41 Mag vs. 44 Mag
- Thread starter Billy The Kid
- Start date
Levi Garrett said:With the .357 and .44 , who needs a 41
Well, unless we are talking about small weight 357, like S&W 19/66, Ruger Security-Six and other similar weight handguns, when you have 41 and 45, I don’t see the need for 357 (on large frame like BH, Bisley, N-frame, etc) and 44?
Toller said:
In that respect, I agree with Toller. Don’t get me wrong, I did have 357 Bisley and GP100, and as son as my budget permits I’ll be looking for a nice stainless Security-Six, but for general shooting, like 200 gr at about 1100-1200 fps, I found much more use of 41 Bisley. Those loads are moderate pressure, easy on gun (especially with single base powders) easy on brass and hands. If I ever sell this 41 Bisley, it will be when I put my hands on a stainless 41 Bisley. And in case I need a “boomer” 45 Bisley is the ticket, just have a look how much power it could develop with proper handloads; http://www.handloads.com/loaddata/d...&Weight=All&type=Handgun&Order=Powder&Source=
Regarding the original statement that the .41 Mag is "more powerful" than the .44 Mag, physics says that's not possible. However, you can make a case that the .41 Mag "outperforms" the .44!
I don't have it in front of me but there is an old Shooting Times article where the gun writer put forward the case that because of its smaller diameter the .41 Mag has a higher sectional density and went on to show that for similar bullet weights (200 .41 vs. 200 .44 etc.) loaded to the same velocity (different pressures?) you would get better penetration. If memory serves, something on average about 6" greater penetration.
Now is that important? Not to me but it made for interesting reading. The title was something like ".41 Mag better than .44? Make mine .41!"
I will dig through and see if I can come up with it.
I don't have it in front of me but there is an old Shooting Times article where the gun writer put forward the case that because of its smaller diameter the .41 Mag has a higher sectional density and went on to show that for similar bullet weights (200 .41 vs. 200 .44 etc.) loaded to the same velocity (different pressures?) you would get better penetration. If memory serves, something on average about 6" greater penetration.
Now is that important? Not to me but it made for interesting reading. The title was something like ".41 Mag better than .44? Make mine .41!"
I will dig through and see if I can come up with it.
IM_Lugger said:
Well, any time we are talking about magnum calibers, I am always thinking what is the effect on longer distances, like 75-100 yds. Otherwise, on 15-25 yds, 250 gr at 800-900 from 44 Special or 45 LC is all that’s needed. In that respect 200 gr from 41 makes more sense than from 44. Now, if we are talking about same frame and pushing “pedal to the metal”, due the thicker cylinder walls, 41 Magnum could be loaded on higher pressure. That transfers to higher muzzle velocity, and due the higher sectional density, higher long distance velocity, AND penetration. Of course, all this will require in depth academic analysis. See http://leverguns.com/articles/paco/41magnum.htm and http://leverguns.com/articles/41data.htm . Now, if we are talking about versatility of 44, many will have good argument stating that 45 LC could do anything that 44 could do, and than some. And all that with about 20-25 % less pressure, that transfers to less blast, bit less recoil, and less gun and brass wear; see http://www.linebaughcustom.com/ , go to “Articles”.
Back to 41; this round really shines on the range, especially on silhouettes. I had 357 Bisley and GP 100; too much steel for such calibre. Majority of 41 shooters can tell you that you could shoot couple hundred rounds from 41 (like 200-210 gr at 1100-1200 fps) all day long, without considerable fatigue. I tried that with standard 240-250 in 44, well, after 100 or so, I felt bit tired. On top of that, since it’s the latest Magnum designed, its SAAMI dimensions and tolerances are somewhat tighter and general consensus among gun writers is that 41 has the edge in accuracy over all other calibers.
I found that a number of serious silhouette shooters in US are using 41 large frame Freedom Arms as the optimum calibre for that sport; flat shooting, hard hitting plates even on distances as long as 200 meters, yet not punishing the hands severely. And those folks shoot a lot; 300-400 rounds a day is nothing extraordinary for them. Some years ago I found the article from the writer whose hands were in such shape that he cannot shoot 44 any more, but 41 was still OK. That was the key information why I selected 41 as my basic calibre. I am in excellent health and still shoot occasionally 45-325 at about 1150 or so fps. However, I decided to preserve my hand for old age and got 41. BTW, I do have 44 Redhawk, but it’s not my primary revolver.
Don’t misunderstand us, 41/45 fans, there is nothing wrong with 44 as a single revolver; it is a very good calibre. However, looking back, I still believe that 41 and 45 combination is the optimum one. Too bad that I didn’t get 41 Bisley as my first revolver, along with T-C Contender. I will be better shooter for less money spent.
Last edited:
Don’t see how; about last 700 round shot through my .44 have all been 200gr bullets…
I don’t buy that .41 is more powerful than .44. That’s just not true. It’s safe to push a 200gr bullet at 1806fps out of a .44mag that’s almost 1450ft-lbs! I doubt you can do that with .41 without going to excess pressures. There are .44mag loads from Buffalo Bore that reach 1650ft-lbs! No .41mag can do that. Period. Not to mention that in .44mag you can use bullets up to 355gr, where .41mag's selection is much more limited.
The larger case capacity of the .44 will allow for more powder and therefore higher velocities, while maintaining lower pressure than .41 (with the same powder charge and bullet weight).
Since I currently use Blue Dot, here’s an example; (http://www.alliantpowder.com/reloaders/RecipeList.aspx?gauge=>ypeid=1&title=Pistols%20and%20Revolvers)
.41mag Blue Dot 14gr /200gr =1470fps (36,000psi)
.44mag Blue Dot 17gr /200gr =1565fps (33,400psi)
As you can see with .44 you can use more powder, achieve higher velocities, and still have lower pressures.
Last edited:
Toller said:
By using the same weight bullet for both you are handicapping the 44 Mag, I shoot 310 gr hard cast gas checked bullets out of my 44 Mag and they would be my choice for a penetration test. No 44 Mag shooter would ever use a 200 grain bullet for a penetration test, that's like shooting a 100 gr bullet out of a 300 Win Mag against a 243 with a 100 gr bullet, it doesn't make any sense.
Try 250-275 gr 41 bullets. This is all math anyway. The 41 and 44 are close enough that your hair splitting over them. And anything that's said in regards to the 44 over the 41 goes for the 45 over the 44. Just buy one of each and try them out. There isn't a gnat's whisker worth of difference in the real world. - dan
Good point. Some folks use minivan for everything, like me. Some prefer to use medium size sedan and full size van. I don’t see any need for glorifying one calibre and bashing another. If I have just one revolver, it will be 44. Since I have a choice, I had chosen 41 and 45 in same revolver model and would do that again.dan belisle said:
As for the loads and how fast bullets could be pushed, I don’t see any need for velocities over 1200 fps from revolver with lead bullets. More than that, gas check might be in order, and that is something I would like to avoid. Some revolvers-loads might not need them but some might.
And if I want more power, I will go with heaviest bullet that could be pushed at 1200 fps.
Just personal preference and publicly expressed opinion. Your preference and mileage may vary…
