h&r topbreak 32 s&w

[stormbringer_28]

Hi,
can anyone tell me if this harrington&richardson topbreak 32 s&w is a blackpowder or smokeless. it's a sixshot cilinder and has "harrington&richardson arms company worchester mass usa patd oct 4 87 dec 25 8x" stamped on top of the barrel and has a square in a circle stamped on top of the grips
thx a lot

 

[mainmech48]

The only reliable way to determine the year of manufacture would be finding where your serial number fits in the maker's records. H&R is long gone, but their assets and name were purchased by NEF (New England Firearms) and they're now a subsidiary of Marlin. IIWY I'd contact Marlin and see if they have the records. If they do, and offer a search service, don't expect it to be free.

Theoretically, there shouldn't be any marked difference in average peak pressures according to SAAMI standard specs for factory loaded smokeless ammo in this caliber compared to the old BP loads. However, there are other factors to be considered due to the obsolete design and antique metallurgy that one should take into account before attempting to fire such a piece. FWIW, there were/are two .32 S&W revolver cartridges, a 'Short' and a 'Long'. While your revolver is most likely chambered for the "Short" version, there is some chance that its cylinder might accept the "Long" cartridge, which wouldn't be A Good Thing as it might be the difference between 'bang!' and 'KABOOM!'. Verb sap.

My advice would be to have it checked out by a competent professional gunsmith to determine its condition and exact chambering before even attempting any firing, no matter what the load.

Some folks, especially in the Cowboy Costume game, do fire old top-break S&Ws, H&Rs, Iver Johnson revolvers. Whether or not to join them is your call.

 

[AntiqueCollector]

Blackpowder. If I were you, what I would do if I wanted to fire it, is buy commercial ammo (.32 S&W short not long) and pull the bullets and reload with blackpowder. Relatively quick if you have the equipment. Charge should be 9 or 10 grains by volume. Be sure the bullet compresses the powder of course.

These guns shouldn't explode if you shoot smokeless despite the age but they will loosen up and become useless...

 

[Jim K]

Modern .32 S&W cartridges, while loaded with smokeless powder, do NOT exceed the pressure of the old black powder rounds and can safely be fired in any revolver chambered for the cartridge that is otherwise safe. Pulling bullets and loading with black powder is not necessary. I have fired hundreds of modern .32 S&W and .38 S&W cartridges in guns dating to the 1870s with no problems.

FWIW, the .32 S&W Long was introduced with the First Model Hand Ejector in 1896, so nothing made before that will be chambered for it. In fact, I know of no breaktop revolver that was made for the .32 S&W Long, but there may have been some.

Jim

 

[AntiqueCollector]

I respectfully disagree. I have seen many old Iver Johnsons and the like loosened up by shooting smokeless. Like I said, the guns won't explode but they will loosen up.

 

[Old Fuff]

The picture isn't all that good, but it appears that someone put H&R grips and barrel/cylinder assembly onto a Smith & Wesson .38 Double Action top-break frame assembly. Note the wide flanks on the hammer, and the shape of the trigger and trigger guard.

As for shooting, I wouldn't shoot it at all until it's determined exactly what it is.

H&R and Iver Johnson did make some six-shot .32 S&W long revolvers on their larger .38 platform top-break frame. Smith & Wesson however never made a top-break that used the long cartridge.

 

[Jim K]

Hi, Antique Collector,

I have to wonder how many of those guns you have fired extensively with BP cartridges. Those old top-breaks will loosen up with any firing, and I doubt that BP vs smokeless matters much at all. I have seen loose guns that had not been fired in the smokeless powder era, so they had to have been battered by BP loads, yet they were effectively wrecked. With a few exceptions, those guns were never made for extended firing with anything. Most S&W's will stand up pretty well, but the other top breaks will not.

There is no "smokeless" dividing line, as with the Colt SAA when they started to make the cylinders and frames from steel instead of wrought iron. The old top breaks were cast iron right up to modern times, and they never changed. Worse, it is in the nature of top break guns that they shoot loose, and nothing will change that. (Which is why no one has ever successfully made a top-break for even the .38 Special, let alone the .357.)

