Need some advice on load I'm working on

[TTv2]

Okay, first one is kind of out there. I bought an H&R Young America .32 and when I got it found out that I can chamber .32 S&W Long wadcutters because the chambers are bored straight thru. Previous with a 98gr Speed wadcutter I tried 1.8gr of Bullseye and that had quite a bit of recoil, so today I used 2.2gr of Unique and instead of seating the bullet flush with the case mouth I let it hang out a bit (OAL was .990") and the one reading I was able to get from the chrony was 414 fps.

I'd like a bit more velocity, but I'm not sure how far to push things. The gun is a solid frame and .32 S&W has a max PSI of 17k PSI. The issue I have is the revolver retains the cylinder pin with a spring loaded lever in a groove on the cylinder pin and if the recoil is too much in the 7oz gun the pin can jump over the latch and cause problems.

I didn't have any such issues with that today, but I'm wondering how far should I go with this?

 

[FROGO207]

Since those were designed for 32 short the max the gun was designed for is 12,000 PSI. It is actually higher than the 32 long round. I would work with the heavier bullet (wadcutter) and a slow propellant to avoid spiking the pressure so much. Do you have any Trail Boss? It might work well. I will look at my books and get back to you.

 

[TTv2]

Since those were designed for 32 short the max the gun was designed for is 12,000 PSI. It is actually higher than the 32 long round. I would work with the heavier bullet (wadcutter) and a slow propellant to avoid spiking the pressure so much. Do you have any Trail Boss? It might work well. I will look at my books and get back to you.

I've seen a lot of debate about this, but I did a lot of research and found this on castboolits that says .32 S&W max pressure is 17000 PSI.

https://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?380657-32-S-amp-W-and-32HR-mag-pressure

 

[FROGO207]

Your data is for the 32 Colt pressure. There is even a higher pressure for the 32 S&W Long. The specs are in the SAAMI specs available on the net.
The pressure data is all over the place for sure. I was using data in the old Ideal manuals and approximate for CUP as others calculated. I just know whatever I loaded with Trail Boss per how to make a safe load worked well with any of the lead bullets I used and were accurate. Well as accurate as a rusty pitted barrel would shoot anyway.

 

[tightgroup tiger]

This is from the SAAMI maximum allowable pressures.
https://saami.org/wp-content/upload...FP-and-R-Approved-2015-12-14-Posting-Copy.pdf

 

[tightgroup tiger]

This is from SAAMI pressure and proof loads, transducer readings.
https://saami.org/wp-content/upload...FP-and-R-Approved-2015-12-14-Posting-Copy.pdf



Page 185, It looks like 17K for 32 S&W and 15K for S&WLong as maximum average pressure in PSI, per transducer.

As far as advise the published reloading data will more than likely be based on this pressure data so you should be good.
I would use the period pressure values for the gun, meaning if there was any chance the gun could have been originally engineered for black powder, I would use powders like TRail Boss and the like.
If definitely not engineered for Black Powder then published load data should be fine for it.
Edit to correct "maximum allowable" to "maximum average".

 

[Jim Watson]

I'd like a bit more velocity,

Why?

I'm wondering how far should I go with this?

If I were putting that little clunker back to work, I would be satisfied with anything that would stabilize a bullet and hit a not-too-distant target.

It is all very well to look up pressure standards and pressure tested reloads, but if you are making it up as you go along - you are at the Lyman starting loads for which pressures are not shown - it is well to hold it down.

 

[TTv2]

This is from SAAMI pressure and proof loads, transducer readings.
https://saami.org/wp-content/upload...FP-and-R-Approved-2015-12-14-Posting-Copy.pdf

View attachment 1016489

Page 185, It looks like 17K for 32 S&W and 15K for S&WLong as maximum average pressure in PSI, per transducer.

As far as advise the published reloading data will more than likely be based on this pressure data so you should be good.
I would use the period pressure values for the gun, meaning if there was any chance the gun could have been originally engineered for black powder, I would use powders like TRail Boss and the like.
If definitely not engineered for Black Powder then published load data should be fine for it.
Edit to correct "maximum allowable" to "maximum average".

The gun was made in 1940 or 1941, it's proofed for smokeless, but the design dates back to the 1880s and that's kind of an issue because the base pin jumps the retaining latch with too much recoil. I guess that also explains the generous barrel cylinder gap probably to reduce rotation issues as powder fouling builds up.

With the size of the gap and the lack of a throat .32 wadcutters are really the only option here.

 

[TTv2]

Why?



If I were putting that little clunker back to work, I would be satisfied with anything that would stabilize a bullet and hit a not-too-distant target.

It is all very well to look up pressure standards and pressure tested reloads, but if you are making it up as you go along - you are at the Lyman starting loads for which pressures are not shown - it is well to hold it down.

