32-44 Target Revolver

[Oyeboteb]

Casual extempore images comparing .32-44, .320 RR, and 38-44 Cartridges...the .32-44 happens to be a Gallery Round with a Ball set deep in the Case, and the other two are Target Rounds.

Some early Cartridges were not Head Stamped.

Hosted on Fotki


Hosted on Fotki


Hosted on Fotki

And, some loose .32 - 44s which are Head Stamped -

Hosted on Fotki

 

[rct269]

Perhaps as an aside, because I thought it was common knowledge, the 38-44 S&W cartridge case (designed by Ira Paine) is the same length as the cylinder (of the earlier NM #3 Target revolvers of that caliber)---with the bullet seated entirely inside the case----which is to say the bullet leaves the case and immediately enters the rifled barrel---which is also to say there is no throat---which was a boon to the target shooters equipped with these guns----and a boon to the shooters of the custom hand ejector revolvers produced ever since-------those many of us have at least seen if not owned and used with custom barrels protruding back through the frame to meet with shortened cylinders.

The 32-44 S&W cartridge case is not and never was the same length as the cylinder-----does not and never will enjoy the same advantage as the 38-44 S&W cartridge, which makes me wonder why they bothered to make them in the first place.

That brings me to photographs of 38-44 gallery ammunition I've seen (round balls seated deep within a SHORTENED 38-44 cartridge case)----or perhaps a shortened 357 Maximum case if what I've seen were more modern items. It should require nothing more than being awake to realize these shortened 38-44 cases (whether shortened originals or more modern items) enjoy exactly none of the advantages of short throats.

Ralph Tremaine

 

[BMur]

Black powder loads

It's interesting to note that from an early 1900's UMC catalog you can see the Gallery load for the 38 special and the 38-44 is " Identical ". Both Black powder, both identical bullet weight.

I would think that given the same barrel length the two would perform the same. " Identically". But that's only a theory.

Murph

 

[Oyeboteb]

It's interesting to note that from an early 1900's UMC catalog you can see the Gallery load for the 38 special and the 38-44 is " Identical ". Both Black powder, both identical bullet weight.

I would think that given the same barrel length the two would perform the same. " Identically". But that's only a theory.

Murph

I am sure they would perform identically, out of a same length Barrel.

 

[Oyeboteb]

Here is a 32-44 target revolver I own. It was my first large frame revolver purchase and didn't know very much about them at the time. It is refinished and has matching serial numbers on the frame, barrel, and the cylinder. There is no number on the latch. The serial number is 3xx. There is a 3 digit number under the left grip indicating it was sent back to the factory for work 1/17 (or maybe 11/7). It has 6 notches filed in the end of the barrel. Maybe it indicates the number of shooting matches won with the gun?

At the time I bought it it was listed as a 38-44. Thought is was a 38 until I took it to the gun smith and he said it was a 32. That was about 1 year after I bought it so there was nothing I could do. Sent away for the historical letter and it came back confirming it is a 32-44 that was sent to G.W. Beard & Son Co on January 21st, 1892.

Since working on my model of 91 project barrel in 32 caliber I started looking at the Model 3 revolver a little closer. Bought a 32-44 round and tried to chamber it in the New Model Number 3 but the entire 32-44 round slid right through the cylinder. Took out the caliper and measured the cylinder. They are all bored straight through to about .380, large enough to chamber a 38 special round. The end of the barrel measures about .318 which is correct for the 32-44 round.

Any thoughts on why the cylinder was bored out?

I am unable to imagine what the idea was for the Cylinder being bored-out the way it is.

It makes no sense to me.

There is nothing to sleeve it to, unless changing the Barrel Bore also.

Conversion to .320 'Revolving Rifle" Cartridges would have been easy and feasible, by merely continuing the Cylinder Chambers to be full length...but anything else would be a really big hassle, and also, why bother??

If back when - Twenty-Five Dollars worth of work, to convert an obsolete $7.00 Revolver, to some other Cartridge, when a good condition used Target Revolver in .38 Special, or as one please, could have been had for $10.00 or $12.00...I am just not seeing the logic...

It's a mystery!

 

[Oyeboteb]

If it were me, I'd be very tempted to just do the following -


I'd figure to just use .32 - 20 Brass, and to expand it to oblige a .321 Bullet, and get the Cylinder sleeved and chambered to chamber that 'Wild Cat' Cartridge, and be very happy, since .32 - 20 Brass is plentiful and inexpensive, and expanding it out a little to accept a .321 Bullet is super easy to do...

Crimp die would have to be made, or adapted ( 8 mm Nambu Crimp die might work just fine) just as one has to do for the .32 - 44 anyway, so, other than for that, which is no big deal, the rest would be easy and elegant..!

And it'd be a dandy Round this way too!

Now I want one like this!!

 

[BMur]

Bonehead logic?

