Yes,
Just Hyper Velocity will wear parts sooner as stated in the manual.

I really believe that SV is an old wives tale. But you will definitely get better groupings from SV ammo.

 

That is all mine would shoot without having to change the extractor, recoil spring (6#), and polish the chamber. It took a lot of work to get mine to shoot Standard Velocity, but it always shot High Velocity fine.

 

My experience with pistolas and more than 10 k rounds through my 41 tells me HV minimags et al will batter a 41 with the stock/factory recoil spring. You could use a stronger spring but stupid springs work both ways so a stronger spring will go (slam) into battery with more force.

Try a buffer with your minimags

https://www.midwayusa.com/product/1017860543

 

Here's the science:

These blowback operated guns are a balancing act. It is the recoil energy from the ammo against the recoil spring, the slide inertia, the energy to cock the hammer and the friction of the slide moving on the rails. When balanced perfectly the slide gently kisses the recoil abutment in the frame on recoil. If the gun reliably cycles Standard Velocity ammo then it is "balanced" for that level of energy. Use High or Hyper Velocity ammo and the excess energy has to be absorbed by the gun's frame (beats on it with every shot). That is abusing to the firearm.

If you just have to shoot the hot stuff (???) then at least install a buffer to help absorb the excess energy. If you up the recoil spring it will reduce the impact to the gun's recoil stop in the frame but will increase the velocity of the slide returning to battery, beating up the slide breech face. In general you should use the lowest energy ammo in these guns that reliably cycles the gun and locks the slide back on the last shot. in most cases with the Model 41, that is Std Vel ammo, like CCI Std Vel or other ammos that have a box listed velocity of about 1080FPS, assuming a 40 grain bullet.

Since a S&W representative has no "skin in the game" as it is not his gun, his response is not realistic. The science says it all if you want to extend the life of the gun and not abuse it. Anyway, that is my opinion and yours may vary.

LDBennett

 

41 slides have been known to crack at the corner of the front rail meeting the breech block. So I ask....HV in a 41, Why? 41s are "target" pistols. Shoot SV only like in a HS. And maintain the recoil springs.

 

41 slides have been known to crack at the corner of the front rail meeting the breech block.

Wow, S&W should really do something about that.

Is it a balancing act with all .22semi-autos? Should owners of .22lr that will cycle SV avoid using HV ammo? My SA-22 is a very lightly built gun, it has no issues running SV ammo, will HV beat it to death?. Same goes for my little Beretta 87 Cheetah, avoid HV? Come to think of it my Ruger MKII ran with SV, so HV would bang the slide into the frame? My Marlin 60 & Nylon 66 also were balanced to cycle SV.

I knew the warnings about CCI Stingers and the other hypervelocity .22 ammo but didn't know semi-autos that would cycle SV battered itself with HV

 

"Is it a balancing act with all semi auto 22LR guns (blowback operated guns)?"

YES and NO ??

Some modern guns come with a buffer so Hi Vel ammo is probably OK in them. In general, if the gun operates reliably with SV ammo then you probably should only use SV ammo in the gun to avoid abusing it.

Again, it depends on whether there is a buffer or if the gun is built tough (like the Ruger MK all steel guns). Buckmarks come with a buffer and there is an after market buffer for the Model 41. Rifles in general are pretty toughly built but to not abuse them it may be wise to only shoot the lowest power level ammo that reliably cycles the gun. You choose...it is your gun. The science says... shoot the least powerful ammo that reliably cycles the gun. This is especially true for target 22LR guns. Beside, SV ammo usually gives the best accuracy.

LDBennett

 

I never thought about HV ammo damaging a .22 until I purchased my little Beretta 87. I did ask in the Beretta forum about HV ammo. https://www.rimfirecentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1163257

My plan with the 41 is SV for range fun and HV for scoped ( QD rings ) use. So the HV will be a small percentage of the rounds thru the pistol.

So, getting a buffer and 8lb recoil spring should take care of any slide impacting issues? Would the weight of the scope set-up be enough to slow the slide down and avoid the harsh impact?

