32 cal loads for handguns
- Thread starter Green Frog
- Start date
ozo said:
When I consider that 2.7-3.4 grains of 231 will drive a 148 WC, or 158 SWC from my .38's with plenty of oomph, I have to believe a 2.3 gr charge (which is almost as heavy as the .38 charge max of 2.7 gr) under a much lighter bullet, but in a much smaller bore, so more pressure obviously, will be more than enough. I went and checked through most all of my manuals (which span about 50 years of time) and that charge seems to be pretty much in line with what most of them show.
ozo
Member
Thank you Gun4Fun....for the reply.
I will take these and test, prolly in the AM
I shall report with the outcome.
I will take these and test, prolly in the AM
I shall report with the outcome.
The loads I listed that I use are for the 32 long. My load manual actually uses a little more 231 then 3.0 gr. I'm on the lower end of the scale. I use the same 3.0 gr for my 38 spec loads, saves changing the powder measure. The 2 gr of 231 for the HBWC a friend uses in his Hamerli, deadly accurate in his gun. He switches from 22 to 32 depending on the match he's shooting. He also had a custom bbl made with a 1 in 10 rate of twist. Larry
OP
Green Frog
Member
There you go again.....
YUP!!
Skeeter built some fire breathing loads in the first Federal brass in 32 H&R. The pressure they developed is said to have caused some engineers @ HP White Labs to need a change of underwear (not really, that was just for effect) and Shooting Times had to print warnings and disclaimers (that did happen.). They probably would have been fine in a K-frame or Blackhawk, but in Single Sixes and Model 631s the were just too hot. 327 FM is designed to operate hot in suitably strong guns... that's just the way it is. Sooooo, I figure if I have a gun that will handle all of them, I'm pretty much good to go with any of them. I can shoot whatever strength I want in the appropriate cartridge. I still like the old 32-20, but it won't do anything I can't do with one or the other of the straight cylindrical 32s. I may sound like I'm preaching, but that's my story and I'm sticking to it!
Froggie
I've seen some posts in the past that the 32 long was loaded pretty hot. Hammerdown used buckshot for low end plinking, not sure of the powder charge. Larry
OP
Green Frog
Member
I just went back to the old original Lyman Cast Bullet Handbook for their recommendations. They show a starting load of 1.1 gr of Bullseye behind a 77 gr bullet and 1.0 gr for the 84 gr bullet. They show starting loads or 1.6 and 1.5 gr respectively for Unique and those bullets. I'm not going to put their whole page out here, but will be happy to send you a photocopy if you PM me a snail mail address. They show charge data for 7 different powders, but all are for loads that max out around 2.5 gr or less, and those two bullets only.
Froggie
PS If there was ever a case that screamed to be reloaded with a 310 tool, this is it... JMHO!
stu1ritter
US Veteran
Which manual shows 3.0 gr. of W231 in the 32 S&W Long? I'd like to take a look at that. Thanks,
Stu
ozo
Member
All those years I had it stuck in my head that the .32's were cheesy,
and 60yrs ago, they were......
But when I actually started messin'/loading/shooting them, it was an entirely different story, despite all the criticism still flying around the www, but I have come to understand it's simply because the ones that ridicule the .32's just haven't shot them. This surely holds true for the .327 federal.
We're off here shortly to go test these new ones.
and 60yrs ago, they were......
But when I actually started messin'/loading/shooting them, it was an entirely different story, despite all the criticism still flying around the www, but I have come to understand it's simply because the ones that ridicule the .32's just haven't shot them. This surely holds true for the .327 federal.
We're off here shortly to go test these new ones.
I've been trying to get a GP100 in 327 for one full year now. The holster and custom grips came last december... The brass and lead came in around February. But no gun. Sigh. Calling Ruger got me the same result twice:
"We just shipped three to distributor X."
Call to distributor X:
"If Ruger shipped them, they sure didn't tell us about it."
"We just shipped three to distributor X."
Call to distributor X:
"If Ruger shipped them, they sure didn't tell us about it."