Because I think it's a cool gun, not many double action revolvers have been made that were this small and light. I found out a way to aim it and hit the target yesterday, I hit the target more than I missed it, so I consider that good. The reason I want more velocity is I don't think 400 fps is good for much of anything, but I guess I could test it out on some 1/2 thick wood and see if it will penetrate as that was the old Army standard.

 

[SingleActionAndrew]

Interesting pursuit & pistol. Could you share any pictures? Have you measured the gap between the chamber and barrel?

 

[TTv2]

Interesting pursuit & pistol. Could you share any pictures? Have you measured the gap between the chamber and barrel?

Yeah, it was about .030"

 

[TTv2]

UPDATE:

I decided to up the 2.2 grains of Unique to 2.5 grains and I guess more pressure is exactly what the doctor ordered because I ran it over the chronograph and got this as the result: Lo-558 High-655 Avg-611.

Also, I guess with all the powder fouling it was helping to retain the cylinder pin because I tried to pull it out before I left the range tonight I couldn't. The only issue I had was I didn't crimp the bullet enough, so the bullets were pulling out of the case during recoil and hitting the barrel during the cylinder rotation. BTW, recoil wasn't all that bad, if anything the worst part was the blast coming out of the sides due to the large gap was burning my forearms.

So, if I can keep it over 600 fps with a 98gr wadcutter that puts it very close to what Luckygunner got in their tests shooting .32 wadcutters from the Ruger LCR and those were all capable of penetrating well over 12 inches in gel, thus I think with this load in the Young America... it's got potential as a self defense gun and it's not even loaded to max power, the load data I have has 2.7gr of Unique as the max charge for .32 Long wadcutters.

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

The gun was made in 1940 or 1941, it's proofed for smokeless, but the design dates back to the 1880s and that's kind of an issue because the base pin jumps the retaining latch with too much recoil. I guess that also explains the generous barrel cylinder gap probably to reduce rotation issues as powder fouling builds up.

With the size of the gap and the lack of a throat .32 wadcutters are really the only option here.

There was actually a cartridge called .32H&R which was longer than a .32S&W but shorter than the .32S&W Long. It’s generally thought to have gone out of use by the time the .32 Long became popular, around 1910 or so. I have had quite a few H&R revolvers like the one you described and all of them made for smokeless, after about 1910, had reamed cylinders with throats. I know it might seem a little odd to ask but, are you really sure your gun has the original cylinder and not a replacement made for black powder .32H&R?

 

[TTv2]

There was actually a cartridge called .32H&R which was longer than a .32S&W but shorter than the .32S&W Long. It’s generally thought to have gone out of use by the time the .32 Long became popular, around 1910 or so. I have had quite a few H&R revolvers like the one you described and all of them made for smokeless, after about 1910, had reamed cylinders with throats. I know it might seem a little odd to ask but, are you really sure your gun has the original cylinder and not a replacement made for black powder .32H&R?

Yeah, no concern that that is the case. The reason they made the cylinders so long is because they were also making .22 Long (not LR) Young America's and those have an OAL almost as long as a .32 S&W Long case and the prevailing theory as to why the chambers on the .32 are bored straight thru was a cost cutting measure, but I think it may have been because H&R was making .32 S&W AND .32 Rimfire versions of the Young America and the rimfire models would have been bored thru because they're heeled bullets just like .22 rimfire and instead of going thru more time and inspection work they just decided to bore the .32 S&W chambers thru as that was the norm for the rimfires.

The end result of that being that .32 S&W will not shoot well, but .32 S&W Long wadcutter can be and really a near 100 grain wadcutter going over 600 fps is way better than the .32 S&W and its 85gr round nose going whatever it does.

 

[forrest r]

Yeah, no concern that that is the case. The reason they made the cylinders so long is because they were also making .22 Long (not LR) Young America's and those have an OAL almost as long as a .32 S&W Long case and the prevailing theory as to why the chambers on the .32 are bored straight thru was a cost cutting measure, but I think it may have been because H&R was making .32 S&W AND .32 Rimfire versions of the Young America and the rimfire models would have been bored thru because they're heeled bullets just like .22 rimfire and instead of going thru more time and inspection work they just decided to bore the .32 S&W chambers thru as that was the norm for the rimfires.

The end result of that being that .32 S&W will not shoot well, but .32 S&W Long wadcutter can be and really a near 100 grain wadcutter going over 600 fps is way better than the .32 S&W and its 85gr round nose going whatever it does.

+1^^^^^^^^

Years ago the cramer mold co had the same idea when it came to the 32cal bullets. They had a #52 line of molds:
52 full diameter 100gr 1r rn bullet
52a 95gr swc
52b 95gr wc
52c 100gr 1.5r rn bullet with a stepped nose (designed after the lyman 358311rn bullet)
52 95gr flat rn bullet



Both of those bullets pictured above were excellent designs.