The S&W 35 cal semi auto pistol

I disagree with Armyphotog's post that it is asking for trouble to shoot .32 ACP rounds in a Model 1913 S&W .35 auto. I have fired 1,000s or rounds of .32 cartridges in these .35 Autos and never had a problem, irrespective of the factory opinion that the power of the .32 acp was more than the .35 S&W round. The .32 is 0.011 in. smaller and of course the case expands slightly when used in the Model 1913. This has never caused problem in my experience, however I can agrees with the old warning of never fire a round in any gun that is not the round for which the gun was designed, is an appropriate safety caution. The barrels in these guns are .32 cal. and the exact same barrels were used to manufacture the .32 S&W pistols that followed the .35s. The original design of the .35 pistol was as a .30 Cal ( yes, Thirty Caliber) based on the Clement patent, and tooling was made to produce both .30 cal., .32 cal., and a .45 cal. pistol, but only the .32 was put into final production, and called a .35 cal. Joe Wesson, the designer of the Model 1913, felt that a half mantel jacketed bullet would lessen barrel wear, etc. Chuck Suydam's book "US Cartridges & Their handguns" gives all the dimensions of the .32 and .35 cal cartridges on pages 260-267, if you want to study those rounds. Ed.

opoefc said:

I disagree with Armyphotog's post that it is asking for trouble to shoot .32 ACP rounds in a Model 1913 S&W .35 auto. I have fired 1,000s or rounds of .32 cartridges in these .35 autos and never had a problem.

Click to expand...

You must have been a very wealthy man to be able to afford to shoot "thousands" of rounds of .32 ACP.

The reason that shooting .32 ACP in a .35 is not a good idea is that the .35 relies on a very light recoiling bolt, supposedly slowed down by a very heavy spring, thus having no significant mass to counteract the forces of recoil other than that spring. A heavy spring does nothing to actually counteract the recoiling forces; It's only function is to store kinetic energy to return that bolt to battery. A person versed in physics could probably explain it better than I, but that's the general gist of the matter. If you did, in fact, fire "thousands" of rounds as you state, my guess is that you have battered that poor little gun into oblivion.

I have both .35s and .32s, and the .32 is a competely different design. In fact, I don't think any significant parts interchange, and certainly not the barrels. In the case of the .32, the recoiling mass includes not only the breechblock, but the forward slide assembly as well coupled to a rather stiff recoil spring.

I don't know where you got the idea that the barrels were the same, but it's certainly not the case.

At any case, to use a simple analogy, firing .32 ACP in a .35 is akin to firing 9mm Parabellum in a 9mm Glisenti.

I would advise anyone who wants to shoot their .35 that they handload .32 auto with a reduced load.

The .30 and .380 pistols were only experimentals and never made it into production.

Smith & Wesson Auto .35cal Model 1913

If any one is looking to buy a Smith & Wesson Auto .35cal Model 1913 eighth variation I was going to post one on Gunbroker later this week but I would like to give the forum a shot first.

This pistol is often referred to as the Model 1913, since it was introduced in that year. It was S&W's first attempt at making an auto pistol. Production lasted until about 1921, and only 8,350 examples were produced. It used a unique cartridge which was fairly expensive and there were no adequate substitutes. This almost certainly accounted for the lack of popularity of the gun and caused its replacement by the S&W .32 Automatic Pistol. Going back to the .35 these appeared in eight different variations. This example is one of the eighth variation guns.
This gun, however, is quite rare, since fewer than 1,000 were ever produced. The last one left the factory in November, 1936. The serial number is 7391, rather close to the end of production. But the best indication of an eighth variation is the markings on the side of the barrel. This was the only variation that had the company name on the left side and the caliber designation on the right. This example is in very good condition, so it should definitely interest collectors.


Photobucket album with couple more pictures: IMG_1874_zps7111130b.jpg Photo by ern1911 | Photobucket

dondone said:

You must have been a very wealthy man to be able to afford to shoot "thousands" of rounds of .32 ACP.

The reason that shooting .32 ACP in a .35 is not a good idea is that the .35 relies on a very light recoiling bolt, supposedly slowed down by a very heavy spring, thus having no significant mass to counteract the forces of recoil other than that spring. A heavy spring does nothing to actually counteract the recoiling forces; It's only function is to store kinetic energy to return that bolt to battery. A person versed in physics could probably explain it better than I, but that's the general gist of the matter. If you did, in fact, fire "thousands" of rounds as you state, my guess is that you have battered that poor little gun into oblivion.

I have both .35s and .32s, and the .32 is a competely different design. In fact, I don't think any significant parts interchange, and certainly not the barrels. In the case of the .32, the recoiling mass includes not only the breechblock, but the forward slide assembly as well coupled to a rather stiff recoil spring.

I don't know where you got the idea that the barrels were the same, but it's certainly not the case.

At any case, to use a simple analogy, firing .32 ACP in a .35 is akin to firing 9mm Parabellum in a 9mm Glisenti.

