38 -vs- 32

Status
Not open for further replies.
O

Onward Allusion

Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2009
Messages
3,401
Location
Illinois
I didn't want to hijack one of the other threads. Why didn't the 32S&W Long or 32 H&R Mag take off? Ballistically, the 32 S&W Long is about the same as the 32 ACP and the 32 H&R Mag is about the same as the 38 Special (non +P) loads.

A lot of folks recommend the snubbie chambered in 38 Special as a good gun for a woman or novice shooter. I'd asked why in another thread and below was a response (a very good one I might add).

So, couldn't the same be said of the 32S&W Long or 32 H&R Mag? Especially when recoil is much more manageable & less snappy. There's also the plus of having 1 additional round in snubs chambered in 32.

Quote:
Which brings to mind, why do people recommend 38 spls to 1st time women shooters as a SD/HD weapon...but I digress..

  • The only firing controls are the trigger and (on exposed hammer guns) the hammer.
  • They can reliably fire any ammunition which can safely expel the bullet from the barrel.
  • They're MUCH harder to fire negligently, especially the concealed hammer guns.
  • The immediate action drill for a failure to fire is to pull the trigger again.
  • They can be fired from INSIDE a coat pocket or purse.
  • They can be fired from contact distance without fear of the mechanism being taken out of action, unlike a semi-auto pistol.
 
The .32 S&W Long was quite popular... about 75 years ago.

The .32 H&R (and .327 Ruger) are niche products that have a hard time competing with the well established .38 Special. Guns and ammunition are not well distributed, which gets you into a circular process of poor availability that keeps them from being tried which tells the dealers and manufacturers that not many are needed.

How many .32s do YOU have? Are you supporting the dream?

The small revolver, whether .32 or .38 has the advantages listed.
Most of them relate to simple operation.
Unfortunately their small size and tough DA trigger make shooting them well difficult.
Most women - or men - will get better hits with something like a Kahr K9 or Glock 19, IF they will take the time to learn how to drive the machinery.
I don't know The Answer in terms of equipment.
 
With luck, maybe the introduction of the .327 Federal Magnum will rejuvenate the entire family of .32 caliber rounds that can be fired from 6-shot J-frame revolvers. It seems a practical concealed-carry round.
 
When my wife went through CC training, I figured a .32 revolver would be a great idea. I went about searching for one to buy, rent, hold, look at, anything.

Couldn't find a single one, anywhere.

So now, she's sifting through all the dozens upon dozens of options in .38 Special.
 
With luck, maybe the introduction of the .327 Federal Magnum will rejuvenate the entire family of .32 caliber rounds that can be fired from 6-shot J-frame revolvers. It seems a practical concealed-carry round.
Click to expand...

unlikely, the .327 has been around for 3 or 4 years and still has not even got a large following. In my opinion, it will go the way of the 10mm and .357 sig. Being used by people who love it dearly but never gaining enough momentum to rival any of the mainstream calibers.
 
Because shooters are hard-headed and resistant to change. If it's new, it will have a hard time making it, even if it's good. Firearms history is full of good ideas, guns and cartridges that just didn't sell. The .327 is a wonderful cartridge that fits into smaller guns than the .357 while delivering blistering performance but look at all the crybabying that ensued when it was released.
 
CraigC said:
Because shooters are hard-headed and resistant to change. If it's new, it will have a hard time making it, even if it's good......
Click to expand...

And no group of shooters is more resistant to change than the revolver owners it seems. One need look no further than this subforum for how well received threads about the fairly new .327 Federal Magnum have been received. The general concensus was a hearty "HARUMMPH!" made through staid old world handlebar moustaches while smoking cigars and drinking port at the Gentleman's Club! Sure there's a few that wished the new cartridge well and wanted it to suceed but on the whole it was greeted about as well as a child molester at the local school's sports day.

Similar feelings have been shown towards the idea of 9mm revolvers set up solely for moonclips and the Chiappa Rhino revolver with the 6 o'clock barrel position. Both, to my mind, excellent ideas for a number of valid technical and performance reasons.
 
I'm actually thinking of getting something in .327 mag.

After reading up on the ballistics, I think the cartridge makes a lot of sense. The problem is that ammo is hard to come by and with the exception of 32 S&W Long, is expensive.
 
Because a large chunk of the gun owning market doesn't do a lot of research into guns before buying one. They just know that a 38 is that police have always used and they buy one and call it a day.
 
I personally have 2 and think they are top notch. Ammo is the key its hard to find and only comes in blocks of 20 for $25. I just wish everyone made a FMJ .32 H&R
 
It's my opinion the .327 will find favor in leverguns and SA revolver for small game hunting and Varmint control but not much more. I see nothing wrong with the .327 Federal Magnum except for the fact they rolled it out in the wrong package.

If your wife does but a .327 for SD I highly recommend you reload and stock up on components now to insure she can shoot it later.
 
.32 S&W Long is extremely popular for bullseye target shooting... in semi-automatic pistols, such as the Hammerli and Walther. About ten years ago, there was talk of Marvel making a .32 S&W Long conversion kit for the M1911, similar to the .22 conversion kits. To my knowledge, nothing ever came of it.
 
It's my opinion that .327 federal is a better CCW than 38/357.

38S in 2" barrel = pretty anemic
357 in 2" barrel = 9mm ballistics, lots of recoil, blast
327 in 3" barrel = 357 ballistics, less recoil than #4
357 in 3" barrel = low end of 357 ballistics, but more recoil than #3.

And you have all the other .32s you can shoot for reduced loads. 327, 85 grain bullet, or 32 H&R for those recoil sensitive.

