Author Topic: S&W 41 best years for quality (Read 1448 times)

ronsunni · « **on:** December 19, 2003, 08:09:33 AM »

I would like some information from the S&W 41 gurus. I have decided to look for an S&W Mod.41. The group that I shoot with (were all retired) have strongly advised me to find a pre owned 41 for the quality. Could some one supply me with the best years of production and if possible Serial # to look for.
Thanks for the help.
Ron

Buford · « **Reply #1 on:** December 19, 2003, 02:51:45 PM »

I have owned several Model 41's during the past 40 years - the biggies from from what I have seen have been the deletions of the cocking indicator on the back and the absense of a muzzle brake - they have always been a top-of-the line target weapon. I am sure some folks will point out any errors. I do not know when the changes were made. Some of the newer ones are set up to accept optical sights.

Questor · « **Reply #2 on:** December 22, 2003, 04:18:43 AM »

You may have gotten bad advice. A lot of new products have come on the market since the 41 was introduced nearly 50 years ago. I don't think the 41 is of particularly good quality when compared to others. In fact, I rather prefer the Browning Buckmark that has had a trigger job. It seems that the 41 remains alive based on its reputation that was built long ago. It's more of a nostalgia piece today.

I own a 41 and a Buckmark. If I could only have one, I'd keep the Buckmark for bullseye competition. It's just a better gun. The sights on the Buckmark are better too-- no small consideration for a target pistol.

On the other hand, you should be able to get a used 41 with no need for a trigger job, plus two magazines for only about $150 more than you'd pay for a new Buckmark.

Shootingamigo · « **Reply #3 on:** December 22, 2003, 05:28:01 AM »

I have owned and shot a Smith Model 41 which is a newer issue. It is 5 yrs old. Never had a problem with it. Digests anything fed to it. I will agree with previous remarks on the pricing of it but disagree with the quality issue. The Buckmark to me is a nothing more than an entry level pistol for field use. I have never heard of a trigger job for a model 41. At least the one I have is very good out of the box. Some guys are just trigger buggy. I would recommend a Ruger mark II there are various models available. I am sure there is a version to blow the hair back. Quite a price difference here but little difference in accuracy or quality.

ironfoot · « **Reply #4 on:** February 06, 2004, 03:32:15 PM »

I had a few Browning Buckmarks. I liked them. One came with a real good trigger out of the box. But they can't be compared to a 41. The 41 is better built. Disassembly without tools is a snap. I see lots of guys shoot 41s for bullseye. I don't see anybody with a Buckmark.

Rod in Pa · « **Reply #5 on:** February 11, 2004, 01:20:31 PM »

I had a Smith 41 in the 70s. A very nice pistol, however it spit lead shavings once in a while to the shooter next to me. My sister liked it so much that I sold it to her. I bought another Smith 41 last year. It shot better than the one I had in 1970, plus it didn't spit any lead. Also this one came with the barrel drilled and tapped so I could mount a scope for my ageing eyes. This new model Smith 41 shoots 3/4 inch groups at 25 yards. For you guys who know Smith 41, it has a 1 on the under side of the barrel. Rod