April 1, 2008, 10:47 PM
I bought a LNIB SP101 in .32 for $300. It's used but the price seemed pretty fair, as I never see them for sale for less than $425. At any rate it's got a 3 1/16" barrel. It appears that Ruger never made this gun in a 2" version. I'm no ballistics expert but I'm thinking that you need at least 3" to take advantage of the .32 magnum. Some short barreled revolvers don't seem to burn all the powder before the bullet exits the barrel. Am I mistaken?
April 1, 2008, 11:05 PM
The 3" (1/16" doesn't matter) barrel offers a number of advantages. Better cartridge performance, longer sight radius, longer ejector rod, more weight forward and better balance. I notice that their new .327 Magnum is coming out with the same barrel. I'd say you lucked out. ;)
April 2, 2008, 07:05 PM
I'd say you got avery good deal. I paid more for mine and feel very good about it. The .32Mag is a very under rated cartridge especially when you add in the fun factor. As a reloader you can get full potential from this round and you'll be impressed once you go beyond the manuals top end. The .327 is the result of what handloaders proved this round capable of.
Joe the Redneck
April 3, 2008, 03:07 AM
To me, I think a 3 inch barrel is totally useless on a revolver. It should have a 2 ince for concealment or a 4 inch for serious work.
Three inches is too big for the pocket and too short to need a holster.
I was going to get the new one in 327 and get it cut down, but it seems it costs about 200 bucks to get them cut.
Ruger said that they might consider a two inch version in a year ot too if sales are good.
April 3, 2008, 06:58 AM
I gotta have a Fed Mag when they start showing up here. Give us a range review please. Congrats
April 3, 2008, 08:47 PM
Gentlemen: Thanks for responses. My carry guns include 2.5 S&W 66, a 3" S&W 64 and a Security Six 2.750". I don't think I'll carry the .32
April 4, 2008, 07:43 AM
The 32Mag and 327Mag were both tested (A and A-) in this month's Gun Tests magazine. They liked 'em a lot!