Rethinking 32 S&W long ---‐-‐-‐‐--‐---‐---‐-----‐-

[BSA1]

BC38,

You not define the rules for your proposed duel so I will play by my rules;

First thing to know is I AM A CHEATER.

Second thing to know is I will do EVERYTHING I can to win ANYWAY I can.

There are no rules for dueling in today’s society but come to think of it since I am going to cheat I am going to ignore your rules anyway. (Kind of like how it is with today’s criminals). So suppose I use the skillet as protection while charging at you as fast as I can run? A healthy person could cover that distance in a few seconds. If I am in a wheelchair it will take a bit longer. Unless going downhill. Then you have the problem of getting out of the way to avoid being ran over. (Remember I said I am going to win anyway I can. The cause of death listed as being ran over by someone in a wheelchair on the Police Report will be in interesting).

Remember I am also armed with a large kitchen knife…

And I am a cheater.

But I am honest about being a cheater.

 

[BSA1]

Yeah, it worked well enough for "Rough Rider" Teddy and the officers of the NYC police force that reported to him for a few decades.

You are overlooking some very important details.

The .32 Long cartridge was introduced in 1896.

Teddy Roosevelt became Police Commissioner in 1895 and served less than two years. NYPD was corrupt and officers carried a variety of weapons. T.R. was a progressive leader and made reforms to the N.Y.P.D. which included issuing the most technologically advanced cartridge at that time…

The .32 Long loaded with new fangled smokeless gun powder.

Little was known about the human body and stopping power. I am sure that a lot of folks thought that smokeless gunpowder would not be successful so it was a bold, decisive move by T.R.

So if we are to use T.R.’s leadership as a example for today then it stands to reason that he would look to adopt the most technologically advanced cartridge, bullet and handgun presently made. Arguably the polymer frame semi-auto and a JHP 9mm cartridge.

 

[mtgianni]

I appreciated those links. Thank you for posting.

Now I want to get a 100 grain SWC bullet mold!

+Take a long hard look at the RCBS 98 gr SWC. It has been an accurate mold for many shooting the 32's. An also ran is Lyman 31357. It was built for the 32 long and 32-20. Both are plain based, and give the 32 Long a much better platform than those who assume that the target wadcutter is all that was ever available. For edible small game I have put aside the 327 Fed and most often shoot the 32 long or a downloaded 32 H&R with one of these flat pointed swc's.

 

[Warren Sear]

I have four .32 caliber bullet molds in various weights, all round nose. I tried to order some GT SWC bullets yesterday, but their web site wouldn't let me (wanted my password, which I can't remember).

I started to order a SWC bullet mold, but that is hard to justify since I already have four, and I only shoot the gun for pleasure, never hunting or concealed carry.

So, I guess I will just stay with my round nose bullets for now.

 

[BC38]

You are overlooking some very important details.

The .32 Long cartridge was introduced in 1896.

Teddy Roosevelt became Police Commissioner in 1895 and served less than two years. NYPD was corrupt and officers carried a variety of weapons. T.R. was a progressive leader and made reforms to the N.Y.P.D. which included issuing the most technologically advanced cartridge at that time…

The .32 Long loaded with new fangled smokeless gun powder.

Little was known about the human body and stopping power. I am sure that a lot of folks thought that smokeless gunpowder would not be successful so it was a bold, decisive move by T.R.

So if we are to use T.R.’s leadership as a example for today then it stands to reason that he would look to adopt the most technologically advanced cartridge, bullet and handgun presently made. Arguably the polymer frame semi-auto and a JHP 9mm cartridge.

You completely missed - or are attempting to obfuscate - the salient points. Those points would be that:
1) the 32 SWL cartridge was standard issue for use by a lot of law enforcement agencies for decades, and
2) it's use put a lot of bad guys in the ground, and
3) in the right hands the 32 SWL works, and
4) if it is the best alternative a person is able to use, THEN USE IT.
Nothing to do with politics. No speculation. Just the plain, simple, HISTORY & facts.

