Just look in past post on this forum. You will see the lows and the highs. Most say buy older. I am not one of those, both are great models. If you are going to use factory sights only I would go with the standard 41. I do not like the tall sights on the Performance model, but that is a personal thing and one with no experience on that model at all. I have the standard with three barrels of both lengths.

 

Now is a great time to build up the 22LR stable!!!

Been looking at the S&W Model 41 for a while now.

The five and seven inch versions are nearly identical in price.

The Performance Center is about $200 more.

Looking for pros and cons of each from owners. Thanks!

I own an older model with the cocking indicator. I have both the 5.5 inch and 7 inch barrels and distinctly prefer the 5.5 inch. I hold it much more stable than the longer barrel. This is the same with my high standards. I prefer the shorter bull barrels to the longer, fluted versions, for instance. Its probably personal preference. They are very, very fine pistols but as you see....much of this forum is discussion around operational issues, their causes and their remedies. I'm currently experiencing some myself. However, I'm looking at another one now that is about like the one I own! They're nice, and you'll enjoy, but I'd sure rather have one of the older models.

 

When I bought mine back in the early 80's I got the 7" barrel, off a rest it shoots like a rifle. For fun and field carry I picked up a factory offered "field barrel" . I think it is 5 - 5 1/2 " long and weight wise looks like a cut down 7" barrel, but has a red ramp sight for an easier draw out of a holster. Very accurate, balances well and feels like my Browning Hi Power or Colt 1911.

Personally I would go with the longer barrel, then look around, there are some excellent shorter heavier barrels available from other sources such as Clark Custom Guns.

 

At this point in time, as can be seen by reports made here by some new owners, S&W has a quality control and service problem. It is not unusual for the guns to come new with a problem or two. When returned for repair the delays can be very long and it may take multiple trips back to S&W to get the gun right. Some guns come through perfect and others not so much. This started, it seems, when S&W started offering the Performance Center guns a few years ago. Prior to that S&W had a few dedicated top notch assemblers that took responsibility for the gun from a box of parts until it shipped. This assured better quality because someone at S&W was directly responsible for each gun.

I like new guns better than used guns but in this case I would not buy a new Model 41. I did buy one new in the early 1990's and it was fine right out of the box. In fact it was great!

In my old age and very bad eyes, I need a red dot sighting system on my target guns. I also like shorter barrels as well. So I bought a Clark optics barrel for my older Model 41. It has no sights but a rail for red dot mounting. The rail and barrel are machined out of a single piece of steel. They buy a huge name brand barrel blank and whittle it down until they have a barrel with an optics rail, all one piece. Mine shoots every bit as well as my original S&W 7 inch barrel. I think it balance better in my hands. You can also get Ergo grips (Is it Herrit??) to make the gun a shooting dream.

Anyway that is my opinion and yours may vary.

LDBennett

 

I have always preferred the look and balance of the 5.5 inch heavy barrel model 41 myself. I know that the longer sight radius of the 7 inch model should make it easier to shoot more accurately, but for me that just isn't the case. All three of the model 41 pistols that I have owned were problem free and very accurate handguns, my last and current one was made in 2007. It's just been in the recent years that I have read so many horror stories about the newer model 41 pistols. Personally, if I were buying a model 41 today I would like it to be a used one that I could actually test fire before I bought it. I know that restriction can make the purchase difficult.

 

S&W has opted for more profits by assembling TIGHT tolerance of CNC machined parts in place of knowledgeable smiths. The good thing is it reduces costs, Or ups profits.

The bad side is they don't get the finishing work and things get over looked. They are still great guns. They are just more likely to need a little polishing.

I got the Performance Center because it had the machined rail on the barrel. I also liked the Laser etched Performance Center on the Slide .

However that's all you really get with the performance center model.



If where I got it had a significant price difference in the 2 models. I would have preferred to have gone with the standard if it was cheaper. I would have used the extra money on getting A Clarke's custom threaded barrel.

 

S&W has opted for more profits by assembling TIGHT tolerance of CNC machined parts in place of knowledgeable smiths. The good thing is it reduces costs, Or ups profits.

What is your source for the "CNC machined parts"?

I don't doubt that it could be true but I have not seen this stated anywhere else. It does make perfect sense. I don't want to repeat it if it is an assumption and not backed up with facts and a source.

