Model 41 - Buy new or risk old?

I often appreciate finely crafted items for the work and thought that went into their creation, just as much as for their performance.

For instance, I have a chair made in France from the 1700s that is beautifully hand-carved. Although it functions similarly to a cheap chair from Walmart, I value it for other reasons beyond its functionality.

This is also why I prefer a 41 over a Ruger, Buckmark, or Victory. While I plan to shoot it frequently, that is not the sole factor in my decision. I am not comparing other makes and models.
 
I can run a quick regression analysis on past completed gunbroker auctions to figure out what factors affect the price and how much they impact listings sold in the last three months.

Here’s what I found:

- Each year older adds $7 to the price. For instance, a 1970 gun would sell for $70 more than a 1980 gun.

- The box tends to add $148 if it’s present.

- Barrel length isn’t significant at the 5% level.

- For example, a 1979 gun with the box would sell for $1,116, while a 1985 gun without the box would fetch $928.

I only considered listing in excellent shape when running the numbers.
 
Last edited:
I currently own 4 Model 41s. I acquired the last one last week. It purportedly was made in 2021. Two of the others were made in 1997 and the last one was made in 1978. I bought all of them used with no idea as to how many rounds were put through them, but they all looked good. I just put 200 rounds (CCI Standard Velocity and Remington Target) through the gun I just bought with the only hitch being from a misfilled magazine by its fumble-fingered owner.

For what it's worth, one of the 1997 guns is on its way back from Smith & Wesson. It started locking the slide back on just about every round in the magazine. I have been advised that it might be a bad spring on the slide lock, which is beyond my capabilities to fix. But I have used this gun exclusively for the last two competition seasons without a problem and I have no idea how many rounds have been put through it in addition to the rounds I have put through it.

I guess I wouldn't keep buying them if they started giving me a lot of problems. They certainly shoot a lot better than I do.
 
Thanks again for all the info. I’m still on the hunt for one, and am trying to decide on which barrel length I’d prefer without getting to handle one in person.

Interestingly enough, when I run across past auction that have multiple barrels included, it seems the 5.5 is always the one mounted on the pistol.

Is there that big of a 5.5 barrel preference for shooting, or is this a fluke?



The 5.5" tends to balance better for 99%-ish of shooters. The extra weight on the longer barrel tends to feel muzzle heavy.

Unless one is looking for a Camp Perry-level rimfire match, I can't see why one would opt for the longer barrel, IMO. The average shooter is not going to be able to tell the difference in accuracy (if any).

The good news is, you can get the 5.5" model & if you want it, buy the 7.5" barrel down the road. After shooting it, you might never want the 7.5", so why waste the $$$?

My .o2
 
I think I am going to save some dollars, and getting a Ruger MK4, and throwing a Volquartson trigger in it along with the accu package, and go to the range. I am sure it will shoot better than me, and I believe there will not be much difference in accuracy.



I'll take that bet for $1.

I would contend the 41 will give you groups 1/2 the size of the Ruger.
 
For what it's worth, one of the 1997 guns is on its way back from Smith & Wesson. It started locking the slide back on just about every round in the magazine. I have been advised that it might be a bad spring on the slide lock, which is beyond my capabilities to fix. But I have used this gun exclusively for the last two competition seasons without a problem and I have no idea how many rounds have been put through it in addition to the rounds I have put through it.

This gun came back and it looks like I was given good advice. The accompanying paperwork stated that the slide lock was replaced. I manually ran a magazine full of dummy rounds through the gun and it seemed to work fine. Now to take it out to the range and see how it works.
 
The 5.5" tends to balance better for 99%-ish of shooters. The extra weight on the longer barrel tends to feel muzzle heavy.

Unless one is looking for a Camp Perry-level rimfire match, I can't see why one would opt for the longer barrel, IMO. The average shooter is not going to be able to tell the difference in accuracy (if any).

The good news is, you can get the 5.5" model & if you want it, buy the 7.5" barrel down the road. After shooting it, you might never want the 7.5", so why waste the $$$?

My .o2

I like this one I got because I can have the best of both worlds. The front sight extends out to the longer length.
 
That gun has an extended front sight. I'd say it was a steal! I paid a little more for an EFS model recently. Sadly when I slid the front sight forward, I found someone had poorly drilled and tapped holes for a mounting rail. Yours looks great for the money. Enjoy it

Nice score
 
Last edited:
Maybe so, but I want to say I am not going to shoot comp, so decent grouping is fine

I completely disagree! I own a 1979 copy of the S&W M41 that I bought new back then and use it for competition and target practice, (extremely accurate, great 2# trigger, runs terrific) and I also shoot 1 of 3 of my friends Ruger Mark 4's quite often. The Ruger, assuming that is has the Volquartsen trigger kit installed, shoots just as well for me as my own M41. I am not comparing the build quality of the two pistols, the materials, the out of the box triggers, or the fit and finish - but saying that IMO a new Ruger Mark 4 with the Volquartsen kit will outshoot pretty much anyone here.

The targets below are not nearly my best, but considering it was not my gun we were shooting and at 50 feet, I would give the Ruger / Volquartsen combo a thumbs up! There are days I shoot my own M41 better and days I shoot her Ruger Mk 4 better - so don't discount the inexpensive Ruger with the trigger kit. Don't mind the flyer - that was just me! lol :D

NOTE: Without a Volquartsen trigger kit installed, the Ruger's are terrible - I will admit that!!! The Ruger BTW is also about 1/3 the price of the M41!

NARRAGANSETT:

Don't sell yourself short. With a few thousand rounds through the Ruger (especially if you do install the Volquartsen kit) you will tighten those groups up considerably - as long as you have the desire to do so and do everything else right.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_6117.jpg
    IMG_6117.jpg
    47.5 KB · Views: 10
  • IMG_6757.jpg
    IMG_6757.jpg
    50.7 KB · Views: 10
Last edited:
That s/n range puts your gun as an older model 41 approximately mid 1970's? You did Good at that price. I hope this gun proves to be everything you wat and are looking for in a 22 semi automatic
 
Here’s what I ended up with for $705. The serial prefix is A132XXX.

At that price if it doesn’t run 100% you can send it to Clarks Custom Guns for their “reliability package” and still be under grand.
 
Back
Top
OSZAR »