Gang, I am new to the world of top breaks. Just became interested in them after a gun show vendor let me play with a few. I just bought a little HR .32 S&W bicycle gun. Just really looking for any sage advice, safety tips regarding ammo etc? Thanks!

Hi Sox,
Happy Holidays!

I've studied the transition from Black Powder to Modern smokeless with other manufacturers besides Smith & Wesson. Smith & Wesson was literally one of the only companies that maintained the same Groove and land diameter with their top-break production revolvers.

Other companies "DID NOT"! So you must be very careful when deciding to shoot them. The Antique variation of Harrington & Richardson, Iver Johnson, early Thames, Hopkins and Allen/Merwin & Hulbert, Forehand & Wadsworth, later Forehand Arms Co. etc did not follow "standardized" measurements...Those that survived until the Smokeless ERA was in full swing did adjust to smokeless standards..

So, you must first identify if your Bicycle gun is Antque or Modern. Harrington and Richardson had a transitional period that is kind of complex but the "General Rule of thumb"? If it has the caliber "STAMPED" on the left side of the barrel? You are in the smokeless ERA....If there is no stamp and the cylinder has non positive locking slots? It's Antique and should only discharge Black Powder rounds with 99% lead bullets.... "SAFETY FIRST".

See photo's of smokeless post 1900 stamped barrel and pre-1899 NON stamped barrel. "BLACK POWDER ONLY">


Murph

Attached Images

	0B4885BD-FB9E-4AA5-8BA5-5502572BF14B.jpg (38.1 KB, 83 views)
	328DEBA4-91ED-406A-95CC-BED9223842A1.jpg (64.1 KB, 90 views)
	65E7D498-6A54-4C60-86B2-37EEF6FEAAC8.jpg (47.1 KB, 89 views)

And a rule to live by provided by one of our more astute black powder fans: "A black powder load with an air space is the definition of a pipe bomb."

Ralph Tremaine

Generally, any modern factory-loaded ammo in .32 S&W or .38 S&W will be safe to shoot in the old top break revolvers in good condition, even though loaded with smokeless powder, as the peak chamber pressure is held to black powder levels (or below). I don't know of any commercial loadings available today which use black powder, so about the only way to obtain any would be to load your own, or to have someone else load them for you.

That old ammo is still out there but gunshow dealers seem to think it's highly collectable if it's still in the original box. I have one guy that sells it to me cheap rather than hauling it around to gunshows for years. I often find it loose in a zip lock bag at shows , usually cheap. They are lots more fun to shoot with BP though.

You did not mention, but I assume you are writing about a 2" Safety Hammerless? If so, most 2" Safety revolvers were manufactured post-1898, so are considered "modern" by the BATF. That also means they were built in the smokeless era. Some think that something magical happened to S&W models that were manufactured on and after January 1, 1899, and they all became stronger and ready for smokeless powder, but that is not at all the case. The 32 Safety Hammerless built either before or after 1899 is exactly the same gun, so current manufactured ammo will function just fine in either era guns.

As for old pocket revolvers other than S&W, if the barrel is stamped with the caliber name, I would shoot it today. The only calibers that changed physical dimensions over time still manufactured today were those that started out with heeled bullets and later transitioned to seated bullets. Even those calibers can be shot today with current ammo since the bullet is actually smaller than the bore.

One thing I will say is that there were some really cheaply made pocket revolver and they are typically from lesser known brand names. On the other hand, H&R, Iver Johnson, and other known brands were built with sufficient strength to fire modern ammo since major manufacturers designed their current ammunition to be safe to shoot in top-break revolver and loaded light with low velocities and pressures. Almost every old pocket revolver still out there have been shot with smokeless ammo over their lifetime and survived to this day. The biggest issue shooting these is that they can break just like modern firearms, but parts are almost non-existent today and if you break springs, chip sears, or the gun just quits working correctly, you have ruined any value it had, so go easy at the range with these vintage classics,

__________________
Gary
SWCA 2515

I wish it was simple, but the Black Powder ERA was not in the least a simple ERA to evaluate and study.

