Rebirth of the 32s?

Kleanbore said:

By whom? It has been almost universally considered obsolete as a duty round for centuries.

I know of no one who would recommend a .32 Long for self defense.

Click to expand...

I don't know what qualifies as a "duty round" but I don't see what the deal is with something being considered obsolete being used for self defense. Being obsolete does not mean it is ineffective and while I've yet to see any writers in gun rags or any LE organizations actively recommend .32 Long, I've also yet to see the same groups discourage its use.

TTv2 said:

I don't know what qualifies as a "duty round" but I don't see what the deal is with something being considered obsolete being used for self defense. Being obsolete does not mean it is ineffective and while I've yet to see any writers in gun rags or any LE organizations actively recommend .32 Long, I've also yet to see the same groups discourage its use.

Click to expand...

I love smaller and obsolete calibers, but it’s a bit of a stretch to say that .32 long is a solid choice for SD. Police did use it, in an era where miscreants were, on the whole, a lot less materially blessed than they (and we) are today, and the pistol was a badge of rank, to be used in extremis against lawbreakers who as a rule tended to be armed with fists, knives, and clubs, not firearms.

I have no doubt nobody is discouraging the use of .32 long...... for the same reason nobody is writing articles telling folks they shouldn’t use .32-20 or .36 cap and ball.... any of them are better than a sharp stick in a pinch, and all have killed a lot of men over the years, but there are many, much better options, available.

TTv2 said:

The difference between the .380 and the .32 Long is the .380 has hollow points that expand and .32 SWL does not. The .32 SWL at least penetrates to the 12" minimum, so it can be considered effective, but shot placement is critical, while most .380s whose hollow points expand often fail to meet the 12" minimum.

The .380 being superior to .32 SWL in terms of ballistics, about the only measurable way it could be figured that way is by energy ft-lbs and that alone isn't enough to consider it superior.

The expanding hollow points are nice tho if you get the ones like Fiocchi or the new Federal Hyrda Shok Deep that expand very little, but go 12 inches.

IMO, if a bullet expanding to .43" and goes 12 inches is acceptable, then the .32 H&R Mag ammo that does about the same specs as those .380 hollow points do, but is doing it with a bullet that's 10 to 20 grains lighter, that's just as good.

If only one of the ammo manufacturers designed a .32 bullet that weighed more than 80 grains and was designed to expand more at snub .32 Mag velocities (900 fps) and hit 12 inches repeatably, it'd be perfect.

Click to expand...

none of that really matters without good shot placement, and with good shot placement none of that will really matter (between these two).





for .32 H&R references....

Has every member had a chance too post at least twice?

Looks like we are beating this to death, slowly.

Mosin77 said:

I love smaller and obsolete calibers, but it’s a bit of a stretch to say that .32 long is a solid choice for SD. Police did use it, in an era where miscreants were, on the whole, a lot less materially blessed than they (and we) are today, and the pistol was a badge of rank, to be used in extremis against lawbreakers who as a rule tended to be armed with fists, knives, and clubs, not firearms.

I have no doubt nobody is discouraging the use of .32 long...... for the same reason nobody is writing articles telling folks they shouldn’t use .32-20 or .36 cap and ball.... any of them are better than a sharp stick in a pinch, and all have killed a lot of men over the years, but there are many, much better options, available.

Click to expand...

I never said that .32 Long is a great choice for SD, but I cannot say that it's horrible either because while it doesn't expand, it does everything else the FBI specs demand. There are worse choices for SD that many rely on or come here on forums and ask something to the effect of "so and so has this ailment, can't take recoil, needs something for protection, is .22 LR or .22 Magnum a good choice?"

And they're not good choices, not when .32 Long is out there.

The crux of the argument is there are those who think everything .32 Long and H&R Mag can do, .38 does better and is on a theoretical "experts" approved checklist thus making it seem better while my counter to that belief is, apples to apples, the .32's effect on target is the same, the .32's effect on the shooter is greatly reduced recoil that improves accuracy and speed.

All of this is under the umbrella of being shot from a short barrel revolver.

Removed by poster

OneFreeTexan said:

Has every member had a chance too post at least twice?

Looks like we are beating this to death, slowly.

Click to expand...

I think what we see in these threads is that there is a very dedicated group of us that still sees real need for the 32 caliber handguns. I'm 64 and have sever arthritis in both thumbs. I really enjoy my target shooting with the many 32acp and 32 S&W handguns that I own. Will carry the LCRx with 32 H&R magnums and will also carry either a Makarov or my recently acquired CS9 S&W. My handguns range from 22 short to 10mm, 357 Sig, 45acp, and even 45 long Colt. Personally I'm a little happy that folks undervalue these 32 caliber guns because you can still purchase 32 ammo at pre-crazy prices !!

lincen said:

I think what we see in these threads is that there is a very dedicated group of us that still sees real need for the 32 caliber handguns. I'm 64 and have sever arthritis in both thumbs. I really enjoy my target shooting with the many 32acp and 32 S&W handguns that I own. Will carry the LCRx with 32 H&R magnums and will also carry either a Makarov or my recently acquired CS9 S&W. My handguns range from 22 short to 10mm, 357 Sig, 45acp, and even 45 long Colt. Personally I'm a little happy that folks undervalue these 32 caliber guns because you can still purchase 32 ammo at pre-crazy prices !!

