On another forum, I can't recall which, someone asked how does the .32 Magnum compare to a .41 Magnum. O.K. that was a really silly question, but the thing which got me going was how some of the answers really made fun of the .32, saying it isn't really a magnum cartridge. Well, what is a magnum cartridge?

Let's start with a working definition which seems to fit most so-called magnum cartridges.

"A magnum cartridge is one which will propel standard-for- caliber weight bullets at higher velocities than "standard" cartridges, or heavy-for-caliber bullets at standard for caliber velocities". This seems to be the basis of one of the first "Magnum" cartridges, the .300 H&H Magnum. It also pretty well defines magnum handgun cartridges with the exception that heavy-for-caliber bullets are usually driven at higher than standard velocities also.

Using our common handgun calibers, let's look at what the standard and magnum relationships are for major manufacturer factory ammunition.

.38 Spl, 158 gr. @ 850 f.p.s.
.357 Mag, 158 gr @ 1450 f.p.s.

.44 Spl, 246 gr. @ 750 f.p.s.
.44 Mag, 240 gr. @ 1450 f.p.s.

.45 Colt, 255 gr. @ 850 f.p.s.
.454 Casull, 255 gr. @ ca. 1550 f.p.s.

Since Veral Smith of LBT fame has stated in his catalog that the .32 Magnum in a Ruger Single Six (barrel length not stated) is capable of 1600 f.p.s. with 100 gr. bullets and 1450 with 115 gr., then why does everyone seem to feel that this cartridge falls in the "mouse gun" category?

In my personal experience with a 4" Ruger SP-101 I have been able to get 1400 f.p.s. with a 115 gr. cast bullet without signs of excessive pressure. This translates to 500 Foot Pounds energy at the muzzle, 1450 equals 537 f.p.e. Just for the sake of arguement, that makes this a legal deer cartridge in Utah!

Most seem to judge the .32 Mag. by available factory loads. Using this logic, then the .45 Colt isn't even the equal of the handloaded .32 Magnum since factory loads only produce 350-400 f.p.e. at best.

I'm not trying to make a case for the .32 Magnum being a big game hunting cartridge, but let's give it the respect it deserves.

Many would say it is a practical defense cartridge since factory loads are equivalent, based on energy, to .38 Spl. Since the average deer is aproximately the same weight and size as the average man, why would I want to try to defend my life with a cartridge which isn't even considered adequate for an animal which isn't trying to kill me?

IMHO

You're preaching to the choir as far as I'm concerned on this one. The .32 provides similar energy to the 38 Special with factory available loads, making it quite powerful for a .32. I would advise you to be careful of relying wholly on standard pressure signs with this cartridge. The late, great Skeeter Skelton was developing his loads in this manner. A gunwriter, whose name escapes me, pressure tested some of the old loads from when the cartridge was new, that where advocated by Skeeter: They where in the 50K PSI range. There is a guy from a company named Alpha Precision that made up a 5 shot stainless single six for himself that you might be impressed by, not a inexpensive peice. He claims 115's at 1350 in his five shot. www.alphaprecisioninc.com if you're interested in taking a peek. Based on my loading of this cartridge for the 3 Rugers I have, your loads seem hot. Just for the sake of curiosity, what load are you using, to get that velocity out of your SP101? Brass, bullet, power, primer, if you don't mind sharing? I'm curious to see where it is in relation to what I'm doing now. The .32's I have are Single Six's and a Blackhawk convertible that mainly see's 32-20's that surpass light bullet .357's by some margin.