YUP!!
Skeeter built some fire breathing loads in the first Federal brass in 32 H&R. The pressure they developed is said to have caused some engineers @ HP White Labs to need a change of underwear (not really, that was just for effect) and Shooting Times had to print warnings and disclaimers (that did happen.). They probably would have been fine in a K-frame or Blackhawk, but in Single Sixes and Model 631s the were just too hot. 327 FM is designed to operate hot in suitably strong guns... that's just the way it is. Sooooo, I figure if I have a gun that will handle all of them, I'm pretty much good to go with any of them. I can shoot whatever strength I want in the appropriate cartridge. I still like the old 32-20, but it won't do anything I can't do with one or the other of the straight cylindrical 32s. I may sound like I'm preaching, but that's my story and I'm sticking to it!
Froggie
I miss Skeeter...
I would love a 327, not that I would shoot many full bore loads, but I would like to be able to. The 32 Maggie at 1000fps does everything I need here in MI. I think the Blackhawk/K Frame size is overkill in the 327. Your 616 is an exception, mostly because this is the SW forum....a 16-4 is on my bucket list.
How ever, I just really love a 32 Thread...
Ethan
Stu, I'm on the low side of the 38 powder charge and the book says 2.7 gr of 231 with a "do not reduce" for the 32 long. Did buy some 98 gr cast bullets this weekend at the gun show. Figured 50.00 for a thousand is OK today but will buy a bunch if the prices go down a bit. Larry
.32 S&W (not Long)
I have used 1.0 grain loads of Bullseye in the short case with a piece of O buckshot for a bullet. It was seated flush with the case mouth and then a sliver of bullet lube applied by scraping the case mouth against the side of a stick of bullet lube. Very little is needed. These have been fired in guns far less respectable than S&W top breaks with no problems. Ken
I have used 1.0 grain loads of Bullseye in the short case with a piece of O buckshot for a bullet. It was seated flush with the case mouth and then a sliver of bullet lube applied by scraping the case mouth against the side of a stick of bullet lube. Very little is needed. These have been fired in guns far less respectable than S&W top breaks with no problems. Ken
ozo
Member
I'm impressed with a lot of these loads.
That 16-4 is sweet.
My Lyman Cast Bullet Handbook shows a .32 S&W Long load with a HP version of the .32-20 bullet moving at over 1100 FPS from a 4" model 30-1.
Not a pipsqueak, if you ask me.
Then again, neither are a lot of the loads posted in this thread.
That 16-4 is sweet.
My Lyman Cast Bullet Handbook shows a .32 S&W Long load with a HP version of the .32-20 bullet moving at over 1100 FPS from a 4" model 30-1.
Not a pipsqueak, if you ask me.
Then again, neither are a lot of the loads posted in this thread.
Alk8944
US Veteran
I assume you refer to the 4.3 gr/Unique that Lyman has listed for something over 50 years? 1100 FPS is a bit optimistic. I have shot thousands of 4.0/Unique with the 3118 and they chronograph about 950 from my Model 16. Pressure signs with the 4.3 gr. were, well, let's just say that you should never see "pressure signs" in any standard revolver cartridge.
For whoever called the .32 H&R a "Wannabe Magnum" let me tell you about that. I have worked up loads for my 4" Ruger SP-101 with Lyman #3118 @ 112 gr. that will honestly chronograph within a very few FPS of 1400 FPS. No pressure signs and the gun shoots like a rifle. The 3118 has the same sectional density as a 158 gr .38 bullet! I defy you to get 1400 FPS from a 4" .357 Magnum revolver with a 158 cast bullet! No, the .32 H&R is no "Wannabee", it is the "Real Deal" in guns capable of using loads to it's full potential. And, NO, I will not shoot those in my 631, but I have gotten it safely to about 1200 FPS with the same bullet. And, likewise, NO, I will not post what the load(s) is/are.
