I'm thinking of buying another pistol for medium game(whitetail mostly).

I hunt a bit every season with my scoped 586 357 and 158 grn JHPs over Bluedot or Lil' Gun. It's enough for medium game but, I'm looking for alittle more punch and can't decide whether the 41 or the 44 would be the best.

I've had a chance to shoot both the 657 in 41 and a 629 in 44 and they both seemed about the same as far as recoil/blast etc. Of course, the 44 is going to have alittle more punch on paper but, I'm wondering how they'd compare in the field on medium game.

Do you think there would be a notcieable difference between the two?

Thanks,

Reloader

I shoot a 6.5" S&W 29 and a 6" S&W 57. Have taken muliple deer and hogs with both. Either will serve you well. The 44 on hogs is awsome. That bullet having as much frontal area as it does hitting meat really has a loud WHOP to to when it hits. I use W-296 in both.

30378,

Thanks for the reply.

I was thinking a 210 XTP from the 41 or a 240 XTP from the 44. Either H110 or W296 would probably push both at similar speeds with max charges. The SD would be similar and they'd probably both have plenty of punch.

The 44 seems like it may be the wiser choice due to the availability of components. OTOH not everyone has a 41.




Reloader

Reloader

I recommend the 44 Mag. Mainly for the reason you stated. Much easier to find factory ammo, [should you need it] as well as reloading componets. Also if for no other reason Speer Shotshells. They work great for snakes and small game.

My wife and I have taken many a grouse, rabbit, squirrel, quail, and several snakes.

You can never go wrong with a 44 Mag.

Hey Reloader, Back around `80-`84 I worked(and Hunted occasionally) with a guy(Boyd) that had a 41Mag and I had a 44Mag, both Rugers. We tried our best to duplicate shots on Deer, but our Sample size is WAY TOO SMALL to be relevant. Having said that, we could see no real difference with On Game performance.

However, you are correct about Components being a bit more difficult to find in some locals for the 41Mag. With the on-line suppliers available though, I'd say it only matters if you leave the ammo at home, and then you don't deserve to Hunt anyhow.

Boyd cast his own slugs for his 41Mag. Can't remember if he put Gas Checks on them or not. To hear him tell it, the "Alloy" was so secret he was concerned the Russians were trying to figure it out. (It was Wheel Weights with a bit of Tin tossed in! )

But, there is one thing that might tilt the choice toward the 44Mag - rifles are also available in this caliber. And they are a pure joy to carry and shoot, due to the reduced Action size.

I had a 21" Contender Carbine in 44Mag and it did fine. Plenty of 1-shot kills "inside" the swamps and woods where the shots are relatively close. One of the Marlins would be even better.

ALWAYS have a 357Mag on the hip which is primarily for Snake Dancing, but it also has Bambi Blasters in the last 4-cylinders. If a Deer is REAL close, the 357Mag does just fine(as you know).

I'm partial to the 44Mag, but from what I've seen, the 41Mag is a fine cartridge too.

Best of luck to you.

You can always load a 44 down to match anything a 41 mag might do, but you can't load a 41 up to match a 44 mag.

Shot a lot of deer with a .41, load some 250-265 cast bullets at 1200, not jacketed. My second would be a Ruger in .45 LC with HEAVY handloads.

I've hunted with a 6" M57 Smith so long that it has recessed cylinders ;> Actually bought it in 1967.

Has always worked. Ranges have been up to 124 yards. Worked then too.

I have tried various bullets and have found the 210 Remington SP to be as good a bullet as any. Gives a nice mushroon yet holds up well enough that I've never recovered a bullet.

Only advantage to the 44 Rem Mag is that you can buy shot capsules for that caliber.

i've got 8" smiths and prefer the mod 57. the 41 seems to me to have all the striking force of the 44 with a much more manageable recoil. that said 44 is the standard and 41 is sort of an outcast

Thanks for all of the input fellas.

Seems like it would be hard to go wrong with either.

The 44 is definitely the most practical choice. I'd probably only go with the 41 to have something alittle different. Heck, it'd be nice to just buy both Like I need them I guess I really needed the 338 Federal and the new 300WM I rescently bought as well! I guess I should get back into the GBA meetings(Gun Buyers Anonymous).

