S&W model 41

[Yleefox]

I'm curious about the model 41 Smith. For those who know, are the current production 41's as good as the early guns? What other .22 pistols would compare with the 41 in terms of accuracy and trigger?

Thanks in advance
Y

[Bullseye]

The newer Model 41's are (quality wise) every bit as good as the older ones. The main difference is S&W created a way to mass produce these where many of the older ones were hand fitted by a small few on the assembly line.

The 41 is the premier American made .22 target pistol. Needless to say the price as risen to match the desire of target shooters to own them. There are other pistols that can hold close with it but these are considered the best American made for bullseye competition.

Triggers can vary, in that some 41's may need a little work out from the factory, but overall they are very good. The 41 trigger is far better than the Ruger Mark Series. A old High Standard would be comparable to the Model 41.

Model 41's are notorious for being picky on ammo diet. They can be temperamental about feeding different brands but CCI (SV or GreenTag) tends to feed well in these pistols.

R,
Bullseye

[bebloomster]

Current production or vintage, it really makes no difference... either is superb. Buy a Model 41 and you will never be looking back.

[Yleefox]

Thanks for the answers. It sounds like a fantastic firearm and now I want one real bad.

Y

[Pete D.]

It sounds like a fantastic firearm and now I want one real bad.

It is a fine gun; if somewhat finicky. You might be be as well, or better, served by tracking down an old High Standard Victor or Supermatic made in the Hamden factory. One of those will shoot at least as well as a 41 and probably cost less.
Pete

[Yleefox]

Pete D

I have heard the High Standard Victors from the old factory were extremely accurate, but I have yet to see one in the flesh. Of course, most of my life I wasn't looking for one either, so I may have passed a few by.

Y

[Bullseye]

High Standards can have their issues too, usually it's feeding due to the magazine feed lips. The lips on the mags are easily damaged and are at a fairly steep angle in relation to the chamber. Takes a lot of tweaking to keep them running properly.

R,
Bullseye

[Pete D.]

Takes a lot of tweaking to keep them running properly.

That is true of after market magazines. The mags that I have for my Victor are all reliable. I have had no reason to adjust them in decades.
I have had a series of newer magazines that were less well made and which just could not be made reliable.
Recently, I ordered a new mag from the current manufacturer of the H-S named guns. It works fine.
Pete

My Victor and a Falcon barrel with an Ultra Dot:
[img][img]http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2004-3/6 ... G_0391.JPG[/img][/img]

[ruger22]

How about the Beretta 89 ? I know it was only made about 1988-2000. I've read several references to it being up with the 41. In his Beretta Pistol guide, J.B. Wood calls it magnificent, claims it outshoots all of his collection except a Hammerli.

I passed one up at Gander several months back, and somewhat regret it. It was $350. Still in original box with two mags and three front sight blades. Did not have the match grips, though, which was better for my preference. Likely poor availability of parts was my hesitation.

[Bullseye]

I was referring to American 22 target pistols when talking about the M-41 but there are plenty of nice quality European rimfire target guns out there.

R,
Bullseye

[bbh791]

This is a very tricky situation. I bought a M41 from a military shooter. It was a current model and he did very well with it. He had work done to it which included a trigger job. I couldn't shoot it worth doodly squat. I shot 10 points higher with my Ruger MKII. So what did I do? I sold it and still shoot very successfully with my MKII. The triggers between the two are very different. I think the bottom line is what you do the best with and what feels good in your hand. Also, the grip angles are different and that can make a big difference in feel. So in my experience, I think the M41 is overpriced for a bullseye gun. At our Wednesday night bullseye shoot, the M41 has more alibies than any gun there. With my M41, it never jammed or fail to eject with CCI SV. Not even ONCE! But a price was paid to get it to do that.

For the price one pays for one of those dudes, you shouldn't have to have ANYTHING done to it. The older models with the A prefix were very reliable and you got what you paid for. I will stick with with the ever reliable MKII. You don't have to spend extra cash to MAKE it reliable and you pay a very good price for great accuracy out of the box.

[Bullseye]

You bring up a good point. There are some folks who just don't perform well with a Model 41. I've had them come to me and ask what can be done. I take them and the pistol out to the range and demonstrate the pistol is fine. It seems there's two kinds of shooters; ones who do well with the 41 and ones who don't.

I also cannot argue about the M-41's unofficial title, "those alibi guns". They are finicky about ammo diet. Most times when there's an alibi out on the bullseye firing line, the person who has it is holding a Model 41. I had one that the only way I could get through a string of 5 shots was to put a drop of oil on the casing of the top round in the mag - regardless of the brand of ammo. CCI-SV or Green Tag wouldn't run through it without choking. I tried everything to get that pistol to function correctly, changed the springs to different weight values, tuned the mags, changed and tuned the extractor, nothing worked. I finally ran a match reamer down the chamber and I never had another issue with that particular pistol again.

Model 41's didn't start out expensive, they got that way all on their own from the demand people placed on them. I paid $305 (brand new) for my first one way back, when Rugers were running about $150 each. The Model 41 then was not very high priced compared to its counterparts. But market demand, and a change to Smith's production process elevated the price to where it is today.

R,
Bullseye

[greener]

Gee, you are talking me out of buying one.

I'm not sure that the price ratio has changed much. Yesterday I was at my favorite gun pusher. Steel Rugers, depending on models, had prices in the $400-$450 range and a heavy barrel (5.5") M41 had a $1000 price tag.

[charlesb]

I have had two S&W model 41's, both with the short bull barrel. One was scoped, the other was not. Both were outstandingly accurate, and I never experienced reliability problems with either one of them.

Currently I own a stainless Ruger MkIII Hunter with a Burris 2X scope. It is not up to the S&W model 41 standard, but is still a good gun. The trigger and grip do not compare with the Smith's, and the groups are not as good.

If you want the best American made .22 and are thinking about shooting bullseye, I recommend the S&W.