are fine quality guns but don't fit my small hands quite right and prove painful to shoot. I've ripped the web of my hand open a number of times with a 629 I owned, recoil it a weak spot I guess. Let that red juice run out.

I don't normally recommend .357. I see it more as an experts gun for someone who's already shot a few deer with a handgun and has gotten a feel for how things work, differences in shot placement rifle vs handgun, etc, however it is a very viable option. There's sort of a shortage of long barreled .357 revolvers these days, S&W has dropped the 8-3/8" length from the 586/686, no more 8" Colt Pythons, and so on. If you can find one, though, it's a consideration. I've gotten remarkable accuracy out of the 180 grain nosler handgun partition with Win 296.

Good luck!

Tom

once you kill the first with the handgun you want to do it that way all the time sorta ranks right their with first big game ever taken

I get good accuracy with 210 gr xtp's and H110. I wish I could see my iron sights that's one thing I miss, is my clear vision. I should own a single action, as that is the way I shoot most of the time. I've just always liked the way a smith fit my hand. I have a 686 in a 4", that I used to be able to shoot well. I think the standard model 29 is not as hand friendly, as the 629 Classic, and a good set of rubber grips. I have them on the 657, and it is comfortable to shoot. maybe I just need laser surgery. lol I think a holosight is a little cheaper.

Here's a second on that 7.5 inch Ruger Super Blackhawk Bisley Hunter, but mine is a 41 mag.

Mine likes the Hornady 210 XTP over H110 for about 1400 fps. The Nikon 2X in Ruger rings makes for accurate shot placement.

I've taken two more deer since my pistol deer, and I still like shooting them with a rifle, or bow. Going crossbow hunting tomorrow. I just like to hunt. good hunting. Don

FWIW, I love the .41mag. My Blackhawk is lighter than a .357, and nearly as powerful as a .44. Here's a couple of options for you. Find someone that has Hogue Rubber Mono grips on a Blackhawk single action that you can try. I have them on my 4 5/8". They look like crap, but feel great, more like a S&W. You also might try the "one ragged hole" rear sight blade to help compensate for the old eyes. Kick the trigger spring off of one side and add a Wolff hammer spring. Oh, maybe replace the hammer to a lower SBH. Now you have it, your own custom single action. Good luck.

I have two Smith model 57's, in .41 mag...very accurate...and a ruger super blackhawk in .44 mag... also accurate... HOWEVER... the fps and ballistic difference isn't enough for me, personally to warrant the pounding I take from a .44 mag. I handload the .44 mag down to .44 special specs... and it works fine... so, once again, I'll just say that it doesn"t matter what you use...when you do your part, the deer hits the ground, and he doesn't really care what caliber you dropped him with

I sold my deer rifles long ago except the Swede I customized myself, will never part with it.
Many, many deer have fallen to my revolvers. I don't own a .41 but see nothing wrong with it at all. I love the .44, .475 and 45-70 revolvers best, just never bought a .41. I don't like the .357. Too hard to find the right bullets for hunting. It does work with the right stuff.
I don't like a scope for hunting, too dark in the morning and evening. My eyes suck with open sights in my old age so I use Ultra Dots now.
Once you start shooting deer with a revolver, you will never quit and will sneer at rifle hunters. I love it more then archery.
Take that .41 or .44 and go have a great hunt, don't look back, it is just too much fun with more satisfaction. It brings excitement back.
I shot 3 with revolvers this season, here is one.

Here is another, yes I am a GOOD meat hunter, don't like buck meat.

Here is my 45-70 BFR deer.
The revolver is WONDERFUL!