Effective range for .32ACP?

You can compare a Walther PPK in .32 to a Walther PPS in 9mm. Similar size, with the differences being negligible, depending on what you prefer. However, what do you feel a .32 is going to do BETTER than a 9mm from a similar sized gun? The .32 will kill someone, but it probably is always going to fall short of a 9mm at STOPPING someone who is determined to fight if the bullet is not placed in any "high incapacitation" part of the body (brain, heart, groin, etc). And that requires a high level of skill, or luck. The ODDS are in the 9mm's favor, due to mass and penetration advantages over the .32.

However, what do you feel a .32 is going to do BETTER than a 9mm from a similar sized gun?

Click to expand...

Controllability. In the hands of a large segment of the population the 32 will be far more controllable than a 9mm in a similar size weight package. Being more controllable; they will put more rounds on target quicker. Rounds on target beats misses every time.

Shoot a Walther PPS in 9mm. Most everyone states that it is an extremely comfortable and controllable gun to shoot. Another plus is the sights are larger, and faster on target than most smaller sights found on the .32's. It might be easier, and more accurate than a comparably sized .32.

Tried one. Also shot a LC9 this past weekend. These are closest to a Walther PPK in size and weight. Having shot many Walthers over the years in 32 and 380, the recoil does not even compare. The 9mm is waaaay snappier.

Considering that you can get 32's that are significantly smaller / lighter than the PPS you are comparing apples to oranges. A heavy pocket 32 is the Beretta Tomcat at 17 oz. loaded. That compares to a PPS at 19.5 oz. empty.

Well one time while at a rifle range during a DCM qualification shoot I hit a 200 yard target at 200 yards using a Colt 1903 Pocket Automatic.

Of course I did have to shoot a few sighters, and my point-of-aim was a crow sitting at the top of a dead tree located on a burm behind the targets...

According to an advertisement in my reprint copy of a Sears Roebuck 1909 mail order catalog that featured the Colt, "... is accurate up to 300 yards, and will penetrate four one-inch boards at a distance of 15 feet."

Clearly, the marksmanship skills of some of today's younger shooters leave much to be desired.

That said: Effective range is more determined by the skill of the shooter, then the handgun being used. Most quality pistols and revolvers will perform better then the person using them.

The 32 is a very effective round, and the little steel European pistols, and colts, are a pleasure to shoot. My Favorite is the Beretta 70.
It is not known as a long range handgun, but most hand guns are not for long range but for close range, and the 32 is great at close range. If you don't believe that do some research on the number of 32 cal pistols the Military forces of the world have used, and quite effectively. The 32 is also easier to keep on target than some of the smaller 380's and 9's.

I think the general shooting ccw public would be better served if the current crop of micro 380's were also offered in 32.

These tiny guns in 32 all of a sudden become controllable for multiple shots and begin to show surprising accuracy particularly when equipped with a laser. The 32 offers more capacity and in the case of the kel tec gains a last shot slide lock. As one poster once said shooting the p3at is like holding onto an exploding credit card.

The arguments about small modern 9's making the 32 obsolete ignore one glaringly obvious fact. Modern 32's are still that much smaller. 32 acp development didn't end with hitler's suicide gun.


Honestly I'm extremely underwhelmed by 380 and 32 penatration numbers in gel with jhp IMO both are firmly FMJ only proposals. As such I'm always going to lean towards more capacity, speed and accuracy.


I like my p32's they're light and extremely thin. For the same footprint as a pf9 I can fit a laser AND a 10rd mag.







posted via that mobile app with the sig lines everyone complains about

I carried a Browning FN M1922 in .32 ACP back up throughout my 1966 tour of S.E. Asia. I can vouch for it's effectiveness on human-sized targets at 100 yards. While not exactly "knock-down" power, nobody likes getting shot. Pretty much took the starch out of a few miscreants, despite the range. Don't believe that lack of power is also lack of effectiveness. You are not exactly unarmed with the old 7.65 Mauser pistol round. Heck if it was good enough for 007-----

Curator said:

I carried a Browning FN M1922 in .32 ACP back up throughout my 1966 tour of S.E. Asia. I can vouch for it's effectiveness on human-sized targets at 100 yards. While not exactly "knock-down" power, nobody likes getting shot. Pretty much took the starch out of a few miscreants, despite the range. Don't believe that lack of power is also lack of effectiveness. You are not exactly unarmed with the old 7.65 Mauser pistol round. Heck if it was good enough for 007-----

Click to expand...

Good post

However I do want to point out that 7.65mauser is a vastly different cartridge than 7.65browning/32acp

7.65 Mauser would take the fight out of anything on the planet short of big bears and cats and perhaps even then.




posted via that mobile app with the sig lines everyone complains about

The .32 ACP Mauser HSc I posted an appreciation of recently is my EDC. It's more than enough for any realistic threat I'd face here in the north woods.

el Godfather said:

Starting this tread, I had 15 yards in mind as . . . range.

Click to expand...

That's what I think of my Taurus TCP 732 in .32 ACP. At 15 yards shooting slow fire, 5-shot groups I've cared to record were 3 to 5 inches. Same with a surplus CZ27 in my hands.

Then, there is my NAA Guardian in .32 ACP that shoots paper plate size groups at 5 yards.

So, it can depend on the gun.

My .32 H&R Magnum doesn't need a +P or +P+ rating. With that said, I would like to own a smaller pistol. Right now my main carry is a Taurus 731UL, J Frame.

groundhog34 said:

It is a weak cartridge at best. With 9mm the same size as 32 why have one. Blowback design limits the power of the cartridge thus negating the possibility of a +p

Click to expand...

First, .32's are considerably smaller than even the smallest 9mm. Second, do your comments mean you'll volunteer to take a .32ACP for the team? You know, just to prove how weak a cartridge it is.

Originally posted by groundhog34: Blowback design limits the power of the cartridge thus negating the possibility of a +p.

Click to expand...

Must not have checked Buffalo Bore's offering 32ACP +P

220 ft. lbs. rated is right in at 380 / 38 Spec.+P power levels last time I checked.

Early on in my carry journey, I bought a European police surplus Manurhin Walther PP in 32acp.
It carried beautifully IWB. It was extremely accurate at 25yds and fed everything I tried without fail. I would certainly have called that a 25yd pistol.
Of all the pistols I have owned and traded away, I would love to have that one back.

Sights of Škorpion go to 150m for some reason..

However I do want to point out that 7.65mauser is a vastly different cartridge than 7.65browning/32acp

7.65 Mauser would take the fight out of anything on the planet short of big bears and cats and perhaps even then.



I think you are thinking of the 7.63 Mauser "Broomhandle" round. That is a different animal all together!

SharpsDressedMan said:

However I do want to point out that 7.65mauser is a vastly different cartridge than 7.65browning/32acp

7.65 Mauser would take the fight out of anything on the planet short of big bears and cats and perhaps even then.



I think you are thinking of the 7.63 Mauser "Broomhandle" round. That is a different animal all together!

Click to expand...

It is an interesting cartridge and the predecessor to 7.62x25

7.65 Mauser however = an old time 308win




posted via that mobile app with the sig lines everyone complains about

Sights of Škorpion go to 150m for some reason..

Click to expand...

Because most gun designers are optimists....

If a .22 will kill a rabbit at 50 yards, I'd think a .32 would.

It is the gun-not the cartridge

GODFATHER,
I have been shooting the .32ACP a lot lately. I have taken to collecting pocket pistols.

I found that really small guns like the NAA Guardian have such poor sights, that a 10 yard range is the maximum I would shoot it. On the other hand, a compact or mid-size pistol like the WALTHER PPK and BERETTA model 82 can keep all the rounds inside the target at 15 yards. With the sights on the BERETTA or SIG 232, 25 yards would still be reasonable for me.
I am not talking about a slow fire, taking you time, target shooting, but rather using a .32ACP on the same qualification drill my agency uses with the .40 S&W pistols we are issued.

The smallest guns have small grips and sights.
They also have considerable recoil because of the light weight and small grips. I find shooting more than 25 rounds at a time out of the NAA Guardian, to be painful.
On the pre-WW II guns that I shoot, the small sights make it more or a challenge than on modern pistols.
On a larger gun like the BERETTA 82, it is fun and no work at all.

The lack of stopping power and the semi-rimmed case are the biggest defects on the .32ACP.
The ease of shooting such a low recoil round and the small guns that this allows are its biggest strengths.

I will probably shoot the .32ACP more and more as I get older and less recoil tolerant.

Jim

I'd say 50 or so yards. I can group them pretty nicely at 50yds with my PPK.

According to an advertisement in my reprint copy of a Sears Roebuck 1909 mail order catalog that featured the Colt, "... is accurate up to 300 yards, and will penetrate four one-inch boards at a distance of 15 feet."


I have seen that before but in S&W adds.. the 38sp and 32-20 is rated at 6 and1/2 pineboards 7/8" thick..

You bring the baseball bat....I'll bring the PP.

10 paces turn and have at.

Click to expand...

I've seen similar tests done from a slightly closer distance, using hard rubber knives and AirSoft pistols, and the guy with the knife almost always wins.

Make it a total of 10-15 paces or 15 (rather than 10 by each participant) and the results may surprise you. Unless your gun is out, up, and ready to fire. If it's in a holster (on the belt or in a pocket), you'd still be in the process of getting it out of the holster or pocket by the time the guy with the knife or baseball bat is delivering the first blow.

And, if it comes as a surprise, where you aren't expecting the attack (as with "10 paces turn and have at it), it's even worse... If you've got an AirSoft pistol and a stick, this is one test you and a friend (or child) can do yourself, without risk.