.32 H&R Magnum & True Blue & Ruger's LCR

Status
Not open for further replies.
jski

jski

Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2016
Messages
2,292
Location
Florida
I'm trying for an optimal load for my .327 Magnum Ruger LCR using Starline .32 H&R Mag brass. I emailed the Starline ballistician to ask if their .32 Mag brass could withstand 9mm levels of pressure. That being done, I search about the web looking for credible .32 Mag True Blue recommendations ... trying to find something that would work well with 85 and/or 100 grain XTP bullets.

Why True Blue? Because in appears to work well with snubbies and it's definitely (one of) the best metering powders I've worked with.

What appears to work well (for me) is:
  1. 6.7 gr of TB with an 85 gr XTP bullet
  2. 6.1 gr of TB with a 100 gr XTP bullet
Both are giving me ~1200 FPS
 
I'm not familiar with True Blue but would suggest to try some 231 or HP38 for .32 H & R.
 
jski said:
I'm trying for an optimal load for my .327 Magnum Ruger LCR using Starline .32 H&R Mag brass. I emailed the Starline ballistician to ask if their .32 Mag brass could withstand 9mm levels of pressure. That being done, I search about the web looking for credible .32 Mag True Blue recommendations ... trying to find something that would work well with 85 and/or 100 grain XTP bullets.

Why True Blue? Because in appears to work well with snubbies and it's definitely (one of) the best metering powders I've worked with.

What appears to work well (for me) is:
  1. 6.7 gr of TB with an 85 gr XTP bullet
  2. 6.1 gr of TB with a 100 gr XTP bullet
Both are giving me ~1200 FPS
Click to expand...
Autocomp worked much better than True Blue in my wife’s Taurus ported snubby. I don’t use a “meter” so how well powders meter are irrelevant to me. I’m still using Red Dot for my 85gr XTP loads because it burns clean, burns completely, has low flash and I can run it close to max without sticky extraction or flat primers.
 
I'm not interested in reproducing .327 level pressures BUT I am interested in reproducing 9mm level pressures.

.32 H&R Magnum (Pet Loads)
Some readers may be wondering: Why bother developing “+P style” handloads in the .32 Magnum when we have the .327 Federal Magnum? There are several reasons. First, the .327 can be very accurate; however, many loads – including some factory loads – have very high extreme velocity spreads and only offer mediocre accuracy. A savvy handloader can certainly develop loads that address that problem, but the .32 Magnum does not suffer from this malady. Rather, with any respectable load it usually exhibits extremely low velocity spreads and impressive, ragged-hole 25-yard groups. Second, Starline cases are readily available and cost less. Third, the cartridge uses lighter powder charges and produces notably less muzzle report. Fourth, the shorter powder column of the .32 H&R is less sensitive to powder positioning with all loads, including full-house, midrange and light target loads, resulting in outstanding overall accuracy. Fifth, cases extract and clear the chamber easily. Call me old fashioned, but for several experienced-based reasons I prefer traditional six-shot revolvers, including the Ruger Single-Six, USFA Pre-War SAA, Smith & Wesson Model 16-4, etc.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
I suggest H110. Next, LongShot.
It gives the highest velocity and best accuracy from my Taurus M-76 with the 100gr XTP. It will still give highest velocities with a shorter barrel. I get 1,320fps from the 6” gun. It’ll put you in the 1,200+ neighborhood with the LCR.
25yd target. 6-o’clock hold.

Link to Brian Pierce article.

https://www.handloadermagazine.com/32-h-r-magnum-pet-loads

He only got 1,028fps with 6.8gr of TB in a 1-7/8” S&W.
Otherwise, to get 1,200fps with a 100gr will likely require .327mag brass and data.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0003.jpeg
    IMG_0003.jpeg
    156.4 KB · Views: 3
  • IMG_0388.jpeg
    IMG_0388.jpeg
    125.8 KB · Views: 3
Last edited:
GooseGestapo said:
I suggest H110. Next, LongShot.
It gives the highest velocity and best accuracy from my Taurus M-76 with the 100gr XTP. It will still give highest velocities with a shorter barrel. I get 1,320fps from the 6” gun. It’ll put you in the 1,200+ neighborhood with the LCR.
25yd target. 6-o’clock hold.

