Alpo
Member
Title pretty much says it. Fella asked me if it was safe to shoot commercial 32 S&W in his 32HE 1st Model.
When did S&W start proofing for smokeless?
- Thread starter Alpo
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
OP
Alpo
Member
He just gave me the SN, 164xx.
jsmith
Member
That's a good question I have even wondered about myself.
I have a Model 1896 [shipped 1897] and a two Model 1903's [shipped 1904 and shipped 1907].32 Hand Ejectors. All I ever shoot out of them is modern smokeless .32 S&W Longs and reloads.
The .32 S&W Long originally started out as a blackpowder load but made the switch to smokeless very early on. All the cartridges out there that were originally loaded to blackpowder are loaded to smokeless equivalents. With a few exceptions, almost all guns that were originally blackpowder cartridges will safely fire smokeless loads. Never fire smokeless loads in guns that are of the tip-up design or are brass-framed.
The .32 S&W Long was also made in top-break revolvers by H&R and Iver Johnson when they officially made the switch to smokeless powder. H&R made the switch in 1905 and Iver Johnson in 1909.
The .32 S&W and .32 S&W Long's are not very powerful rounds by today's standards.
jsmith
I have a Model 1896 [shipped 1897] and a two Model 1903's [shipped 1904 and shipped 1907].32 Hand Ejectors. All I ever shoot out of them is modern smokeless .32 S&W Longs and reloads.
The .32 S&W Long originally started out as a blackpowder load but made the switch to smokeless very early on. All the cartridges out there that were originally loaded to blackpowder are loaded to smokeless equivalents. With a few exceptions, almost all guns that were originally blackpowder cartridges will safely fire smokeless loads. Never fire smokeless loads in guns that are of the tip-up design or are brass-framed.
The .32 S&W Long was also made in top-break revolvers by H&R and Iver Johnson when they officially made the switch to smokeless powder. H&R made the switch in 1905 and Iver Johnson in 1909.
The .32 S&W and .32 S&W Long's are not very powerful rounds by today's standards.
jsmith
Alk8944
US Veteran
Just to cover all bases at once, any S&W revolver in good condition can be safely fired with modern manufactured ammunition in standard loadings regardless of caliber. Standard loads manufactured to SAAMI standards are loaded to pressures appropriate for older guns.
FWIW, S&W never chambered a top break in .32 S&W Long, they were all .32 S&W. The .32 S&W Long was originally developed for the .32 Hand Ejector Model 1903. Most, if not all, cartridges the S&W Hand Ejector series of revolvers were chambered for were available in smokeless loadings from very early. S&W never cautioned against shooting smokeless powder loads in any Hand Ejector revolver.
FWIW, S&W never chambered a top break in .32 S&W Long, they were all .32 S&W. The .32 S&W Long was originally developed for the .32 Hand Ejector Model 1903. Most, if not all, cartridges the S&W Hand Ejector series of revolvers were chambered for were available in smokeless loadings from very early. S&W never cautioned against shooting smokeless powder loads in any Hand Ejector revolver.
cgt4570
Member
Sorry, but you're 7 years late. That round was developed for the Model of 1896 Hand Ejector.
Alk8944
US Veteran
You are absolutely correct, but that doesn't change the fact that the .32 S&W Long was never chambered in a top break.
OP
Alpo
Member
Trying to get this back to the original question, does anyone have a date for when S&W said, "Okay, our guns are safe for smokeless"? Colt did it in, I'm pretty sure, '97. Winchester obviously did in by '95, at least. This gun is a model 1896. SWAGing from the serial number, it was made about 1901. Logic says it would be safe.
But they guy doesn't want "logic". He wants a cut-off date. Has Smith and Wesson ever issued one?
Oh, and Alk8944, "the .32 S&W Long was never chambered in a top break" by Smith and Wesson. There are lots of other top-breaks out there chambered for it. IJ and H&R, for example
But they guy doesn't want "logic". He wants a cut-off date. Has Smith and Wesson ever issued one?
Oh, and Alk8944, "the .32 S&W Long was never chambered in a top break" by Smith and Wesson. There are lots of other top-breaks out there chambered for it. IJ and H&R, for example
twaits
Member
I don't mean to start a pissing match with you here but this is dangerously inaccurate information. NONE of the old large frame big bore Top Break S&Ws are safe with smokeless powder and even the little .22 tip ups are not safe with modern .22 short ammo. It might not kill you to fire them with modern ammo, but you will eventually destroy the gun. Probably sooner than later.
Last edited:
Driftwood Johnson
Member
Howdy
Colt first factory warrantied the Single Action Army for Smokeless powder in 1900, not 1897. The 'modern' spring loaded cylinder pin latch first began appearing on the SAA around 1892, but that was prior to Colt warrantying the gun for Smokeless Powder. In 1901 Colt began stamping 'PW' in a little triangle on the trigger guard which stood for Smokeless Powder Verified Proof. I do not have any specific information regarding Smith & Wesson, but I find it unlikely that Smith would have had access to steel that was any stronger than what Colt was using at the time. 1900 is a safe bet.
>Standard loads manufactured to SAAMI standards are loaded to pressures appropriate for older guns.
That is incorrect. Guns made for Black Powder simply are not safe to shoot with Smokeless Powder, no matter how lightly it is loaded. Smokeless Powder burns with a much different pressure curve than Black Powder. Even with old low pressure cartridges like 45 Colt, when loaded to SAAMI standards, Smokeless burns with a much sharper pressure spike that can shatter the old steel in guns not designed for Smokeless Powder.
Colt first factory warrantied the Single Action Army for Smokeless powder in 1900, not 1897. The 'modern' spring loaded cylinder pin latch first began appearing on the SAA around 1892, but that was prior to Colt warrantying the gun for Smokeless Powder. In 1901 Colt began stamping 'PW' in a little triangle on the trigger guard which stood for Smokeless Powder Verified Proof. I do not have any specific information regarding Smith & Wesson, but I find it unlikely that Smith would have had access to steel that was any stronger than what Colt was using at the time. 1900 is a safe bet.
>Standard loads manufactured to SAAMI standards are loaded to pressures appropriate for older guns.
That is incorrect. Guns made for Black Powder simply are not safe to shoot with Smokeless Powder, no matter how lightly it is loaded. Smokeless Powder burns with a much different pressure curve than Black Powder. Even with old low pressure cartridges like 45 Colt, when loaded to SAAMI standards, Smokeless burns with a much sharper pressure spike that can shatter the old steel in guns not designed for Smokeless Powder.
Last edited:
Driftwood Johnson
Member
Sorry, Double Tap
Last edited:
OP
Alpo
Member
I just got off the phone with Roy Jinks. He said they had not recommended shooting smokeless until 1909.
On a sadder note, he told me that my gun, that I had hoped would be my birth year (1955) was February of '56. Bummer. Must needs continue looking for the illusive "birthday gun".
On a sadder note, he told me that my gun, that I had hoped would be my birth year (1955) was February of '56. Bummer. Must needs continue looking for the illusive "birthday gun".
Driftwood Johnson
Member
pace40:
Thanks very much for posting those pages. Good documentation. I guess I better stop shooting Smokeless loads in my Model 1899 that was made in 1902.
Thanks very much for posting those pages. Good documentation. I guess I better stop shooting Smokeless loads in my Model 1899 that was made in 1902.
Ahhh...I shoot smokeless loads thru a 1863 model 2 on occassion. Hasn't blowed up yet...
Similar threads
- Locked
