1sailor
Well-known member
I'm just wondering why Lipsey's would have chosen the H&R magnum for the 432 and 632 revolvers rather than the Federal magnum.
Why would S&W/Lipsey's choose .32 H&R
- Thread starter 1sailor
- Start date
Because they have aluminum/alloy frames that won't stand up to the 327 Mag pressures?
Jeff
SWCA #1457
Jeff
SWCA #1457
I'm really not sure, but............
The Model 642 has some aluminum parts and is a.38 Special, or maybe not & the Model 632 should be all stainless but no clue as to why they chose the .32 H&R Magnum as opposed the the .327 Federal Magnum unless they anticipated problems finding the .327 Federal Magnum ammunition. I would have preferred the .327 Federal Magnum chambering but would have, most likely, used the .32 H&R Magnum as my every day carry ammunition.
The Model 642 has some aluminum parts and is a.38 Special, or maybe not & the Model 632 should be all stainless but no clue as to why they chose the .32 H&R Magnum as opposed the the .327 Federal Magnum unless they anticipated problems finding the .327 Federal Magnum ammunition. I would have preferred the .327 Federal Magnum chambering but would have, most likely, used the .32 H&R Magnum as my every day carry ammunition.
Last edited:
According to Lipsey's website the 632 has an aluminum frame. Also mentions stainless but I think that is the cylinder. The original 632-1 indeed had a stainless frame and was chambered in 327 Magnum.
Jeff
SWCA #1457
Last edited:
Here's some prior threads from this forum on that topic, maybe you'll find them interesting. Maybe not. 
I'm just glad the .32 H&R is gaining some traction, I really like the round.
https://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-r...813-64-000-question.html?highlight=Lipsey+432
https://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-r...timate-carry-lipsey.html?highlight=Lipsey+432
There are many more, but I don't want to overload. I personally have no use for a .327 Federal in a handgun, although I do own a Ruger chambered for that round - but I'll never shoot one in it.
I'm just glad the .32 H&R is gaining some traction, I really like the round.https://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-r...813-64-000-question.html?highlight=Lipsey+432
https://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-r...timate-carry-lipsey.html?highlight=Lipsey+432
There are many more, but I don't want to overload. I personally have no use for a .327 Federal in a handgun, although I do own a Ruger chambered for that round - but I'll never shoot one in it.
The aluminum-alloy airweight frame can stand up to 32 H&R pressures. Bumping things up to 327 would increase the cost of the gun significantly. Being that these UC guns were a proof of a number of concepts, it makes sense not to hamstring them by an overly-high price point.
Hopefully we'll see a steel 327 K-frame from Lipseys sometime soon!
Hopefully we'll see a steel 327 K-frame from Lipseys sometime soon!
Nope, the actual full 360 degree frame that surrounds the cylinder and contains the barrel threads of the 327 LCR is steel, not aluminum, not plastic. Their grip module on the back is all that is plastic. They actually use an aluminum frame on their .38 special version, but the .357 and 327 frames are 100% steel.
Last edited:
Green Frog
Well-known member
I have spent quality time with a 4" Model 631 in 32 H&R and the oft-mentioned Project 616 in 327 FM, a 4" K frame. With factory ammo in both, I can say the H&R is plenty for the J frame, but even with heft of a K frame and full lug barrel, the recoil of a full tilt FM load is all the fun I can stand! Think full house 38 +P+ in a Model 10 with Magnas. When I go to high performance 327 loads it Quickly becomes too much fun! 
I've developed a bit of a devotion to 32s or various lengths and strengths, but I'm in it for fun, not punishment.
. I agree with Lipsey that the J frame is good for 32 H&R, and there is the hint of a rumor they may also be considering a K frame 327 FM. If I weren't so old and didn't already have the two mentioned... 
Froggie
I've developed a bit of a devotion to 32s or various lengths and strengths, but I'm in it for fun, not punishment.
. I agree with Lipsey that the J frame is good for 32 H&R, and there is the hint of a rumor they may also be considering a K frame 327 FM. If I weren't so old and didn't already have the two mentioned... Froggie
Last edited:
Most likely, Lipsey’s has some sort of deal cooked up with one or more ammo manufacturers.
It’s no different than toy manufacturers marketing toys to sell more batteries.
It’s no different than toy manufacturers marketing toys to sell more batteries.
Last edited:
catcus-jack
Well-known member
It may have to do with price point but honestly, they are not much cheaper than an M&P340 which has a Scandium frame that can absorb 357 magnum. And they are a lot more expensive than the 442 and 642 in 38 special. Still I suppose it will appeal to those who are 32 lovers and are willing to pay the price.
SGT ROCK 11B
Well-known member
Lipsey's will sell the Federal Magnum next year and the .32 niche will buy that one too.
Not a lot of folks bought the 632 in .327 Fed Mag. I had a SP101 in .327 and it had a lot recoil and would indeed bust the backs of my trigger finger on the inside of the trigger guard no matter how tight I held it. May S&W will do a one-time production run with six rounds of the .327 Fed Mag on a 640 Pro stainless steel frame (with sights) which would be nice. That gun, with .32 H&R rounds, would be like shooting a .22.
Sistema1927
US Veteran
Having shot .327 Fed Mag in my 3" SP101 I am very happy that my 432UC is not chambered in it, but is instead .32 H&R.
I'm in the minority here. I wish the new Lipsey's 32s were in .32S&W Long. I have no interest in Magnums in a J-frame, of any caliber, even though you can shoot the 32 S&W Long in them
Last edited:
There's a $220 difference in MSRP, which would not meet Lipsey's price target.
Also, S&W is set up to manufacture aluminum J-frames at higher rates than their other revolvers, so there was more room in the manufactured queue for Lipsey's to secure the volume that they wanted.
I've got a steel frame Taurus in 327 FM and boys and girls and that thing will kick you with Hornady Critical Defense, 80 grain, 327 FM. It ain't much fun at all. That is not your grandfathers 32, I promise you. The steel frame gun weighs about 25 ounces IIRC, (unloaded, with a 3" barrel), vs about 15 (listed) for an airweight J-frame. Even with a 3 finger Hogue grip, it is a handful.
I think I'd be afraid to try the 327 FM in a J-frame airweight. I'm not too sure about the 32 H&R in that little thing.
I don't even shoot the Federal Magnums anymore, limiting myself to 32 Longs, and 32 H&R.
It ain't much fun at all. That is not your grandfathers 32, I promise you. The steel frame gun weighs about 25 ounces IIRC, (unloaded, with a 3" barrel), vs about 15 (listed) for an airweight J-frame. Even with a 3 finger Hogue grip, it is a handful.I think I'd be afraid to try the 327 FM in a J-frame airweight. I'm not too sure about the 32 H&R in that little thing.
I don't even shoot the Federal Magnums anymore, limiting myself to 32 Longs, and 32 H&R.
I'd be all in. The 632 pro is probably the best set of features they have had on a j frame. I'd probably never carry 327 in it other than the odd hike maybe, but would be a wonderful gun.
Real world experience. I bought a 431 32 H&R. I then found a spare cylinder for sale, bought it and reamed it to 327. WOW, I am not recoil sensitive at all and while it is not painful, it is what I will call quick and difficult. Small light guns are like small light bullets, they achieve higher velocities than heavier ones. Between that and the small grip frame it is way more difficult to quickly get back on target for a second round. I also tried it in a 642 frame with a 43 barrel installed. Same story of course.
I am going to put that cylinder in a steel frame
I am going to put that cylinder in a steel frame
Last edited:
