32 H&R fans rejoice

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm bummed as I really liked this idea and was really motivated to get one. Would have been my first Charter. However, I will drive on and spend my $$$ with other makers. Really a horrible business model for Charter.
 
As much as I want this revolver to work for me in 32 H&R, I just can't bring myself to buy one that shoots that far off of point of aim at 7-15 yards. I get the impression that I'm not alone. I refuse to change the way I shoot to make up for a deficiency in the design of a new gun. I search the internet from time to time to see if maybe Charter Arms will come to their senses and make this thing right but to no avail. But today I read one of the online reviews from a company called K-Var Corp.

https://www.k-var.com/gun-test-charter-arms-professional-32-hr-magnum

They sell firearms including Charter Arms but don't appear to carry the Professional right now in either caliber. But like any review I tend to read them with lot of skepticism. They were at least somewhat honest by describing it as follows:

"The revolver tended to fire slightly low. I accounted for this by holding the front optic sight slightly higher than the rear sight, resulting in the bullets homing in on target. The revolver is more than accurate enough for filed and camp use"

Slightly might be stretching intellectual integrity a bit. But I found this in a subsequent paragraph:

"I liked the revolver enough to experiment with a couple of loads from Buffalo Bore. We are introducing extra recoil into a package that was designed to offer lighter recoil, but we are also increasing wound potential substantially. If carrying the revolver for defense against feral dogs or the big cats, the Buffalo Bore loads change the equation. The 100-grain JHP is surprisingly fast at 1,220 fps. The point of impact is raised, and the revolver is dead on the money at 15 yards. This load is closer to the .38 Special in recoil but offers excellent penetration and expansion. The 130-grain flat point, hard cast load breaks 1,190 fps. This is a stout load that sometimes offers sticky extraction and should be used sparingly. Recoil is there with this load."

Now, if that is true you could still end up with a decent 7 shot revolver that shoots the way we expect it to. It doesn't help the person who is looking for less recoil in a carry revolver though. I'm not sure this package could put up with a significant amount of the Buffalo Bore stuff though.

My thoughts were to wait for one of these to show up on the used market for a significantly discounted price and have my smith put a basic adjustable sight on it. But I don't think I'm going to see one for $200 anytime soon, if ever.

So, does the use of the heavier 100 grain/1,220 FPS load soften your disappointment in the revolver?

And no, I'm not interested in a 6 shot 357 for recoil reasons, though I'm thinking that either the 100 grain or especially the 130 grain would put it up into the same class of recoil as a light 357 revolver.

What are your thoughts?
 
I’m not interested in purchasing a gun that can’t over time stand up to the loads it shoots most accurately.

Being a fan of the .32 calibers I’m still interested but won’t reach for my wallet until (if ever) this issue is resolved.
 
Fair enough Frulk. There is also the Federal low recoil 85 grain .327 Federal Magnum Hydrashock with a reported (manufacturer) 1,400 FPS.

In reality, I'm trying to put my head around a faster load impacting higher than a slower load. It seems logical that a faster load would arrive at the target faster and not have enough time to rise as much as the slower round. In my peanut brain, a slower round would have more time to rise to point of aim wouldn't it?
 
I think that most on this site have found the problem. The prototype had a 'thinner' rib that the front sight sat on. It also might have been tapered. The production model has a taller rib that raises the front sight high enough to produce the problem. Some speculate that Charter wanted to standardize the rib on both the 32 H&R and the 357 model. I think one member here has actually milled down the rib and reinstalled the front sight to correct the problem. Something I'm not willing to do for the current cost of the revolver. It would have to be steeply discounted for me to invest gunsmithing costs into a new revolver.
 
Zendude said:
Looking at the height of the front sight, it almost looks like it was designed to have a rear sight.
Click to expand...
Or it was designed to shoot .357 and .38 instead.

Which Charter just so happens to also be making in the same exact gun, but with a 6 shot cylinder.
 
0419FF0B-BEBA-4ADE-9C6D-3798665C2B39.jpeg
TTv2 said:
Or it was designed to shoot .357 and .38 instead.

Which Charter just so happens to also be making in the same exact gun, but with a 6 shot cylinder.
Click to expand...
The 357Mag Professional is a 6 shot built on the XL frame , the 32 H&R is built on the Bulldog frame
I have the 357mag Professional being shipped as I write this .
 
Buckeye63 said:
Im not sure how the difference in the frames would effect the barrel assemblies...
Click to expand...
I was mistaken on the frame size, but I'm thinking the barrel assemblies are the same as a cost cutting measure.
 
Walkalong, I noticed your photo of the wadcutter. I’m not familiar with them using a plated bullet in 32 S&W Long. Is that one of your own loading?
 
I know I harped on it before but I wish C.A. would fix the POA and POI with their .32 mag professional. my .327 LCR is sweet but I would like a longer bbl and the S/A option.
 
Last edited:
JERRY said:
I know I harped on it before but I wish C.A. would fix the POA and POI with their .32 mag professional. my .327 LCR is sweet but I would like a longer bbl and the S/A option.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I realize I could probably work around the issue but I don't understand why we should have to have a 'work around' on a brand new firearm. At this point I'm going to wait until I can find one used at a bargain price (maybe never, and that's OK) and add an adjustable rear sight. That could be easier than it sounds but I'm not going to pay full price on a gun only to work on it/send it to a gunsmith and end up not having a manufacturer's warranty. It is as if the manufacturer has given up on fixing the problem. Or never intended to in the first place. Close enough is not good enough on any new revolver no less a 'Fighting Revolver'.