My wife and I are big fans of the .32 Magnum. Most of the cartridges critics have never used it, or had very limited exposure to it.
You are correct about Skeeter Skeltons loads. He came back the next month and wrote a disclaimer on them.
We have several S&W and Ruger .32 Magnums. We have found our Ruger's stick cases a little quicker than the S&W's because the chamber walls are not as smooth.
As you stretch the cartridge brass life is shortened. If you accept that in the beggining and load appropriate to the gun you can achieve very high performance. 5.0 grains of Unique behind the Lyman 311008 comes to mind. This load will stick cases in a J frame S&W, it functions fine in a K-frame or SSX Bisley. In either gun brass life is short. The primer pockets will loosen in five shots. Reducing the load to 4.5 grains sacrifices very little velocity and extends brass life significantly. In the early days when we only had Federal brass loading for the .32 Mag. was a big problem. Starline came to our rescue with good quality brass at reasonable prices. I believe that Starline saved the .32 Magnum.
I like big bore handguns. I also like the .32 Magnum, in the Ruger Bisley it is capable of surprising accuracy, and it is easy to shoot well. The 4" S&W Kit Gun is probably the best handgun ever chambered for this round, but very few were made. The .32 mag is "a better mousetrap", our shooter's ego's have kept it from being as sucessful as it deserves.

William,
I'm envious of the Bisley. I had one on order for a year when Ruger stopped making them and never got one, or the single six I had on order for that matter. What is the weight of the lyman bullet you mention? I have a Saeco 4 cavity in a 115 gr FN that I use in my 32-20 to good effect. I've yet to try in the smaller .32. I don't see the mould on the Saeco chart any longer, so I'm happy to have it.

Lymans 311008 is listed at 115 grains. It is plain base and still available. This is a very good bullet in the .32-20 and the .32 Magnum.
I have NEI's #81 SWC as a plain base bullet, it weighs 100 grains. A friend has the Saeco and RCBS equivilents, they all shoot well in the .32 Magnum.
I think that Ruger is missing a good bet with the .32 Magnum Single Six. I think there are enough "middle aged" shooters like me that need the clearly defined sights, I have trouble with the fixed sights on the current .32 Mag. SSX.
I want a Dan Wesson .32 Magnum but other guns keep leaping in the way! One thing about handguns in .32 Magnum, when you see them you had better buy them. They are built in short production Runs!

So the 32-20 is the Non-mag 32. I was going to coment on this, that the 32 Mag wouldn't be considered a Mag Cart considering it didn't have a little Bro Cart. I personally have never shot one that I can remmber. As far as the Mag Monicor it's usually the Cart Co. that starts this craze form inputs by Reloaders always stretching the limits with standard rounds 38Spl, 44 Spl. 45 LC etc and same goes for the rifle side of the house. So the Cart Co. say hey we stretch the case some, call it mag and sell more ammo and guns.

Some one did and article on calibers that are out dated/obsolete- In it the 32 H&R was one as well as my favorite .45 LC. Can you believe that? Anyway obviously it still useful to you folks and I'm sure it's a fine caliber for it's intended purpose I just never had a need for one.:D

Just thought I would see what kind of reaction I could get, and it worked.

I'll will try to answer all of the questions above, but forgive me if I overlook a point.

So far as the .32 Mag. not having a little brother, what do you think the .32 S&W Long is? Federal or H&R merely did exactly the same thing as was done to the .38 Spl, .44 Spl, and .45 Long Colt to create the .357, .44 M, and .454. So far as the .32-20 is concerned, that is a completely different matter. Since I have at least 7 different .32-20 guns, Gunnut is invited to stop and go shooting next time he is in the Salt Lake City area.

I am aware of the situation with some of Skeeter's loads and the subsequent retraction. Possible liability on the part of the publisher was no doubt a large part of that situation.

My history goes back to the early 1960's with .32 cal. handguns. My first, and I still have it, was a S&W Model 1902 .32-20 Hand Ejector which was one of the last made before the 1905 was introduced. Paid $15 for it. This one got me wanting one with adjustable sights, so when I found a S&W K-32 Masterpiece, NIB, in a drugstore in Missoula MT in 1966 I bought it intending to rechamber it to .32-20. Glad I never did with what they are worth these days. I've never found a .32-20 with target sights that I was willing to buy, but that .32-20 started something and over the years I have had 30 or so various .32 cal. handguns of all flavors.