Ya'll have a Good One,

Reloader

I have three .41 Mags, a 6.5" Ruger Blackhawk, a 7 5/8" S&W 657, and a 14" Contender, so you can guess which I prefer. The 44 is more common, ammo is more available, it handles heavier bullets, etc,blah blah, ad nauseum. However, given a good load in a .41, deer/black bear are this round's forte. Arguably it is a niche cartridge but it fits the niche perfectly. With either one, you can't go wrong.

THERE WAS a time in my life when I had 3-.41s and 3-.429s(44mag is not a true 44)
ANYWAY
I looked at it as to which would serve better and I went with the choice of the .41s. They will throw a bullet farther, faster and flatter with a much better sectional density and if you are hunting with a handgun PENETRATION is important because as far as energy it is not anywhere in rifle class of anything.

to get th most out of the .41 you have to handload. If you dont get the .429 because there is simply more out there for it OTC.

My favorite heavy animal load was loaded for the Ruger Redhawk and would never shoot it through any of the Smiths.(the .41 mag count eventually got to 7 different configurations of handguns and rifle) It consisted of a Sierra 220gr silouette bullet made for shooting steel targets. To test out the load I was shooting through aged oak sections, the kind that make chain saws spark and axes bounce off.
It would get through penetration on 16" of oak at 50 feet.
the first pig I ever shot with it was about 40yds away and was backgrounded by a snow covered hill. I touched it off and saw the blood spray out the far side and porky was dead when he hit the ground. You know how everyone always says dont shoot in the shoulder ecause of the plate? Went though both shoulders through those "tough" plates. The guy running the place came to drag out the hog and looked at the wound and said he had never seen a handgun do that. The entry was .41 and the exit was about .42 Sectional density does that.

EVERYTHING it hit it exited.
For vermin I used the 170gr Sierra HC and it was devastating with the energy dump.

but as I say, you need to handload to get the most from it.

Both a good choice, but I would give a slight edge to the .44 in frontal area (bigger hole is always better), and the fact that you can shoot heavier bullets in the .44. I don't feel that expanding bullets are necessary when hunting as the diameter of the bullet is big to start with, but penetration is critical, so I like heavy for caliber hard cast bullets. I shoot 320 grain hardcasts in my .44 magnums. JMHO.

quote:

Only advantage to the 44 Rem Mag is that you can buy shot capsules for that caliber.

I reload, so I make my own shotshells for my S&W 57. They work just fine.

L.W.

I bought the ported Taurus Tracker in .41 Rem. Magnum several years ago because it was the most power that I could get in a weapon that was lightweight and yet quick to use on a bear while I was fishing. Now, the .44 is available in the Tracker, so, if I were to do it again, I'd go with the bigger bore.
The .41 has worked well, though. Since I have owned it, I've never seen a Bear !

quote:

Originally posted by Reloader:
30378,....I was thinking a 210 XTP from the 41 or a 240 XTP from the 44. Either H110 or W296 would probably push both at similar speeds with max charges. The SD would be similar and they'd probably both have plenty of punch....Reloader

Reloader

I've been shooting and hunting with .41s and .44s since '68. Though I still have one DA revolver in .44 (Anaconda) my hunting style with revolvers has me with SAs these days. My two main hunting revolvers are Ruger BHs; a 7 1/2" Bisly in .41 and a new 6 1/2" BH Flat Top 50th Anniversary in .44. Prior to that I've run the gammit of DA and SAs in both calibers.

I push .41 210 XTPs and .44 240 XTPs at 1450 fps from the .41 and the 240 XTPs at 1425 fps from the .44. I've shot numerous deer (mulies and black tail) over the years with these loads and others out of these and the other revolvers I've had. As far as "punch" on the deer I couldn't tell a nichols worth of difference between the .41 and the .44. Doubt the deer could tell any difference either.

The .41 is a little easier to shoot as with equal size revolvers the .41 will be a little heavier and the recoil of the 210 gr bullet vs the 240 gr bullet at the same velocity will be less. However I shoot either equally well so my choice is based on whether I want to have a belted carry handgun or a shoulder holster carried handgun.

There are a lot more options of factory ammo and loading componants for the .44. However I've felt for some years there are "enough" for the .41 also. After you settle on a couple loads, either factory or reloads, for either the .41 or the .44 the availability of "other" componants or ammo is most often a moot point.

