Model 58-2 in 41 Mag

Tom Mix

Yesterday I was in Cabela's and I was looking at their guns in that special little room of to the side and I noticed a Smith and Wesson model 58-2 in .41 mag.

I have no problem with owning a revolver and have been thinking of getting a Model 66 but I want just a little more punch than .357.

The RIA 1911 in 10mm I am looking at is $750 and this model 58 is only $780 and I bet I can get them to come down even more.

Do you see any reason to NOT get it over a 10mm auto loader. I do not need 10 shots in 3 seconds and I feel that a revolver is more of what I need for woods protection/hunting gun.

Why would a 10mm autoloader be better than this revolver.

Also, what is the quality on 58's made since 2008? I am sure it is S&W top quality.

snake284

Tom Mix wrote: »

Yesterday I was in Cabela's and I was looking at their guns in that special little room of to the side and I noticed a Smith and Wesson model 58-2 in .41 mag.

I have no problem with owning a revolver and have been thinking of getting a Model 66 but I want just a little more punch than .357.

The RIA 1911 in 10mm I am looking at is $750 and this model 58 is only $780 and I bet I can get them to come down even more.

Do you see any reason to NOT get it over a 10mm auto loader. I do not need 10 shots in 3 seconds and I feel that a revolver is more of what I need for woods protection/hunting gun.

Why would a 10mm autoloader be better than this revolver.

Also, what is the quality on 58's made since 2008? I am sure it is S&W top quality.

Man, I'm glad it's not me because I hate those kinds of choices. I would love either one of those. I'd love another S&W Revolver, since I only have one. But a 41 Mag would be one of those really NICE to have items. I know many on here look at a 41 as useless same as with a .270, But I see it differently. I don't think it's that much different than a 44. It's better than a .357 and it IS probably easier on your hands than a 44 Mag.

Now a 1911 in a 10 mm sounds cool too, although I love mine in .45 ACP. I would love both of these.

jbohio

Long term, the S&W will hold its value much better than a RIA.
If you handload, the 41 is the way to go.

shootbrownelk

You're going to fall in love with the S&W 6 holer in .41 magnum. I have a .41 mag and much prefer it to a .44. The S&W is a much better investment than the RIA as stated. And by all means, start reloading. The shelves at the LGS are as devoid of .41 mag ammo as they are of .22 LR.

Freezer

Be a man....buy both! There's always lay-a way.

What your wife doesn't know won't hurt you.

breamfisher

What JBOhio and Wambli said. Both are great for their purposes, but you have to consider its use and what you want to get out of it.

Bigslug

Perhaps I'm becoming boring in my increasing years, or maybe it's the performance testing with cast bullets, but I wouldn't get either.

My 10mm Glock 20, purchased in the early '90's, has pretty much become a safe queen - doesn't do anything I can't do with the .45 1911 I have a lot more brass for, and the flat-nose LBT's I can cast with impunity. The 10mm comes out every now and again, and I even bought a mold for it, but can't really generate any more enthusiasm for the project.

I respect where they were TRYING to go with the .41, but ponder the surrounding options:
A .357 can handle the lower end of the spectrum with the option to go even lower with .38 Specials.
A .44 can deliver more oomph up close, and have the option to go mild with .44 Specials.
A .45 Colt in a Redhawk can be loaded mild or wild. If you like abuse, there's even the Super Redhawk Alaskan ummm. . .snubby in .454 Casull, which also has the light .45 Colt option.

As someone who's into the history of guns, there are a few weird chamberings that have ended up in my collection. The result of this is a set of dies and a pile of rounds that work in ONE gun, maybe two. The 10mm is kind of a PITA in that regard, and so are the Webleys. When it comes to working guns, I don't want exotic. At the end of the day, it's a lump of lead somewhat under half an inch in diameter moving at something around a thousand feet per second. My main concern is that I can find food for it, and, that accomplished, don't have the burden of something "special".

Big Chief

I'd get the S&W .41 Mag. I'm saving my .41 Mag brass for the day I find a .41 deal I can't refuse.

I have fired and reloaded for a friends .41 Mag in the past, but never owned one, always had .44s.

They say a .41 Mag is the "Middle Magnum" between a .357 and .44 and a .44 can do anything it can, only better. Just depends on how you look at it.

Its downfall or reason it never was a big hit was there is no "Special" sub-load-caliber for it like a .38 Spl is to a .357 mag or .44 Spl is to a .44 Mag. Only some SWC target loads were offered for it, but still fairly potent.

Definitely a reloaders proposition to realize all the power levels you you can use in one and tailor your loads to what you plan to do with it.

The times in years past I came close to buying one I always told myself, naw just be another caliber to reload for and different dies/brass and bullets to keep around and track of.

If they would have listened to Elmer Keith as told in this article, we may have been seeing the .41 Magnum around a lot more back then and today as more than a niche like cartridge.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.41_Remington_Magnum

HAWKEN

I have a 4" model 57 S&W that I inherited from my father. While it is accurate, the felt recoil is not significantly less than a .44 magnum. My 70 series, 1911, throws empties hell western crooked. For that reason, if for no other, I favor the .41 magnum because keeping track of your empties is much easier or even possible. robin

Tom Mix

See, this is what happens when I go gun shopping. I lose sight as to what I started out to get and in the end I chose a 80mm cannon.

I am going back in time and stop where I start.

I need a 10mm autoloader and that is where I am staying.

Weatherby

Do you see any reason to NOT get it over a 10mm auto loader. I do not need 10 shots in 3 seconds and I feel that a revolver is more of what I need for woods protection/hunting gun.


Go get that 10mm........really.......we are no influence at all....................squirrel!!!!!

bisley

If you want a self-defense (against human predators) gun, my choice would be .357 revolver or .45 pistol. For a woods gun, 10mm high capacity or .44 magnum revolver. If you want it for both, .357 mag or 10mm, with appropriate ammo. The .41 magnum is fine, but I'd just as soon have a .44 and shoot specials for SD, if necessary. Just my opinion.

Jermanator

Tom-- I got a Kimber Target II in 10mm, along with a Glock 20, then a S&W 610 and a Redhawk in .41 mag. So be decisive and just get them all!

RickVS

I have 3 .41 mags, with a Ruger Old Model with the short barrel as my first centerfire handgun. I also have .44 mags. I don't have a 10mm auto. As mentioned, collecting the brass from an auto can be a pain. I have a Model 58 from the 1970s, and I like it very much as it is a non-nonsense heavy duty revolver. No matter how you try, the 10mm will not equal the .41.