 

So, getting a buffer and 8lb recoil spring should take care of any slide impacting issues? Would the weight of the scope set-up be enough to slow the slide down and avoid the harsh impact?

The buffer "buffers" the slide moving rearward. A stronger than factory spring increases the impact of the slide going forward.

From Wolff springs:

Recoil Springs

For Use in:
41, .22 Caliber - All Variable Recoil Springs

Reduced Power...: 6, 6.5 & 7 Lb.
Factory Standard.: 7.5 Lb.
Extra Power........: 8 Lb.

A scope doesn't mount on the slide of a 41.....

 

The question isn't "is the ammo beating up the gun," but "where will the point of failure come?" I am convinced you could shoot all the HV ammo you wanted out of a Ruger Mk II and never have problem. Why the Ruger Mk II? Well, they have been around since 1982, folks don't baby them, and you don't hear about them cracking apart all that often. This is not true of every design, of course.

Infamously, there were issues with certain High Standards in this regard, although not every High Standard.

I have had very, very good accuracy out of my Model 41 (which is a target pistol after all) with CCI-SV at conventional shooting distances. Don't really see the need to go HV in it. Nevertheless, the science/engineering is above, and the choice, of course, is yours.

Keep in mind that if you change out the spring for HV ammo that this may have effects using lower powered ammunition. These things are always a trade off. The fun part is to try it and see.

 

My S&W 41 is more reliable with standard velocity than it is with HV. Besides, as stated earlier, the Model 41 is a target pistol so I use SV ammo in it.

I have a Browning Challenger that was well worn before I bought it. I put about 80,000 rounds through it before I wore off most the finish. I had it Hard Chromed and it now has over 250,000 rounds through it. It still shoots better than I do. Most of the ammo shot through it was bulk pack HV ammo. I put a converted buffer in it shortly after I had it hard chromed. Since I have many Belgium Browning 22 pistols, I took the one that was well worn and chose it as my regular “shooter”. It was common for me, and my friends, to shoot a bulk pack through it when we took it out, which used to be about 3 times a month. I have shot this pistol more, by far, than all my other firearms combined. With the red dot sight and threaded barrel, it is a lot of fun.

Some firearms can take that kind of usage. The S&W 41, I don’t think would survive that constant diet of cheap bulk ammo. That being said, I really like my 41 for what it was designed for, target shooting.

 

My S&W 41 is more reliable with standard velocity than it is with HV. Besides, as stated earlier, the Model 41 is a target pistol so I use SV ammo in it.

I have a Browning Challenger that was well worn before I bought it. I put about 80,000 rounds through it before I wore off most the finish. I had it Hard Chromed and it now has over 250,000 rounds through it. It still shoots better than I do. Most of the ammo shot through it was bulk pack HV ammo. I put a converted buffer in it shortly after I had it hard chromed. Since I have many Belgium Browning 22 pistols, I took the one that was well worn and chose it as my regular “shooter”. It was common for me, and my friends, to shoot a bulk pack through it when we took it out, which used to be about 3 times a month. I have shot this pistol more, by far, than all my other firearms combined. With the red dot sight and threaded barrel, it is a lot of fun.

Some firearms can take that kind of usage. The S&W 41, I don’t think would survive that constant diet of cheap bulk ammo. That being said, I really like my 41 for what it was designed for, target shooting.

 

As pointed out your pistol does not have a built in chronograph, and has no idea what the velocity of your ammunition is. What we really want to be looking at is energy, specifically the energy that the pistol sees under recoil. That is actually a fairly difficult thing to quantify as it takes in many variables like the mass of the slide, spring rate of the recoil spring, friction, etc. It is a little more than I want to comprehend on a Sunday morning…

But there is an easy way to compare the relative energy of different cartridges. You can compute the bullets energy and assume that the relative energy imparted on the pistol would be the same if you use the same method for all. Thus, not giving you absolute energy but relative energy in each scenario.

