.32-20 +P ammo-Safe??

[lgeorge1]

I own a vintage single action Colt revolver. Colt archive research ID's gun as shipped to Sears in 1906. Not sure of the prior travel history of this gun other than my father owned it for as long as I can remember. Well over 70 years. I don't think it has ever had all that many rounds put through it. After my fathers death I took his guns & used up the couple of boxes of .32-20 ammo he had left. Since then I have only been able to locate a small quantity of additional ammo. Cowboy loads from Georgia Arms. Now, Midway has some in stock but it is .32-20 +P for rifle. I'm not sure if this should be used in my gun, even though it is in very fine condition.

Anyone have any experience here?

 

[Heinz]

It is a colt single action and should be "safe" but I would not use "+P" loads. The springs and small parts are over 100 years old and anything that breaks will be hard to find, and no longer original. If you do not reload now, I would suggest getting a simple reloader and loading up black powder or light smokeless loads with 32-caliber round balls (00 buckshot). I personally would put the well-cared-for beauty on the shelf and be happy with cowboy loads very sparingly. One replaced part might set you back a thousand dollars in value.

 

[Muley Gil]

I would personally buy the Remington ammo that Midway has in stock and NOT the +P .32-20, to shoot in your Colt.

The Remington ammo is safe in a good condition handgun.

 

[gwpercle]

Vintage Colt SA 32-20 , made circa 1906 ...

I wouldn't shoot any +P ammo in the old girl ... she's Old !

My Daddy would tell you ... "Boy , don't be acting the fool ! "

It may not damage the gun ... but I would rather be safe than sorry .
Gary

 

[ColbyBruce]

HSM in Montana has a cowboy competition load that might work for you.

You have a nice looking Colt there.

 

[44wheelman]

I would not. Besides, rifle ammo will have a slower burning powder, and accuracy may suffer. Similar to 30 carbine…I always reload for that.

1905 was transition to smokeless powders for Colt Saa. Does yours have a VP proofmark on trigger guard?

 

[M29since14]

The Remington .32-20s are the right choice for your old Colt, IMO. Beyond that, the .32-20 is not difficult to load for and doing so will save you some money if you will shoot much. You’ll find it’s common to find .32-20 rifle data published separately from .32-20 pistol data. Stick with the pistol data. Economical versions of basic reloading equipment are not all that expensive. You might find you enjoy the hobby.

 

[cgt4570]

A hard NO on +P! You won't blow a Colt SAA up with it, but it will be very hard on it, and stretch things.
The big co's (Rem, Win, etc.) only do seasonal/occasional runs of some of this older stuff. With the overall ammo shortage the past few years, I don't think they've produced ANY (.25-20, .218 Bee, .32-20, .32 S&W, .38 S&W, the old Colt calibers, etc.). It should come back eventually.
Until then, hit up any gunshows. You'll probably find (but pay for) some.
I've seen some of those calibers sell at online auctions for as high as $2/round! Glad I have a stockpile, and can reload pretty much everything I shoot.
Just in .32-20, I have 3 first gen SAA's, numerous pre-war S&W M&P's (including a couple target models), a Marlin 1889, a Remington Rolling block, and I'm probably leaving a few out.

Good luck!

 

[.455_Hunter]

Good grief!

$103 for a 50 round box of new Remington standard lead .32-20!

Those Buffalo Bore loads are going to get somebody in trouble. 2000 fps from a rifle and 1400 from a revolver with 115 gr is HOT. I sure would NOT run them in my 1899 HE.

 

[SuperMan]

I'm in the camp of anything made before WWII should be treated with kindness. That said the Colt SAA was approved for use with .38-44/.38 Special High Speed ammo in the 1930s. They were probably running in the 25-29k psi range. Anyone know what the rifle rated .32-20 was rated at?

I've got a pair of 2005 vintage Colt SAAs in .32-20 and a FA 97. Don't worry about what I put in them at all.

Bob

 

[silicosys4]

Buffalo bore advertises their 32-20+p at 1200fps out of a 4 3/4" SAA. I might hesitate to run those through a BP Era gun,
But a smokeless proofed SAA wouldn't have a problem. We are talking about .32 h&r magnum ballistics
They chambered them in .357 magnum, after all.

 

[Model19man]

Anything Colt made they warranted as safe for smokeless powder from 1900 onward. They only later started adding the "VP" stamp when consumers demanded to see something.

Nonetheless I would avoid +P ammunition in a revolver that old. Other, safer options exist.

