Using antiquated rounds for defense purposes

[Onward Allusion]

One thing about these antiquated cartridges that not everyone is aware of is that they are down loaded drastically. This is so that they don't blow up older guns with softer metal. Also the condition of the gun's bore will dramatically impact energy. I've personally have seen this with 25 acp.

In any event, I'm going out to the club this weekend with 2x4's and a few different 32 S&W's with barrels in varying conditions. Unfortunately, I don't have any milk jugs. I shall report back.

 

[WestKentucky]

I will be joining you from affar. I plan to test a few rounds at bad breath distance now, and again later when I reload my own and ladder up to nice flat but not flowed primers. I suspect I will see great improvement over my prvi rounds.

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by Onward Allusion: One thing about these antiquated cartridges that not everyone is aware of is that they are down loaded drastically. This is so that they don't blow up older guns with softer metal.

All of the guns made for the .32 S&W were "older", and made with "softer metal". It is highly doubtful that any revolvers manufactured for the .32 S&W cartridge ever had heat treated cylinders. Be careful with what you stuff into them. And don't leave any experimental rounds where they might later be used.

Even those "down loaded" smokeless loads of recent manufacture should never be used on the older IJ, H&A, and similar revolvers that were intended for black powder only. Only some of the "later" guns would be safe to use with even the most anemic smokeless rounds. That has been covered here in the past. I am not conversant on the specifics of dates and serial numbers.

Back when there was a TV show on cowboy shooting, there was an episode on the old .32 revolvers. Slow shooting, they sounded like cap guns. Fun for some people, I suppose. But I keep going back to Sam's comment in Post 26--defensive fighting with a gun isn't for fun and nostalgia.

 

[BSA1]

Thank you Kleanbore for your comments.

I am very familiar with the 32's. I have boxes of 32 S&W, Long, Auto, H&R Magnum and 32-20 sitting on the shelf right now. Some cartridges outperform for their size when fed the right ammunition. For example snub nose revolvers in 22 Magnum when fed Speer Gold Dot and the 32-20 (32 WCF) has always delivered outstanding performance.

Other rounds such as the 32 S&W and Long are simply inadequate. O.A. Your little H.R. was originally marketed as a bicycle gun. It was advertised for use by bicycle riders at the turn of the century for protection against dogs.

I have said many times over that a person needs to shoot their ammunition in their gun when choosing a self-defense round. 3/4" pine board isn't deep enough for me. Relying on a 32 S&W instead of seeking a better weapon will get you killed. O.A. You said it best when you said I might killed with a lucky shot. Bullet performance is something that should not rely for a lucky shot. I can guarantee that a blow from cast iron skillet is going to cause damage to the head.

In addition to shooting pine boards I save empty one gallon milk jugs. I cover them with pieces of old clothing for bullet testing . Yes I know it is crude and not scientific but it gives me a reliable benchmark for comparing bullet performance.

Besides shooting things is fun.

 

[Kleanbore]

There is one other thing to consider--the reliability and durability of the firearm.

I've seen more than one old revolver with something broken inside. One that comes to mind was an old S&W Safety Hammerless that my paternal grandfather had. The DA-only trigger didn't do anything. It had, once, but at one time something broke. I sure would hate for something like that to happen 'in the gravest extreme." Now, those old Smiths were jewels. Would an Iver Johnson, Harrington and Richardson, or Hopkins and Allen be something to which one should trust one's life? Those I have handled never impressed me very much, but I'm not the Old Fuff or Jim Watson, and I just don't know.

On more time: defensive fighting with a gun isn't for fun and nostalgia.

By the way, that old S&W was a five-shot .38 S&W-- the same kind that led Rex Applegate to start pushing S&W to come out with a .38 Special version after using the old one in a real encounter.

I am rather risk averse. I like better controllability, more capacity, more power, and proven reliability. I don't even think that having a backup is an extreme strategy.

 

[orionengnr]

Would one of these calibers be my first choice? Hell no! I carry an 8 shot 357 mag! BUT, if that was all I had at disposal...

Sorry, but that is a straw man.
The very premise of the thread was that some choose to carry these rounds...not that this is all they have available.

As far as lethality versus effectiveness, I'm surprised that no-one brought up a prime (and recent) example.

James Brady was shot with a .22LR...and died 09 Aug 14.
Was that round lethal? Absolutely. But it took 33 years to be lethal.

 

[Deaf Smith]

Well let's say this folks.

Using Buffalo Bore .38 S&W ammo, and my trusty..

then no doubt I could make it through the night.

