32 s&w -32 long colt

are the above ctg. interchangeable ?please help Yes or NO 32 s&w long -32 long colt

No.

... has too few characters!

Nope. Won't interchange. Well ... the .32 Short Colt and .32 Long Colt will effectively fire in the .32 S&W Long revolver with no issues though the cartridge is not a true fit. One cannot chamber the slightly larger in diameter .32 S&W Long in a .32 Long Colt revolver.

The .32 Short and Long Colt cartridge has a neck diameter of .313 while the .32 Smith & Wesson Long cartridge has a neck diameter of .335. Bullet diameter of the .32 Colt is .313 while the bullet diameter of the .32 S&W Long is .312 (according to Barnes "Cartridges of the World")

.32 S&W Long flanked by .32 Long Colt and .32 Short Colt.


I once wagged a .32 Long Colt chambered Colt New Pocket home from the Dallas Market Hall Gun Show thinking I could make use of supplies of .32 S&W Long I had on hand. No. Instead I had to mount a search for scarce .32 Colt ammunition, Long and Short.



I-Frame Smith & Wesson Model 1903 .32 Smith & Wesson Long (above)

Colt New Pocket .32 Long Colt (below)

IIRC Colt's .32 BP cartridges used heel bullets (like .22 rimfires), so the case is a smidge smaller ( by 2x case thickness) in diameter than a S&W .32.

As stated you can chamber and fire Colt L or S in a S&W Long (bullets are same diameter) but not S&Ws in a Colt (the cylinder holes are too small).

You can chamber S&Ws in a S&WL. You can also chamber and fire .32 acps in a S&WL; S&WL, S&W, L or S Colts and acp in a .32 H&R; or all of the above in a .327 Federal.

You did not say what type of gun, Black Powder has a different pressure signature than does smokeless, with the pressure peak being longer in time from ignition. Guns made for BP (and different makers changed at different times, probably all by 1910 or so) do not have long happy lives if exposed to many higher peak pressure early smokeless powder loads.

On the positive side the smell of sulphur and bacon grease is something everyone should experience. Just my $0.02.

.32 S&W (not S&W Long)

Afterthought: A Colt marked .32 New Police is .32 S&WL, neither C nor S&W could bear using (or prob. uttering) the others name.

A few years ago I picked up a really nice condition Colt in .32 Colt. I think the bullet diameter is .299 on the Colt. Even if its a low pressure round, I would think the case would rupture if used in a .32 S&W.

So my table partner took mercy on me and gave me his 12 rounds of Colt ammo. Then by carefully searching the following shows, I found a couple of boxes for sale. It taught me to not trust ammo sellers. They take a Colt box and pour in some 32 S&W rounds and call it good. New rule: even if wrapped in plastic to "protect" the valuable box, don't trust the thieves.

Then shooting the revolver is a hoot. It has what we call "mild" recoil. Its about the same as shooting 22 shorts. Not the HV variety. You hear it go bang and a hole appear on the paper. But you kind of think something was wrong. The sights didn't even move. I recommend them highly, even if the wrong brand.

Here's a portion of a pontification of a post I made over on Colt Forum a few years back. Both the .32 Short Colt and .32 Long Colt were tested along with the .32 S&W Long.

_______________________


The .41 wasn't the only Long Colt cartridge in attendance at the range today. I included a little 4-inch Colt New Pocket (transition) revolver that I have and a box of both .32 Long Colt and .32 Short Colt ammunition. This revolver dates from 1905 and is in reasonable shooting condition with a fair bore and a nice, tight action. It went head's up in competition with a couple more elderly revolvers, both chambered for the .32 S&W Long. I think it beat out its Smith & Wesson competition for load performance.



Ammunition used was late vintage Remington .32 Long Colt and late vintage Winchester .32 Short Colt.

Remington .32 Long Colt 82 grain lead round nose

783 fps MV
112 ft./lbs. ME
72 ES
24 SD

Winchester .32 Short Colt 80 grain lead round nose

763 fps MV
103 ft./lbs. ME
54 ES
19 SD

I fired the Winchester .32 Short Colt load first. The Remington .32 Long Colt load fooled me into thinking that I could perceive a significant increase in power when I was firing it. It was longer and had a heavier bullet. The chronograph revealed how wrong perceptions may be.

The Remington .32 Long Colt load billowed great clouds of white smoke, both from the muzzle and from the barrel/cylinder gap. It didn't hang in the air like black powder smoke but dissipated in a wink. I thought this a bit unusual and excessive. I'm guessing it has something to do with the bullet lube used. The revolver was very sooty at the end of its session. I've not examined the bore closely yet but a cursory look in bright sunlight, without my reading glasses, revealed that rifling could still be seen.

As may be seen there is very little difference in velocity performance between the .32 Long Colt and .32 Short Colt. Couple this fact with the whopping 2 grain difference in bullet weight and we effectively have identical cartridge performance.

A 1917 vintage Smith & Wesson Model 1903 .32 Hand Ejector was also carted out to the range and put through its paces with Aguila factory loads.



This revolver is in excellent condition and tight as new. It sports the 3 1/4-inch barrel which has a sparkling bright bore.

Aguila 98 grain lead round nose fired in the Smith & Wesson Model 1903

631 fps MV
87 ft./lbs ME
50 ES
20 SD

A Colt Police Positive .32 was also tested with the Aguila ammunition. This little revolver has seen better days but still has a little original finish and is serviceable. It has a 4-inch barrel.