Regarding the .32 Mag. revolvers which have been available over the years, I missed most and really regret it. I don't think I need to elaborate on why I never bought one of the H&R or Charter Arms guns. Passed originally on the Ruger SSX because the cylinder was too short to make a .32-20! Didn't get a S&W 631 or re-intro Model 16 because they had ugly grips, M-16 was too heavy with the full lug, and didn't know they were to be such a limited production item! When I finally got the real urge for any of these they were all out of production and the SP-101 was the only gun (Except the DW) which had a barrel over 2". I am still hoping to find a Ruger SSX or a S&W 16, but did find a S&W 631.

So far as loads are concerned, I have no idea what Veral was using or had knowledge of. I have to make a slight correction now as I have reviewed my notes, Yesterday I was writing from memory, and some of you guys my age know how dangerous that is!!!!!!!!!!!!!! What I should have said was I have been able to get NEAR 1400 fps, and with a 100 gr jacketed bullet, not a 115 cast. We are still talking over 400 fpe out of this 4" gun. If I were to set the barrel back and tighten the gap 1400 would be an easy reality. Most of what I have done with this cartridge is to see what can be done with it, not how it should be loaded for full time use. The little Ruger shoots the 311316GC like a rifle.

I havn't done any formal accuracy testing on most of these, but I do shoot clay birds at 100 yds. quite a lot and any of these loads have been very good for that.

I have several cautions. First, these loads are for the Ruger SP-101, S&W Model 16, Dan Weson, and any Ruger single action. (Really wish I could find a Buckeye .32-20/.32 Mag.) These are also to be loaded in Star Line brass only. Nothing catastrophic will happen with Federal, but it is soft and can loosen primer pockets in one load. I will elaborate if anyone wants tro ask. All primers are Win. WSP. All bullets seated to the cannelure and crimped with a heavy roll crimp. Lyman bullets are seated to the top of the top band.

100 gr. Hdy. XTP, 5.6 Universal Clays, 1378 fps
100 gr. Hdy. XTP, 13.0 H-110, 1368 fps
100 gr. Speer JHP, 7.6 Blue Dot, 1268 fps.
115 gr. Lyman 3118, 5.4 U-Clays, 1307 fps.
115 gr. Lyman 311316GC, 5.4 U-Clays, 1276 fps.

My best luck has been with Universal Clays, it also gives very good results for extreme spread and standard deviation. I have 5 pages of various load data, but these were the best for velocity. A cast GC bullet would probably give at least another 50-100 fps with these same loads, but I don't have a mould. I have found an interesting phenomenon with this cartridge, and that is that you can actually load it to the point where velocity drops off with increases in charge. I have reached this point with both H-110 and Blue Dot as well as Lil' Gun. For some reason I can't get any sort of velocity with 2400.

My experience has been that with the S&W 631 I start getting sticking at relatively low charges, and this has been the basis for determining maximum with that gun. This is in spite of polishing and burring the charge holes. It was a typical Smith in that there was a distinct burr in all of the charge holes. This little gun would probably take more, but I an unwilling to push it too hard. In addition, I use only Federal brass in the Smith and Star Line in the Ruger to avoid getting a too hot load in the Smith by accident. William Iorg mentioned 5.0 Unique/3118. My Smith sticks at 4.5 even though 5.0 should be reasonable. The Ruger takes this without a hitch. I have shot the .32 S&W Long with 4.0 Uniq/Rem 100 JFP (.32-20 bullet) extensively in my S&W K-32 and .32 Hand Ejector with no problems so I am curious why the 631 objects. I have used Unique for over 40 years, but have tried to get away from it since it is so dirty and U-Clays and 4756 will do about the same thing.

If Ruger would build a run of SSX Bisleys with 5 1/2 or 6" barrel I would be first to buy one, same for S&W and the Model 16 or even a 616. I am seriously considering a DW, but have to decide on .32 Mag. or .32-20. What a dilemma!