See photo posted. You will note 7 different manufactured 38 centerfire "Black Powder" cartridges that were individually designed by 7 different firms for 7 different guns of the "Black Powder ERA" beginning with the Cartridge Conversions in Centerfire and ending with the introduction of Smokeless at the turn of the Century. The majority of these Black Powder antique rounds "will chamber" in a .38 top break Smith & Wesson. Even though they "WERE NOT" originally engineered and designed for that gun!!!

The variance in bullet diameter in these photo'd .38 centerfires is between .345 and .375 diameter... That was my point in my post. Try to imagine using a smokeless load in an antique revolver having a Groove diameter of .345 using a Smith & Wesson .38 smokeless round having a .360 bullet diameter. The result would be a significant pressure spike no matter what your smokeless load was, no matter how much lube you put on the bullet. The result would be at a minimal, significant "leading" at the forcing cone until the gun had enough of it and burst. Simple as that.

Firms such as Ethan Allen, Forehand and Wadsworth, Merwin & Hulbert, Peters, UMC, Winchester, U.S. Cartridge Co., American Arms, etc....ALL manufactured different variations of each caliber during the Black Powder ERA that was "Engineered" for a specific gun.

That "ALL" changed when smokeless was introduced....These guns "DID NOT ALL CHAMBER the .38 Smith & Wesson" nor the 32 Smith & Wesson. They originally chambered different .38's and .32's and are not stamped on the barrel with that original caliber. That's my point.

Refering to the Op's H&R? The H&R's were NOT chambered for the .32 Smith & Wesson until the Smokeless ERA came about. Prior to that ERA they went through transitional periods that are extremely difficult to evaluate since they are not caliber marked as to what original .32 they actually chambered. I can only say this....The bore dynamics DO NOT match Smith & Wesson's. They more closely match the grossly undersized .308 and .345 groove diameters mentioned and photo'd... This is not my opinion. I'm only conveying researched fact.

A lot of these guns actually burst due to disregarding the most basic reloading procedure. Page one, paragraph one....Match bullet to bore!

Happy Holidays!

Murph

Attached Images

57687671-4CBB-4CDB-BEC8-D0449D812D6C.jpg (15.1 KB, 31 views)

What is "good condition"? and what does the gunsmith look for?
Yea, rust and cracks!

__________________
Mike 2796
SoFo Bunch member

Good condition? I would say good bore and no heavy rusting or pitting. The gun should function in double action mode and should stay cocked in single action mode and then break when trigger pressure is applied. The extractor should push the empties out and then snap crisply back. Most importantly there should be good alignment between a chamber and the barrel when the gun is ready to fire (often called good timing). Check this before you buy. Cock and the cylinder should rotate to where the bolt locks it in its notch. Then pull the trigger and look at the front of the gun to see alignment. Even a small misalignment is readily visible. Then do double action for all chambers and check after each for misalignment. If you find misalignment for most chambers, you will have to find what is causing it. Pass on the sale unless you are very handy and can get parts.

A note on timing: Sometimes a single action cock will not quite align chamber and barrel. Then when you fire, everything aligns and it fires without incident. This is because the hand is a bit worn or the hand spring is weak and is most often found in Harrington & Richardson revolvers. Not so much in S & Ws. Pulling the trigger moves the hand just enough for good alignment. My opinion is it is safe to fire such a gun as long as you keep an eye on it for increased misalignment. Readers, correct or add to these comments as you see fit.

