S&W Mod.41's

Kirmdog · Post by **Kirmdog** » Fri Mar 07, 2008 9:42 am

For those that knkow more than myself. Are there any differances between say a S&W 41 that was made in the 1960's as compared to a newly manufactured one? Are the new ones as good as the old ones?

I'm looking to replace my old HS and i'm looking at S&W 41's. I know there are better bullseye pistols out there but the finer shooting (Walther, Hammerelli, spelling?) ones are out of my budget.

Kirmdog

jjgun · Post by **jjgun** » Fri Mar 07, 2008 12:56 pm

I don't know about the older 41's, but I bought one new about 3 years ago and it is very accurate. I've got about 25,000 rounds through it now and the only problem I've had is that I can no longer get it to consistently cycle 'softer' target ammo such as Eley, SK, or Aguila even with a 6 lb recoil spring. However, it never misses a beat with CCI SV.

Fred Mannis · Post by **Fred Mannis** » Fri Mar 07, 2008 1:30 pm

Kirmdog wrote:For those that knkow more than myself. Are there any differances between say a S&W 41 that was made in the 1960's as compared to a newly manufactured one? Are the new ones as good as the old ones?

Talked to Larry Carter a while ago about my 1965 M41. He said my original 5.5" heavy barrel was far better than any of the new production S&W barrels. I have had other people tell me the best thing to do with a new S&W M41 barrel is to drill it out and sleeve it.
But as in all shooting issues, YMMV
Fred

tenex · Post by **tenex** » Fri Mar 07, 2008 11:14 pm

I bought a M41 in 1999 (new) and the 5" barrel shoots mediocre groups with CCI std. vel. I bought a new 7" barrel, and it shoots great groups with CCI std. vel, luck of the draw. I'd just get one and test it, it probably has enough accuracy to get the job done. If not, you can always sleeve it or replace the barrel, but I doubt you'll need to.

Good luck,
Steve.

6string · Post by **6string** » Sun Mar 09, 2008 6:40 pm

The older 41s are much better. They used to test each barrel individually using a fixture on a 100 yd. indoor range. They would scrap any barrel which couldn't shoot inside an inch at that distance. A side by side comparison with a new model from the Houlton factory will make the amount of hand work on the older ones self evident. In fact, a side by side comparison with a Hammerli-Walther Olympia would be more appropriate. I have always suspected the design of the 41 was based on the older Hammerli design with considerable input from outside sources such as the AMU gunsmiths. I do believe the first ones went to the AMU.
If you can, search for an older 41 with the cocking indicator, muzzle brake (even if you don't use it), and possibly the barrel weights. The really old ones also do not have relief cuts in the receiver behind the trigger, just like a 1911 compared to a 1911a1.
Check around! If you commit to look for a month a so at online auction sites or gun collector/dealers you can find an old one for about the price of a new one. It will retain its value better than a new one.

PS: The Clark match barrels for M41 are really good and deliver the promised performance. They get blanks from S & W and do their own chambering and crowning, and machine sight/scope cuts. The latter allows for a lower scope and lighter weight. The reliability seems to be enhanced as well.

38HBWC · Post by **38HBWC** » Mon Jun 02, 2008 10:50 pm

Bought a new HB M-41 barrel from Gil Hebard, put it on the cocking indicator 41 frame from the Dark Ages, bolt will not completely close and slam round into chamber. This barrel would make a nice hammer the next time I pound nails in my siding! Whate ever happened to consistant quality/interchangeability?

6string · Post by **6string** » Tue Jun 03, 2008 2:01 am

Something about the m41 not a lot of people know about is that they make (or at least made...) three different breach face inserts for the slide. One keeps the round centered, one is slightly offset to the left and one is slightly offset to the right. The idea is to allow adjustment or remedy of chambering problems caused by misalignment. If Smith can't help you, try contacting Clark custom guns. Maybe an easy fix for you?
Best regards and good luck!!

jrmcdaniel · Post by **jrmcdaniel** » Tue Jun 03, 2008 12:06 pm

Another barrel option for the 41 is Bully Barrels -- I just got one and am very pleased. About half the price of Clarks but only stainless. Fit perfectly on my older 41 -- it was going to cost almost as much as the new barrel to get drilling/tapping for a Weaver mount.

Best,

Joe

alb · Post by **alb** » Sat Jun 07, 2008 9:52 pm

jjgun wrote:I don't know about the older 41's, but I bought one new about 3 years ago and it is very accurate. I've got about 25,000 rounds through it now and the only problem I've had is that I can no longer get it to consistently cycle 'softer' target ammo such as Eley, SK, or Aguila even with a 6 lb recoil spring. However, it never misses a beat with CCI SV.

According to Larry Carter, a problem that happens with all rimfire guns after about 25,000 to 30,000 rounds or so is that the back end of the chamber gets peened over, causing the back end of the chamber to be smaller than the front end. When the brass expands with firing, the round doesn't eject properly.

Lapping the back end of the chamber thoroughly with JB Bore Bright restored normal operation in my Pardini SP, at least with high velocity ammunition. Of course, now I have a loose chamber. I'll get it re-barreled when I run out of the high velocity stuff (I'still have about 3 bricks of it). In the mean time, I got a new front end for the Pardini, and it works great whith anything that I feed it.

Regards,

Al B.

TargetTalk

S&W Mod.41's

S&W Mod.41's

Re: S&W Mod.41's

newer production M-41 bbls.