How good are the 1920s-30s .32 I-Frames? Are the DA triggers, etc. comparable to centerfire J-Frames? (Modern .22 S&W DA pulls are completely unusable for several of my friends). Can they use the same spring kits as J Frames? Are parts available?
The I-frame is in effect a slightly shortened .38 J-frame, which succeeded it. Production of the .32 Hand Ejector, Model of 1903 started that year and continued until World War Two in 1942. Of course minor changes were made, the most important being the introduction of heat-treated cylinders in 1920 at serial number 321,000, and the addition of an improved hammer block in 1949 in a serial number range around 537,000.
All of these revolvers, and early post war production that resumed in 1949 had leaf rather then coil mainsprings. A leaf spring gives a better feeling double-action trigger pull, and is easier to cock in the single-action mode, but the action isn’t necessarily lighter because the spring was designed to reliably fire older primers that were less sensitive then most of those made today. In 1953 S&W changed to an “improved” I-frame that used a coil mainspring similar to that in a .38 J-frame, so spring kits can be used in improved I-frame revolvers (that don’t have a mainspring tension screw located at the bottom/frontstrap of the handle), but not in the older guns with the leaf mainspring (that do have the screw).
In 1961 S&W discontinued the improved I-frame and replaced it with the now well-known J-frame at serial number 712,954.
Because we have primers that are much better then those made during the early/middle 20th century one can slim the leaf mainspring a bit and go to a lighter rebound slide spring without having negative effects on reliability.
.22 rimfires – the .22 W.R.M. in particular – are harder to set off because of their construction, then modern center-fire primers. So because of this the little .22 revolvers of all makes have heavier springs (and D.A. trigger pulls) then their center fire counterparts.
I read once that Glaser had a 32 S&W Long loading, but I don't see it on the Cor-Bon site. Are there any other makers attempting to modernize this antique? I guess it's not hard to handload, maybe speed up a wadcutter a tad... or use one of the hollowpoints for .32 mag? (Keeping pressure below 14,500 or so, of course).
Handloading these cartridges is an excellent idea, because the factory fodder is both hard to find in some places, and expensive when you do. One set of dies can load both .32 S&W Long and .32 H&R Magnum. Most of the .312” bullets offered for loading .32 S&W Long, .32 H&R Magnum and even .32 ACP can be used in the .32 S&W Long cartridge. If you have a 1903 Hand Ejector numbered over 321,000 you can carefully increase the load a little bit. Factory stuff from the major makers is held down because of questionable quality top-break guns made by companies other then Smith & Wesson – who incidentally never cataloged a top-break in .32 S&W Long.
I don’t bother hot-dogging the cartridge though. It is far and away better then any .22 rimfire, and in my view, the .32 ACP as well. When used as a defensive weapon, the key is bullet placement – not brute force. The light recoil allows fast, accurate follow-up shots, and a modest shooter with a little practice can quickly put 5 or 6 shots into the head area of a silhouette target at 15 feet. This will do for government work.
Where is a good link on I-Frames to get me to stop asking all these questions? Thanks for any help!
Try
www.armchairgunshow.com for both information and an honest source for these revolvers should you decide to buy one – or more. The older guns are usually found with 3 ¼ or 4 ¼” barrels although some had 6” lengths. Post war production is found in these lengths as well as 2, 4 and 6 inches. There is also a variant called the Regulation Police, which is different only in that it came with a square, rather then round butt.