Please note, I am not recommending any of these loads to anyone, merely citing my experience! You are on your own and all customary warnings about working up to maximum apply.

If anyone wants more data, E-mail me your address and I will photo copy and mail my sheets and notes.

Alk,
I've got a stainless Dan from last time they went bankrupt,not the first time but the second. All I have to say about that 32-20 revolver is that you should have one. My first centerfire revolver was a Dan Wesson in .357. I would not hesitate to purchase a Dan Wesson revolver in any caliber. From what I gather, the stainless .32-20's can't be had for the $300 I paid for mine. The Buckeye convertible is a nice gun, I've got a matching 38-40/10mm and love them both, but it's a lot of gun to carry around to shoot the 32 H&R (real magnum or not). You should see what a 38-40 in a strong revolver will do! Thanks for the load data. I'll have to work up some 115 gr loads for the 32 H&R, I'd always relegated those bullets for the 32-20. I guess it's time to go fire up the Saeco sizer and lube some bullets! I wonder what kind of velocity I can get out of my long barrelled SSX, I think it's about 8". I like my 4 5/8" better, but the long one is easier to hit at long range with. I bought 3 used 32 moulds off of ebay this year and am waiting for some warmer weather to cast a variety of different bullets to see what they'll do.

I assume you are aware of this, but just in case...


http://www.ruger.com/rvpages/newsstext.html

Wish you hadn't posted that, now I gotta get one!!!!!!!!!!!

Argghhh, why not a single six with adjustable sights?

That last is exactly what I have been asking since 1997 when Ruger discontinued it.

I can't abide a small game gun with fixed sights. Alk, are you sure it was '97? It seems to me that it was more like the early 90's when they became unavailable. If you want adjustable sight, you've got to find a used one or buy the Dan.

Guys, do a search, if I can find it I'll put a link....DOK did like a 60 response thread on just the same thing!!!

Found it!
http://shootersforum.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1385

It's a quite lengthy thread but ALOT of info!!!!

kciH,

It seems to me that the SSX .32 Mag. guns were discontinued earlier too, but the '97 date if from the Sturm-Ruger company website so I have to believe them. (Well sorta')

I ordered a .32-20 DW 6" blue this morning since that looks like the only adjustable sight gun I'll be able to find in that caliber. Like that and the .32 Mag, can't really afford even one.

I did pick up a 6 1/2" blue SSX convertable with an eye to converting it to .32 Mag. If I chicken out I've still have a nice .22/.22M. Don't tell those guys on the Ruger Forum, it is a 95%+ condition Bi-centennial marked gun.

Congratulations on the purchase, I'm sure you'll be happy with the revolver. I've been think of ordering a 6 inch barrel for mine. It's got a full underlug 8" barrel because I bought it when I used to slam steel for fun. The only grip I've had about my Dan Wessons where the non S&W trigger pull. I cured mine with some springs from Wolfe, or you can pay Dan Wesson to do it for you before it leaves the factory.

I found a write-up on the new rugers for those interested:

http://www.gunsandammomag.com/dynamic.asp?intSectionID=199&intArticleID=910

There is a Dan Wesson stainless 32-20 with a 3 barrel set on GunsAmerica right now for a very reasonable price if any of you are interested. I've already got one, but I'm tempted to get it just for the extra barrels. It is item GA# 976341140. This is not SPAM, I'm not selling it and don't know who is. Just letting you have a shot at an excellent pistol for a bargain price.

I too have been interested in the 32 Mag for awhile now and have just had a Stevens 44 1/2 barreled up in it and will start working on loads soon! I currently have a single six with a 9 1/2" barrel chambered in it and shoot a hardcast 120gr TCW over 9gr's of WW296 for alittle over 1200fps. I was using 10gr's of 296 with this bullet but after losing afew cases that split length wise I decided to drop the charge 1grain and the brass seems to hold up very well now.


Best regards,
John Anderson

John,
I haave a few handguns in .32 Mag, and a 24" TC barrel. The long TC barrel shoots heavy cast bullets well and does not have a "crack" at the muzzle when firing.