So, lets look at the energy of 6 different cartridges using CCI Standard Velocity as our baseline

CCI Standard Velocity 40Gr @ 1070 FPS = 102 Ft Pounds of Energy (Baseline)
Federal Bulk 36gr @ 1260 = 127 Ft Pounds of Energy (25% increase)
CCI Mini Mag 36gr @ 1260 = 127 Ft Pounds of Energy (~25% increase)
Winchester Expert HV 36gr @ 1280 = 131 Ft Pounds of Energy (~28% increase)
Remington Golden Bullet 36gr @ 1280 = 131 Ft Pounds of Energy (~28% increase)
Federal Lightning 40Gr @ 1240 = 146 Ft Pounds of Energy (~43% Increase)
CCI Stinger 32Gr @ 1640 = 191 Ft Pounds of Energy (~87% Increase)

So, the CCI Singer and the Federal Lightning (40 Grain Bullet) have a ~87% and ~43% increase in energy respectively. That is pretty significant. I would not shoot those.

But all the 36 grain High Velocity rounds are in the ~25% increase in energy, or ~25 foot pounds of energy greater. Personally, I would not think that is a significant increase. Remember that we are talking about a pistol made out of modern steels here, for perspective my Ruger 10/22 was made in to 60s and has an aluminum frame and has put up with tens of thousands of rounds with no issue.

Just for another comparison lets look at the energy of a 9mm 115 Gr @ 1125 FPS = 325 Foot Pounds of Energy or a 219% increase in energy over the CCI Standard Velocity. The Glock Pistol that I fire it from does have a heavier recoil spring, as you would expect due to the greater energy. But the components are not any thicker in the recoil absorbing areas. The Glock also shoots bullets from 115grain to 158grain regularly without any issue.

Now I am not saying that you should go rechamber you Model 41 for 9mm, but in relative terms the energy delta between 36 grain HV and 40 grain Standard Velocity do not seem that significant to me.

I would not shoot the 40 grain High Velocity, or any of the Hyper Velocity. But I would not be that concerned with the 36 grain High Velocity.

Just my 2 cents,

Attached is the data and graphs for anyone that is a visual person.

 

Thanks BradH for all that info.

 

Here is a pix where the 41 slide was repaired by a real pro.

Somewhere is the pix of the slide before the weld. Can't find it.
The heavy mass rear of the slide wants to keep going when the lighter mass in front stops. The frame stop point is on the front.
Spring and ammo choice is critical

It is a similar but reverse situation with the High Standard. When the slide hits the rear of the frame, the frame is stressed at the weak link crack point. The rear half of the frame wants to go. But the front half of the frame with the heavy barrel and maybe a dot sight, wants to stay. All the frame cracks I have seen are on Victors. Maybe the lighter slide moves faster and hits harder on the rear lug. ???

 

Is this a Hi Std Victor only (and not the other Supermatic's) problem. I have never taken note of which models produce the most cracks. Anyone got input on this? How about a survey of model types of cracked frames?

My thought is that if all is balanced (recoil energy vs slide inertia, slide friction, recoil spring energy absorption, and energy to cock the hammer) then the slide should just gently kiss the recoil stop in the frame. Of course getting that balance with all the variability of Std Vel ammo is probably not easy. But I suspect most frame cracks are caused by poor maintenance (worn out recoil spring) and using ammo other than Std Vel. But what do I know?

LDBennett

 

That is a nice repair.

I wander if the repair would be more than a new slide? Unless of course it is the old style slide which is no longer made and you would have to get it repaired or buy another slide on fleabay.

Thanks for the post.

 

I shoot HV 22LR ammo through my S&W Model 41 quite regularly. Bought it brand new a dozen years ago. Most of the ammo is SV rounds about a good share of the rounds were HV ammo. I do have a buffer installed and run a heavier spring in the gun. So far so good. I do understand that I *should* run SV ammo through a target gun.

 

I do have a buffer installed and run a heavier spring in the gun. So far so good. I do understand that I *should* run SV ammo through a target gun.

I'm a firm believer in running a buffer in my model 41.:bthumb: I used to shoot high velocity ammo in mine but now shoot mainly CCI - SV. Even with standard velocity ammo the buffer is just added insurance.