This gun was designed in 1941, so the story goes, and not release until way after WWII (is it early 1960's??). As such the design relied on some hand fitting and many individual machining processes. If S&W did convert to CNC manufacture to save money, they did not pass the savings on to us consumers. This current quality problem started only a few years ago when they temporarily stoped selling them and returned with a "standard" model and the PC model at very elevated pricing from before. The savings must have gone into their pockets!

Perhaps some 20 years ago I read a story on these gun in "Shotgun News". The writer visited S&W and the assembly line for the Model 41. The story was expressly about the Model 41. There they pointed out that the Model 41 assemblers were pick because they were the best. There were only a few of them. Each gun was assembled from a box of parts to being shipped out the door by one assembler. That gun was his responsibility alone. Regular assembly at S&W is done at many stations by many people. I assume (??) this was done away with when the recent stoppage and the new assembly regime (standard and PC) and significant price increases (within the last five years or so??) were instituted.

Again, it seems a gamble when buying a new Model 41 today. Basing the purchase on the warrantee is foolish as the S&W service has been shown here to sometimes be incompetent and lengthy, and often requires more than one trip for fixing the same problem.

I love my many S&W guns (most are decades old). Too bad that their premier target gun is in its present state for some of them, according to posters here recently.

LDBennett

 

M/41 preference...............

I bought a 1978 vintage gun with 5 1/2" barrel, after shooting it for a while I wanted something a little lighter so located a 5" Field Barrel. This barrel is for me the ideal weight and the gun balances better for me. I also replaced the grips with a used set that had been altered to remove the hump making them similar to 1911. This improved the trigger reach for me since my fingers are shorter. Set-up this way the gun is ideal for me.

 

I had the 7" barrel and it felt unwieldy to me. The 5.5" barrel puts the center of gravity in a more favorable location for me and I could hold it steadier. I do not think there is a difference in the overall weight. Last I knew, both barrels weighed the same, but this was on a 90's version.

When they work, they are fantastic pistols. If you look at the problems noted by LD, I am a recipient of every one of them. I'll never own another SW product. I've never had worse customer service from a firearm manufacturer. Three trips to fix the same issue. On the last repair they destroyed the finish and refused to make it right. I even had pictures time stamped just before I sent them the gun.

 

Classic John Henry vs the machine.

I’ve always been partial to John Henry and hand fit firearms .

 

Let's go with the assumption that Smith and Wesson decided to abandon the Model 41 and develop a new true .22 target only pistol. CNC or not just how much money do you think S&W would have to throw into this project and what would the end user cost be? If a current Performance Center Model 41 is roughly $1500.00 any newly developed .22 target pistol will obviously cost more no doubt close to $2000.00. Would this be a profitable venture for Smith and Wesson based on the relatively low demand for such a pistol? Let's be honest here, any newly developed pistol is only going to be forthcoming based on projected sales and production costs. In this current market I seriously doubt anyone at Smith and Wesson would support trashing the Model 41 in favor of developing a new .22 cal target pistol that will cost more on the open market and have limited sales at best. Face the facts here, bullseye shooting in on the decline and few people are looking for an expense purpose built .22 bullseye gun.

Benelli's and Hammerli's are great target pistols but also have a great price. They are not easy to obtain and even so-so used ones bring prices well over the cost of a new Model 41 standard. Parts for these pistols can be problematic to obtain and finding people to repair them is another difficulty one encounters. Owning one of these pistols is a risk and as long as they work well life is good. When they don't stand by for a rocky road getting it repaired.

If you go by most forum usage, people only post when they are interested in buying something, or when they have a problem with with an item. It is rare for someone to jump on a forum and say they just bought "X" and it is great. So I think there are far more Model 41 owners that are happy with their pistols than those that are not. Without the ability of contacting each and every new Model 41 owner directly there is no real way to find out if they are satisfied with the product. As I stated many times in other such threads, years ago I listened to those people that bemoaned buying a new Model 41 versus an old one, so I bought an old one. In nice terms it was a great looking exercise in frustration. I paid for what I believed was a quality firearm and had no right of return when it didn't work worth a hoot. Bad on me as I should have known better. I sold it at a loss and never looked back. So when I decided to try a new PC Model 41 I once again read all the opinions about old versus new, but having been down the "old road" I went with the new. I also knew right at the start I would be putting a red dot on the pistol and the Performance Center model was the ticket for this. Yes my new Model 41 had issues and needed help from Smith and Wesson, but this time I had a warranty to cover ALL costs including shipping. Without that warranty if I had purchased another old one and it needed repair, shipping alone would have close to $100.00 one way! One trip to the factory was all my PC Model 41 needed and it was fixed. One trip and it wasn't damaged in any way, shape or form. This all took place during winter so I really wasn't out anything but time which was extended somewhat by Covid and the holidays.