125gr hard cast SWC at 900 fls from a 3 incher. Not a real power house but that would have enough penetration as well as a good frontal area.

Deaf

 

[Dr.Rob]

I think .32-20 could still be a viable round.

EXCEPT THAT:

100 years ago people were blowing up and bulging barrels with 'rifle only' loads so you won't ever find a pistol round loaded with a decent charge and bullet. Nor are you likely to find one with a barrel under 4 inches.

It's pretty similar to a 9mm or '327' when loaded 'properly'. Fun to shoot with cowboy loads, but alas mostly obsolete.

Still love shooting mine.

 

[eastbank]

i like the S&W md 31 in 32 s&w long and the colt .32 acp also and i like the older rifles and revolvers in all calibures and reload and fire them. my last buy was last year, has i have a win 92 in 38-40 that has impressed me, i was looking for a older 38-40 revolver to go with it and found this colt bisley with a ex bore. with 9 grs unique and a 180 cast bullet i would not feel under gunned at all, this colt has been protecting life and limb for over 100 years and i see no reason it could not do it for another 100 years with a little care. and there are many older revolvers that could do the same if in good condition. eastbank.

 

[45_auto]

colt bisley with a ex bore. with 9 grs unique and a 180 cast bullet i would not feel under gunned at all

Have you ever been in a gunfight? If you haven't, it would be interesting to see if your feelings changed once you were actually in a gunfight. If you have been and still don't feel under gunned with a Bisley, you are one bad MF in my book! However, I wouldn't choose you for a partner.

During my 4 year military and 8 year LEO career there have been 3 times that I used a personal weapon to defend myself and others. I would have felt EXTREMELY under gunned in all cases with a Colt Bisley. Never saw anyone in a gunfight feel that a lower capacity and slower-to-reload weapon would be better.

There's probably a reason why you don't see very many military or law enforcement agencies using single action revolvers.

If my life or someone's that I care about is on the line, I want the most effective equipment available.

Kleanbore said it best:

defensive fighting with a gun isn't for fun and nostalgia.

 

[Kleanbore]

That was Sam....

 

[WestKentucky]

LEO and military is far detached from The average person. There are lots of folks who carry 5 shot revolvers with no reloads or 7 shot autos without spare mags. I think that the 6 shot SAA is perfectly fine for defense purposes in almost any caliber. True it's slow to reload and 6 shots isn't leaving much room for error but it's better than 5 with no reload. It's also better than a fancy autoloader with unlimited rounds if the autoloader doesn't find its mark but the SAA does.

 

[paintballdude902]

my old man used to joke that he would use his 1850's cap and ball muff guns for home defense.


pretty sure .45 colt will put a hurt on anyone

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by WestKentucky: I think that the 6 shot SAA is perfectly fine for defense purposes in almost any caliber.

I respectfully suggest that anyone who has ever availed himself or herself of any kind of defensive pistol training will have abandoned any such belief during the first drill.

Of course, anyone who carries an original SAA with six shots in it is asking for trouble in more ways than one.

 

[eastbank]

45 auto, i have never been a rambo. buti have been shot at and hit and have shot back. the colt bisley would not be my first choice as a combat firearm, but a center mass hit with a 180gr bullet at 900-1000 fps will ruin any ones day. any of the so called antique firearms talked about on this post are 1000 times better than a sharp stick. as i never was a leo and its been 50 years since i was a soldier, the odds of me having to face several shooters at the same time are very slim at best . i say the best gun you can have at a gun fight is the one you are holding at that time, be it a .22lr or 460 ruger. eastbank

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by eastbank: as i never was a leo and its been 50 years since i was a soldier, the odds of me having to face several shooters at the same time are very slim at best.

Realistically, the odds of anyone ever having to threaten or use deadly force for self preservation on any one day are virtually nil.

The likelihood of having to do so at least once over an extended period is much higher, depending upon a lot of things, but for most people, the likelihood of every having to defend oneself in earnest is remote, at best. But the potential consequences are so severe that it is a risk that many of us choose to mitigate.

BUT: should the eventuality ever materialize, the chances are better than even that more than one attacker will be involved. We have been over that issue many times on this board.

Regardless, let's go back to training. Here's what Sam said earlier: "A decent shootist can put aimed rounds on target at better than five shots a second (that's only a 0.2 sec. split). Shooting fast multiple shots when confronted by a lethal threat is good practice, and taught by every reputable trainer everywhere. "

Then see how fast you can shoot that Bisley with combat accuracy. Measure it, and consider how far an attacker moving toward you at 15 feet per second will move before your first shot, and between the first and the second, and so on.

