I have never owned a hand gun. I am thinking about getting a 41 mag. I reload. If you don't count the 300 grain 44 mag round, is the 41 mag close to the 44 in killing power? Or is it lacking? Meaning -- If a Brown Bear came by, would I realy NEED the bigger gun? I would rather pack a smaller gun if possible.
Thanks
Rich

I was asking a similar question a couple of months ago, you came to the right place for advice. These fellows are great.

I bought a Ruger super Blackhawk Hunter in 41 and have enjoyed it more than any gun purchased in the last twenty years.

I am shooting 210 gr bullets in mine at 1400 fps, and there are some cor-bon loads available which are a bit more powerful than this.

The 41 will never quite compare with the very top loads in a 44 mag, as much heavier bullets are available in 44. But the difference is less than many people might guess.

As far as large brown bears are concerned, I have never seen one, but I think I would feel undergunned with anything less than a 45-70 carbine or a slug loaded 12 gauge.

If you are interested in seeing the previous discussion, here is a link.
https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads...true#Post592783

On paper the edge will always go the 44 Mag. In the field there is no discernable difference except for less recoil with the 41 Mag. I have two 41s and have shot many deer with 357 Mag, 41 Mag, 44 Mag and 40 S&W over the past 15 years. I have also developed some incredable loads for the 41 using 210XTP and H110 that are efficient and very accurate and sufficiently powerful. I have chronoed more than a few of the loads, many several times in several of my handguns. The 41Mag is near cult status, but people who are in the know will seriously recommend the 41mag. Get one, I recommend the Ruger Blackhawk ss 7.5 with a 2xBurris, you will thank me later.

I'm a little confused about the "bigger gun" thing. The .41 and .44 Mags are almost always built on the same frame, with the .44 actually being a touch lighter - same barrel and cylinder with bigger holes.

i have a redhawk a blackhawk and a super blackhawk hunter
all in 41
my hunting load is a lbt cast performace 250 cast bullet behind h110
i think the recoil is a very different style than the 44
the 41 is milder more straight back the 44 is harder snaping up kind

Hi Rich
Twentyfive years ago I had a 7 1/2" Ruger SBH in 44mag. Too heavy to carry all the time. I sold it and bought a 4 5/8" BH 41mag that is a lot lighter. I was never sorry. I now also have a Taurus 41mag 2 3/4" belly gun that fits in my jacket pocket. If I were to buy a new 44mag, it would probably be a Redhawk. They can handle the hot carbine loads. You will not be sorry with the 41. And now to confuse you more. The last handgun that I bought is a 5" Ruger Stainless Bisley in 45LC and it can be had with a 45ACP cylinder. Hot 45LC rounds will match the 44mag and the ACPs are cheap to shoot. It is sweet. Maybe the best of both worlds. Good luck.
George

If you are looking for a bear defense gun remember just like in gun fighting the fastest, most powerful miss in the world does you no good. And that is where the .41 has it over the .44...noticably less recoil for bullets of equal sectional density and velocity. Buffalo Bore, CorBon and Federal all have heavy hardcast loads that will shoot though anything a .44 will until you start getting up well over the 300 grain range. For that matter there are several 300 grain LBT and SSK designed bullets that can be run 1300+ fps and I am not sure what will stop them. So if you reload you can equal anything a .44 will do.

Bob

My personal comfort rating for brown bears starts with the 480 ruger driving 400 gr @ 1200 fps, I carried a 44 mag with 320's @ 1200 for years, but I considered it a bare minimum.

Really, brown bears are a job for a rifle!

Rich, unless you're up in Alaska, you'll not have worry about running into a Brown bear.

If you're speaking of the cinnamon or "rust" colored Black bears of Calif., and much of the U.S., then, Yes, a .41 mag. will handle them quite well.

When I lived in Calif., I killed a 400 pound Black bear (cinnamon colored) with my S&W 57 .41 Mag. 6" bbl. One shot, 20 yards at the treed bear, and dead bear.

Good luck.

L.W.

Leanwolf....I was just reading a story last night about a hunter in Montana who was killed by a grizzly while dressing out an elk. He may not run into a Brown Bear down this way but chewed up is chewed up....Bob

___________________________________________________

Bob, you're certainly correct that a person could run into a Griz here in the "lower 48," and as I live in a State (Idaho) in which we have some Griz, I am ALWAYS aware of my surroundings when out in the boonies and mountains. I've not seen a Griz here, but have damned sure seen their tracks.

That said, Rich won't run into any Brown bears or Griz in Calif., as the last Griz was shot there in (I believe) 1923. But, there are some pretty good sized Black bears there, and some of them are not friendly.

When we lived in Los Angeles ('62-'97) we had a vacation home in the Sierra on the western slope at 6,000' altitude, in southern Tulare County. Over the years, there were numerous sightings and incidents with Black bears. When my wife and I were out hiking, etc., we sometimes took a rifle, but always had our handguns with us: her's a Ruger Security Six .357 Mag., and mine either my S&W .41 Mag., S&W .44 Mag., Ruger .44 Mag., or Ruger B.H. .45 Colt. (There were also a lot of mountain lions around there, too.)

Anytime I'm cleaning a deer or elk, I want a good, heavy caliber handgun with me, as my rifle will not be all that handy to me in a down and dirty situation. (I wonder if the Montana hunter had placed his rifle "out of the way" while cleaning his elk, before the Griz hit him???) Same if I'm packing out meat. I need BOTH hands to help me get up and down mountains on slippery slopes, through brush, over rocks and logs, etc.

