32-20

Guns.com Vault
Gather App
I

Igiveup

Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2008
Messages
2,449
Reaction score
1,935
City & State/Province
Southern Oregon
I have 100 gr. lead round nose bullets that I would like to load for my two S&W revolvers, older ones. I have lots of Unique powder I would like to use with them. This will be for plinking, not serious target shooting. Has anyone developed a similar load for this?
 
I haven't had a .32-20 revolver in a while, but I used to load for a Colt Army Special using a 90-something grain bullet and a 120 grain bullet, both cast. I've tried a variety of powders, but Unique will do at least as well as anything else. I don't use Unique anymore only because it doesn't flow well through my Redding measure. Get a copy of Lyman's Cast Bullet Handbook. It has data you can use even if the bullet configurations aren't the same as yours. I think most sources recommend small rifle primers. Anyway, that's what I always used. Good luck-
 
That 4.0 load sounds like an excellent starting point. I will give it a try. I have Titegroup and many other powders, but was recently able to purchase three pounds of Unique for $25/ lb. So why not use it.
 
If you can find any Trail Boss, 2.5 gr for the 117 RNFP is a very good load in my 4" 1902 no change and my 6" Police Positive Special from 1919.

I have a modern Marlin 1894 CL in 32-20 also, it gets the hot loads!! But those are all jacketed. (That's how I keep an absolute separation on the ammo.)

Ivan
 
before you waste a lot of powder and primers, and have to pull everything down... Load a couple dummy rounds and try them for OAL in the cylinder! There are 100 gr bullets out there that the profile, when crimped in the crimp groove, will not fit in the chamber! I got bit with this with the RCBS 32-98-FN bullet! It WILL fit in a 32 S&W L chamber, but in the 32-20 case, it is too long for cylinder in some 32-20 models (and only BARELY too long)! I would recommend loading 6 dummy rounds and rotating the cylinder multiple times to make sure you don't get any bind if they completely fill the cylinder in length!
 
With the 100 gr. LRN - Start with a charge of ...
5.0 grs Unique @ about 985 fps
and you can go up to ...
5.5 grs. Unique @ about 1075 fps .

If these loads are too heavy / fast ...The problem with Unique is it doesn't like to be light loaded... it needs a mid-range load to develop the pressure it needs to burn cleanly ...
As a mid-range load Unique works well ... but if you seek light loads ... you want to use a faster powder ... Bullseye , Red Dot , W231 , HP38 .

My mid-range favorite 32-20 load is with 5.2 grs Unique with a 100 or 115 gr, cast lead bullet . Very accurate and not punishing to gun or shooter .
Load Safe ,
Gary
 
It was either Skeeter Skelton or Elmer Keith who wrote that the .32-20 was an extremely loud cartridge. .32-20 factory ammo must have been loaded a lot hotter back then than it is now because my .32-20 rifle isn't all that loud at all.

Unless I'm getting more deaf.
 
cp1969 said:
It was either Skeeter Skelton or Elmer Keith who wrote that the .32-20 was an extremely loud cartridge. .32-20 factory ammo must have been loaded a lot hotter back then than it is now because my .32-20 rifle isn't all that loud at all.

Unless I'm getting more deaf.
Click to expand...
I've shot a couple of .32-20 rifles for years; seems about the same as a .22 rimfire. In a handgun, everything is loud to me.
 
Igiveup said:
I have 100 gr. lead round nose bullets that I would like to load for my two S&W revolvers, older ones. I have lots of Unique powder I would like to use with them. This will be for plinking, not serious target shooting. Has anyone developed a similar load for this?
Click to expand...
Kevin,

What several others have recommended. 4.0 gr. Unique, is a very good load. There is one exception I need to tell you about and that is primers for the .32-20 in revolvers, and this is very important! I have been loading this cartridge for over 65 years for the second S&W, and several others, that I own. This is a Model 1902 1st change.

Most manuals recommend using the small rifle primer, and there is a very good reason for this, although I have never seen an explanation for it in any manual. This is why. The .32-20 in a revolver has a bad tendency to squib, which can result in a bulged barrel if another round is fired if the squib is not noticed. I have seen many, dozens, of .32-20 revolvers with bulged barrels, including my own Model 1902! (It was that way when I bought it.) All I have seen have been S&Ws for an unknown reason! I have two friends who have had squibs and, unfortunately, have bulged the barrels of previously perfect revolvers!

