As promised - 32 Cal tests from this weekend!!!

[Jim K]

Permit me a small cease fire in the middle of the caliber war to note that firing the .32 ACP in less strong revolvers than those made for the .327 is not recommended. It can be fired in revolvers chambered for the .32 S&W and .32 S&W Long, but runs much higher pressures than either and could be dangerous in an old and weak gun.

Jim

 

[420Stainless]

Bottom line is, I would prefer a 32 pistol over a stick and a fry pan.

I have to say I've been thinking the same thing ever since someone suggested otherwise. I really can't think of a scenario where, if all three of those objects were equally accessible and I needed something to defend my life, I would choose to grab other than the pistol.

I greatly prefer larger cartridges than the .32s for defensive carry, but I really doubt that if data were available on a per capita basis by cartridge (number of casualties suffered by the defendant in defensive use of .22lr, .25acp, .32acp, 9mm, .38 special, .357 Mag., ...) that there would be much difference. Until data is available on how often the bad guy runs or gives up once realizing that the intended victim is armed and willing to shoot, it is not possible to say what the advantage of one cartridge over another may be. If 99%percent of the bad guys cease then there could only be a 1% difference worse case between cartridges. If 85%, then it is possible that one could have a 15% advantage over the other assuming one always saves the good guy and one never does - which doesn't seem likely no matter which two cartridges are chosen. Of course even 1% is important when talking about one's own life, but in reality we don't know if those who carry a .32ACP daily suffer any difference in casualty rate vs. those that carry a .357 or .45ACP because that data is not known.

BTW Onward, I really appreciate the testing you posted and the subsequent discussion from all sides that it has fostered.

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by 420Stainless:

....in reality we don't know if those who carry a .32ACP daily suffer any difference in casualty rate vs. those that carry a .357 or .45ACP because that data is not known.

The data, if known, would not be meaningful. There are far too few real data points of that kind, and far too many other important variables.

However, there are people whose professions involve the evaluation of wounding effectiveness, and they have arrived at conclusions regarding penetration requirements.

Those conclusions would persuasively convince most reasonable people that a .32 ACP falls short. The round fell out of favor with law enforcement decades ago.

That does not mean that a .357 or a .45 is ideal, however. Terminal ballistics is but part of the picture. The ability of a defender to put a sufficient number of rounds on target rapidly enough to provide a reasonable probability of striking key internal parts of the target timely is also extremely important.

 

[Stony]

I take care of some rural properties for a local man and he was carrying a Colt 32 S&W long revolver with him in his truck. I told him to carry at least a .38, and I think he is finally taking me seriously. He had an old stock tank he wanted to make a planter out of, and tried shooting some holes in it for drainage. The next time I saw him, he asked me if I would shoot some holes in it, as his just dented the metal. I had a .40 with me that worked just fine.
I rechambered a J frame S&W for my wife into .32 Mag., and it seems to work just fine and is pretty accurate as well. I have no reservations with her carrying it.

 

[420Stainless]

Wound characteristics are definitely a worthy consideration if one actually is trading fire with someone and is able to get an effective hit. I would expect someone with an occupation that puts him in constant danger of being in a gunfight to take wound characteristics into consideration (among other things) when choosing their weapon. I would also expect that those civilians who train for combat just in case to do likewise.

The data, if known, would not be meaningful.

On the contrary, it is the only data that would be meaningful in determining whether or not there is an effective advantage in carrying one chambering over another for the average person. Defensive use of a firearm involves many factors including: did it actually need to be fired, the ability of the person firing it to effectively control it and make hits needed to stop the attack, the amount of training the person has, the ability of the person to keep their nerve under the circumstance, ... For the average person that does not wish to go defenseless, yet does not choose to devote large portions of time to combat training, a .32 in the pocket may very well be as good of a choice as a .357 Magnum or a 1911. Again, there is no data that I'm aware of that either substantiates or refutes a lower casualty rate for those who carry one chambering over another for strictly defensive purposes.