Smith & Wesson Forum

Advertise With Us Search
Go Back   Smith & Wesson Forum > Smith & Wesson Revolvers > S&W Hand Ejectors: 1896 to 1961

Notices

S&W Hand Ejectors: 1896 to 1961 All 5-Screw & Vintage 4-Screw SWING-OUT Cylinder REVOLVERS, and the 35 Autos and 32 Autos


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 09-30-2014, 10:33 AM
ronpozoromo ronpozoromo is offline
Member
Smith & Wesson 32 Long Chronograph Testing Smith & Wesson 32 Long Chronograph Testing Smith & Wesson 32 Long Chronograph Testing Smith & Wesson 32 Long Chronograph Testing Smith & Wesson 32 Long Chronograph Testing  
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Liked 9 Times in 5 Posts
Default Smith & Wesson 32 Long Chronograph Testing

My brother in law in invited me to go shooting with him this weekend. He had reloaded some 9MM that he wanted to chronograph and I really wanted to see the velocity of the 32 long ammo I had on hand. I'm shooting a S&W hand ejector 3 1/4" barrel that's in very good condition and shipped in 1953. Ammo is Buffalo Bore 100 grain wadcutter, Magtech 98 grain semi jacketed hollow point, and PPU 98 grain lead round nose.
The Results in feet per second are as follows for six rounds each:
Buffalo Bore: 845, 850, 855, 877, 855, 851-average 855.5 fps
Magtech: 712, 619,605,504,492,650-average 597 fps
PPU: 682,662,690,651,683,671-average-average 673 fps

The Buffalo Bore is just as advertised- their website advertises this round at 900/fps and listed a gun just like mine shooting 872/fps. Magtech lists theirs at 778/fps, but you can see from the results that this load is weak and inconsistent. I can't find the PPU advertised velocity but I think it's consistent with most 32 long factory loadings.
I will continue to carry the Buffalo Bore in my revolver and practice with PPU-it's usually the cheapest ammo on ammoseek.com and it seems just as accurate as the Buffalo Bore. I thought the Magtech might be a carry option but in my opinion it's pretty much garbage-some of the rounds even sounded and felt weak. The Buffalo Bore has a little more recoil but is still pretty mild.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #2  
Old 09-30-2014, 11:18 AM
Erich's Avatar
Erich Erich is offline
Member
Smith & Wesson 32 Long Chronograph Testing Smith & Wesson 32 Long Chronograph Testing Smith & Wesson 32 Long Chronograph Testing Smith & Wesson 32 Long Chronograph Testing Smith & Wesson 32 Long Chronograph Testing  
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: High Desert of NM, USA
Posts: 6,259
Likes: 9,420
Liked 8,917 Times in 2,575 Posts
Default

I handload the .32 S&W Long using Sharpe's data from the 1930s for my solid-frame revolvers - those Buffalo Bore results are pretty attainable.
__________________
Now go make God proud...
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Smith and Wesson Model 430 32 Smith and Wesson Long Airweight HeyJoe S&W Revolvers: 1980 to the Present 44 01-28-2017 10:37 AM
Ammo Testing w/ Chronograph Data 5.56Spartan Smith & Wesson M&P 15-22 15 07-04-2013 07:32 PM
Smith & Wesson .32 Long R Tillery S&W Hand Ejectors: 1896 to 1961 4 01-31-2013 10:03 PM
Smith & Wesson beat out Glock and Sig in ATF testing, apparently. wheeler10k Smith & Wesson Semi-Auto Pistols 15 09-07-2010 01:15 PM

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3
smith-wessonforum.com tested by Norton Internet Security smith-wessonforum.com tested by McAfee Internet Security

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:51 AM.


Smith-WessonForum.com is not affiliated with Smith & Wesson Holding Corporation (NASDAQ Global Select: SWHC)