 

[rockquarry]

I have four .32 caliber bullet molds in various weights, all round nose. I tried to order some GT SWC bullets yesterday, but their web site wouldn't let me (wanted my password, which I can't remember).

I started to order a SWC bullet mold, but that is hard to justify since I already have four, and I only shoot the gun for pleasure, never hunting or concealed carry.

So, I guess I will just stay with my round nose bullets for now.

I haven't loaded for this cartridge in about fifteen years but my most accurate load used an RCBS flat nose design of about 88 grs. cast of wheelweight alloy. 2.5 grs. Bullseye gave it a muzzle velocity of 830 fps from a 4" barrel. Bullets run through a .314" die were noticeably more accurate than those sized using a .313" die.

 

[BC38]

I haven't loaded for this cartridge in about fifteen years but my most accurate load used an RCBS flat nose design of about 88 grs. cast of wheelweight alloy. 2.5 grs. Bullseye gave it a muzzle velocity of 830 fps from a 4" barrel. Bullets run through a .314" die were noticeably more accurate than those sized using a .313" die.

Good data for those of us still handloading the 32SWL.
Thanks!

 

[Walter Rego]

Most of the currently loaded factory ammo for the .32 S&W Long is pretty mild. the wadcutters are really designed for the high grade autoloading target pistols like the Pardini and others. The round nosed ammo is loaded to pressures safe in 100 year old guns.

Buffalo Bore loads it a bit hotter and that may be an option for those that do not handload.

I have an S&W Model 31-1 with a 3" barrel. It holds 6 rounds unlike the typical J frame .38 snubbies that hold 5. It is light and the 3" barrel isn't appreciably more difficult to conceal than a 1 7/8" barrel on a Model 36 for example. With the right loads it should be as effective as a .38 Special out of a 1 7/8" barrel and offer that additional round. If physical limitations precluded carrying anything more powerful for self defense I wouldn't feel under gunned with it if it was all I had to choose from.

But I'd sure practice to make sure I could put 'em in the bulls eye every time out to 10 yards or so.

 

[BSA1]

You completely missed - or are attempting to obfuscate - the salient points. Those points would be that:
1) the 32 SWL cartridge was standard issue for use by a lot of law enforcement agencies for decades, and
2) it's use put a lot of bad guys in the ground, and
3) in the right hands the 32 SWL works, and
4) if it is the best alternative a person is able to use, THEN USE IT.
Nothing to do with politics. No speculation. Just the plain, simple, HISTORICAL facts.

No I am not missing your points. I am offering counterpoints as to why the .32 S&W and Long are poor choices for self-defense.

1) The 32 Long smokeless powder cartridge along with the double action revolver with swing out cylinder was cutting edge technology at the turn of the century. T.R. and other lawmen of the era were taking advantage of the best technology of it’s day.

2) How many good guys were “put in the ground” when using the 32 for self-defense?

3) Don’t confuse being lethal with stopping power.

4) Todays criminals are harder to stop quickly. Probably the biggest reason is being high on drugs. It is undeniable that use of powerful illegal drugs is common in our society.

It is not a matter of success but rather that the consequences of failure is so high. My comments about the 32 is only directed for use in self-defense.

 

[max503]

I almost bought a Taurus 32 off of Bud's, mainly because I have a 32 WC mold and no gun to shoot them out of. I do use them for squibs out of my 30-30.

 

[BC38]

No I am not missing your points. I am offering counterpoints as to why the .32 S&W and Long are poor choices for self-defense.

1) The 32 Long smokeless powder cartridge along with the double action revolver with swing out cylinder was cutting edge technology at the turn of the century. T.R. and other lawmen of the era were taking advantage of the best technology of it’s day.

2) How many good guys were “put in the ground” when using the 32 for self-defense?

3) Don’t confuse being lethal with stopping power.

4) Todays criminals are harder to stop quickly. Probably the biggest reason is being high on drugs. It is undeniable that use of powerful illegal drugs is common in our society.

It is not a matter of success but rather that the consequences of failure is so high. My comments about the 32 is only directed for use in self-defense.