Link to Brian Pierce article.

https://www.handloadermagazine.com/32-h-r-magnum-pet-loads

He only got 1,028fps with 6.8gr of TB in a 1-7/8” S&W.
Otherwise, to get 1,200fps with a 100gr will likely require .327mag brass and data.
Click to expand...
I’ve used 11 gr of H110 with a 100 gr XTP bullet. Excellent performance at 1200+ FPS but definitely more punishing on your hands than the 6.1 gr of True Blue with a 100 gr XTP bullet.

No way to know the pressure levels of these different loads with different bullet weights but as I stated above: I’m not interested in reproducing .327 Mag levels of pressure but I am interested in achieving 9mm levels of pressure.
 
Last edited:
JERRY said:
1,200fps from a snubbie is federal magnum power not h&r power.
Click to expand...
Exactly! That's why I backed off of it. The 6.1 gr load of True Blue with a 100 gr XTP gave me ~1150 FPS and the recoil seemed significantly less.

Like I said: I want 9mm level pressures, NOT .327 level pressures.
 
Last edited:
jski said:
Take a look at Buffalo Bore's .32 H&R Mag ammo:

Keep in mind that Buffalo Bore uses exclusively Starline brass.
Click to expand...
I have some of this and in my 431pd its very unpleasant. I'd rather have standard 32h&r magnum ammo.
 
JERRY said:
I have some of this and in my 431pd its very unpleasant. I'd rather have standard 32h&r magnum ammo.
Click to expand...
NOT surprising. Just thinking about the pressures that go with these rounds.
Make me believe that Starline's .32 H&R brass is simply shorter .327 Fed Mag brass.
Whatever it is, it must be ass busting strong!
 
jski said:
NOT surprising. Just thinking about the pressures that go with these rounds.
Make me believe that Starline's .32 H&R brass is simply shorter .327 Fed Mag brass.
Whatever it is, it must be ass busting strong!
Click to expand...
I see you're still convincing yourself that brass is stronger than steel.
Sadly, as someone experienced at working with metals, statements like this just make me shake my head and wonder about the future.
The brass cartridge casing is just a medium for holding the bullet, primer and powder together in a convenient package and it has the side benefit of sealing the chamber fairly well. That is all it is designed to do and that is all it is capable of doing. The head and web are the only "weak points" of a brass cartridge and their weakness is made moot by the primer's thin shell, which is significantly weaker. Other than late 19th/early 20th Century balloon-head brass - that is, any brass with a solid web and head, which is ALL brass since the 1930's when SAAMI came along - there is no significant difference in the materials or dimensions of pistol brass from any SAAMI- or CIP-compliant manufacturer. This is a basic dimensional requirement to avoid marketing professionals from influencing the manufacturing process and ending up with brass which has significantly lower internal volume in the retail stream.
"Our brass is so strong an elephant can stand on it!" - Yes! and the internal volume has been reduced to the point that a standard starting load is over pressure sufficiently to destroy the chamber of any properly-built firearm. Nice.

The cartridge brass lends absolutely ZERO strength to the chamber during combustion. Relying on cartridge brass to contain an over-pressure load is just not smart.
 
jski said:
Exactly! That's why I backed off of it. The 6.1 gr load of True Blue with a 100 gr XTP gave me ~1150 FPS and the recoil seemed significantly less.

Like I said: I want 9mm level pressures, NOT .327 level pressures.
Click to expand...

How are you coming up with those velocities?

Brian Pierce got 1,028fps with 6.8gr with a 1.825” S&W.
He got 1,274 from a 6.5”bbl .

Are you chronographing or extrapolating?
 
I have a 4.2" SP-101 in 327 and totally understand the OP's desire for a more mid range load. The recoil in a 327 snubby is real, but the blast gets into the "unreal" category. And the blast is probably the more objectionable aspect for many.