I would advise anyone who wants to shoot their .35 that they handload .32 auto with a reduced load.

The .30 and .380 pistols were only experimentals and never made it into production.

Click to expand...

Both "Cartridges of the World" and Donnelley's "Manual of Cartridge Conversions" give a bullet diameter of 0.309" for both .35 S&W and .32 ACP cartridges. The only significant dimensional difference in the cases is that the .35 S&W has a slightly larger OD, probably because its case wall thickness is a little greater. Regarding the bullets, the weight of the .35 S&W factory bullet is given as 76 grains, while the standard bullet for the .32 ACP is 71 grains. The .32 ACP MV is slightly greater, but the muzzle energies are very similar. I imagine the .35 S&W semiauto pistols have collectively fired far more .32 ACP rounds in them than the .35 S&W, as virtually everything that I have seen written about the .35 S&W mentions that it was an extremely common practice to do so.

It is not possible to conclude that there is anything harmful or dangerous in firing .32 ACP ammunition in the .35 S&W pistol.

Back in the 40s, 50s & 60s, .32 acp caliber rounds were very common, especially foreign ammo. intended for the Walthers and other semi autos made in Europe. I had cases of that ammo., bought very cheaply at the time, which gave me the opportunity to fire 1,000s of rounds in various .32 cal auto pistols, including the Model 1913 S&W. Most of it was FMJ and probably didn't help the bore in those guns, but did help the ammo to feed nicely. None of the various makes of the ammo. gave me any problems in the S&Ws, that I recall, and it was common knowledge among shooters to use .32 cap in the .35 auto Model 1913s. Ed.

35SW ammo

Buffalo Arms sells 35SW ammo, it's a bit pricey(67-73 a box of 50) but we are talking about obsolete ammo here. It is loaded with 78gn lead bullets and they have plenty in stock, I just looked at it today.

What I would do were I the current owner of a .35 S&W (I did have one long ago, but didn't shoot it much, and I used .32 ACP ammo), is to handload lead bullets in .32 ACP cases to a level not much beyond that required to get positive functioning. But I already have the reloading dies to do that. At one time I had an extensive collection of .32 and .380 US pocket pistols, and reloaded about everything I fired in them. My two favorites were the Remington 51 and the Savage M1905. They sure don't make them like that anymore.

As this seems to be most recently active thread on SW 1913's, I thought I'd share a few comments.

I just acquired a very nice condition Model 1913, s/n 5xxx. I also bought 150 rounds of custom made .35 SW ammo from Buffalo Arms (not cheap). Interestingly, this ammo uses cut-down brass marked "25-20 Win" which research shows was a rifle cartridge based on a necked-down .32-20 Win cartridge. Have not fired it yet though. I also was lucky to buy a full box of Rem/UMC original .35 SW for around $100 with very clean shells (and an OK, but original, box). That is just for collector purposes of course! Another site is asking $295 (!!) for the same thing!

Although I have not yet fired it, upon racking and dry-firing, I am VERY impressed by the crispness and precision of the trigger break. It is not a light break by any means, but it is very crisp with very little creep and no grittiness or mushiness, in contrast to my Savage 1917 and JP Sauer M1913, which I still love anyway...

I have been trying to find the user's manual (if one exists) for the gun, even a repro, but without luck. One site that posts free pdf's of old gun manuals has a note that S&W lawyers told them not to post S&W materials, so no luck there. I am corresponding with S&W customer service about this, but they have been slow and stupid in their responses so far.

There are 2 decent articles on this gun, from the June 1956 and October 1963 issues of American Rifleman, and I bought originals of each issue on EBay for about $7.00 each. One of them has decent take-down instructions and a diagram.

The asking prices of these guns varies ridiculously on the auction sites, ranging from around $400 for real beaters (the grips seem especially prone to drying out and splintering), to over $1,500 for examples that are really not much better, but of course these never get any bids and are simply re-posted ad-nauseum. I got lucky on mine for the price and condition. The BlueBook values for these guns are: $875 (98%), $775 (95%), $625 (90%), $525 (80%), and down to $185 (10%).

There are also a very few nickel plated versions, but oddly these have blued slides and trigger guards that to me make them look like they were cobbled together from parts. A recent very nice example went for $705 on GunBroker in Jan. 2015.

I'll try posting a few pics of my new toy, and if there is any interest I'll post a range report (although I almost feel this is too pretty a gun to soil by shooting it!).

Regarding the.35 S&W cases made from .25-20 brass, Donnelley's "Manual of Cartridge Conversions" recommends using .32-20 cases for a starting point. Of course, below the shoulder, the .25-20 and .32-20 cases are dimensionally identical. But I'd think .32-20 brass would be easier to come by. Most who reload the .25-20 simply neck down .32-20 cases.

But it is surprising that anyone would want to undertake the considerable labor of making .35 S&W brass from .32-20 cases, when .32 ACP cases work just fine in the .35 pistol. Especially so when the likelihood of finding .35 S&W reloading dies (other than by having a set custom-made) is essentially zero.