Aguila 98 grain lead round nose fired in the Colt Police Positive

728 fps
115 ft./lbs ME
37 ES
16 SD

The surprise here for me was that the Colt gave so much higher velocity than the Smith & Wesson. I can't imagine that 3/4 inch of barrel length would make much difference with a low pressure load like this Aguila .32 S&W Long ammunition.

The Police Positive is much the better gun for pleasant shooting. It gives a fuller grip and is better balanced though it is still pretty small and concealable. For me, both the Smith & Wesson Model 1903 and the Colt New Pocket have stunted grip frames with thin panels that don't afford a truly adequate grip for my fairly large hands. I enjoyed the Police Positive so much that I shot it for a while at a spinning disc target I had brought with me. I forget about actually shooting this Police Positive from time to time and need to take it out more for some great .32 fun.



I also tried the Aguila in a 7.62 Nagant revolver that I won last year in a shooting contest, just because so many claim that it is ok to shoot .32 S&W Long in the Nagant's factory cylinder. I've already tested the revolver for accuracy with .32 S&W Long and satisfied myself that it is a non-event to fire .32 S&W Long ammunition in it. All that remained was to test .32 S&W Long for velocity and consistency.

Aguila .32 S&W Long ammunition fired in a Nagant revolver

574 fps MV
72 ft./lbs ME
25 ES
15 SD

By studying the 7 cartridge cases in the above photo, one may see a slight bulge in the .32 S&W Long that forms when it is fired in a Nagant revolver. I've fired most of a box and have not had a split.

So, using the same ammunition, the Colt Police Positive gave the best efficiency. It is preferred for pleasant shooting. If I bear down and really strive to shoot both the Colt and the Smith & Wesson for accuracy they group identically for me. I feel that I may be more prone to fliers with the Smith & Wesson.

The Nagant will give a really good accuracy performance with the .32 S&W Long ammunition, better in fact than it shoots its own proper ammunition. It handles, balances, and points much better than it looks. It is hopeless to load and unload. Slower than molasses, it has a loading gate like a Colt Single Action Army but with a curious pivoting ejector rod that has no spring to retract it. Most awkward. If under attack or fighting hand-to-hand in a combat situation, one would have its cylinder's complement of 7 shots with no reasonable way to reload in a timely manner. The gas seal system for which it is famous does work, but for no purpose since the ammunition is so feeble.

Here's a test of Fiocchi factory 7.62 Nagant ammunition with a 98 grain jacketed bullet.

672 fps MV
98 ft./lbs ME
84 ES
28 SD



When considering the operation of the Nagant, the Soviets would have been just as well off to try to beat back the German hoards in 1941 if they had been armed with a Colt Police Positive .32.

Are there any NEW .32 S&W Long or .32 Long Colt revolvers being made here in the USA?

The original Charter "Undercoverette" from 1960s-70s era was chambered in .32 S&WL, it is now chambered for the just slightly longer .32 H&R Mag. Any revolver chambered in .32 H&R Mag will fire .32 S&WL or .32 S&W. Those chambered in .327 Fed Mag like the Ruger LCR, SP101, Single Six or Seven or S&W's 632 will fire all the above.

I liked bmcgilvray's ammo test and agree the little Colt Police Positive is a great little gun. I have owned several and all shot very well. I wonder if the difference in performance vs the S&W is due to variations in bore dimensions rather than barrel length?

As to the Nagant the Fiocchi ammo is well known to be underpowered, I have seen tests (on Gunboards and other forums) comparing Soviet military ammo to the commercial stuff (Fiocchi and PPU) and the military stuff was significantly hotter. Still no powerhouse by US standards but probably seen as acceptable performance for the 1890's era it was developed in. Fiocchi performs much closer to the specs of the Russian target ammo that was first imported with the guns when they started arriving here some years ago. Came in little 40 rd yellow or white boxes and usually had a bullseye printed on it. I miss those days and all the cheap, fascinating surplus that was coming in then.

"The surprise here for me was that the Colt gave so much higher velocity than the Smith & Wesson. I can't imagine that 3/4 inch of barrel length would make much difference with a low pressure load like this Aguila .32 S&W Long ammunition."

It shouldn't be a surprise. It has been long recognized that average MV differences among different revolvers, even revolvers of the same make having the same barrel length and firing the same load, can be significant if not sizeable. The most likely explanation is variances in the width of the barrel-cylinder gap, but there may also be other dimensional difference factors in play. Speer's Reloading Manual #9 (and possibly other editions) has a fairly lengthy article about it which demonstrates just how large the MV differences among similar revolvers can be. The main take-away is to not assume MV information provided in any reloading manual or ammunition manufacturer's literature will apply to your revolver. If you really need to know the MV of a specific load for your revolver, the only way to find out is to get a chronograph.

32 Long Colt

I found 2 boxes of 32 Long Colt at the show in Tulsa recently, the Peters is full & correct missing one end flap, the Western is still sealed. I have reloaded both long & short for a number of years, I think they are harder to reload than any others I have. The original cartridge was for revolvers, case longer than a short, but shorter than the inside lubed later cases, they had a longer heeled bullet. Second photo shows a glue test bullet from a short mold, then a commercial modern cast heeled bullet, then a short Colt with lubaloy heeled bullet, in center is one of the original Colt in-between case with heeled bullet made for the early revolvers, next is a shortened reloaded long Colt case trimmed down for the commercial heeled bullets, at far right is original long Colt case reloaded with an inside lubed hollow base bullet.