Any 41 magnum shooters?

[Tundra Tiger]

I was originally turned on to the .41 by a friend of mine. He had lost some fingers and parts of others in an industrial accident. He tried shooting a S&W 29 .44 mag, but couldn’t control it. He sold it off and bought a 57 with 8 3/8” and loved it. After shooting his, I had to have one and bought a. Duplicate. Wish I still had it.
Side note: When I was buying my first handgun, I was set to to get a .357. The LGS was pushing Astras. They had a used nickel 58 .41 for only a little more. Like a dumb a**, I bought the Astra .357… What a piece of S**T!

I had their .44 mag. I liked it OK. I got a good deal, and it shot well. But I sold it to help finance a different gun.

 

[HankBuck]

I always wanted a .41; alas no love yet.

A couple of weeks ago I bought my first ever .357 - a GP101 with a 4" barrel.

@Tundra Tiger - how do you like the GP101 and did you compare it to the S&W 686? I don’t care for the newer S&Ws since they added the stupid ‘lock’ and the triggers seem “stiffer” then most pre 2000 models — just from my limited exposure to both. The GP101 is certainly a strong-well made .357 but it seemed a bit “clunky” to me….however, it may be a very fine shooter and for full power .357 loads — unlikely to ‘shoot loose’.

 

[Wyatt Smith]

I always wanted a .41; alas no love yet.

A couple of weeks ago I bought my first ever .357 - a GP101 with a 4" barrel.

Everything I hear about the GP100 is that it’s an incredible durable revolver. You will be well served by it. Did you get some brass from raven rocks?
The farm store in town has 6”. I was set to buy it, but decided against it as I am used to a S&W cylinder release and the ruger is completely backwards to that. I bought a 686 instead.

 

[Wyatt Smith]

@Wyatt Smith - any deer with a real handgun & open iron sights is a good one (looks like you made a perfect shot) on that Fawn and good to help thin out your doe population vs taking Mature doe that are more successful raising their young and likely pregnant after Nov. 15th. As far as the 41 mag, I like the caliber but since they are built on the same S&W “N” Frame (same as .44 mag) I use the .44mag for hunting.

The 41 above was actually built on a 29-2 frame. You can see where they stamped 57-0 over it. According to my armchair research it was common for smith and Wesson to do that with revolvers that had compatible frames.

 

[Inkgardener]

@Tundra Tiger - how do you like the GP101 and did you compare it to the S&W 686? I don’t care for the newer S&Ws since they added the stupid ‘lock’ and the triggers seem “stiffer” then most pre 2000 models — just from my limited exposure to both. The GP101 is certainly a strong-well made .357 but it seemed a bit “clunky” to me….however, it may be a very fine shooter and for full power .357 loads — unlikely to ‘shoot loose’.

You won’t be disappointed with an older pre-lock 686!!!

 

[HankBuck]

The 41 above was actually built on a 29-2 frame. You can see where they stamped 57-0 over it. According to my armchair research it was common for smith and Wesson to do that with revolvers that had compatible frames.

@Wyatt Smith - 29-2 is the Model number, the frame is “N” frame and the same “N” frame was used on S&W model 57 & 58. I guess it didn’t make financial sense for S&W to create a separate frame for the .41 mag - so they just kept the “N” frame used for their .44 mags and bored out barrel & cylinder to .41 specs. It adds a bit of bulk & weight that was not necessary but I still like the .41 mag caliber.

 

[Inkgardener]

@Wyatt Smith - 29-2 is the Model number, the frame is “N” frame and the same “N” frame was used on S&W model 57 & 58. I guess it didn’t make financial sense for S&W to create a separate frame for the .41 mag - so they just kept the “N” frame used for their .44 mags and bored out barrel & cylinder to .41 specs. It adds a bit of bulk & weight that was not necessary but I still like the .41 mag caliber.

Yep! An “L” frame 41 mag would be perfect!

6” barrel with Target sights and stocks for me, I’ll take one!