For my gun, keeping velocities up with more reasonable recoil and blast lead me to go with 85 gr bullets.

Reading this thread, I also question the velocities being discussed. My gun tends to underperform predictions where the OP's numbers seem to be more than I would expect.

The OP's choice of powder is actually pretty good for 327s, but is probably not optimum for blast reduction. Blast is much more affected by muzzle pressure than it is by chamber pressure. I use Quickload a lot to try to figure this kind of stuff out. Using Quickload for this application indicates that reasonable performance and even lower muzzle pressures can be had by going with faster powders than the OP selected. Note that Quickload barrel length is muzzle to breech so I input 3.5" for the LCR. The table below has loads all predicted to have the same velocity and is sorted with lowest muzzle pressures at the top. Also note that the faster powders get 100% powder burn in the gun, where the slower powders are still burning when the bullet exits the gun.

------------------------------------------------ CAUTION - FOR USE IN 327 GUNS ONLY ---------------------------------------
Code: 
Cartridge          : .32 H&R Magnum
Bullet             : .312, 85, Hornady HP/XTP 32050
Useable Case Capaci: 12.979 grain H2O = 0.843 cm³
Cartridge O.A.L. L6: 1.350 inch = 34.29 mm
Barrel Length      : 3.5 inch = 88.9 mm

Powder type          Filling/Loading Ratio  Charge    Charge   Vel. Prop.Burnt P max  P muzz  B_Time
                                      %     Grains    Gramm   fps     %       psi     psi    ms
---------------------------------  -----------------------------------------------------------------
Vihtavuori N310                     66.7      4.6     0.30    1200   100.0    36831    7452   0.342  !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Hodgdon TiteGroup                   53.3      5.2     0.34    1200   100.0    32116    8020   0.358  !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Alliant RED DOT                     80.2      4.8     0.31    1200   100.0    32164    8148   0.362  !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Vihtavuori N320                     72.9      5.1     0.33    1200   100.0    30327    8356   0.372  !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Accurate Nitro 100                  74.9      4.7     0.30    1200   100.0    30441    8362   0.365  !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Alliant GREEN DOT                   76.7      5.1     0.33    1200   100.0    30349    8503   0.372  !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Winchester 231                      61.9      5.6     0.36    1200   100.0    28915    8838   0.375  !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Ramshot Zip                         55.6      5.6     0.36    1200   100.0    28915    8838   0.375  !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Vihtavuori N330                     71.9      5.6     0.36    1200   100.0    27358    9294   0.389  !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Hodgdon Universal                   71.6      5.5     0.36    1200   100.0    27810    9451   0.392  !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Accurate No.2                       71.4      5.7     0.37    1200    96.5    27764    9636   0.377  !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Vihtavuori N340                     75.2      6.0     0.39    1200    98.3    27038    9876   0.388  !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Alliant BULLSEYE                    65.5      5.2     0.34    1200    98.3    26361   10078   0.388  !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Ramshot Silhouette                  62.4      6.5     0.42    1200    96.0    26438   10264   0.391  !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Winchester WAP                      62.6      6.5     0.42    1200    95.7    26432   10276   0.390  !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Alliant UNIQUE                      75.8      5.8     0.38    1200    97.5    26149   10483   0.401  !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Ramshot True Blue                   58.4      7.1     0.46    1200    91.3    26297   10528   0.392  !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
 
Last edited:
P Flados said:
I have a 4.2" SP-101 in 327 and totally understand the OP's desire for a more mid range load. The recoil in a 327 snubby is real, but the blast gets into the "unreal" category. And the blast is probably the more objectionable aspect for many.

For my gun, keeping velocities up with more reasonable recoil and blast lead me to go with 85 gr bullets.

Reading this thread, I also question the velocities being discussed. My gun tends to underperform predictions where the OP's numbers seem to be more than I would expect.