Harrington & Richardson revolvers are often mentioned when we talk about top break revolvers. I am often tempted by the lower prices of some H&Rs. I will present two that I have experience with. One is a winner and one is a loser. The first is a "Defender" of WWII vintage. I have heard that this is the only revolver made by H&R during the war years. It is a 38 S&W, very well made and with good accuracy at self defense ranges.
IMG_0416.jpg
IMG_0421.jpg
The second is called the "Victor" but I don't know what it would be victorious over. H&R took some manufacturing shortcuts with it. This one's a 32 but they also made it in 22 and 38.
IMG_0397.jpg
IMG_0404.jpg
IMG_0408.jpg
Note that it has a solid frame. They didn't put in cylinder flutes. Worse the chambers are smoothly machined, not specific for cartridge. Thus any 32 will fit from 32 S&W (short) to Long, to 32 H&R Mag, and 32 Fed mag. The latter two are too long to function, however, but the 32 H&R Mag case is a bit shorter so a mag loaded with a flush wadcutter would probably fire (not to do it!). The H&R name does not appear on the gun; they made it for sale to folks who wanted to apply their own name. Thus, if I owned Nelson's feed store I could engrave that on the top of the frame and give one to my best customers. You don't want one folks. This gun looks just like I thought a toy gun should look when I was a boy. Since I am still aboy at heart, I got one.

"Good condition" for a top break should also include checking that the latch holding the barrel to the frame locks up tightly. You don't want it to pop open upon firing.

"These guns "DID NOT ALL CHAMBER the ... 32 Smith & Wesson. They originally chambered different... .32's and are not stamped on the barrel with that original caliber."

Excluding rimfires, I do not know of any .32 CF cartridges that were used in American top break revolvers other than the .32 S&W (short)/.32 Colt New Police. There was a .32 (short) Colt cartridge but I am not aware of its ever being chambered in any American top break revolvers, only Colt solid frame revolvers, and also a European .320 revolver cartridge, also never chambered in any American-made revolvers that I am aware of. Does anyone know of .32 CF cartridges other than the .32 S&W/.32 Colt New Police that were used in American top break revolvers from any maker?

Its been my limited experience with black powder loads that if you put the correct amount of black powder into the case, there is usually just enough room to put a .030 fiber wad between the powder and bullet and still have enough room left in the case to seat the bullet to the appropriate COL. I first learned about this shooting 45/70 in an original Trapdoor Springfield, you cannot get 70 grns of 2F black powder in the case and still seat the bullet with wad...the earlier cases had balloon heads like the early .44 special which allowed for more powder, also the cartridge thickness was thinner allowing more powder to be loaded into the case. Currently Winchester makes the thinnest cases, they are getting harder to come by. While fooling around with .38 S&W I was tempted to load some smokeless but did not like the empty space, I resorted to using pufflon or dacron teddy bear filler to keep the powder against the primer. I have been told I was wasting my time, similar to weighing individual black powder loads. One must exercise caution with these older, antique firearms even when using black powder, a general rule of thumb though is as I mentioned earlier, put enough powder in the case to allow at least a .030 fiber wad and a very slight amount of compression on the powder. Goex black powder performs better with compression, Swiss not so much due to the fact Swiss is graphite coated, Goex is not. You do not want to crush the grains of coated black powder, Goex can handle almost .25" of compression, Swiss .10...you gain nothing compressing Swiss, the laws of diminishing returns will bite you, accuracy will fall off. Now with Goex all but finished we should all learn to work with a more superior powder for as long as the Swiss will continue to satisfy the market, both civilian and military.

Long story short? There were several .32 centerfire both shorts and Longs manufactured during the black powder era.

Harrington & Richardson actually contracted U.S.Cartridge Co and also UMC to manufacture the H&R .32 centerfire Long for their large frame top breaks and rare long barrel 7 shot target models and the .32 centerfire short for their small frame topbreaks.

Merwin and Hulbert also contracted to manufacture their variation of .32 centerfire short and .38 centerfire for their early revolvers.

Neither is the same as Smith & Wesson.

Both companies eventually went to the more popular Smith and Wesson calibers but for several years and many thousands of guns manufactured to chamber their own custom calibers that do not match the .312 Smith & Wesson .32 and the .360 Smith & Wesson .38.

It’s a much longer story that dates initially to the centerfire cartridge conversions.

Murph

Gang, wow tons of helpful stuff so glad I asked! Can keep all my fingers now��

Hey Sox,
Can you post a photo of your Bicycle gun or at least confirm if it's an early version "no" caliber stamp on the barrel or a late example with the caliber stamp?


Murph