Using the small rifle primer in revolvers greatly, if not totally, eliminates experiencing squibs with this cartridge. I very strongly recommend heeding this warning. There is absolutely no reason to use small pistol primers, the cost is the same. I have always used small rifle and have never had a squib or mis-fire in all 65 years!
 
cp1969 said:
It was either Skeeter Skelton or Elmer Keith who wrote that the .32-20 was an extremely loud cartridge. .32-20 factory ammo must have been loaded a lot hotter back then than it is now because my .32-20 rifle isn't all that loud at all.

Unless I'm getting more deaf.
Click to expand...
A number of us shoot 32-20 rifles in Lever Action Silhouette. Not what I'd call noisy in the least. However, a guy brought a 32-20 revolver to a Bullseye match and shot next to me. Yeah, it was LOUD! At the first opportunity I put in foam plugs under my muffs. Much like a 30 Carbine is ok in a long gun, but just downright nasty in a handgun, the 32-20 is also noisy in a handgun.
 
Alk8944 said:
Kevin,

What several others have recommended. 4.0 gr. Unique, is a very good load. There is one exception I need to tell you about and that is primers for the .32-20 in revolvers, and this is very important! I have been loading this cartridge for over 65 years for the second S&W, and several others, that I own. This is a Model 1902 1st change.

Most manuals recommend using the small rifle primer, and there is a very good reason for this, although I have never seen an explanation for it in any manual. This is why. The .32-20 in a revolver has a bad tendency to squib, which can result in a bulged barrel if another round is fired if the squib is not noticed. I have seen many, dozens, of .32-20 revolvers with bulged barrels, including my own Model 1902! (It was that way when I bought it.) All I have seen have been S&Ws for an unknown reason! I have two friends who have had squibs and, unfortunately, have bulged the barrels of previously perfect revolvers!

Using the small rifle primer in revolvers greatly, if not totally, eliminates experiencing squibs with this cartridge. I very strongly recommend heeding this warning. There is absolutely no reason to use small pistol primers, the cost is the same. I have always used small rifle and have never had a squib or mis-fire in all 65 years!
Click to expand...
Does using the small rifle primer require a reduction of the powder charge when loading a recipe specifying small pistol primers?
 
Since we’re in the S&W forum, I’ll mention the two M&P 32-20s I’ve had. One came and went almost 50 years ago, and one I have currently but haven’t shot all that much, but I can say they were both more noisy than other prewar M&Ps in 38 Spl, but not the earsplitting booms of say, a 30 carbine revolver.

I do still have the second of my 32-20 M&Ps as well as a Ruger Blackhawk 32 combi with 32 H&R and 32-20 cylinders and Uberti copy of an SAA in the same caliber, so maybe I should schedule a range day for all three of them.

🐸
 
Ivan the Butcher said:
If you can find any Trail Boss, 2.5 gr for the 117 RNFP is a very good load in my 4" 1902 no change and my 6" Police Positive Special from 1919.

I have a modern Marlin 1894 CL in 32-20 also, it gets the hot loads!! But those are all jacketed. (That's how I keep an absolute separation on the ammo.)

Ivan
Click to expand...
Ivan, I like your reference to IMR Trail Boss, it happens that I just got a gift of 3 pounds of IMR Trail Boss as a gift from an estate and my 32-20s both S&Ws & Winchester rifles came to mind. I can not find any load data for this powder. Help!
 
delta-419 said:
Ivan, I like your reference to IMR Trail Boss, it happens that I just got a gift of 3 pounds of IMR Trail Boss as a gift from an estate and my 32-20s both S&Ws & Winchester rifles came to mind. I can not find any load data for this powder. Help!
Click to expand...
Hodgdon distributes the IMR powders and their loading page has some info.
The original Trail Boss came with instructions to load without published data:

1) measure inside length of case.
2) subtract bullet length from cannelure to bast
3) subtract 1/16 to 1/8 inch (1/16 is usually the most accurate)
4) weigh this volume of Trail Boss.

That is the load for that bullet in that brand of brass, change one component and you need to start over.

My 38-55 Low Wall, shoot one hole groups at 100 yards loaded this way, but 3" groups with 1/8" gap.

NEVER COMPRESS TRAIL BOSS!

Ivan
 
Martyk said:
Does using the small rifle primer require a reduction of the powder charge when loading a recipe specifying small pistol primers?
Click to expand...
I don't think so. I've done it both ways, SRP and/or SPP, and honestly haven't seen a significant difference. The SRP isn't going to overpower any otherwise safe powder charge.