Then the deciding factor could be that you have 6 shots instead of 5 in a j-frame size.
 
I own a couple 32's and will probably buy a couple more. However they are increasingly a handloader's niche item nowadays with 32 S&W Long ammo about the same price as 357 Magnum ammo. 32 Long is a nice old cartridge but honestly when you are talking 38 Special vs 32 Long ballistics there's no comparison.

There's too many old potmetal antiques chambered in 32 Long to ever see any ammo company release 32 Long ammo that is anything hotter than anemic. My personal tinkering with steel flip-open revolvers shows that 32 Long can be loaded up towards 32 H&R Mag levels without undue issue. But try to put them in a US Revolver Breaktop Hammerless and you will wear the cylinder in your forehead.

327 Federal is an interesting caliber but it really fails to deliver in anything except the small snubbie market. When you move into the 3" - 4" barrel size firearms where you get 6 shots in any caliber you want, why use 327 when 357 gets you more everything.
 
327 Federal is an interesting caliber but it really fails to deliver in anything except the small snubbie market. When you move into the 3" - 4" barrel size firearms where you get 6 shots in any caliber you want, why use 327 when 357 gets you more everything.
Click to expand...

It's advantages carry over into the larger frame and longer barrel revolvers like a 115g @ over 1500 fps in the Ruger GP100 7 shot, 4" barrel, and about 1700 fps in an 8 shot, 5 1/2 barrel black hawk.
 
When my wife went through CC training, I figured a .32 revolver would be a great idea. I went about searching for one to buy, rent, hold, look at, anything.

Couldn't find a single one, anywhere.
Click to expand...

Charter Arms Undercoverette; Just bought one a few weeks back, have about 150 rounds through it, no issues; small and light.
 
327 Federal is an interesting caliber but it really fails to deliver in anything except the small snubbie market. When you move into the 3" - 4" barrel size firearms where you get 6 shots in any caliber you want, why use 327 when 357 gets you more everything.
Click to expand...
Nonsense. As a sporting round the .327 fills a rather considerable gap. It fits into Single Sixes and shoots really flat. It should also let a K-frame survive a lifetime of heavy loads without cracking the forcing cone. Folks are so worried the .327 will derail the perennial favorite, the much vaunted and overrated .357Mag.
 
The reason I chose .38s is because they are more popular.

Circular logic, at its best!
 
CraigC said:
Nonsense. As a sporting round the .327 fills a rather considerable gap. It fits into Single Sixes and shoots really flat. It should also let a K-frame survive a lifetime of heavy loads without cracking the forcing cone. Folks are so worried the .327 will derail the perennial favorite, the much vaunted and overrated .357Mag.
Click to expand...

Funny how I've been shooting K-frames for what, 20 years? And never cracked any forcing cones with 'overrated' 357 Magnum 158-grain loads...

What 'gap' pray tell, does 327 Magnum fill? The only place I see it as beneficial would be the J-frames & SP-101, where you can fit six instead of five. With other guns there's no benefit because you get six. Or seven in S&W 686.

If you like 327, knock yourself out, that's why America is the greatest country in the world- you can have what you want.

Oh- just one MORE thing- how much reloadable 357 Mag brass is out there compared to 327 Mag brass?
 
Funny how I've been shooting K-frames for what, 20 years? And never cracked any forcing cones with 'overrated' 357 Magnum 158-grain loads...
Click to expand...
Nor are you likely to, since as I recall, the problem was with lighter bullets, the 110gr.s, I think. You can shoot hot 158gr. loads, and as long as they're to SAAMI standard, you won't hurt the forcing cone. You will however likely shoot the gun loose, but of course that's a DIFFERENT problem.
 
Thanks for proving my point, .357 fans instantly get defensive at even the implication that the .327 'may' steal its thunder. Gimme a break.

There is no gap between the .22Mag and .357???

Last I checked, the .357 doesn't fit in the Single Six, while one in .32H&R is easily converted to .327 with the addition of only a new cylinder. This is the platform is should've been introduced in.

If I wanted .327 brass, I would call Freedom Arms and order it.
 
The issue with the 327 was the initial lack of readily available ammunition, while the gun makers were watching ammo sales.it became a self-fulling doom scenario, which is too bad - IMO, it would a much superior round in a small j frame - 6 shots, the ability to use 3 or more cartridges in one gun, and as good or ballistics - just makes sense
 
.32 H&R, Mag or .327 would not be a bad idea for me, other than having to get a new set of dies and a gun for them. Took me 50 years to get a .32 ACP, don't know if I will have the time to get a .32 revolver.

That said, I did see a really nice conversion one time. A Ruger Bearcat converted to a .32 H&R Mag. It was sweet, shot nice, too.

Oh yeah, there is one other thing that is keeping me from picking up a .32 revolver, my wife and kids $pend like there i$ no tomorrow!$! :what::eek::what:

The Doc is out now. :D:cool:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

C
  • Locked
32 H&R Magnum -- a useful caliber, or obsolete?
2 3 4
Replies
95
Views
13K
Merle1
M
L
  • Locked
Why is the 32 auto semi rimmed?
Replies
4
Views
2K
Jim K
J
O
  • Locked
As promised - 32 Cal tests from this weekend!!!
2 3 4
Replies
79
Views
7K
420Stainless
4
G
  • Locked
Can also fire another caliber
Replies
21
Views
1K
rha600
R
Mr. Mosin
  • Locked
.32 vs .38
2 3
Replies
55
Views
6K
golden
G
Back
Top