So will Smith and Wesson ever discontinue the Model 41 and bring out something to replace it? They could conceivably discontinue the Model 41, but I seriously doubt they would replace it with some new design target pistol. Not enough market for that. I will never own a Benelli or Hammerli due to price and parts availability. Not my cup of tea. If the Model 41 went away with no factory replacement I would no doubt be content with my Ruger MKIV Target and call it a day. The Ruger is a great pistol in it's own right and has a great aftermarket parts selection, but now I have the best of both worlds. A great Model 41 and a great Ruger MKIV. Life is good, but the better news is should either break down I have warranty on both!!

Rick H.

 

Let's go with the assumption that Smith and Wesson decided to abandon the Model 41 and develop a new true .22 target only pistol. CNC or not just how much money do you think S&W would have to throw into this project and what would the end user cost be? If a current Performance Center Model 41 is roughly $1500.00 any newly developed .22 target pistol will obviously cost more no doubt close to $2000.00. Would this be a profitable venture for Smith and Wesson based on the relatively low demand for such a pistol? Let's be honest here, any newly developed pistol is only going to be forthcoming based on projected sales and production costs. In this current market I seriously doubt anyone at Smith and Wesson would support trashing the Model 41 in favor of developing a new .22 cal target pistol that will cost more on the open market and have limited sales at best. Face the facts here, bullseye shooting in on the decline and few people are looking for an expense purpose built .22 bullseye gun.

So will Smith and Wesson ever discontinue the Model 41 and bring out something to replace it? They could conceivably discontinue the Model 41, but I seriously doubt they would replace it with some new design target pistol. Not enough market for that.

Rick H.

Rick H.,

Very well written! I fear that the day will come when S&W will discontinue making the Model 41. Colt used to make the Woodsman and Match Target Pistols. Hammerli no longer makes the Model 208. Long ago, both of these firms determined that those pistols were just too expensive to manufacture, especially when considering the limited demand for guns of this type. Nowadays, plastic guns are all the rage. For the makers, they are cheap and easy to make, along with being profitable.

If the 41 is dropped from production, the company will probably focus its efforts on the .22 caliber Victory Model. So, cherish your 41 and maintain it as best that you can. Unfortunately, this pistol will go the way of the dinosaurs. I truly hope that I am wrong about all of this.

 

I have the older version with the cocking indicator, both barrels and box and papers. I much prefer the 5.5 bull over the 7 and have given the latter a lot of "try" but just can't get there with it.

I am looking at another older model that I will probably pick up, just because they are really well made pistols and a pleasure to own...more from a collector perspective. I personally get much more shooting pleasure from my HSs and Colts because of their reliability. This forum is replete with threads discussing how to "fix" your 41's performance, but after a while I just put it down and grab a colt or HS.

Heresy here...I know.

 

If strictly for iron sight shooting, I'd lean toward the 7 inch, due to the longer sighting radius. If you're mainly interested in a Red Dot or scope, I'd lean toward the 5 inch model. I have the 7 inch iron sighted barrel, and a aftermarket 5 or 5.5 inch with an Ultradot. I like them both.

 

Now is a great time to build up the 22LR stable!!!

Been looking at the S&W Model 41 for a while now.

The five and seven inch versions are nearly identical in price.

The Performance Center is about $200 more.

Looking for pros and cons of each from owners. Thanks!

I purchased a PC in November, for an exceptionally competitive price.

The PC model was chosen over the other two models because of the integrated rail, the slightly different trigger adjustment setup, and the taller, removable Patridge front sight. The special PC edition grips and upgraded carry case were nice-to-haves.

The rail on mine hosts a Sightron S30-5 red dot.

I will soon be purchasing the 7" S&W barrel for use only with its iron sights.