 

[murphydog]

I would personally buy the Remington ammo that Midway has in stock and NOT the +P .32-20, to shoot in your Colt.

The Remington ammo is safe in a good condition handgun.

It is listed as a “rifle” load but this looks like standard pressure lead. The Buffalo Bore + P loads look comparable to the old jacketed true rifle loads, definitely not advisable for any older handgun.

 

[BLACKHAWKNJ]

Skeeter Skelton wrote of firing "Rifles Only" ammunition out of the 32-20 SAA he bought in 1946 when he was discharged from the Marines. Said it kicked too much, didn't hit were it was aimed-and didn't recommend it.

 

[SnidelyWhiplash]

I agree...save +P .32-20 ammo for long guns.

 

[THE PILGRIM]

I’ll say ‘WHY’ before I say ‘NO!’

 

[silicosys4]

Curious what people here so adamant against any factory +p think is going to happen.
The .357 magnum was a factory clambering for 1st gen SAA's.
There have been many early smokeless SAA's converted to .357 magnum that also don't have a reputation for beating themselves to death
A smokeless .32-20 cylinder is exceptionally strong given the amount of metal surrounding each cartridge.
A smokeless SAA frame that can easily handle the conversion to .357 magnum can also easily handle .32 H&R pressure.

The .32-20 high speed cartridges of yore didn't blow up guns. They stuck bullets in the barrel because smokeless powder was a new thing and the new, slow burning powder used proved to burn inconsistently in revolvers.

So I'm really not sure where this idea came from, that a .32-20+p is so far beyond what a smokeless SAA can handle, or that it will beat it to death⁸

A smokeless proofed gun that is capable of handling the .357 magnum is not going to choke on a .32 h&r magnum-level .32-20.

 

[Jim Watson]

There is no standard for .32-20 +P; the Buffalo Bore stuff is an overload to whatever they think a "modern" gun will handle. Read their caveats
32-20 WINCHESTER +P Hard Cast

Although SAAMI considers .32-20 a rifle cartridge, all that is standardized is the low end load at 16000 CUP, about like a .38 Special. The expensive Remington or somebody's "cowboy" load is what you need.

Remember, this is a 1906 gun, not a 1930s "first generation good enough for .357 magnum."

 

[silicosys4]

There is no standard for .32-20 +P; the Buffalo Bore stuff is an overload to whatever they think a "modern" gun will handle. Read their caveats
32-20 WINCHESTER +P Hard Cast

Although SAAMI considers .32-20 a rifle cartridge, all that is standardized is the low end load at 16000 CUP, about like a .38 Special. The expensive Remington or somebody's "cowboy" load is what you need.

Remember, this is a 1906 gun, not a 1930s "first generation good enough for .357 magnum."

This caveat?
"use this high-performance ammo only in firearms made with barrel steel designed for smokeless powder."


Can you give a single example of a failure of an early smokeless frame rechambered to .357? We know there were many such conversions.
Better yet, can you give an example of an early smokeless 32-20 SAA failing from the use of high velocity "rifle" .32-20 loads?

 

[BMur]

High pressure loads

Great subject.

I have hand loaded smokeless loads in the 32-20 for both the SAA and the Frontier DA Colt but only for post 1905-1907 examples. (Modern)

Elmer Kieth in the early 1900’s would hand load them up to 1500 FPS in the SAA safely using 2400 powder. To be fair though he did blow up his fair share of SAA’s. However, he never had any reported or documented problems with the 32 WCF on a SAA platform.

Introduced in 1884 on the SAA platform it was designed as part of the “Dual purpose” Frontier cartridge that would chamber in both the Rifle and pistol. Very popular caliber it is often seen in reloading tools of that era. Arguably the “most popular “ cartridge standing along side the 44WCF. Extremely common on Ideal tools. So it is safe to say it was hand loaded A LOT back in the day.

This is probably the one cartridge that I have a lot of tolerance for regarding pressure loads. Extremely thick cylinder, forcing cone and barrel I have never seen or heard of one being damaged. All the guns I have seen over the years damaged I have never seen a 32/20 SAA damaged but I have seen many put together so clearances can be an issue.

Also mixing black powder parts with modern parts can also be an issue since they were not serial numbered and antique parts seem to find their way onto smokeless frames.

Still, there is a lot of metal on these old guns. They are noticeably heavier in the hand as compared to a 45cal. Pretty safe caliber to shoot if not “the safest”.

Murph