What year did "smokeless" .32 short frames start?

[stantheman86]

I have had, in the past , many S&W .32 and. .38 breaktops.

I fired them sparingly with very light smokeless loads, but ended up selling them all since they weren't "shooters".

I would like to get another .32 Lemon Squeezer, I was just curious what year did S&W make these suitable for smokeless loads?

 

[Skeetr57]

All 32 S&W and .38 S&W revolvers, if in good condition, are suitable for modern loads from reputable manufacturers. There are so many old revolvers chambered for these cartridges that the standard loads have always been held to black powder pressures. There are some smaller companies that produce loads that should not be used in top break revolvers but I have never used any of their products. If I need more power, I use one of my hand ejector models.

 

[DWalt]

Guns made before the wide acceptance of smokeless powder were the same as those made later. The only thing that happened is that S&W eventually concluded they were OK for use with smokeless loads. Many think that in the early days S&W was more concerned about reloaders using smokeless powders without knowing what they were doing, and so published warnings against use of smokeless powder. Factory smokeless loads are very lightly loaded for use in the old top break revolvers and will not damage them. Remember, smokeless powder was in widespread use since the very early 1900s, so most of the old top breaks have never fired anything but smokeless loads.

 

[glowe]

It is likely that many gun manufacturers were dealing with guns that failed using smokeless powder around the turn of the century, so the assumption was that it was the fault of the new powder. It is my understanding that those failures were likely improper reloading. Remember that black powder was very easy to load. Just fill the case to the point where the bullet base rests and you are good to go. With smokeless powder, more equipment was needed to weigh the powder. Many reloaders of the era simply assumed that you filled the case and shoot as with BP, but the results would be catastrophic failures.

As DeWalt stated, I believe that almost all top-break revolvers that spanned the turn of the twentieth century continued production without changes, so the "strength" of an antique was the same as the early 1900s same model gun. That would mean all were capable of firing standard smokeless loads with the same results.

Opinions changed quickly at the factory as more information and experience was made available. The 1900 catalog (first attachment) states that smokeless powder was far from being equal to BP. By the 1903 catalog (second attachment) the company stated that smokeless powder was superior to BP, but they remained ambivalent about supporting the new powders.

 

[DWalt]

In summary, it's mainly a situation of not fully understanding new technology. Early shotshell smokeless powders were available in "Bulk" form (low bulk density) so that smokeless powder could be substituted volume-for-volume for black powder in reloading shotshells. Back in the early days, many hunters loaded their own shotshells, sometimes in all-brass cases, before going out for a day afield. Not so for rifle and handgun smokeless powders. Using volume-for-volume smokeless loads in reloading a black powder handgun caliber would create an extreme overload which would almost certainly destroy a revolver. And it probably happened frequently to many who did not know what they were doing.

 

[brazosdave]

I have 3 top breaks, a new departure, a double action, and a single, in .38 S & W; and one H & A in .32 S & W. All were made prior to 1895. At this point, I have only fired bp handloads. Am I to understand that I could safely switch to Unique using light loads specified in the loading charts? I am basing my present use of only bp mainly by the recommendations of Dave Ciccione in his excellent series of gunsmithing books, and because I make it, so i have it available cheaply at all times.

 

[glowe]

Personally, I prefer using Trail Boss at the minimum posted loads for both old 32 and 38 S&W and it is a high bulk powder that makes it impossible to double charge a case. For me, it is the perfect choice for my Old West calibers and performs well in all my revolvers. I am sure that Unique might work for reduced smokeless ammo, but Alliant does not list any loads for 32 or 38 S&W calibers, plus the very small charge makes it more prone to reloading mistakes.

 

[DWalt]

The older Lyman reloading handbooks show loadings for both Bullseye and Unique (and several other powders) for both .32 S&W and .38 S&W, and I have used Unique as my standard propellant in .38 S&W reloads for many years (usually 3 grains). As stated, Bullseye and Unique have high bulk densities, and there can be a risk of double-loading if you do not exercise extreme care in reloading. But that's true for any handgun caliber reloading using Bullseye and Unique, as a 3 grain load of Bullseye in a .38 Special case is barely visible, and certainly does not come anywhere near filling the case. I always charge primed cases in a separate operation and look inside each and every loaded case with a small flashlight before seating the bullet to ensure there are no empty cases or double charges. Just part of the price you pay for safe reloading.

 

[brazosdave]

3 grains is a miniscule charge, and if thatun works for .38 S & W, i reckon you'd need a microscope for the .32 S & W charge. Despite the pita of cleaning both the gun and the spent casings after a good ole bp shoot, the reloading process seems to be a whole lot easier, and i don't have to worry about overcharging the case, so I believe I shall stick with what I know and am familiar with. Thanks for the info though DWalt!

 

[glowe]

. . . I believe I shall stick with what I know and am familiar with.

Dave, I understand your concerns, but you should check out Trailboss powder. I don't change my favorite loads often, but I could not be happier with TB. With both 38 & 32 S&W, you pretty much fill the case. The amount required just fits under the bullet, but make sure you do not compress the powder. It shoots great and is definitely worth taking some time to do a little research.