And note: 1400 FPS, plain base cast bullet, Saeco Green lube, and no significant leading! Anyone who says you can't push a cast bullet over 1000FPS without terrible leading simply doesn't know what they are talking about and/or have no real experience shooting cast bullets. Bullet fit and lube are everything, alloy hardness and gas checking have virtually nothing to do with whether you get leading or not.
Last edited:
ozo
Member
"And note: 1400 FPS, plain base cast bullet, Saeco Green lube, and no significant leading! Anyone who says you can't push a cast bullet over 1000FPS without terrible leading simply doesn't know what they are talking about and/or have no real experience shooting cast bullets. Bullet fit and lube are everything, alloy hardness and gas checking have virtually nothing to do with whether you get leading or not."---Alk8944
Speaking of leading.......I have an 8" barrel that only gets fed 158gr TCBB Penn in .3585dia and it just came back from having repair. The gunsmith was very gracious and cleaned it to look like new, even the face of the cylinder looked new. It is a satin stainless, and it gets dirty fast.
Well, to shoot/test it I did........and I shoot the same load from it all the time....but, the first five rounds shot awful [low-left] until I had a bit of lead back in that spit-shine barrel that the gunsmith so meticulously cleaned.
People that shoot lead, understand lead....and it's great benefits.
People that complain about it are usually ones that don't shoot much of it, don't understand it, and regurgitate what they have read about it....from others that don't understand it.
Speaking of leading.......I have an 8" barrel that only gets fed 158gr TCBB Penn in .3585dia and it just came back from having repair. The gunsmith was very gracious and cleaned it to look like new, even the face of the cylinder looked new. It is a satin stainless, and it gets dirty fast.
Well, to shoot/test it I did........and I shoot the same load from it all the time....but, the first five rounds shot awful [low-left] until I had a bit of lead back in that spit-shine barrel that the gunsmith so meticulously cleaned.
People that shoot lead, understand lead....and it's great benefits.
People that complain about it are usually ones that don't shoot much of it, don't understand it, and regurgitate what they have read about it....from others that don't understand it.
OP
Green Frog
Member
Good stuff so far, guys! Keep those comments and recipes coming. To Alk8944 I would say, yes you can make the 32 H&R design into a real magnum, but like the 327, a hot 32 H&R then really doesn't belong in a small or weak design like the H&R offerings or the smallest Smiths or Rugers. Yes, the latter two will hold up to them for a while, but will probably be beat up badly in relatively short order by these hot loads. For that matter, I can probably make a 32 S&W Long have a strong enough charge to wreck any of those, but the brass might not be too happy either. Anyway, I figure "a little is good, more is better, and too much is just right," so the 327 fits any and all needs in the 32 family and I want a gun heavy enough to handle it, so a minimum of a K-frame Smith, a 101 or mid frame SA Ruger, or perhaps an old Colt in the mid-size or larger frame. Then if I want to shoot light, I can pick one of the "Longs," for medium, the H&R offering, and if I want to toss thunderbolts, I can do it from the same gun with the 327 FM. This is all my personal opinion and experience and you are welcome to take or leave it as you wish. 
Froggie
Froggie
Last edited:
ozo
Member
I gotta agree Froggie.....
Why beat up a nice gun ? It's the same with these light guns, poly's, airweight, aluminum, etc......they are designed for a particular purpose, to be light for carry and comfort, and not designed as a range gun with hard use, but for a few rounds if need be.
I do not feel comfortable shooting heavy .327fed loads in the S&W 632-1 Pro Series as a steady diet. The GP-100 or Blackhawk, even the SP-101 maybe.......no problem.
Why beat up a nice gun ? It's the same with these light guns, poly's, airweight, aluminum, etc......they are designed for a particular purpose, to be light for carry and comfort, and not designed as a range gun with hard use, but for a few rounds if need be.
I do not feel comfortable shooting heavy .327fed loads in the S&W 632-1 Pro Series as a steady diet. The GP-100 or Blackhawk, even the SP-101 maybe.......no problem.
Lets get this back on top, speaking of top is there any loads that give the 32 long a little better performance? Larry