One thing this has done is sour me on Charter Arms firearms in general. I have owned a Charter in the past and was happy with it, but it was from an earlier ownership group. I'd like to have them as an option, but can't as long as they bury their head in the sand on this issue. It is fix it or lose me as a customer. Forever. That sounds harsh, but there are too many options out there.
 
As I had posted before, I have a great interest in various 32 caliber handguns. Like so many, the three inch barrel and seven rounds was what drew me to the Professional in 32 H&R magnum. After receiving it back from the factory with very little improvement I said “ to heck with the warranty “. Really wished I’d measured the top of the barrel rib before milling it down to the bottom of the groove in the rear sight, then I could tell you how much material had to be removed to get this thing to shoot to POA. I’m glad I did the modification and have no regrets.
 
Is that J frame pro series a 327 Magnum? I didn’t know there was such a thing.
 
I shot both of them yesterday and both were excellent. Except the Single Seven locked up in the middle of one cylinder full and then started working fine after a little coaxing.
 
Johnm1 said:
As much as I want this revolver to work for me in 32 H&R, I just can't bring myself to buy one that shoots that far off of point of aim at 7-15 yards. I get the impression that I'm not alone. I refuse to change the way I shoot to make up for a deficiency in the design of a new gun. I search the internet from time to time to see if maybe Charter Arms will come to their senses and make this thing right but to no avail. But today I read one of the online reviews from a company called K-Var Corp.

https://www.k-var.com/gun-test-charter-arms-professional-32-hr-magnum

They sell firearms including Charter Arms but don't appear to carry the Professional right now in either caliber. But like any review I tend to read them with lot of skepticism. They were at least somewhat honest by describing it as follows:

"The revolver tended to fire slightly low. I accounted for this by holding the front optic sight slightly higher than the rear sight, resulting in the bullets homing in on target. The revolver is more than accurate enough for filed and camp use"

Slightly might be stretching intellectual integrity a bit. But I found this in a subsequent paragraph:

"I liked the revolver enough to experiment with a couple of loads from Buffalo Bore. We are introducing extra recoil into a package that was designed to offer lighter recoil, but we are also increasing wound potential substantially. If carrying the revolver for defense against feral dogs or the big cats, the Buffalo Bore loads change the equation. The 100-grain JHP is surprisingly fast at 1,220 fps. The point of impact is raised, and the revolver is dead on the money at 15 yards. This load is closer to the .38 Special in recoil but offers excellent penetration and expansion. The 130-grain flat point, hard cast load breaks 1,190 fps. This is a stout load that sometimes offers sticky extraction and should be used sparingly. Recoil is there with this load."

Now, if that is true you could still end up with a decent 7 shot revolver that shoots the way we expect it to. It doesn't help the person who is looking for less recoil in a carry revolver though. I'm not sure this package could put up with a significant amount of the Buffalo Bore stuff though.

My thoughts were to wait for one of these to show up on the used market for a significantly discounted price and have my smith put a basic adjustable sight on it. But I don't think I'm going to see one for $200 anytime soon, if ever.

So, does the use of the heavier 100 grain/1,220 FPS load soften your disappointment in the revolver?

And no, I'm not interested in a 6 shot 357 for recoil reasons, though I'm thinking that either the 100 grain or especially the 130 grain would put it up into the same class of recoil as a light 357 revolver.

What are your thoughts?
Click to expand...
The Bulldog has the same frame and an awfully delicate-looking cylinder, and it holds up to downloaded 44 sp well enough. So the Professional could conceivably deal with those hot 32 loads. (I know there’s more to it than that)
 
lincen said:
As I had posted before, I have a great interest in various 32 caliber handguns. Like so many, the three inch barrel and seven rounds was what drew me to the Professional in 32 H&R magnum. After receiving it back from the factory with very little improvement I said “ to heck with the warranty “. Really wished I’d measured the top of the barrel rib before milling it down to the bottom of the groove in the rear sight, then I could tell you how much material had to be removed to get this thing to shoot to POA. I’m glad I did the modification and have no regrets.
Click to expand...
Photos?
 
Johnm1 said:
As

My thoughts were to wait for one of these to show up on the used market for a significantly discounted price and have my smith put a basic adjustable sight on it. But I don't think I'm going to see one for $200 anytime soon, if ever.

So, does the use of the heavier 100 grain/1,220 FPS load soften your disappointment in the revolver?

And no, I'm not interested in a 6 shot 357 for recoil reasons, though I'm thinking that either the 100 grain or especially the 130 grain would put it up into the same class of recoil as a light 357 revolver.

What are your thoughts?
Click to expand...

They are fetching $520 on Gunbroker right now. For a Charter! Incredible.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

S
  • Locked
32 H&R Mag
Replies
1
Views
431
32 Magnum
3
Mr_Flintstone
  • Locked
Thoughts on a Charter .32 H&R
Replies
18
Views
1K
Tallball
Tallball
aaaaa
  • Locked
Why the Dearth of 32 Caliber Revolvers?
2 3 4 5
Replies
102
Views
4K
SteadyD
SteadyD
F
  • Locked
Future .32 Snub Revolvers
2 3 4 5
Replies
111
Views
5K
GeoDudeFlorida
GeoDudeFlorida
Oninotaki
My most used accessories for CA Professional .32 H&R Revolver
Replies
2
Views
294
Oninotaki
Oninotaki
Back
Top