432UC Ti (Titanium) - A Cautionary Tale re: Ammo Pressure

This is to share an experience in the event it helps others and, perhaps, to elicit comments and advice from forum experts.

I have quite a few of the new Smith & Wesson products, including all of the UC snubs and new 36, 10, and 19. Very pleased with all of them and so happy that Smith & Wesson and Lipseys collaborated on these projects. So, I was surprised by an unusual experience test firing my 432 UC Titanium this afternoon. Upon further review, it appears that my very poor ammo choice caused the problem. Thanks to demkofour for helping me sort it out.

My first six shots went to point of aim but felt unusually "hot." I chalked it up to titanium cylinder, lighter gun, etc. Okay, no big deal. Well, I went to eject brass and nothing moved. All cases were effectively welded in place. I smacked the ejector rod hard and it moved forward, pushing the cylinder over the frame lug (corrected). That left a black mark on the cylinder. So, I closed everything up and went home to sort it out. I was irrationally angry at that point. Had not yet learned that it was probably my fault.

Talked with demkofour while searching for the ammo box to identify the ammo at issue. Apparently, I loaded the 432 UC Ti with Buffalo Bore "Heavy 32 H&R Mag + P, 100 gr. JHP - 1300 fps" instead of the Hornady Critical Defense .32 H&R Mag 80 gr. that I usually carry. Demkofour identified the Buffalo Bore offering as way to hot for the regular 432 UC. It fused brass to the chambers in the titanium cylinder. * I did not mean to use the Buffalo Bore. Grabbed the loose rounds from a shelf in my office.

Felt like I had a good handle on the situation after talking with demkofour and opted for self-help with an appropriately-sized hammer to the ejector rod. It freed the brass and everything appears to be okay. I'll try again tomorrow with appropriate pressure ammo.





I recommend against the Buffalo Bore Heavy



Mark from jumping the cylinder stop.

The black mark on the cylinder was caused by the frame lug. The cylinder stop protrudes up into the cylinder window to lock the cylinder rotationally.

Wow, at least no one got hurt.

Glad nobody was hurt, things can get rather exciting when you get outside of SAAMI specs.

Martyk said:

The black mark on the cylinder was caused by the frame lug. The cylinder stop protrudes up into the cylinder window to lock the cylinder rotationally.

Click to expand...

Yes. That's what I meant to say. Frame lug.

I had no issues with the same Buffalo bore +P ammo in my 432UC with the steel cylinder. Hot, yes, but no issues with ejection or otherwise.

flundertaker said:

I had no issues with the same Buffalo bore +P ammo in my 432UC with the steel cylinder. Hot, yes, but no issues with ejection or otherwise.

Click to expand...

Agreed! I fired 6 cylinders of the same Buffalo Bore through my 432-UC (steel cylinder) and ejection was not necessarily problematic, but the recoil and “bark” was excessive. YMMV, but when I see primers pancake like those in NCBeagle’s post as well as my spent casings, I consider that a clue.

I view Buffalo Bore ammo in the same vein as other performance enhancing things that turn a donkey into a race horse. It's all good until it ain't.

I wouldn't fault the gun for what happened.

Nomadmax said:

I view Buffalo Bore ammo in the same vein as other performance enhancing things that turn a donkey into a race horse. It's all good until it ain't.

I wouldn't fault the gun for what happened.

Click to expand...

Oh, I absolutely do not fault the gun. Was definitely an inappropriate ammo option. The BB is 25% heavier and loaded significantly hotter, than the appropriate 32 H&R Magnum round

My 340PD has a similar problem ejecting .357 casings, although a very hard smack on the ejector does the job. Given that experience I keep it loaded w/110 grain +P.

I "assumed" Buffalo Bore was loaded within SAAMI specs. Certainly the revolver is able to take SAAMI specs. However (stating the obvious) you clearly have over-pressure evidence. Apart from not shooting Buffalo Bore again, I'd get it contact with them. No, I'd be yelling at them.

I've never shot Buffalo Bore ammo, and this thread makes me even more resolute.

“For use in all firearms chambered for .32 H&R Magnum…”

They don’t say how many times. You used it one time.

Krogen said:

I "assumed" Buffalo Bore was loaded within SAAMI specs. Certainly the revolver is able to take SAAMI specs. However (stating the obvious) you clearly have over-pressure evidence. Apart from not shooting Buffalo Bore again, I'd get it contact with them. No, I'd be yelling at them.

I've never shot Buffalo Bore ammo, and this thread makes me even more resolute.

Click to expand...

If it is ".32 H&R Magnum +P," it is not loaded to SAAMI specs, as there is no SAAMI spec for +P .32 H&R Magnum.

"+P" in cartridges without SAAMI spec for +P (like say, .32 ACP, .380 ACP, and .40 S&W among many others) is very much a buyer beware, caveat emptor situation.

demkofour said:

Agreed! I fired 6 cylinders of the same Buffalo Bore through my 432-UC (steel cylinder) and ejection was not necessarily problematic, but the recoil and “bark” was excessive. YMMV, but when I see primers pancake like those in NCBeagle’s post as well as my spent casings, I consider that a clue.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the review.

Beju said:

If it is ".32 H&R Magnum +P," it is not loaded to SAAMI specs, as there is no SAAMI spec for +P .32 H&R Magnum.

"+P" in cartridges without SAAMI spec for +P (like say, .32 ACP, .380 ACP, and .40 S&W among many others) is very much a buyer beware, caveat emptor situation.

Click to expand...

That's a good point, Beju. I confirmed it on the SAAMI website. There are SAAMI +P specs for a few cartridges, but .32 H&R Magnum isn't one of them. Yet, as another posted noted, Buffalo Bore claims it safe. Worrisome.

I 'wonder' how titanium machines i.e, smoothness/surface finish compared to steel. The 'roughness' might be the cause rather than the pressure perhaps.
What do other think about this point?

NCBeagle said:

My first six shots went to point of aim but felt unusually "hot." I chalked it up to titanium cylinder, lighter gun, etc.

Click to expand...

With all the interested in .32 caliber snubby revolvers I thought it was for the Senior Citizen and shooters with arthritic issues.

But .32 Magnums really doesn't make sense. If a shooter cannot manage .38 Special in a snubby they would be better served with a .32 S&W Long.

505Gibbs said:

I 'wonder' how titanium machines i.e, smoothness/surface finish compared to steel. The 'roughness' might be the cause rather than the pressure perhaps.
What do other think about this point?

Click to expand...

I’m not an engineer, a metallurgist, heck, I don’t even reload anymore, but I’m thinking it’s a combination of both. The cases expanded (drastically) upon ignition (which we know always happens) and a lack of lubricity on the part of the Ti both contributed to the hard extraction.

505Gibbs said:

I 'wonder' how titanium machines i.e, smoothness/surface finish compared to steel. The 'roughness' might be the cause rather than the pressure perhaps.
What do other think about this point?

Click to expand...

Years back I bought a Rock Island 9mm/.22TCM Government Model combo pack. The .22 TCM brass would not extract from the chamber, making my 1911A1 a single shot. I took a cotton cleaning jag with Flitz, chucked it up in my cordless DeWalt, and commenced to slowly polish out the chamber. .22TCM extraction problem solved. This might, or might not be the case with the .32 H&R Titanium cylinder. YMMV

Do not, polish the cylinders of your Smith & Wesson titanium cylinders in that method. They are coated specifically and you will remove that coating.