Basicly just take your pick and enjoy.

Larry Gibson

fourty one.

Thanks fellas.

I got a chance to handle another 41 657 this past week. Had a great feel with the 7.5" bbl.

Tough choice, I think I may end up with both before it's said and done. Pistol hunting definitely puts some challenge back into this great sport.

Ya'll have a good one,

Reloader

I have both, a Super Redhawk and a Contender in .44 and two Mod. 57's, with 8 3/8" and 4" bbls. I absolutely love the long-barreled Mod 57. I'll be hunting it in five days in SC with 210 XTP's. It's accuracy is equal to that of the Contender, and that's after several years of handloading both low velocity target loads and hi-V hunting loads.

If Dirty Harry had used a 41 mag, it would be more popular than a 44 today. Or perhaps if OJ used one onhis infamous great escape. Truthfully, either would be good for whitetail. The 44 would be advantageous if you have a habit of losing your ammo and may need to buy some at wally world.

John

I am a .41 fan. For deer, hog and blackbear it is hard to beat. I bought my first one because it seemed that everyone had a .44, I like to be different. My fav deer bullet is the 210XTP, the 210 sierra has served well too. I bought a box of the 240 platinum tips to try this year.

I always liked the .41 magnum and it served me well on deer...but like with all big bore cartridges the cross section of bullet is what counts the most, rifles included...

The .44 is the best killer, but the 41 will do.

If you reload, go with the 41. As far as rifles, I handled a 41 mag lever today at Gander Mountain...Had a Ruger SBH in .44 for several years but had been looking for a .41 when I decided to settle for the .44...never regretted it, but still wish I had a 41. If you go with the .44 or .45 you can get a single shot in H&R

Don't forget you can load hard cast bullets clear up to 300 grains with the .41, so bullet weight isn't a big problem. I definitely wouldn't hunt with anything but a wide flat nosed SWC in a revolver, you just have to have penetration first.

It's a gimmee as to which I'd choose. I've been shooting a .41Magnum since about the late '60s. I'm just completely taken with the .41Magnum. So much so that I've sold all my .429s that I've hunted with such as the 6.5 inch M29 no dash.

With the .41Magnum, I've taken animals on the order of elk, large black bear and boar, oryx, red hartbeeste, blue wildebeeste, bushbuck, waterbuck, nyala, and kudu. I've also killed a big old range cow that wanted to set her hooks in my hide.

The only time I'd put my .41Magnum up is when getting to the larger DG like grizzly and coastal brownies, lion, cape buffalo, asian water buffalo, etc. Then, I'd skip the .429 magnum as well and go straight to one of my .475Linebaughs.

I also wish people would quit comparing the 10mm to the .41Magnum. It really isn't even close in commercial loadings anymore. I like the 10mm as it's the closest thing in a packable semi to the .41Magnum. I've got a Glock 20, Colt Delta, and S&W 1006 and like them all. Not nearly as well as I like my .41Magnums, though.

There is quite a choice of commercial ammunition available today that we didn't have a few years back. I'm waiting to be able to test the new Fiochi stuff. The price looks like it will be reasonable.

I've always liked the .41, although it may just be that I like to be different. I would go to a heavy loaded 45LC rather than .44 Mag.

quote:

Originally posted by jstevens:
... I would go to a heavy loaded 45LC ...

Had a guy stop by to visit this week and he brought along a couple of firearms I've never seen before. One was a 6 1/2" barrel Blue and Rubber Grip Taurus chambered for 5 - 2 1/2" .410ga or 45LC. The barrel is rifled. He bought it two years ago and had never even spun the cylinder - not a Pawl mark on it anywhere.

His other one was a .410gr M9410 Lever Action Winchester with a smooth bore. It has never been fired either.

Both had Front Fiber Optic Sights with a Fixed Rear on the Taurus and an Adjustable Rear on the Winchester.

The grips on the Taurus have closely spaced flexible Rubber Fins for the grip surface. Kind of like real close "Air Cooling Fins" on a Harley Cylinder. Felt right nice, but I don't know how it would do under recoil.

The Taurus should be quite a nice Snake Dancer and Deer Killer though.