Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns 41 mag vs 44 in killing power

....for those of you .41 Lovers who have been wanting a Marlin 1894 FG Carbine but have been putting it off I would not wait much longer. On the updated 2006 Marlin website the pistol gripped 1894s are gone and along with it the .41 Magnum FG. If I can confirm they have been dropped I will let you know.....Bob

I'm not convinced ANY handgun is much protection against big bears but if it makes you feel good go for it. That said 41 or 44 makes little difference. I do like the .44 Magnum better but realize the .41 has a fanatical following in some quarters and is, in fact, a fine caliber.

FWIW - the .41 mag and the .44 mag are basically identical except for three things.

The first is bullet weights: the .41 can go a touch lighter, the .44 a touch heavier. No big difference, and for all intents and purposes, either kills stuff just as well as the other.

The second is the existence of a .44 Special, and the continued non-existence of a .41 Special. Having readily available factory loaded lower velocity plinking and practice ammo for the .44 can be a huge advantage, esp. when it comes to learning and being comfortable with the big boomers.

The third is the availability of .44s in lots of different factory configurations and in almost every store in the country. .41s are just not that prevalent. Now, if availability and factory selections don't matter to you, fine. But to some, those things do matter.

I'd love to see Ruger come out with a .41 Special (.41 Ruger Special, perhaps), and really beef up their selection of .41 magnum revolvers in the Blackhawk, SBH, and SBH Hunter (Bisleys, too, but that's asking too much). If they did that, well, then #2 and #3 get far less dramatic.

If that happened, I'd probably never own a .44 Magnum, or another .357 Magnum. Instead, I'd have my .32 H&R (S&W 16-4), a .41 Magnum, either an S&W or a Ruger SBH Hunter, and a .45LC, probably in a Ruger Bisley 5.5 ss.

That's a fine summation, VAnimrod.

Aaahh, thank ya, thank ya vaary much... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

Hey, was that ELVIS?

WHAT? WHERE? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

So, HE LIVES! Somehow I just knew it was true! I ain't no fool...

I have a S&W mod 57 in .41 w/4" barrel. I can say you will not be disappointed with the .41. Yeah, yeah yeah, ammo availability, blah blah heavier bullets... The differences are really on paper except for the recoil - less of it on the .41! If you want to try a real hammer in a factory round, try the Cor-Bon 250 grn hard cast. Pretty darn close to all but the 300 grn .44 mag loads.

If you think about it the .41 and .44 are not the big boys anymore..I have a dan wesson .44 and love it it's heavy and loud but recoil is managable..last year my wife bought me a ruger redhawk .454 casull it's really loud and recoils like hell and after a few hundred dollars woth of shots. I havent learned to be able to recover fast enough for a quick follow up shot. I'd love to own a .460 smith or even a .500 but man if the casull is punishing they have to be pure hell...

BTW I've never fired or even seen a .41 magnum
but it aint no .44 and the .41 hasn't starred in a movie yet.
.44 has a huge following around here with the .357 a close second.

talking about bears id consider the .454 casull minimun..


Robert..

..those who shoot .41s have nothing to prove... the .41 simply "is".

44=.429
41=.410
Dirty Harry was actually holding a 41 in the movies....
Read that some were, do not remember were...

I prefer the 41 mag, and the 45 colt.

Kudo's to everyone for getting through a thread about handguns and bears, without anyone mentioning that lame-ass joke about filing off the front sight....

I hate it when people say that.

You and me both!!!

..it never came up as everyone knows that .41s are not enough for big bear so why would we even discuss it.... Everyone knows that you need at least a .500 S&W for that kind of work...and if you notice there were soooo many people, especially in Alaska, who were filing their front sights off that S&W started pinning on the front sights so they could easily be put back on by those who know better....


;-)

how do you know this??...

Besides, everyone knows a vaquero with that nice smoooth front sight and a dab of vasaline eleminate the need for all that gunsmithing. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" />

Barrel length is much more important... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/help.gif" alt="" />

How do I know what?


That the diam. of the 44 mag projectile is .429? It is....
The diam. of the 41 mag projectile is .410? It is as well....
Or that the prop gun in Dirty Hary was actually a 41 mag not a 44 mag?

http://www.the-dirtiest.com/41.htm
Smith and Wesson .41 Magnum

Many claim that the gun Eastwood uses in Dirty Harry is actually a .41 Magnum, although the difference isn't noticeable onscreen. Considering that the Magnums were created from parts for the film, it's quite possible.

Introduced in 1964 in the Smith & Wesson Model 57 revolver, the .41 Magnum was originally conceived as the ideal cartridge for law enforcement use. Two factory loadings were developed by Remington, one for general police duty, the other for use by state troopers who needed more power and greater penetration. The police load consisted of a 210 grain lead bullet at 1150 fps while the high velocity load featured a jacketed soft point bullet of the same weight at 1500 fps.

In law enforcement circles, the .41 Magnum proved to be less than successful, but as hunting cartridges designed by a major manufacturer to be used in revolvers go, it is second only in power and popularity to .44 Magnum. In addition to the Smith & Wesson revolver, the .41 Magnum chambering is available in the Ruger Blackhawk and Redhawk, and in the Desert Eagle gas operated autoloader.

As a big game cartridge, the .41 Magnum has always played second fiddle to the slightly more powerful .44 Magnum, but when both are used on deer size game, the difference in their performance is not great enough to write home about. This probably does not hold true when larger game, such as moose and elk at woods ranges, is on the agenda which is a moot point since only a few hunters use revolvers on game that size.

A number of excellent jacketed and cast bullets weighing from 170 to 210 grains are available for the .41 Magnum. Full throttle hunting loads call for the use of H110, but for plinking and paper punching with reduced velocity loads, HS6 and HS7 are the correct propellants.


Ok, does this answer your question?

It answers all of mine. But you forgot to mention how much fun to shoot, the 41 can be, with just a little dab of Unique behind the bullet.

Who needs a 41 Special, we build our own!

There is a gentleman name Phil Shoemaker that occasionally posts on 24 Hour Campfire.
He is a staff writer for Wolfe Publications, but his main job is being an outfitter in Alaska. He wrote an excellent article a few months back on handguns for bear protection, and there are probably very very few people better qualified to write such an article.
I won't try to repeat what he wrote, but the gist of his article was that the really big boomers (454 and 480) were of little use, because the recoil is so severe that its hard to recover for follow up shots. He and his off spring actually carry 357 magnums for protection against the Alaska brown bear and have used them sucessfully more than once, I believe. The 41 magnum would of course be as good as the 357.
As a matter of fact, a horn hunter from Wilsall, MT killed a grizzly in Tom Miner Basin a couple of years ago after it started to maul him. He used a 41 Magnum, I believe.
A scope on a handgun carried for bear protection is silly.

Royce