We have several .32-20 revolvers and a vintage Remington Model 25 slide action rifle chambered for the cartridge, and I've observed an interesting phenomenon that I have noted on this forum previously. The recommended smokeless powder charges generally do not come remotely close to filling the .32-20 cartridge case. Shooting over a chronograph, which is routine for me for any "new" handload recipe, reveals some big differences with a pretty wide variety of powders with respect to where the powder is in the case.

If a revolver is held with muzzle skyward and briefly shaken gently, then lowered into firing position, the velocity is generally quite a bit higher than when the revolver is pointed downwards and then brought up to shooting position. Sometimes the differential exceeds 100 fps of muzzle velocity. I've done this dozens of times and it's real. I imagine the powder resides mostly along the "bottom" of the case but may be concentrated nearer the primer, or the projectile, depending on the before firing ritual.

I've never had a squib but imagine that positioning the powder nearer the primer and using a small rifle primer, one of which I know results in more muzzle velocity, may go a long way towards preventing squibs. My two cents.

Bryan
 
Last edited:
TXBryan said:
I don't think so. I've done it both ways, SRP and/or SPP, and honestly haven't seen a significant difference. The SRP isn't going to overpower any otherwise safe powder charge.

We have several .32-20 revolvers and a vintage Remington Model 25 slide action rifle chambered for the cartridge, and I've observed an interesting phenomenon that I have noted on this forum previously. The recommended smokeless powder charges generally do not come remotely close to filling the .32-20 cartridge case. Shooting over a chronometer, which is routine for me for any "new" handload recipe, reveals some big differences with a pretty wide variety of powders with respect to where the powder is in the case.

If a revolver is held with muzzle skyward and briefly shaken gently, then lowered into firing position, the velocity is generally quite a bit higher than when the revolver is pointed downwards and then brought up to shooting position. Sometimes the differential exceeds 100 fps of muzzle velocity. I've done this dozens of times and it's real. I imagine the powder resides mostly along the "bottom" of the case but may be concentrated nearer the primer, or the projectile, depending on the before firing ritual.

I've never had a squib but imagine that positioning the powder nearer the primer and using a small rifle primer, one of which I know results in more muzzle velocity, may go a long way towards preventing squibs. My two cents.

Bryan
Click to expand...
I haven't really reviewed .32-20 data in a while. I've used the cartridge well over forty years in a couple of rifles and one revolver. I have always used a small rifle primer. Are there reputable sources that recommend a pistol primer?

I never tried orienting the powder with this cartridge or any other for use in handgun or rifle. I don't doubt your word, but the difference in velocity you cite may have been there during my chronographing work; I just don't recall it. I'd have to go through old notes from years ago to find out.

I did have a Colt Army Special with 5" barrel in .32-20 about twenty or more years ago. It was in pristine condition when I bought it. Functioning was perfect but I was never able to get decent accuracy with that revolver, even with much load development and trying several different bullet diameters. I had the exact problem with a 1930s 5" Police Positive Special in .38 Special. Poor shooter though the gun was in great shape.

I'll look up old chronograph notes on the .32-20 revolver as I'm now curious.
 
TXBryan said:
I've never had a squib but imagine that positioning the powder nearer the primer and using a small rifle primer, one of which I know results in more muzzle velocity, may go a long way towards preventing squibs. My two cents.

Bryan
Click to expand...

Yes it does! .32-20 revolvers are found to have a far higher incidence of bulged barrels than other calibers as a result of a subsequent shot being fired after a squib that left a bullet stuck in the barrel. For some reason most of the bulged barrels I have ever seen in .32-20 revolvers have been S&Ws.

For the same reason I recommend using bulkier propellants like Unique instead of Bullseye, HP38/231, etc. My favorite replacement for Unique is CFE-P.

A friend had this happen a few years ago. He was shooting rapid double- action at a close object on the ground in front of him. The sequence was something like BANG, BANG, pop, BANG, s**t. Bulge was just behind the front sight.

My old 1950-1960s Lyman loading manuals recommended small rifle primers, probably because of the squib issue. I believe Phil Sharpe recommended SRP too.

FOR cp1969, .32-20 is not loud from rifles. revolvers is a different matter. Revolvers are what Keith, Skelton or whoever were referring to by that remark.
 
Last edited:
Alk8944 said:
Yes it does! .32-20 revolvers are found to have a far higher incidence of bulged barrels than other calibers as a result of a subsequent shot being fired after a squib that left a bullet stuck in the barrel. For some reason most of the bulged barrels I have ever seen in .32-20 revolvers have been S&Ws.

For the same reason I recommend using bulkier propellants like Unique instead of Bullseye, HP38/231, etc. My favorite replacement for Unique is CFE-P.