Click to expand...

There's a group of people that uses reason and facts to make their argument and those that use their gut to dispel the usefulness of a caliber they don't like. Just because there isn't a lot of options out there for a .32 defense ammo that comes up just short of passing the FBI's criteria doesn't mean it's always going to be that way. The more .32's improve in popularity, the more demand for more ammo, ammo variety and bullet variety is going to go up and then we'll get improvements in .32 Mag and .327 that will make it indistinguishable from .38 and .357 for self defense in terms of terminal effect.

My goal is for people who use forums as a resource (I know Hickok45 lurks on forums as do a lot of other guys on youtube) to get more information on things to come to their own conclusion. My bottom line is .32 isn't perfect, but for some people it's more perfect than .38 or .357 is, especially in snub revolvers.

The one fact about .32 revolvers is that they're here to stay now. The days of the weak H&R's and Iver Johnsons are gone, no longer is the option for a .32 revolver a 5 shot Charter or a $1000 S&W, and with .327 there is a huge gap between max .32 H&R power and starting .327 loads that ammo companies can play with for a low recoil .327 factory ammo.

Like I (and many others) have said......I like the .32 stable of cartridges. They tend to be smaller guns and often times are quite accurate (shot placement..hint, hint). The I and J frame S&Ws hold 6 rounds vs. 5 rounds of .38. They carry and point well and are quick on target. There are also a ton of them out there.

9MM was barely adequate for defense when the .40 S&W arrived remember? .40 was the in thing for 25+ years. Now what are Fed and local LE agencies doing?........Going back to the weak puny 9MM. How dare they?! I have always thought the 9MM was more than adequate for combat/duty/defense. The same idea with other calibers (like the .32s). Hype and fervor doesn't negate a cartridges effectiveness.

.410 was openly scoffed at as a defense option for decades. To even mention it in mixed company you would be lambasted. Then the Taurus Judge and S&W Governer came and .410 is gonna save this here Republic. So if .410 doesn't work from an 18-22in barrel how on earth will it work from a 3in barrel?! Hype and fervor folks.....

I'll keep carrying my .32s. I'll also keep custom loading ammo for them and shooting tiny little groups with them. They work for me and will continue to do so. I dare not stand in front of any of them either.

I normally carry 9mm, but I really love .32

.32 S&W Long, .32 H&R, and .327 are a joy to reload, and are all great at the range. At the same time, carrying a S&W Model 31 on the belt while woods walking allows one to engage targets of opportunity, and would be sufficient for discouraging even 2 legged threats, especially when loaded with a stout hard cast SWC. Not optimal for urban threats (that's what the EDC P365 9mm is for), but I wouldn't feel undergunned in the woods with the .32 on my belt, even with the "lowly" .32 Long.

lincen said:

I think what we see in these threads is that there is a very dedicated group of us that still sees real need for the 32 caliber handguns. I'm 64 and have sever arthritis in both thumbs. I really enjoy my target shooting with the many 32acp and 32 S&W handguns that I own. Will carry the LCRx with 32 H&R magnums and will also carry either a Makarov or my recently acquired CS9 S&W. My handguns range from 22 short to 10mm, 357 Sig, 45acp, and even 45 long Colt. Personally I'm a little happy that folks undervalue these 32 caliber guns because you can still purchase 32 ammo at pre-crazy prices !!

Click to expand...

I empathize. The only J-Frame I will still voluntarily shoot is an all-stainless-steel, .32 H&R. The base joint of my firing-hand thumb is right at the corner of the frame, so J-snubs concentrate their recoil right where it hurts. I might grab an Airlite .38 J-snub, in an emergency, but they are really my wife’s guns, even if I am carrying them. (There are places that I can legally carry, as a retired LEO, where she is unable to carry, as a licensee.)

I could add larger grips to a J-snub, but that makes it as large as an SP101, and I have SP101 revolvers. The factory grip of an SP101 is just long enough to stabilize the weapon against the “heel bone” of my hand, and full enough to distribute the recoil, so I do still shoot them, though mostly with my healthier left hand.

Very good points made in the above posts and one touched on another benefit of the 32's. The 32 H&R magnum forced me into reloading due to the high cost per round. Plus you can load the 32 Longs a little hotter when you roll your own !

lincen said:

Very good points made in the above posts and one touched on another benefit of the 32's. The 32 H&R magnum forced me into reloading due to the high cost per round. Plus you can load the 32 Longs a little hotter when you roll your own !

Click to expand...

Very good point about hotter ammo. I can load a 100gr RCBS 32-098 SWC in the 32 Long pretty hot. No factory ammo (which is quite expensive) can get close. I can go from the 77gr Lyman 311-252 to a 115Gr SWC and do it super cheap. No worries here.

TTv2 said:

My bottom line is .32 isn't perfect, but for some people it's more perfect than .38 or .357 is, especially in snub revolvers.

