GP100 in .41 Mg.?

Has anyone here, or elsewhere for that matter, had a GP100 converted to .41 Mg?

Clements Custom Gun used to do GP conversions to .41 Special. Fairly stout loads, IIRC, maybe 210gr at 1200ish FPS?

I would think that Ruger could theoretically produce a .41 Magnum GP100, and may already have 'run the numbers' for both engineering & marketing. Smith makes a medium frame .44 Magnum (Model 69), so I would guess it's feasible. I would also guess that most gunsmiths would avoid such a conversion for liability reasons.

As always, FWIW, YMMV, IMHO, etc., etc.

OK, thanks guys. In the winter time I tend to day dream about something that I don't have.

I have not had one done, or any other gun customized for that matter.
Never seen one in person yet either.

While we are talking, I will just throw this out there for the sake of discussion: What, in your mind, constitutes magnum handgun velocity? To me if it won't hit 1200 fps from a 6" bbl, it is not a "magnum." As to the "special" moniker, I don't think any cartridge that won't yield 1000 fps from a 6" bbl. warrants the special designation either. Now I am fully aware of the reasons for the 'special' and the 'magnum' designations and I am not starting any campaign to change anything, but am only talking about what's 'big' and what's 'little' in the minds of y'all.

The addition of the wording "Magnum" was more of a marketing thing to try & sell the new caliber(s) not a way of measuring what a cartridge would do or not do.

contender said:

The addition of the wording "Magnum" was more of a marketing thing to try & sell the new caliber(s) not a way of measuring what a cartridge would do or not do.

Click to expand...

Oh, I agree to that, especially in the case of the .357 Mg., since there was no cartridge that was simply called a .357 as a frame of reference. The .38 Special was called a 'special' to separate it from the .38 LC and, I suppose the .38 S&W. But what I am getting at is not so much the reasons for the "honorific" as it is to how do those terms strike you when you see, or hear them as a matter of semantics.

To my mind a "Special" (really only two exist, the 44 and the 38) runs a standard weight for caliber bullet between 850-900 fps. . Modern firearms and powders have extended these velocities to what could be called "Special Magnums" commonly known as +P. To be in magnum territory the same bullet should exceed 1200 fps.

The discussian of cartridge names reminds me how much I like some of the old ones! For example:

.375 Belted Rimless Magnum Nitro Express

Now THAT sounds like a cartridge you can bet your life on!

As mentioned above the 41 Special was a "simple" rebore of the barrel and chambers. And
a 220 grain at about 1200 is achievable.
However the original GP cylinder is too short for the magnum case except with shortest bullets.
I suppose a custom long cylinder would be possible but I've never heard of it being done.

"
I suppose a custom long cylinder would be possible but I've never heard of it being done."

Another user once mentioned to me that Clements was able to get the velocities he quoted on his .44 SP conversions by using an extended cylinder with a shortened projection of the forcing cone into the cylinder window so as to get the smaller dia. forcing cone (i.e., barrel shank) of the barrel on the .44's to stand up (compared to diameter on the 10mm GP's).

Sugar River said:

As mentioned above the 41 Special was a "simple" rebore of the barrel and chambers. And
a 220 grain at about 1200 is achievable.
However the original GP cylinder is too short for the magnum case except with shortest bullets.
I suppose a custom long cylinder would be possible but I've never heard of it being done.

Click to expand...

I can get all the performance I need from a mid sized revolver using the 41 special case. I tried the 250gr in a mid sized frame and I can tell you it was not fun.

"how do those terms strike you when you see, or hear them as a matter of semantics. "

If you truly study the naming of caliber & cartridges, it can be an exercise in frustration trying to figure out everything. It's one of those topics that can confuse & upset new people in firearms.
There was no "standard" method of naming stuff decades (or even centuries) ago. So, when I hear the word "magnum," or "special" I just figure it's another name for a different caliber. I know that as a "new" caliber,, it has to be able to be different than a previous caliber,, even when it's close to one.

I guess I'm saying, to answer your question, personally I don't even consider it at all.

FYI: GP100, something old, something new and what we could expect?


"I totally forgot that the 10mm version of the GP already has a larger barrel shank. 11/16" compared to 5/8" on the .357 and .44Special. Which is a hair bigger than the .670" of the N-frame. The Redhawk, by contrast is 3/4", so 1/16th bigger."

From https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/lipsey-ruger…ask-for-a-gp100-in-41-magnum.898006/page-5

This opens opportunity not just for 41 caliber, but also for 44 Magnum, 45 Colt and 45 ACP. The only thing I wish that cylinder lengths are equal to those on NMBH, large frame.

While the concept of a .41 mag & other bigger calibers is a nice idea,, we have to look at PRESSURES generated by these calibers. And don't forget,, good old "Bubba" who reloads w/o safety concerns who WILL try & get "more power" out of his gun. This type of stuff is why Ruger can build a lot of good guns,, but won't build the stuff that pushes the safety envelope. It's called "LIABILITY!!!!!!!!!!"

The GP100 in .41 Mag would have a good following I think, but it would probably have to be a five shot then.

We have a 41 mag Redhawk, 5.5" barrel, that is favorite and a keeper. It is a strong revolver that is comfortable to shoot. A favorite load is a 210 SWC at about 1079 fps that shoots lights out @ 25 yards. The picture to the left is the 41 and a typical 25 yard target.

We have a 210 XTP and a 240 FP gas check SWC in the 1350 and 1250ish range but they are no more accurate than the 210 SWC load.

contender said:

"how do those terms strike you when you see, or hear them as a matter of semantics. "

If you truly study the naming of caliber & cartridges, it can be an exercise in frustration trying to figure out everything. It's one of those topics that can confuse & upset new people in firearms.
There was no "standard" method of naming stuff decades (or even centuries) ago. So, when I hear the word "magnum," or "special" I just figure it's another name for a different caliber. I know that as a "new" caliber,, it has to be able to be different than a previous caliber,, even when it's close to one.

I guess I'm saying, to answer your question, personally I don't even consider it at all.

Click to expand...

As far as 'new' cartridges go, it looks like marketing plays a big part in selecting a name - nobody wants to invest a bunch of money in bringing a new cartridge to market, and have it bomb. One great example is the 6.5 Creedmoor, which would likely have been called the 6.5/.250 Savage Improved under common/traditional wildcat naming conventions. Another example is the 350 Legend, which could have been named the 9x43mm. The new names probably contributed to success in the marketplace.

A lot of information to digest. I have been day dreaming all winter about a new cartridge to be between the .357 Mg. and the .41 Mg., and shooting a .384 or so diameter bullet. The stopper is that suitable brass to base the cartridge on is unavailable and also bullets would be a problem. If I had deeper pockets, I could get the brass made and probably also the bullets too, but the .41 Special would, I think, do what I want it to do and with a considerably lower outlay of cash. To those of you who have had a GP100 converted to .41 Special, my question is who did it? I have a .357 GP100 w/6" full underlug BBL that I would sacrifice. I see that Starline is making .41 Special brass, so that would likely be the best option.