Will a NM Vaquero 44 Special handle 41 Mag loads?

[chris_]

I'd like to have a 41 Mag Vaquero built. Ideally, I would start with a Sheriff in 357 or 44 special cause I want a SHORT barrel and don't see where I can get an ejector housing any shorter. I would prefer to cut it down to 3" if I could. I have to believe the 41 and 44 spcl are fairly close to each other in what they put the frame through.

Are the newer small frames strong enough to handle hot 41 mag load should I pursue this?

 

[Chuckbuster]

.41 Mag runs in same pressure range as .44 MAG. not the .44 Special. Sure you have a little thicker chamber wall on the cylinder but I am not sure .010" or so is all that significant strength wise.

I'm sure others may disagree but I am not sure this one is a good idea.
Kevin

 

[chris_]

It would get a new drilled cylinder.

 

[Hondo44]

Yes in a 5 shot and get those cylinder stop notches between the chambers instead of right over them.

 

[TiteGroups]

It's not the frame you need to worry about, the weak link is the smaller dia. cylinder. The 44spl and the 41mag operate at very different pressures. You need to do some measuring of cylinder wall thickness, to me .010 is significant.

 

[Lee Martin]

Custom 41 Magnums have been safely done on New Vaqueros.

 

[Robb Barnes]

I have a 41 mag I shoot with full house 250 HC hunting loads that John Gallagher did on an old model 357 blackhawk. Same size frame as the NV and I have not problems at all with it. Some of the longer Keith style bullets may be too long since it utilizes the original 357 cylinder rebored.

 

[Hondo44]

.41 Mag runs in same pressure range as .44 MAG. not the .44 Special. Sure you have a little thicker chamber wall on the cylinder but I am not sure .010" or so is all that significant strength wise.

I'm sure others may disagree but I am not sure this one is a good idea.
Kevin

I don't disagree. 44 Spl is 15,500, 41 and 44 Mag are 36,000. It's generally accepted by some that Rugers are 100% overbuilt but even if you believe that, the 41 exceeds that by 5000.

But it's all academic. Bowen will make you a 41 or 44 Mag on the midframe with a 5 shot cylinder that's the same size as the large frame 44 mag; that's .060" larger in Diameter than a midfreame cylinder.

And since the distance between the bore axis and cylinder axis on the mid frame is closer together, you actually end up with .020" thicker walls than the full size frame!

 

[CraigC]

Mid-frames can be built into .41Mag's and it does not require a five-shot cylinder. You also don't have to start with a Sheriff's model, ejector housings can be cut to length as well.

 

[Hondo44]

I'd like to have a 41 Mag Vaquero built. Ideally, I would start with a Sheriff in 357 or 44 special cause I want a SHORT barrel and don't see where I can get an ejector housing any shorter. I would prefer to cut it down to 3" if I could. I have to believe the 41 and 44 spcl are fairly close to each other in what they put the frame through.

Are the newer small frames strong enough to handle hot 41 mag load should I pursue this?

You can go shorter than 3 1/2" but it becomes impractical for ejecting Mag length cases. But you can get can maximum effectiveness no matter how short you go w/o shortening the cylinder pin by using a USFA cammed slot ERH (below). It also allows removal of the cylinder pin for cylinder changes in the field w/o removal of the ERH. It comes in proper length for 3 1/2" barrel but can be shortened more.

 

[Hondo44]

Mid-frames can be built into .41Mag's and it does not require a five-shot cylinder.

Do you know of someone that does it commercially?

 

[DeletedMember275]

I discussed this with David Clements a couple of years ago. He said that he only limitation to rechambering a .357 Anniversary Model to .41 Mag would be the cylinder length. It's a might short for some of the heavier/longer bullets that are so popular today.

 

[17tombstone]

Here is my 50th 41Mag.

 

[surveyor47]

41 Magnum loadings are typically about 2 grains less than 44 Magnum loadings. Is this a significant difference? NO. Given the differing diameters, the loadings are near identical, except that the 41 can drive a bullet of similar sectional diameter about 100+ feet per second faster than a 44 Magnum.