There is also a plan to get a Clark STC barrel, threaded, for use with a small 2x scope. And I will have a local company fabricate a custom carry case. Then my Model 41 'kit' will be complete.

Right now, I can deploy IDPA 7x12 steel targets, freehand, at 75 yards, with essentially 100% ringing feedback. I don't really need to take out the Marlin 60 anymore. Who needs a rifle when you have a Model 41?

There are multiple other threads describing issues of recent vintage Model 41 pistols. Here is an edited list of the main issues encountered and what to do about them if yours is among the affected group:

(1) Fail-to-extract -> a function of a wide and relatively complicated set of variables, often solved by adding a single drop of oil to the case of the top cartridge in a magazine, and/or changing ammunition. The other variables can contribute to the matter in various and interactive ways, and diagnosis is only possible by a suitably gifted gunsmith with specific experience in this model pistol.

(2) Fail-to-eject -> another complicated matter, often a function of ammunition, cleanliness, lubrication, and suitability of recoil spring calibration. Much ado is made of chamber sizing, condition, and so forth, but 'home repairs' addressing this are fraught with risk of damaging the pistol or compromising the accuracy. Proceed cautiously. Often occurs in tandem with (1) making the actual underlying problem difficult to assess and address.

(3) Cycling failures, friction-based, including fail-to-return-to-battery -> in more than a small number of newer Model 41, the slide stop (which is a sacrificial wear component) has its anvil canted past the tolerance specification, and is therefore defective. This problem, which can actually manifest after a period of good operation, causes drag from the top of the anvil on the inside of the slide groove where the anvil rests when the slide is in battery. A large percentage of return-to-battery issues are caused by this slide stop component QA issue. This problem can only be correctly solved by replacing the slide stop.

(4) Cycling failures, speed-based -> largely a function of the ammunition used and recoil spring calibration. Can also be an issue with the pistol assembly or current state-of operation beyond simple cleanliness (age, wear, spring life cycle limits, bolt alignment, etc.)

(5) Fail-to-feed -> the #1 cause of this problem is from the magazine 'scoring' the bullet as the slide picks up the round, and/or from incorrect lip tension an/or spring integrity. Other F2F causes are subsets of (3) and (4) above. Most magazines exhibiting this problem (sadly, half of the new-from-S&W examples I bought) can be fixed by a suitably equipped 'handy' person, but the technique to do so cannot effectively be shared in a text based internet forum.

Hope this message is helpful to you.

 

I'd venture to say that most of the folks who own high end Hammerli, Pardini, Feinwerkbau AW93, etc. target pistols are not those who buy one 50 round box of .22LR at a time at their local hardware store for shooting cans in their backyard on the last Sunday of every third month; they're dedicated target shooters, many of whom have sponsors who pay for their equipment and ammunition. They'll keep numerous guns on hand to utilize during competitions if their main pistol malfunctions, and after the competition the malfunctioning pistol is diagnosed and repaired. No worries.

On the other hand, those of us to aren't competition shooters and who had to save up our pennies for that Hammerli, Pardini, AW93, or even a S&W 41 and the ammunition to feed it like to cry all over the internet like little girls the instant something goes wrong. But let's face it, whether new or old, mechanical devices wear and parts can fail, which leads to malfunctions - this is not a perfect world where everything is all rainbows, gumdrops and unicorns, with Jennifer Aniston feeding us grapes, LOL.

The model 41 has made enough of an impression on the public to have lasted since 1957 (though production was dropped in 1992, then resumed in 1994), and such longevity doesn't happen by accident. Sure there can be problems with both old and new models, but whether one was machined by hand or via CNC is inconsequential in regards to function when dimensions are held to tolerance and the proper grade materials and heat treatment protocols are maintained.

 

I have a Model 41 from the early 90’s with the reduced polish and laser etched serial number. It is a great gun and has been from the time I bought it new and still today. Some modern versions made in the last 30+ years seem to have quality issues (only some guns).

Quality begins during the manufacturing process, not when the gun is returned under warrantee. A gun at this price point should have any quality issues resolved before leaving the factory. Add to that a service organization that marks the finish of guns they receive for repair, fail to fix problem until multiple repair trips, gun returned for no problem found, and some buyers can get very dissatisfied with S&W,

While these S&W problems don’t appear to every buyer and those that see them get very vocal about the problems, at the price point of these pistols it should be more rare than it is.