 

[BSA1]

32 Auto Test

Since this thread is still open.

Davis derringer in 32 Auto. 2 1/2" barrel overall length, 1 3/4" rifled barrel.

American Eagle 71 gr. FMJ.

Pine 2 x 4.

Distance 30".

I choose to use a derringer for this test as posts on discussion forums suggest some folks carrying them regularly as self-defense weapons. The Davis derringer is so small it can be hidden in a vest pocket.

I fired 4 rounds. The first two rounds I fired at a angle. Both rounds made it through the board with the nose of the bullet barely sticking out of the backside of the 2 x 4.

I fired the next two rounds in a straight line to the board. The result was unexpected. One round buried itself in the board and did not exit. The other round completely penetrated the boards and buried itself into the second 2 x 4 with only the base of the bullet showing.

Like I said shooting things is fun.

 

[ClickClickD'oh]

A lethal round is by definition, effective.

James Brady died August 2014 of a .22 round he received in March 1981. Lethal, but not particularly effective.

 

[eastbank]

i don,t carry the colt bisley for defence, but your hand will cover all six rounds at 45 feet pretty quick firing two handed and it would be better than all the sticks you could carry. you want to try someting, try firing 5-6 shots thru you coat pocket with you wonder auto.i have seen hand garnades thrown with out pulling the pins,m-16,s with magazines jammed in backwards and men killed from short fuzes(friendly fire), and grown men crap their drawers so i have seen the elephant closer than most and sure don,t need to be told to much about it.eastbank.

 

[Sav .250]

In the defense of your life, you carry carry what ever you like. I, on the other hand, will choose a modern weapon.

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by eastbank: i don,t carry the colt bisley for defence, but your hand will cover all six rounds at 45 feet pretty quick firing two handed...

Not to appear argumentative, but it is important that no one carry a Bisley with six rounds unless it is a Ruger.

 

[eastbank]

every one who ever carried a single action except a new model ruger knows you load one skip one load four more and let the hammer down on the empty chamber. you can slip fire a six shooter faster than you think. and heave forbid you have a misfire with you auto or the magazing falls out. eastbank.

 

[Deaf Smith]

Here's what Sam said earlier: "A decent shootist can put aimed rounds on target at better than five shots a second (that's only a 0.2 sec. split). Shooting fast multiple shots when confronted by a lethal threat is good practice, and taught by every reputable trainer everywhere. "

Then see how fast you can shoot that Bisley with combat accuracy. Measure it, and consider how far an attacker moving toward you at 15 feet per second will move before your first shot, and between the first and the second, and so on.

So now you 'need' .2 second splits in order to defend yourself?

I mean without that you will just ... die? Or you 'need' a .44/.45 or bullets will just bouce off 'em and you die?

Someone is full of it.

Deaf

 

[Sam1911]

You don't know WHAT you might need to defend yourself -- whether your bullets will penetrate, whether you will have enough ammo, will reload fast enough, or will be accurate enough fast enough. Hopefully, whatever you bring to the fight will be enough. A wise man would bring the very most suitable weapon, and the highest level of skill he can muster, and then pray that his best (tools and skills) is enough.

No one ever, ever, ever said, "shucks, I wish I had my cool old engraved, case hardened, beautiful, classic six-shooter that day... that Glock I had to face those muggers with had too much ammo in it, and I was able to shoot it way too many times."

Will you NEED 15 rounds and a fast reload? Who knows? Will you NEED to be able to shoot 0.15s splits and a sub 1-sec "failure drill"? You can't say.

Maybe you will pull our your Bisley and drill him through the forehead. Maybe he'll see it and run away! That's all great!

Or maybe you'll empty it into him (or into the background) and then be killed by his partner, while trying to shuck your empties. You don't know, but everyone's got to decide that they're willing to gamble that whatever they've got is enough, and be at peace with the "what ifs."

Defending yourself is ALWAYS a matter of being "good enough" or not. You don't get to control a lot of things about what will happen to you. Enough gun and enough ammo is one of the few things you can directly influence.

 

[45_auto]

It's also better than a fancy autoloader with unlimited rounds if the autoloader doesn't find its mark but the SAA does.

Yep, but the fancy autoloader with unlimited rounds is better if the antique SAA doesn't find it's mark but the autoloader does.

I would hope that the above would be obvious to anybody without it having to be pointed out ....

On the other hand, if you do your part, the fancy autoloader with unlimited rounds will deliver MUCH more effective hits on every trigger pull after the 5th (or 6th, depending on how you carry your SAA) than the SAA.