You keep ignoring or glossing-over THE main reason for considering the .32 SWL as a defensive alternative. Probably due to your (relative) youth.

I'm talking about those who have reached an age or condition that renders them incapable of using anything more powerful for defending themselves. That may not apply to you, but it certainly applies to a lot of folks

As I have already posted several times in this thread, a 32SWL revolver is a good alternative if that is the most powerful SD round a person is capable of shooting reliably and accurately. Does that make them the BEST choice for everyone? Nope. I never claimed that they were. BUT, are they a still a viable alternative for SOME? Absolutely!

32 caliber firearms and ammo worked for LEO and Military personnel for decades before the "more effective" modern calibers and guns were developed. So does the popularity of those newer calibers mean that the good old .32SWL is no longer a viable SD choice for some folks?

I don't think so. Even though it may not be THE most effective choice, it is still a choice worth considering for those folks whose physical condition means they can't handle the "better" alternatives.

JMO, and YMMV.

 

[Bill Lear]

When I first started carrying conealed, my gun was a 31-1 in 32 long.

Eventually I switched to more powerful guns up to a 357 magnum LCR and a 60-15.

I figured the 32 long cartridge was too weak to be viable.

I'm start to see multiple gel tests showing 32 long caliber guns loaded with wadcutters like the 100 gr Buffalo Bore hard cast turning in 18" penetration numbers. And other, less powerful 32 long loads from other loaders getting penetration numbers in the 12" - 14" range. Similar with round nose flat points

So is 32 S&W long really not viable?

I thinking of dusting off my 31-1 and carring it again.

I've always shot it faster and more accurately than any other J frame.

Plus the square butt stock grip fits my hand well.

Comments.

The link below shows in graphic detail the effectiveness of the .32 revolver. The video speaks for itself.

Grandson Fights Grandfather Over Family Dispute - YouTube

 

[alwslate]

Standard .32ACP works just fine in relatively modern .32 Long revolvers like the S&W model 30 & 31 due to the case being semi rimmed. .32 ACP is cheaper, more readily available and yields much higher velocity and deeper penetration than the low powered .32 Long factory ammo.

 

[BSA1]

I have solely focused on my objections to the .32 SWL and Long cartridge as this is the O.P. topic. To avoid being misunderstood I like the .32 caliber. My favorite cartridge is probably the 32-20 (32 WCF). I thought (well still do) the 32 Magnum is a better choice than the .38 Special in the J- Frame Revolver. While many, well most, handgun cartridges have been improved over their original design with the 32 SWL and Long being mostly a exception.

Buffalo Bore uses a 100 gr. Wadcutter rated at 800 fps. and costs $1.74 per round.

They also list 115 gr. Wadcutter rated at 900 fps and costs $1.74 per round. Generally using a heavier bullet at faster velocity means better stopping power. However a heavier bullet at higher velocity in small gun also means more recoil which means it might actually to harder for the elderly and disabled to shoot.

alwstate suggestion for the .32 ACP is interesting. Buffalo Bore has a 32 ACP +P using a 75 gr. hardcast flat point bullet rated at 1150 fps/220 ft. lbs. That is a big step up.

With the .32 ACP +P we are now approaching.32 Magnum performance. The .32 Magnum is designed for use in revolvers for self-defense. Black Hills offers 85 gr. JHP rated at 1050 fps. Buffalo Bore offers 130 gr. hardcast Keith bullet rated at 1125 fps. Both are a big improvement over the .32 Long. Of course that brings more recoil. Is it possible to lengthen the chambers on the S&W to accept the .32 Magnum?

 

[Walter Rego]

One could lengthen the chambers of a modern Smith & Wesson Model 30 or 31 to accept the more powerful .32 H&R Magnum but that presents two issues:
1. Those guns have fixed sights and it isn't likely that the more powerful loads will shoot to point of aim
2. The increased muzzle blast and recoil which might negate the reason a .32 revolver was chosen in the first place

Rather than go to the expense of having a .32 S&W Long rechambered I'd probably just step up to something like a Model 36 or Model 60 in .38 Special

 

[BC38]

...Is it possible to lengthen the chambers on the S&W to accept the .32 Magnum?