The fact is that today’s Model 41 is not the same as one produced well before the early 1990’s, even when you pay extra for a Performance Center version. At least that seems to be the opinion of some who report here.

As for a new target version, producing a wining match gun is more about prestige than profit. If a company decides to partake then it should strive for the best ALL the time. If S&W came out with a modern high quality 22LR target gun, I suspect that they could not keep up with demand for many years, just as the current Model 41’s never languish in gun stores (most are sold before they get to the dealer). My opinion is, rather than an endless supply of new plastic guns, maybe S&W should stop long enough to raise to the level of a new premium target 22LR pistol. But your opinion may differ.

LDBennett

 

Some info on other target 22LR pistols:

There was the SIG/Hammerli Trailside and its replacement, the Hammerli Xesse. It was suppose to be a Hammerli 280 Econo version. The Trailside had an issue with breaking the trigger guard which SIG did not attack quick enough, ruining the gun’s reputation in a very short time. The fix was a 10 minute job anyone could do with a file but no one seemed to know that fix until I (and others) revealed it. The Xesse fixed that and made the trigger better still and made a few other changes. The Xesse now has a good reputation and is in the same rough cost class as a Model 41.

Benelli’s were available until recently through Larrys Guns. Larry seemed to be the importer/distributor and no one else seemed to have them. But Larry recently died and the business was folded. I do not know if anyone in the US sells them today. In recent times they made two versions: MP90S and MP95E.

The MP90S was the full Olympics style gun with totally adjustable trigger and ergo grips with an adjustable palm shelf. It had a 6 round magazine positioned ahead of the trigger guard. It was very European looking and of a very modern design. The fit and finish was great as was the accuracy. The trigger was Olympic pistol perfect. It was priced equivalent to the new Model 41 PC version.

The MP95E was the econo version of the same gun. The trigger module was less adjustable but excellent. The grips were standard grips and NOT ergo style. The original supplied mags were 9 round and could be used in the MP90S. The basic frame and barrel are the same between the two versions. Its pricing was about where the standard Model 41 was at the time a few years back.

The point? Find any of these guns and their variants on the used market and you could be a winner. The Model 41 is NOT the only game in town. To be clear I have a Model 41 (early 1990’s), the SIG/Hammerli Trailside, and the Benelli MP90S, all bought new. All are excellent guns. I also have several other target guns of this type but mostly vintage versions.

LDBennett

 

Benelli's were available until recently through Larrys Guns. Larry seemed to be the importer/distributor and no one else seemed to have them. But Larry recently died and the business was folded. I do not know if anyone in the US sells them today.

LDBennett

LD,

Out of curiousity, I did a search for Larry's Guns. This is what came up: https://www.larrysguns.com/ContactUs.aspx. Red Feather Outfitters has purchased Larry's inventory.

 

My 41 is a great target pistol! I also have two scorpions ! One is Black nitride stainless 6 inch very heavy gun around 47 ounces but it is one of the best shooters I have had! But 41 is what I started shooting as a kid so I have memories shooting one and have always wanted one that worked! I would not part with either of these two! I bought 41 used got it for a good price!

 

Just thinking about all the hoopla over .22 cal target pistols and it dawned on me why I don't think I will ever own some of the more exotic models. It all comes down to what do you do when you need parts or service for all these foreign made products? As much as a pain as it is to deal with S&W Model 41's it must be much more difficult for off-shore made pistols unless someone knows something I don't. I don't take a lot of time researching foreign made pistols, except for Sig P210's, but rarely do I see new foreign made .22 target pistols, they are most always used. At one time I was considering a Trailside but then I heard about all the issues they were having with broken triggers so I gave that idea up. I will just stay with my trusty, for now, Model 41 and see how it goes. I still have my Ruger MKIV Target as a backup if needed. Ya know the whole issue with S&W Model 41's could be put to bed if the Mothership test fired each pistol on paper and supplied the target with the pistol. That way the factory would know about flawed pistols before they ever left the factory. Come to think of it any top tier target pistol should come with a signed test target. How much would it really add to the price of an already expensive pistol?

Rick H.

 

My sig trailside has a target disc with a 5 shot group fired with pistol . Just thought I would let you know that.