The OP's choice of powder is actually pretty good for 327s, but is probably not optimum for blast reduction. Blast is much more affected by muzzle pressure than it is by chamber pressure. I use Quickload a lot to try to figure this kind of stuff out. Using Quickload for this application indicates that reasonable performance and even lower muzzle pressures can be had by going with faster powders than the OP selected. Note that Quickload barrel length is muzzle to breech so I input 3.5" for the LCR. The table below has loads all predicted to have the same velocity and is sorted with lowest muzzle pressures at the top. Also note that the faster powders get 100% powder burn in the gun, where the slower powders are still burning when the bullet exits the gun.

------------------------------------------------ CAUTION - FOR USE IN 327 GUNS ONLY ---------------------------------------
Code: 
Cartridge          : .32 H&R Magnum
Bullet             : .312, 85, Hornady HP/XTP 32050
Useable Case Capaci: 12.979 grain H2O = 0.843 cm³
Cartridge O.A.L. L6: 1.350 inch = 34.29 mm
Barrel Length      : 3.5 inch = 88.9 mm

Powder type          Filling/Loading Ratio  Charge    Charge   Vel. Prop.Burnt P max  P muzz  B_Time
                                      %     Grains    Gramm   fps     %       psi     psi    ms
---------------------------------  -----------------------------------------------------------------
Vihtavuori N310                     66.7      4.6     0.30    1200   100.0    36831    7452   0.342  !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Hodgdon TiteGroup                   53.3      5.2     0.34    1200   100.0    32116    8020   0.358  !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Alliant RED DOT                     80.2      4.8     0.31    1200   100.0    32164    8148   0.362  !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Vihtavuori N320                     72.9      5.1     0.33    1200   100.0    30327    8356   0.372  !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Accurate Nitro 100                  74.9      4.7     0.30    1200   100.0    30441    8362   0.365  !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Alliant GREEN DOT                   76.7      5.1     0.33    1200   100.0    30349    8503   0.372  !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Winchester 231                      61.9      5.6     0.36    1200   100.0    28915    8838   0.375  !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Ramshot Zip                         55.6      5.6     0.36    1200   100.0    28915    8838   0.375  !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Vihtavuori N330                     71.9      5.6     0.36    1200   100.0    27358    9294   0.389  !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Hodgdon Universal                   71.6      5.5     0.36    1200   100.0    27810    9451   0.392  !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Accurate No.2                       71.4      5.7     0.37    1200    96.5    27764    9636   0.377  !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Vihtavuori N340                     75.2      6.0     0.39    1200    98.3    27038    9876   0.388  !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Alliant BULLSEYE                    65.5      5.2     0.34    1200    98.3    26361   10078   0.388  !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Ramshot Silhouette                  62.4      6.5     0.42    1200    96.0    26438   10264   0.391  !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Winchester WAP                      62.6      6.5     0.42    1200    95.7    26432   10276   0.390  !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Alliant UNIQUE                      75.8      5.8     0.38    1200    97.5    26149   10483   0.401  !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Ramshot True Blue                   58.4      7.1     0.46    1200    91.3    26297   10528   0.392  !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Click to expand...
My choice of True Blue was partially guided by the fact the I am looking to load something that’ll give me 9mm pressures. And that True Blue is touted by many as the optimal choice for 9mm loads.

So I thought possibly True Blue would be an optimal powder for a 32 H&R Mag +P round. After looking at the empirical evidence and reading about other’s experiences, I became convinced that Starline’s brass would handle the pressures. Are there better powders for this purpose? Possibly. I make no categorical statements.

As for the velocities, I use a LabRadar and that’s what it says and I believe it.

Oh yeah, lest I forget, those 11 gr of H110 rounds are listed in the article I linked to above about “Pet Loads” for the 32 H&R and in the LCR those loads will spank your palms. But the gun handled them without problems.
 
GooseGestapo said:
How are you coming up with those velocities?

Brian Pierce got 1,028fps with 6.8gr with a 1.825” S&W.
He got 1,274 from a 6.5”bbl .

Are you chronographing or extrapolating?
Click to expand...
6.8 gr of what? If you’re saying it was True Blue I’ll simply say, I tried a 6.7 gr load of True Blue with a 100 gr XTP bullet and the results we unpleasant: the spent brass would stick in the chambers and my palm was worse for wear. But my LabRadar showed similar velocities to the 11 gr of H110 rounds.
 