I recommend those guns not be fired, not because of the smokeless ammo, but because of the high probability that irreplaceable parts will break, changing what could be a collectible into junk.

Jim

 

[AntiqueCollector]

I've fired my topbreaks (and non top breaks of the same period for that matter) quite a bit with blackpowder. I haven't noticed any of them getting worse than they were when I got them. But, some of them do shake and rattle quite a bit already when they're fired. Some of them are pretty loose, others nice and tight. The latch is definately the weak point in all top breaks, but I've noticed that on the real loose ones that I know have been fired with smokeless in the past that it's also a matter of cylinder lock up too. I think it's a case of the soft metal stretching and such over time, and I think the smokeless does it quicker than the black.

You are certainly correct on no solid dividing line between the smokeless and blackpowder era. There were guns in the 1880's made for smokeless (like the French guns using the 8mm Lebel cartridges and the German 1888 Commission rifle), and guns made into the early 20th century for blackpowder (for example, Iver Johnson's U.S. Revolver line was generally blackpowder only and I suspect most or maybe even all of Hopkins and Allen's guns were intended for blackpowder). The dividing line differs from one company to another.

I do think a top break could be made strong enough for more powerful cartridges, but I suspect there is little incentive for any company to do it right now. It's just a matter of designing a stronger latch system.

 

[Novus Collectus]

From what I have read, the top break Iver Johnsons were not made to fire smokeless untill around about after 1909, but I can't remember if what I read was about the .38s only, or if that was true of all of their top breaks.

 

[Novus Collectus]

I do think a top break could be made strong enough for more powerful cartridges, but I suspect there is little incentive for any company to do it right now. It's just a matter of designing a stronger latch system.

The Webleys fired smokeless rather well.

 

[AntiqueCollector]

From what I have read, the top break Iver Johnsons were not made to fire smokeless untill around about after 1909, but I can't remember if what I read was about the .38s only, or if that was true of all of their top breaks.

Was all their guns sold under the Iver Johnson name I believe. Their U.S. Revolver Co. guns though were still for blackpowder. Basically, they were using up old parts for the U.S. Revolver Co. guns for a while, I believe, instead of throwing them out when they switched to smokeless.

You're right that Webleys and others handled smokeless okay, but they still weren't powerful cartridges compared to, say, a .44 magnum of today, not that the cartridges were truly weak, but they simply weren't as powerful as what is available now. A .44 magnum or a .500 S&W topbreak would be quite an interesting gun...

 

[JohnBT]

From a post on antiqueguns.com -

"my final say on this subjest is starting about 1900 iver johnson's arms & cycle works marked the boxes of the safety automatic revolvers with this warning, "THIS REVOLVER IS NOT SUITABLE FOR SMOKELESS POWDER". this warning was used on all boxes until 1909, the year the third model was introduced. i would advise every one to heed this factory warning.

i have a favor to ask of everyone, please do not shoot the first and second model (especially the really nice ones) leave them for us collectors and only shoot the third models.
bill



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/10/2007 12:14PM by b.goforth."

 

[Novus Collectus]

You're right that Webleys and others handled smokeless okay, but they still weren't powerful cartridges compared to, say, a .44 magnum of today, not that the cartridges were truly weak, but they simply weren't as powerful as what is available now. A .44 magnum or a .500 S&W topbreak would be quite an interesting gun...

Made out of Titanium, Scandium or something exotic or strong maybe?
I love top breaks and I think it would be awsome if someone made some today that wasn't a Shoefield or something. I also love pocket guns in top break and a hammerless one in 9mm or .38 special would be cool.

 

[Leatherbark]

The third model Iver Johnson came out in 1909 or thereabouts......It had a coil mainspring and regular S&W type cylinder locking notches. This was there first smokeless model............My 2nd model with the old timey cylinder notches that had to work together with the hand to lock up the cylinder is sloppy loose. I have played with black powder catergizs, but with modern solid head cases you just cant get enough in there to make much velocity.............................Bob