Others have their own methods and opinions, but that's the way I do things.

FWIW, my "business" load for my .41 Mag., is a 265 grains G.C. Beartooth Bullet with a healthy dose of H110. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

L.W.

Either is going to beat smacking the bear with your fist. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> As the others have said, just use a heavy, deep penetrating bullet......and shoot straight. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

I shoot a Smith 657 in 41 mag and love it. I also use 210gr xtp's and H110.The deer I've shot with it couldn't tell the difference over a 44. I would not recommend xtp for bear ammo though. I'd go hard cast lead for max penetration. Whatever you decide practice,practice.............

I don't think the Musk Ox I shot in 1997 with my 41 mag loaded with 265 grain Beartooth bullet at 60 yards could tell you if it was shot with a 41 or a 44. Complete penetration.

I think if you are going to have to face a griz and you have ANY handgun in your hands, you need a bigger gun (ie a rifle). That said, the type of situation I think we are talking about here is survival, not hunting. If that is the case then ANY handgun .357 or up is WAY better than nothing. No handgun is going to knock a big bear on its rear like a .375 H&H. But at powder burn range, you could make a compelling argument even for a .357 with 180 grain hard cast bullets. I think you would need some thing you can hit with that digs deep.

Got off on a tangent and forgot to say that I love my 6.5 inch .41 Mag Blackhawk. I have little experience with the .44 Mag, but can't help but think its top loads with 300-330 grain bullets and larger frontal diameter would give it more smack than the .41 is capable of.

And that is the reason why my other Blackhawk is a 5.5" chambered in the other cartridge that is just as good or better than the 44 mag. 45 Colt loaded with 370 grain hard cast Beartooth Bullets. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

And that is the reason why my other Blackhawk is a 5.5" chambered in the other cartridge that is just as good or better than the 44 mag. 45 Colt loaded with 370 grain hard cast Beartooth Bullets. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> [/quote]

--------------------------------

Concur. A heavy-loaded .45 Colt is a step above the .44 Mag and would probably be the way I would go if I wanted a handgun more powerful than my current .41.

I asked myself the same question about 20 years ago and went with the .41 and have never looked back. That said, it is easier to find a wider variety of tested loading data for the .44 than it is for the .41.

Rich,
From the perspective of defending yourself against a bear with a 41 or a 44, the outcome would probably be the same. You probably would win with either gun. Despite the criticism of using a handgun for bear protection, you will have to look far and wide to find a single case where a person was killed by a bear while in possesion of a handgun while every year those with long guns are killed. Almost all cases where a person had a handgun they have survived or deterred the attack and the caliber did not make a difference, from 22 to 44.

I have a 41 in Taurus Titanium, 44s in Super Blackhawk and Redhawk, and a 454 in Super Redhawk for comparison. For protection purposes the 41 Titanium is my bear backup preference mainly because it weighs just a tad over 20 oz. When I am in Alaska it is simply attached to me. The others are hunting guns. Only used it once and that was to deter a grizzly while backpacking in the Brooks Range, but it was successful.

Maybe surprising, but of the guns mentioned the 41 is substantially harder kicking, and that is an understatement. It is simply brutal with hot loads because of the short barrel and light weight. The porting keeps muzzle lift down a bit but the hand and wrist are sore to the point of trembling after 1 cylinder. By comparison I can comfortably work up a load with the 454.

The 41 is a very fine round. But if you are only considering the 41 or 44 then my suggestion would be to go to a 44 as your first handgun. I say this due to the popularity and versatility of the 44. It will be easy to find someone locally that also has a 44 that can help with reloading suggestions. You can load it really light with 44 Special rounds until you become more comfortable with handgun handling and work up to higher performance loads. There is a much wider range of bullets available for the 44. You can buy either gun in similar size frames so I don't think how big the gun is, is a significant factor.

#1 44 mag = .426 bullet diameter; 41 mag = .410 bullet diameter, 16 hundredths a big difference?, I dont think so. My Ruger has a 4 digit serial number & has been with me since NIB, many miles lots of rounds down range ( accurate enough to hit jack rabbits out to 165 yds, my longest witnessed shot), I shoot bullet weights from 200 to 275 grains, 2400 & W296 powder. Only thing I have ever seen a 44 do that the 41 wont is kick you harder (tho' a 275 gr, "Keith" hard cast SWC and a healthy dose of W296 isn't exactly tame) current posessions are: 1- the afore mentioned 6 1/2" Ruger, 2- 5 1/2" Taurus "tracker", 3- 4" and 8 3/8" S&W M57's.
As for the bear question, Several years ago when P.O. Ackley was writing for a gun magazine, he was asked to recommend a pistol for a back up in case the hunter missed with his rifle. Ackley advised to forget the pistol and use the money for practice ammo for the rifle.
With that said, I always have a side arm with me (41 mag, 45 colt, 38/44 S&W) in the hills. I do not desire to see how good my jujutsu techniques are against stuff like bears and mountain lions. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

....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

Royce...I have read Phil's artcle and it is as about as "been there and done that" as it gets. Phil does now however carry a S&W .44 Magnum Mountain Gun and gave his daughter the 3" M65 that he always carried. In that article he states that he only has had to kill one bear and that was with the .357 Magnum.
If you have a discerning eye for S&Ws you can tell the difference of the 1/2" of barrel difference between the M29 that had a 6.5" barrel and the M57 that had only a 6". I did read one article a long time ago that said that becuase .44s were so hard to find at the time that the studio "may have" used a .41...but in all the shots of the gun that I saw my belief was that the barrel on that gun was 6.5".

Bob