Click to expand...

Agreed. .32 is what works best for me in a snub.
.38 Special is reserved for my 4" SP-101 and 6" Colt OMM at the range. If I could effectively/competently utilize a .38SPL in a snub for self-defense I would. The .32 just flat out works better for me. It's great that we have choices and can use what works best for us.

Mark 40 said:

Agreed. .32 is what works best for me in a snub.
.38 Special is reserved for my 4" SP-101 and 6" Colt OMM at the range. If I could effectively/competently utilize a .38SPL in a snub for self-defense I would. The .32 just flat out works better for me. It's great that we have choices and can use what works best for us.

Click to expand...

For longer barrels I really like .38 and .357. I have the .327 SP101 4" and that was mainly because I wanted something double action that wasn't too large and heavy, but had a decent sight radius and I could load down for small game, but was still able to shoot a powerful magnum.

In the Oct 2020 edition of Handloader Brian Pearce starts his rather extensive article on the .327 FM with the following comment paraphrased...initially offered in a small frame revolver as a defensive cartridge that would offer less recoil than larger calibers the cartridge has also gained acceptance among sportsmen wanting a flat shooting, low recoiling field cartridge, but chambered in revolvers featuring adjustable sights and longer barrels.

That’s a great summation of where the caliber is right now. It’s making, or already made the jump from snub nose only to lightweight field caliber.

I guess I’m in both camps as my EDC is a 3.2 inch Sp101 .327 FM and I own the 7.5 inch Single Seven for light varmint work.

Frulk said:

I consider the Single Seven my trail gun, displacing the Single Sixes in .32 H&R which held that designation previously.

It really is a nifty and compact firearm that’s capable of packing a significant punch when required to.

Here it is on far right with a couple of Single Six .32 H&R's and 2 New Model Vaquero .45 Colts on top.

View attachment 945694

Click to expand...

Frulk, are the birds head grip frames on those Rugers easy to shoot accurately? Do your hands slip and need readjustment a lot under the recoil of the .327/.32 H&R? I’ve only seen them in the shop cases, I’ve never held nor fired a revolver that had that grip style.

I ask this because the birds head looks to be much more compact than a SA Ruger standard or Bisley grip for packing about. I’ve shot lots with the standard grip frames on large and small frame Rugers, and I’ve found a new love with the Bisley Single Six .32 I picked up a few months ago, but the ease-of-packing look of your birds head guns sure is appealing .

Stay safe.

Of the currently available new 32 revolvers, the best choice for concealed carry in (IMO) is the LCR 327.

I have one and carry it with the 327 Federal Hydra Shok load. That load is a step up from H&R Magnum loads, but is not nearly so hard to control as the Gold Dot or American Eagle 327 Federal loads.

It puts that LCR 327 above the 38 special revolver in both number of shots (6) and muzzle energy. And most tests show it expands.

I really like the looks of the Lipsey 327 Birds Head 3.75" Single Seven Ruger. If for some odd reason, I had to carry a single action, that would be the one.

I'd like to find some of the Critical Defense 327 Federal that was recently released. But it's Unobtainium these days.

I do have a nice stock of 327 Federal Hydra Shok, 100 gr Gold Dot, 115 gr Gold Dot, and American Eagle ammo bought several years ago in between ammo crises.

I'd personally love to see a 7.62 Tokarev cylinder for a .327 Magnum gun. I've been toying with the idea of working up a wildcat along those lines, starting with a larger parent cartridge like a 10mm and necking it down to a .327 Magnum bullet. Lots of bullet choices.

cal44mag said:

I'd like to find some of the Critical Defense 327 Federal that was recently released. But it's Unobtainium these days.

Click to expand...

I heard some early reports of the cases splitting and separation. I don't know if Hornady ever addressed the issues but maybe the lack of them on the shelves could be because of the issues.

Riomouse911 said:

Frulk, are the birds head grip frames on those Rugers easy to shoot accurately? Do your hands slip and need readjustment a lot under the recoil of the .327/.32 H&R? I’ve only seen them in the shop cases, I’ve never held nor fired a revolver that had that grip style.

Click to expand...

I happen to like the BH grips myself. My hands seem to be comfortable when using them. The larger limitation to being able to shoot the BH SS7 accurately is the rudimentary sights (rear shallow frame notch) and the fact there’re polished stainless steel. Bluing would be my preference.

That being said Im able to shoot it to a level if accuracy I’m satisfied with. It really dies have a high cool factor and is fun to pull the trigger on.

Frulk said:

I happen to like the BH grips myself. My hands seem to be comfortable when using them. The larger limitation to being able to shoot the BH SS7 accurately is the rudimentary sights (rear shallow frame notch) and the fact there’re polished stainless steel. Bluing would be my preference.

That being said Im able to shoot it to a level if accuracy I’m satisfied with. It really dies have a high cool factor and is fun to pull the trigger on.

Click to expand...

They look amazing, very cool indeed .

I have a bright stainless Vaquero, you're right about the fixed sights on stainless guns being tough to use.

Stay safe.