It makes no sense to buy a gun based on a 357/44Specil/45Colt frame and expect it to be a 41 or 44 Magnum, when there are magnums readily available in very compact models. Just yesterday, I saw a 44 Magnum Taurus that is not much bigger than a SP101 in the used gun show case. It is pretty obvious that the owner probably shot a box of 44 Magnums through it rather than 44 Specials and said, "To Hell with this thing!" and put it up for sale.

Many owners of Magnum revolvers frequently load them into the Special or slightly above Special range (800 to 1100 fps). This produces a very useful combination of relatively light recoil that is pleasant to shoot and excellent accuracy. Your Ruger 44 Special has that virtue. By giving up the Magnum rating, you are gaining a light weight compact revolver covering 90% of what a full power Magnum will do. Every gun does not have to be capable of hunting grizzlys and I havent noticed any in my neighborhood or in the areas I hunt. In any case, state wildlife regulations frequently spell out the word "MAGNUM" and 7 1/2"BARREL in defining LEGAL ARMS. Your 44 Special is not a magnum and never will be. I would appreciate it for what it is, a fine useful revolver.

 

[chris_]

I don't actually have a 44 special and have no real interest in it. I have enough varied guns that if I wanted to shoot loaded down 44 Mag, I would just shoot hot 357 or 41. I also load a multitude of calibers already and really have no desire for one more.

I have this ridiculous desire for a short 41 Mag Bisley Vaquero for concealed carry. This is probably unnecessary and ridiculously costly. I have a 44 MAg that I could send off and chop the barrel and accomplish all the same things for a fraction of the price and be done and it would look exactly the same.

I guess that ERH was the hangup for me. I was unaware they could be made shorter. I had looked at possibly cutting one in the middle and tig'ing it back together. I had a beautiful case colored 45C Bisley Sheriff Vaquero that I sold in a moment of severe brokedness a few months back. Dumb. :cry:

I will probably skip trying to sell the 44 mag and just send it off to be cut down.

 

[CraigC]

Mid-frames can be built into .41Mag's and it does not require a five-shot cylinder.

Do you know of someone that does it commercially?

David Clements has it listed in his section on Ruger revolvers as a standard offering in any mid-frame Ruger, New or Old Model. Starting at $595 for the JQ Special.

 

[chris_]

Mid-frames can be built into .41Mag's and it does not require a five-shot cylinder.

Do you know of someone that does it commercially?

David Clements has it listed in his section on Ruger revolvers as a standard offering in any mid-frame Ruger, New or Old Model. Starting at $595 for the JQ Special.

That dude's going to make a mint off me this year. :lol:

 

[gak]

Mid-frames can be built into .41Mag's and it does not require a five-shot cylinder.

Do you know of someone that does it commercially?

David Clements has it listed in his section on Ruger revolvers as a standard offering in any mid-frame Ruger, New or Old Model. Starting at $595 for the JQ Special.

Craig's right, and I believe any of the others (Bowen, Gallagher, Harton, etc) say the same thing. As mentioned the bullet length you're running is the only limiter.

 

[surveyor47]

I don't actually have a 44 special and have no real interest in it. I have enough varied guns that if I wanted to shoot loaded down 44 Mag, I would just shoot hot 357 or 41. I also load a multitude of calibers already and really have no desire for one more.

I have this ridiculous desire for a short 41 Mag Bisley Vaquero for concealed carry. This is probably unnecessary and ridiculously costly. I have a 44 MAg that I could send off and chop the barrel and accomplish all the same things for a fraction of the price and be done and it would look exactly the same.

I guess that ERH was the hangup for me. I was unaware they could be made shorter. I had looked at possibly cutting one in the middle and tig'ing it back together. I had a beautiful case colored 45C Bisley Sheriff Vaquero that I sold in a moment of severe brokedness a few months back. Dumb. :cry:

I will probably skip trying to sell the 44 mag and just send it off to be cut down.

Taurus actually makes a 5 shot 41 Magnum with a 2 or 4 inch barrel that would work very nicely as a CCW.

