Rebirth of the 32s?

[jski]

Charter's Professional has 7 rounds of .32 H&R Magnum

View attachment 947435

Where is that made?

 

[fxvr5]

Where is that made?

It's stamped on the barrel.

 

[jski]

It's stamped on the barrel.

That’s the company address. But I looked it up and it said they’re made in the US.

So what’s the word on Charter Arms quality?

 

[TTv2]

My having heard that story cased me to have quite a negative opinion of the .327.

Besides the lack of variety in guns and ammo and the scary boom, is there any other reason you don't like the .327?

 

[TTv2]

That’s the company address. But I looked it up and it said they’re made in the US.

So what’s the word on Charter Arms quality?

There are plenty of topics here on THR that have discussed the Charter Professional.

Being the owner of both the Professional and 80s era Charter revolvers, the older Charters are much better. The Professional has a dorked up front sight that requires aligning the front sights bottom of the fiber optic rod with the top of the rear sight to get it to hit to POA. Aligning the top of the front sight with the top of the rear sight results in the gun shooting ridiculously low.

If you want a .32 Mag revolver, Charter is now making a 6 shot Undercover. I'd get the aluminum model that weighs 12oz.

 

[Kleanbore]

Besides the lack of variety in guns and ammo and the scary boom, is there any other reason you don't like the .327?

Sound pressure, I prefer a larger bore, and ammunition variety.

 

[TTv2]

Sound pressure, I prefer a larger bore, and ammunition variety.

So the answer is it's just the loud noise and the lack of variety. I can understand the ammo issues, even if you're a reloader it's limited, but the loud noise is something remedied with starting loads for .327.

As for a larger bore, I don't see what .38 and .357 are giving that make them better than .32 H&R and .327 Mag. You and others can bring up the 180gr .357 Buffalo Bore load that gets 600 ft/lbs in an LCR, that's not a load anybody is using for conceal carry while in town because that's a guarantee for overpenetration.

 

[ThomasT]

Here is a picture of my 32 caliber guns. A couple of Ruger single sixes, a S&W 431PD in 32 mag, a Walther/Manhurin 32acp and S&W models 31-1 4" barrel and models 30-1 with 3" and 2" barrels. I'm always on the hunt for a new 32 caliber gun. And my new Schrade pig sticker knife.

 

[jski]

This is an interesting contribution to this thread.

It’s just hours old.

 

[Kleanbore]

So the answer is it's just the loud noise and the lack of variety.

"Just" the "loud noise"? Excessive sound pressure is a serious issue.

the loud noise is something remedied with starting loads for .327.

Such as .32 Long equivalent, or .32 Mag? Doesn't that defeat the purpose?

As for a larger bore, I don't see what .38 and .357 are giving that make them better than .32 H&R and .327 Mag.

The .38 Special shoved the .32 Long off the market almost a century ago. The .32 Mag is not as good as a .38.. The .38 creates far less sound pressure than the .32-20, the .30 Carbine, or the .327.

Do not rely on kinetic energy as a measure of merit for defensive handgun calibers.

 

[JT-AR-MG42]

a S&W 431PD in 32 mag

'Like' does not adequately cover my desire for that one.
I for one, really enjoy the .32 threads and civil discourse.

The .32 Mag is not as good as a .38.

Cannot disagree with that using factory or equivalent (per caliber) handloads.
I would venture that the reloader can get .32 H&R to outperform standard factory .38 Special.
I realize that it might be an unfair comparison though.

Such as .32 Long equivalent, or .32 Mag? Doesn't that defeat the purpose?

Interesting take on downloading a cartridge. I've always figured that it adds to the versatility (and usefulness) of the round.

JT

 

[Kleanbore]

I think there are reasons why the .32 rimfires, .32 Short and Long Colt, the .32 S&W. the .32 S&W Long, the 8MM Lebel, the .38 Short Colt, and the .38 S&W disappeared from service use.

The .327 magnum was intended to compensate for the low effectiveness of those rounds via increased energy, and it and looks good on paper, but a .32 handgun with sound pressure that makes range officers believe that a gun has blown up does not appear to be very good choice for self defense.

 

[Kleanbore]

This is an interesting contribution to this thread.

He puts a lot of stock in "power" and energy.

And he should know better than to rely upon averages in terms of ammunition capacity.

 

[Dunross]

If you don't like 32s then don't shoot one.

We all have our own reasons for choosing the calibers and guns that we do.

 

[Kleanbore]

If you don't like 32s then don't shoot one

I do like the.32 S&W Long--for shooting.

Fine cartridge.

I was speaking of the .327, for concealed carry.

 

[ThomasT]

As much as I like 32s I have never wanted a 327. The 32 mag is loud enough for me. Plus I rarely ever load full power 32 mags so a 327 would just be a waste. And my 32s see far more use as a trail gun/small game round than a SD round. I have plenty of guns better suited for SD. The 32s are just for fun shooting. And for that they are at the top of the game. Even the 327 makes a good field gun to carry out in the woods.

I am not a SD expert and never pretend to be. A 5 shot 38 works for CC or the 15 shot 9mm I have with me every where I go. My biggest SD tool is staying out of bad areas and keeping my mouth shut and minding my own business.

 

[jski]

"The .38 Special shoved the .32 Long off the market almost a century ago. The .32 Mag is not as good as a .38.. The .38 creates far less sound pressure than the .32-20, the .30 Carbine, or the .327.

Do not rely on kinetic energy as a measure of merit for defensive handgun calibers.

That statement is meaningless unless you tell me the load data for the 38 Special and the load data for 32 H&R Magnum.