Last edited:
GeoDudeFlorida said:
I see you're still convincing yourself that brass is stronger than steel.
Sadly, as someone experienced at working with metals, statements like this just make me shake my head and wonder about the future.
The brass cartridge casing is just a medium for holding the bullet, primer and powder together in a convenient package and it has the side benefit of sealing the chamber fairly well. That is all it is designed to do and that is all it is capable of doing. The head and web are the only "weak points" of a brass cartridge and their weakness is made moot by the primer's thin shell, which is significantly weaker. Other than late 19th/early 20th Century balloon-head brass - that is, any brass with a solid web and head, which is ALL brass since the 1930's when SAAMI came along - there is no significant difference in the materials or dimensions of pistol brass from any SAAMI- or CIP-compliant manufacturer. This is a basic dimensional requirement to avoid marketing professionals from influencing the manufacturing process and ending up with brass which has significantly lower internal volume in the retail stream.
"Our brass is so strong an elephant can stand on it!" - Yes! and the internal volume has been reduced to the point that a standard starting load is over pressure sufficiently to destroy the chamber of any properly-built firearm. Nice.

The cartridge brass lends absolutely ZERO strength to the chamber during combustion. Relying on cartridge brass to contain an over-pressure load is just not smart.
Click to expand...
I’m trying to make some sense of this. It’s certainly not obvious. Without delving into the physics, are you arguing that when Starline says they’ve tested their .45 Colt brass to 44 Mag levels of pressure, that’s a meaningless statement?
 
Last edited:
jski said:
I’m trying to make some sense of this. It’s certainly not obvious. Without delving into the physics, are you arguing that when Starline says they’ve tested their .45 Colt brass to 44 Mag levels of pressure, that’s a meaningless statement?
Click to expand...
Exactly. The brass is specified in ASM standards as an alloy of 70% copper and 30% zinc. Muntz metal is a less specific alloy used for cartridge manufacturing which can as low as 68% copper and 28% zinc with traces of iron, silicon and/or chromium. The internal specifications for each cartridge are in the SAAMI/CIP articles. Unless Starline is deliberately under sizing the interior dimensions by a significant amount, their brass conforms to standard and isn’t significantly different than any other brass.
However, that’s really beside the point. In a revolver cartridge, where the entire case is contained in the chamber, save for the rim and primer cup, aside from sealing the chamber, all the brass is doing during combustion is holding the primer.
Starline is not being untruthful, they’re just not saying the obvious part: all cartridge brass is the same regardless of the chambering stamped on the head. .223 Rem brass is also cartridge brass (or Muntz metal) and is just as “strong” as .338 Lapua Magnum brass (or Muntz metal).
I hope this helps because I’m running out of ways to say, the chamber is where all of the force is contained and the brass is just a gasket. Do not exceed chamber pressure specifications under the misguided notion that one brand or another of brass will mitigate the pressures. It’s not happening.
 
Just because a powder works well in 9MM at “9MM” pressure doesn’t mean it will work well in another very different application, regardless whether or not you load it to similar pressures.

Research powders that work well for your application. One problem is you are loading over pressure for the round, which really narrows down tested data, if you can find it.

What you want to do can be done, but not by folks on the net guessing.

Y’all be careful out there. :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

jski
  • Locked
Better Load for 32 H&R Self Defense Rounds?
2
Replies
33
Views
885
Walkalong
Walkalong
jski
  • Locked
Hot loads for .32 H&R Magnum
2 3
Replies
68
Views
2K
GeoDudeFlorida
GeoDudeFlorida
M
  • Locked
.32 h&r
Replies
13
Views
3K
MagicD
M
RealGun
  • Locked
My intro to AA#5
Replies
9
Views
1K
RealGun
RealGun
S
  • Locked
load data for .32 H&R Magnum?
Replies
0
Views
798
Sharps Shooter
S
Back
Top