By the way, Donnelley's manual is a valuable reference for almost anyone, even those who have no desire to custom-make odd cartridges. It is an absolute treasure trove of data on just about any cartridge ever made anywhere at any time, including metrics. It is one of my most-used reference books.

Range Report .35 S&W

So I took my new (very old) model 1913 to the range with the Buffalo Ammo I mentioned. Gun cycled flawlessly and with a beautiful clean trigger break. The ammo cycled perfectly as well. but about half or more of the shots left keyhole holes in the target at 25 feet. Not sure why...maybe the bullets are not really the full proper diameter (the bore looks very clean and rifling is distinct), or the bullet construction is off balance. Accuracy is pretty variable. I can easily hit a sub-1 inch group of 5 with most modern guns, but this had about a 4 inch group. Recoil is very mild, and the ammo is fairly smoky.

But all in all, who cares! This is a cool collector pistol that does work, but I probably won't shoot 100 more rounds over the next 10 years.

Jimbocious said:

So I took my new (very old) model 1913 to the range with the Buffalo Ammo I mentioned. Gun cycled flawlessly and with a beautiful clean trigger break. The ammo cycled perfectly as well. but about half or more of the shots left keyhole holes in the target at 25 feet. Not sure why...maybe the bullets are not really the full proper diameter (the bore looks very clean and rifling is distinct), or the bullet construction is off balance. Accuracy is pretty variable. I can easily hit a sub-1 inch group of 5 with most modern guns, but this had about a 4 inch group. Recoil is very mild, and the ammo is fairly smoky.

But all in all, who cares! This is a cool collector pistol that does work, but I probably won't shoot 100 more rounds over the next 10 years.

Click to expand...

Did you pull a bullet to see what its diameter at the base was? Or to see if it was a FMJ ullet? Even though the given bullet diameter for the .35 is .308, the factory bullets used for the .35 S&W were not full metal jacketed. Only the ogive area was metal-capped. The base (in contact with the bore) was soft lead. I suspect that upon firing, the lead cylindrical portion of the original factory bullet probably upset to fill the bore. My limited experiences with my .35 pistol was with cast lead .309 bullets in .32 ACP brass. I do not remember any bullet keyholes with those.

35 s&w auto cts

i have a 1913 35 S&W Auto cts very rare gun its in a 100% complete very nice condition.

Engine36 said:

i have a 1913 35 S&W Auto cts very rare gun its in a 100% complete very nice condition.

Click to expand...

Welcome to the forum. And please post pics!

These early S&W semiautos are fascinating compact firearms.

This S&W 1913 pistol is an almost exact copy of 1908 model .32 calibre Clement pistol..whom S&W bought the rights to manufacture..looks kinda like S&W model 61 Escort also...just saying.

One of the last...

I inherited one of these from my grandfather. Serial # 8112, one of the last. Funny looking gun, but I've never fired it. Ordered some ammo from Buffalo Arms even though it was pricey.

Despite all the anecdotes about it being 'no problem', I'm not sure about shooting .32 ACP ammo in it. Ballistics for .35 Auto with a 76gr round is reported as 830 fps with 116 ft-lb energy. Some factory .32 ACP loads seem reasonably close to that (e.g. Winchester 71gr @ 905 fps, 129 ft-lb), while others seem too hot (e.g. S&B 73gr @ 1043 fps, 176 ft-lb).

I'll shoot the Buffalo ammo just to experience this gun and satisfy my curiosity. I could try loading my own .32 ACP ammo, but I will have to really really love it to go through the trouble (I don't load for .32 ACP currently).

Welcome to the Forum,
Please post some pic's of your little treasure.

I had never heard the story about the .35 S&W bullet having the extruding lubricant, and frankly do not believe that story at all without any further evidence in support of it. To my knowledge, that type of extruding lubricant bullet design was used only to a very limited extent for certain target bullets in a few of the old black powder cartridges, and never in smokeless loads of any kind.

Once again our "Expert" is proven wrong. Here are two examples of Smith & Wesson Self Lubed bullets.

Don, I think I stand corrected. You may be correct that .35 S&W ammo. was never intended by S&W to be produced in the self lubricating style, as patented in the 1890s era. My recollection of such ammo. goes back to the 1950s and I was probably looking at boxes of the self lubricating ammo. mixed up with boxes of .32 S&W auto &.35 S&W auto. The original self lubricating cartridges, as patented by S&W, were revolver cartridges, not auto pistol rounds, of course. Having said all that, the odds are that the next collector cartridge show I attend, I will find a box of self lubricating rounds in .35 caliber. Never fails! I'll buy it and send it to you for Christmas, Don. Ed.

Ed
I quoted one of or expert commentators to prove him wrong. As usual, he hasn't replied. A very good friend of mine was a huge Smith & Wesson ammunition collector. After he passed away I bought his collection from his family. He had a lot of self lubed S&W ammo. The two I pictured are fro that collection.