 

[surveyor47]

This is the Taurus Tracker 41 Magnum. It weighs all of 34 ounces. That ought to do for concealed carry.

http://www.taurususa.com/product-details.cfm?id=197&category=Revolver&toggle=tr&breadcrumbseries=TS2

 

[chris_]

After long experience and plenty of anecdotal evidence, I do not use or buy anything Taurus.

 

[Hondo44]

Here is my 50th 41Mag.

Now that's nice and subtle! Not draped in bells and whistles. Looks like it could have been a factory model but with the added panache of CCH hammer and trigger. Very cool! Who did the work? A little hard to tell for sure, a standard 6 1/2" or possibly a little shorter?

 

[Hondo44]

Do you know of someone that does it commercially?

David Clements has it listed in his section on Ruger revolvers as a standard offering in any mid-frame Ruger, New or Old Model. Starting at $595 for the JQ Special.

Craig's right, and I believe any of the others (Bowen, Gallagher, Harton, etc) say the same thing. As mentioned the bullet length you're running is the only limiter.

Thanks! Interesting Clements does make 6 shots. I knew Bowen's are
5 shot.

 

[17tombstone]

Had some other work going with Gallagher so he rechambered the cylinder and I did the rest. 6.5" barrel. Bought several of the .357 50th when they were cheap so figured I had nothing to lose.

 

[surveyor47]

After long experience and plenty of anecdotal evidence, I do not use or buy anything Taurus.

I have in years past seen problems with Taurus, speciically:
a) A 357 that literally could not keep bullet on target at 10 yards from a bench rest- 20 years ago.
b A 38 with failure of the double action mechanism. It worked just fine single action- 10 years ago.

More recently, I know a number of highly experienced shooters who own and have extremely high regard for their 1911. Their customer service is supposed to be excellent.

Why do you totally dismiss their guns? They have come up with an innovative design for a 5 shot 41 Magnum that really ought to be worth a look. At least I have not heard of Internal Lock Failures on Taurus guns, which cannot be said for S&W. After owning 2 new S&W lemons, I now only purchase pre-lock S&W revolvers or current S&Ws models that are issued to police departments. Why? Because police will not put up with sending guns to and from the factory 2, 3 or 4 times to correct quality control.

 

[gak]

I could not find a reference to 5 vs 6 shots on his site (advisability, etc), but Bowen at least has this to say:

"The .41 Magnum is an excellent choice in the various medium-frame guns since the long cylinder will accommodate potent heavy-bullet loads."

I also do not know if the "long cylinder" referred to is a new, freshly bored .41 made to longer (than .357 midframe cylinder that might otherwise be used) specs, and what if any cylinder frame window mods such a custom cylinder might (or might not as in the caseof .327 Single Sixes) have to undergo. Delving further into the website might--and certainly a call would--clarify,but I couldn't find any further ellaboration.

Ed.-All that said, I'm almost certain doing the 6-shot midframe conversion is a regular Bowen offering.

 

[CraigC]

IMHO, Taurus has no relevance in a dicussion of Ruger single actions, factory or custom.

 

[COR]

That dude's going to make a mint off me this year. :lol:[/quote]

Well not likely this year...You'll pay for it in about 2 years due to everyone else feeling like you do...but well worth the wait! :wink:

 

[surveyor47]

The CCW instructors and police officers I know are all adamant that any custom modifications to a gun or handloaded carry ammunition will cause the carrier nothing but legal trouble if the gun is ever used for self defense. The argument is that "you designed the gun/ammo to shoot someone with". They advise strictly stock guns and factory ammo that says "Personal Defense" on the box. They further advise against single actions because the very act of cocking the hammer can be construed as a threat to shoot someone, potientially giving a perpetrator cause to shoot you- in other words, the tables could get turned on you if you cock the gun and dont fire immediately. This is the reason double action only guns are so popular for self defense- no one can possibly justify the idea that each round was not deliberate.

 

[dixie884]

Clements definitely offers a six shot .41 Mag conversion on the mid size frame.