 

I definitely believe high-velocity ammo can damage semi-auto pistols and have proof to verify it.

I once read where the face of the bolt on Ruger Mark series pistols can become peened from too much HV ammo and not lock back after the last shot.
Just my luck, not long after reading that, the bolt of my old Ruger Mark II began to not lock back after the last shot.
I checked the bolt and sure enough, there's definite signs of peening damage.

For that reason, my two Volquartsen pistols only get SV ammo.
My Pardini SP will certainly not be shot with HV either and comes with a buffer installed to prevent damage even from SV ammo!

So, if you want to get the longest available lifespan from your 22 rimfire pistols, don't use HV ammo in them period, JMO.

 

I definitely believe high-velocity ammo can damage semi-auto pistols and have proof to verify it.

I once read where the face of the bolt on Ruger Mark series pistols can become peened from too much HV ammo and not lock back after the last shot.
Just my luck, not long after reading that, the bolt of my old Ruger Mark II began to not lock back after the last shot.
I checked the bolt and sure enough, there's definite signs of peening damage.

For that reason, my two Volquartsen pistols only get SV ammo.
My Pardini SP will certainly not be shot with HV either and comes with a buffer installed to prevent damage even from SV ammo!

So, if you want to get the longest available lifespan from your 22 rimfire pistols, don't use HV ammo in them period, JMO.

Forward bolt velocity has nothing to do with ammo velocity and everything to do with recoil spring strength. Ruger MK pistols and 10/22 rifles I have had cycled just as well with SV as with HV using the same spring, accordingly forward bolt velocity was identical. I never had any problems with bolt peening.

 

Yes better off shooting s v Ammo in them I use aguila it’s accurate and a good value

 

I do believe this debate can go on forever, it seems pretty well split. Heck I can see another Civil War Coming

 

I wouldn't go there. Mine had problems beating the heck out of itself with 1070fps ammo. I bought mine in the early 90s. Maybe I had some bad metallurgy going on.

I do believe that gunwill shoot beautifully with cci std velocity.

 

I had a similar experience with a Model 41 that pounded a perfect image of the bolt face insert into the breech face of the barrel. My Volquartsen/MK IV has a laser hardened breech and a case hardened DLC coated bolt. No peening problems there.

 

When the recoil from the fired shot exactly matches the energy of the recoil spring (other factors are part of the equation) then the slide cycles fully without abusing the slide recoil stop because the slide gently kisses it. When the recoil energy exceeds the recoil spring’s ability to fully control the slide then the gun frame gets hammered. If the recoil spring is sized up to handle the increased recoil energy of more powerful ammo then the slide closes with more velocity and its bolt face hammers the breech end of the barrel (eventually leaves an imprint or worse or distorts the breach face of the slide). The gun should be fed the least powerful ammo that just locks the slide to the rear on the last shot. The Model 41 is a Target pistol and as such wants Target power level ammo. Ammo such as CCI Std Vel ammo is the perfect candidate AFTER an initial from new break-in procedure of several hundred High Velocity rounds if the gun is at all so tight as to not reliably operate with Std Vel ammo. Once past break-in only use ammo that just reliably locks the slide to the rear on the last shot.

I do not understand why a person would spend well over $1000 for a Target pistol and then shoot High or Hyper Velocity ammo through it to save money on ammo? The most accurate ammo in these guns is regularly Std Vel ammo. Did the buyer not buy this gun for superior accuracy?

Manufacturers often say in their instructions that you can use High velocity ammo in these type guns. But their interest is in selling guns and limiting them to Std Vel ammo (which can be hard to find in some areas) works against that. Besides if you destroy a Target gun with overly powerful ammo then they get to sell you parts or another gun. Shoot these Target guns with the reduced power Std Vel ammo and they will last several lifetimes and give you superb accuracy. Save the Rambo shooting for super rugged pistols like the all steel Ruger MK series guns.

Anyway, that’s my opinion and yours may vary. In the end it is your gun to do with as you please. I choose to not abuse my Model 41 and the many other Target guns I own.

LDBennett