Yes it is - and many have already done so, as I alluded to in my previous posts. A few minutes with a .32 reamer is all it takes for your 32SWL to safely shoot 32 H&R magnums.

From my experience, I feel that shooting 32 H&R magnums in a J-frame produces far less recoil than even target-level 38 Specials in the same J-frame revolver.

That makes a .32 caliber, 6-shot J-frame revolver a very viable SD alternative for the less-able folks looking for an effective SD alternative.

 

[BC38]

BC38,

You not define the rules for your proposed duel so I will play by my rules;

First thing to know is I AM A CHEATER.

Second thing to know is I will do EVERYTHING I can to win ANYWAY I can.

There are no rules for dueling in today’s society but come to think of it since I am going to cheat I am going to ignore your rules anyway. (Kind of like how it is with today’s criminals). So suppose I use the skillet as protection while charging at you as fast as I can run? A healthy person could cover that distance in a few seconds. If I am in a wheelchair it will take a bit longer. Unless going downhill. Then you have the problem of getting out of the way to avoid being ran over. (Remember I said I am going to win anyway I can. The cause of death listed as being ran over by someone in a wheelchair on the Police Report will be in interesting).

Remember I am also armed with a large kitchen knife…

And I am a cheater.

But I am honest about being a cheater.

"Cheat" all you want. I guarantee you won't be able to block every shot with your skillet, and I'll poke you full of holes before you can even get within striking distance with the pan OR the knife. Especially if I have a low-recoil handgun in my hand.
It only takes a couple to the head or pelvis to put an assailant on the ground.

 

[Whistlebritches]

An interesting thread. I was not aware that guys were punching out their original m31, to 32 HR magnum, but maybe its a thing, somewhere.

Maybe little different, than shooting Plus P 38 loads, in an old non Plus P frame?

Most of us have done that, and still have the 5 issued fingers, each hand, and two eyes.

Guys way back punched Colt 38 special I frames to 357 I was pretty young then, but that is comparing an already way heavier frame, to a pocket size frame, any heat treating and metallurgy differences, unknown, to most.

I doubt Smith uses the same heat treat, on their Plus P guns, as they did on the older J frame models, but maybe?

I studied the Lee book, comparing max pressures, for the 32 long compared to the 32 HR mag.

Heck, the 32 mag pressure, behind a 90 gr, is ONLY 11,180 CUP HIGHER, than the Long....

I have little doubt, Keith and Sharpe, both took some guns apart, in their early days, making "magnums".

As my old compadre used to note, "until you have pierced a few primers, ya dont really know what the max load is"....

In life, we pays our money, and takes our chances.

 

[Cal44]

Well, first off, he never claimed it was factory ammo - and that wasn't stipulated anywhere by the naysayers. In fact he specifically said it was his handloads. So I'm not sure that is really pertinent - a lot of us handload.

Secondly a 3" barrel is generally regarded as a snub nosed in pretty much all other calibers - but not 32 SWL? So I guess the definitions are different for J-frames? Any J-frame with a barrel over 2" isn't a snub nosed? Is that the "official" definition now?

From my viewpoint, there is no reason to carry the really weak factory loads.

Not when Buffalo Bore and few other companies offer much more potent loads.

Back when I carried my 31-1 I carried Buffalo Bore 100 gr wadcutters with the BB 115 gr round nose flat point in a speed strip as a reload. (The round nose flat point BB is faster to reload).

 

[Chubbs103]

I have four .32 caliber bullet molds in various weights, all round nose. I tried to order some GT SWC bullets yesterday, but their web site wouldn't let me (wanted my password, which I can't remember).

I started to order a SWC bullet mold, but that is hard to justify since I already have four, and I only shoot the gun for pleasure, never hunting or concealed carry.

So, I guess I will just stay with my round nose bullets for now.

Check out Rim Rock bullets. I've run a couple of their .32 offerings.

Catalog