A friend had this happen a few years ago. He was shooting rapid double- action at a close object on the ground in front of him. The sequence was something like BANG, BANG, pop, BANG, s**t. Bulge was just behind the front sight.

My old 1950-1960s Lyman loading manuals recommended small rifle primers, probably because of the squib issue. I believe Phil Sharpe recommended SRP too.

FOR cp1969, .32-20 is not loud from rifles. revolvers is a different matter. Revolvers are what Keith, Skelton or whoever were referring to by that remark.
Click to expand...

I'm thinking that the Remington 6 1/2 primers that I just happen to have on hand (purchased in a lot deal) instead of regular SRP might be ideal for when I start reloading for this cartridge for the .32WCF Model 1905 I just bought. Your thoughts?
 
Alk8944 said:
You shoot over a Chronograph! A chronometer is a timepiece/watch.
Click to expand...
My humblest apologies. I know the difference and erred anyway. Technically I was, no doubt, wearing my Breitling at the "time."

A friend had this happen a few years ago. He was shooting rapid double- action at a close object on the ground in front of him. The sequence was something like BANG, BANG, pop, BANG, s**t. Bulge was just behind the front sight.

I don't question the preference for small rifle primers but shooting at a close object on the ground in front of you would almost certainly position the relatively small powder charge more closely behind the projectile than nearer the primer. I can't help but wonder if powder placement in the cartridge cases played a significant part in this particular squib?

Bryan
 
Last edited:
RWJ said:
I'm thinking that the Remington 6 1/2 primers that I just happen to have on hand (purchased in a lot deal) instead of regular SRP might be ideal for when I start reloading for this cartridge for the .32WCF Model 1905 I just bought. Your thoughts?
Click to expand...
Seems to me I have seen data somewhere that claims small pistol magnum primers are more-or-less equivalent to small rifle primers with regard to ignition potential. While I do not recall seeing any credible info on the need to reduce powder charges to compensate for using small rifle primers, I have seen info calling for caution when substituting small pistol magnum primers for small pistol primers. While ignition potential may not be dramatically different there is, apparently, some difference in pressure generated by small magnum pistol primers versus small rifle.

Some years ago a friend and I were shooting wax bullets from .38 Specials in his basement. No powder charge whatsoever - only primers for propulsion. We happened to chronograph some using small pistol, small pistol magnum, and small rifle primers. As I recall the differences between the SPP and the SRP weren't that great, or consistent, but the small pistol magnums provided noticeably more umph. Sadly I did not document this information.

Likely some need for caution here as backing off a prescribed powder charge to compensate for the use of magnum primers seems counterproductive towards the goal of eliminating squibs. While primer selection may be important as a squib precaution I would consider it secondary to reduced powder charges - at least charges reduced below some arbitrary critical level - and I don't know what that would be without experimentation.

Revolvers chambered in .32-20 run a large gamut with regard to flimsy/stout quality assessment. I try to keep the intended firearm in mind when cranking out cartridges and label them accordingly. I wouldn't guess about this but rather do some literature review from credible sources.

Bryan
 
Last edited:
rockquarry said:
I haven't had a .32-20 revolver in a while, but I used to load for a Colt Army Special using a 90-something grain bullet and a 120 grain bullet, both cast. I've tried a variety of powders, but Unique will do at least as well as anything else. I don't use Unique anymore only because it doesn't flow well through my Redding measure. Get a copy of Lyman's Cast Bullet Handbook. It has data you can use even if the bullet configurations aren't the same as yours. I think most sources recommend small rifle primers. Anyway, that's what I always used. Good luck-
Click to expand...
Are you using the small barrel in your measure as it was meant for small charges such as yours. Redding is one of the best measures out there.
 
Top Strap said:
Are you using the small barrel in your measure as it was meant for small charges such as yours. Redding is one of the best measures out there.
Click to expand...
Yes, in fact I have two Redding measures set up with the small chamber for handgun cartridges.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
Any secrets to successfully reloading .32-20?
Replies
24
Views
629
Ivan the Butcher
I
Warren Sear
Looking for a 200 grain RN 45 ACP mold
Replies
28
Views
436
Warren Sear
Warren Sear
C
1921 32-20 Smith&Wesson
Replies
5
Views
490
glowe
glowe
C
Bad powder?
2
Replies
34
Views
971
greenwellg
G
Jebus35745
45 acp revolvers and 231
2
Replies
53
Views
2K
SGT ROCK 11B
SGT ROCK 11B

Latest posts

Back
Top