I can actually see someone doing this...Their thinking being that the 32-44 cartridge is impossible to find. Therefore the gun is worthless to them...So, why not bore it out to the most common cartridge out there at that time....The .38 Special? .323 to .358 is not a huge increase. That way you can shoot it.... Thinking that he'd worry about the barrel bore later.....So, he performs a sub-par boring of the chambers and like many projects? That's as far as this person got.

I think I've seen more altered cylinder chambers than any other part on Antique guns and always to alter to a more powerful cartridge. Or, a cartridge that is readily available at that time.....

Murph

 

[Oyeboteb]

I can actually see someone doing this...Their thinking being that the 32-44 cartridge is impossible to find. Therefore the gun is worthless to them...So, why not bore it out to the most common cartridge out there at that time....The .38 Special? .323 to .358 is not a huge increase. That way you can shoot it.... Thinking that he'd worry about the barrel bore later.....So, he performs a sub-par boring of the chambers and like many projects? That's as far as this person got.

I think I've seen more altered cylinder chambers than any other part on Antique guns and always to alter to a more powerful cartridge. Or, a cartridge that is readily available at that time.....

Murph

Yeahh, but...who-ever did the Cylinder bore effort did not even come close to chambering it for .38 Special, they bored straight through, and are way over-size for .38 S & W or for .38 Special, as well as failing to have a 'step' or Cylinder Chamber to Cylinder Bore transition ( leaving aside the Barrel Bore diameter problem ).

Granted, a naive and impetuous person can embark on a project with poor planning and worse understanding, to soon be in some kind of impasse and limbo, and that does happen sometimes...

.380 straight through just makes no sense at all other than maybe, as preparation for sleeves...but, sleeves for what conversion? Given the unique Barrel Bore diameter, nothing else Bullet wise other than .32-44 or .320 RR ( or eventually 8mm Nambu Bullet wise, sort of, ) would fit that Barrel.

As an aside - I have to suppose in theory, that one could have 'Special Ordered' a New Model 3 to be Chambered in .38 Special, at least from 1899 and on from there a ways, and I wonder if any exist?

We do know some ( or at least 1 ) New Model 3s exist in .38 Long Colt, so...might be possible.

 

[BMur]

Rough but close

Phil,
Actually it's pretty close to case specs for the 38 Special/ 38 Long. See diagram. Granted no case stop would impact accuracy negatively but it would still be shootable vs not being able to obtain 32-44 cartridges in my opinion being the root cause for the attempted alteration.

Murph

 

[cwneely]

32 44

Wouldn't that be the 320 rifle round? They were chambered for that and it is full cylinder length. You can make cases from 7.62 Nagant [pistol] brass. As I remember the bullet is .323.

 

[Oyeboteb]

Wouldn't that be the 320 rifle round? They were chambered for that and it is full cylinder length. You can make cases from 7.62 Nagant [pistol] brass. As I remember the bullet is .323.

.320 RR is same diameter Brass as .32 - 44 - it is not .380 in diameter.

I posted images comparing .32 - 44, .320 RR, and .38 - 44 earlier in this thread, if you would like to see what the .320 RR Cartridge looks like...and to compare it to .32 - 44, the images are in Post #31.

Bored Straight Through Chambers of .380 diameter, do not co-respond to any kind of known Cartridge, and certainly none having a Bullet of .321 diameter.

 

[Oyeboteb]

Here are a few more pictures. I was incorrect in saying the 32-44 fell straight through the cylinder. You can see the 32-44 round in the cylinder and is shows the round is quite a bit smaller diameter. I thought the 32-44 was the same length as cylinder and the 38-44 too until I bought both rounds. The 32-44 is shown next the the 38-44 target round in two of the pictures. The ejector star has been modified to accept a larger round just like the cylinder has been modified. Also took a pic of the chamber lined up with the barrel. Wonder if the shooter had a special shell machined to fit the cylinder so he could reload them easier? The 32 long round uses a .312 diameter bullet while the 32-44 uses a .318 (about, i'm still learning) diameter bullet.

Check your PMs, I sent you a message.

 

[Boulder350]

Just out of curiosity, how much do you guys think this revolver is worth in its current condition?

Thanks

 

[BMur]

Net worth?

It's tough enough to evaluate antique guns in various conditions that are functional. This one I see as either parts or restoration.
Restoration would likely cost more than the gun is worth unless you are buddies with a machinist who is willing to take on the work and who also happens to be an excellent Tig welder? Lots of $$$$ to repair it.
Parts would actually be quite a bit if you broke it down piece by piece. Both would likely result in just about the same outcome money wise.

Murph

 

[Oyeboteb]

Just out of curiosity, how much do you guys think this revolver is worth in its current condition?

Thanks

Is this is a refinished Revolver, in addition to the modifications which were done to the Cylinder Chambers?

 

[Boulder350]

It is refinished. Looks like it was done a long time ago