For example, here are 2 possible 32 H&R Magnum loads from Buffalo Bore:

HEAVY 32 H&R MAG. +P Ammo
100 gr. JHP @ (1,300 fps)

HEAVY 32 H&R MAG. +P OUTDOORSMAN
130 gr. Hard Cast Keith @ 1,125 fps

 

[jski]

There are plenty of topics here on THR that have discussed the Charter Professional.

Being the owner of both the Professional and 80s era Charter revolvers, the older Charters are much better. The Professional has a dorked up front sight that requires aligning the front sights bottom of the fiber optic rod with the top of the rear sight to get it to hit to POA. Aligning the top of the front sight with the top of the rear sight results in the gun shooting ridiculously low.

If you want a .32 Mag revolver, Charter is now making a 6 shot Undercover. I'd get the aluminum model that weighs 12oz.

Just looked for 32 H&R’s on the Charter website. I see 2 offers: the Undercoverette and the PROFESSIONAL.

 

[JERRY]

I've come to like the 17 oz. LCR .327 loaded with H&R magnums so much that I wouldn't mind a lighter gun (~12oz) in just that [.32 H&R mag] caliber. The .327 fed mags I have are simply just because, but they are not for the wife and daughter.

 

[TTv2]

Such as .32 Long equivalent, or .32 Mag? Doesn't that defeat the purpose?

I didn't say .32 Long or .32 H&R Mag equivalent loads, I said .327 starting loads. If you looked in a loading manual you'd see that .327 with certain popular powders like Titegroup, Longshot, Unique, etc. with starting charges get 200 to 300 fps more than .32 Mag does when it's loaded to max published data.

Louder than .32 Mag and .38 +P, yes, but far from typical .327.

The .38 Special shoved the .32 Long off the market almost a century ago.

True, but back then the belief was bigger is better and we have methods today that show .32 Long is not an ineffective caliber in terms of penetration, yet is extremely easy for people to shoot given the lower recoil.

The .32 Mag is not as good as a .38.

Why, because none of the gun rags the past 20-30 years have said .32 Mag is sufficient, but have long said .38 is acceptable? Lucky Gunner did a very good job trying out many pocket gun calibers, from .22 up to .38 and concluded that .32 Mag and .327 was superior to .38 in a snub revolver based on a variety of factors.

Do not rely on kinetic energy as a measure of merit for defensive handgun calibers.

I'm not, but the .32 and .327 mags do seem to be equal to or greater than .38/.38+P, so the argument it's less effective is moot. I say the .32 is superior to .38 in a snub because the .32 H&R/.327 have the velocity to expand a hollow point and the .38's have difficulty with that in a snub. That's not to say there aren't .38 loads that don't expand, there are, in general they'll expand .1 to .2 inches more than .32 hollow points will, but that increased size is seldom the difference between an effective stop of an attacker vs an ineffective stop. The benefit of the .32's is the lower recoil and more effective shooting whilst also passing the FBI's specs in gel tests.

 

[TTv2]

I've come to like the 17 oz. LCR .327 loaded with H&R magnums so much that I wouldn't mind a lighter gun (~12oz) in just that [.32 H&R mag] caliber. The .327 fed mags I have are simply just because, but they are not for the wife and daughter.

The benefit of the .327's high pressure is when used in a rifle. Sadly, there are not many options for .327 rifles, but that high pressure also means the handloader can go well beyond the .32 H&R's capabilities, yet remain far below the SAAMI max for .327.

 

[Kleanbore]

I'm not, but the .32 and .327 mags do seem to be equal to or greater than .38/.38+P, so the argument it's less effective is moot.

Doesn't follow.

I say the .32 is superior to .38 in a snub because the .32 H&R/.327 have the velocity to expand a hollow point and the .38's have difficulty with that in a snub.

The best .32 Magnum loads I've seen expand very little indeed in gel.

The benefit of the .32's is the lower recoil and more effective shooting

True.

...whilst also passing the FBI's specs in gel tests.

In terms of min-max penetration, yes. FBI specs also address the expanded diameter of bullets that start out at .356.

Are there any LEO organizations that approve .32 Magnum for backup?

My preference is 9MM, but a 6-shot .38 Special will do, preferably 3", steel to handle recoil.The .32 Long in my computer desk drawer became mine after six well-placed shots failed to slow an attacker. The Magnum didn't exist then.

 

[JCooperfan1911]

The LGS has a Ruger single six in .32 H&R that hasn’t moved in a long time. Good shape. Very tempting.

 

[Frulk]

JC fan....I love all 3 of my Single Sixes in .32 H&R. The main reason being is that neither the weight of the gun nor the recoil of the H&R overpower each other. There’s this rarely achieved almost perfect balance between platform and caliber. Around my area that gun would be sold within a couple of days if the price wasn’t out of line.

 

[TTv2]

Doesn't follow.

How?

The best .32 Magnum loads I've seen expand very little indeed in gel. In terms of mi-max penetration, yes. FBI specs also address the expanded diameter of bullets that start out at .356.

But they expand... and penetrate to the 12" minimum. In terms of expansion, the best .32 Mag's that I know of are hitting at least .4", which is nearly 33% larger and doing it with recoil significantly lower than .38.

I have yet to see what the Buffalo Bore 100 gr JHP .32 Mag load does in gel, but my guess is it expands well and goes 12 inches deep.

Are there any LEO organizations that approve .32 Magnum for backup?

What does it matter what LEO orgs approve/disapprove of in terms of caliber? Are there any LEO orgs that approve .45 Colt or .41 Mag or .22 LR? I doubt it, guess we should all keep those in the safe now. They're not recommended, so they're completely useless for self defense.