I had the same problem of longitudinal split cases with Federal brass early on. Later manufacture Federal brass is better. Starline - "bless their little hearts" came out with good brass at reasonable prices and saved the cartridge! If it had not been for Starline I dont think the cartridge would have lasted. Federal wanted $9.00 a box for empty unprimed brass back in the early days, and we were glad to get it at the time! Drury's Guns Shop in San Antonio was a big booster for the cartridge from the beginning and stocked the brass for the silhouette shooters. A nice little shop.

Well, I want all of you that have made a post on the 32 H&R Mag or on the 32/20 to know that my wife is very upset with you!!! I couldn't stand hearing about how great they are or how much fun they were to shoot, so I found a NIB Ruger Convertible "Buckeye Special". I actually purchased this in February, but through a comedy of errors, my FFL up here just received it and I will be picking it up tomorrow. FFL called and said the box was in rough shape, but the handgun was absolutely gorgeous. He even made me an offer to buy it!

Now see what all of you have done? You've afflicted me with the same malady common to all of you. For shame, for shame!!! :D

Slim,
I use Starline brass exclusivly and that is what was cracking logitudinally with the 10gr's of WW296. I have never found any load info for the 32 Mag with bullets as heavy as the 120 gr cast, would you have any loading info to share?

Best regards,
John Anderson

Alyeska,
If you're going shoot it, I've got some good "modern gun" 32-20 data that I use for my Buckeye and Dan Wesson 32-20's that you might like. If I'm going to carry the 32 H&R, I do it in a Single Six.

Well, I picked up the Buckeye a couple of days ago. That is one large handgun for such cartridges. I think they would be much better housed in the single-six, but with ADJUSTABLE SIGHTS!!!

Having said that, the Blackhawk came as described, NIB condition, really nice. I haven't had an opportunity to hit the range yet, but I will this weekend.

I like a 1.29" OAL, LIL'GUN or 800X.

I find that H110 is too touchy, going from anemic to too hot in a few tenths of a grain.
I have tried AA#9 and Unique, but didn't like the results.

I have been using Liberty 76 gr. cast and Speer 85 gr. JHP.

I need to find a bullet for the 32 mag like the 158 gr LSWC is for the 357 mag.

Kent,

it is good to hear from someone else who is using 800X in the .32 Mag!

I purchased an RCBS powder scale and dispenser with 800X on my mind. It solved any hassels with measuring those big flakes. Lee dippers also work well with 800X.

Kent & William,
I'm always up to try new powders in a cartridge. Any data on either powder, lil gun especially, whould be great.

The 158gr LSWC for the 32 Mag is the 100gr LSWC or possibly the 115 gr 32-20 bullet. I've just started using the 115 gr bullet in the 32 H&R with good results. I've used it in the 32-20 forever. It never really occurred, for whatever reason, to put it in the 32 H&R until it was suggested to me by someone on this forum.

kciH,
The Hodgdon response to email is fast and good.

http://www.hodgdon.com/data/pistol/32hrmag.php

I asked why they did not show cast bullets with LIL'GUN and why the LIL'GUN pressures were lower than other powders for 357 mag, and they said that the LIL'GUN was melting the base of some lead bullets and that was all the powder they could fit.

It would be my guess that the 12 gr. LIL'GUN listed for the 32 H&R Mag and 85 gr. is the same situation.

I know I can fit 13 gr. in the case, and LIL'GUN does not seem to melt my hard cast bullets.

"Lyman's 47th" has loads like 5 gr. 800X for 85 gr. and 4.3 gr. for 100 gr. at the full 20 kcup pressures.

One of the good things about LIL'GUN and 800X in the 32 mag is that the change in powder charge does not cause a big change in pressure and velocity.
I had trouble with Unique and H110 in that the too low, just right, and too high loads were so close together in weight, that I was afraid to load up a batch of good ones.

The 32 mag is easy on the primer and brass, but I have to watch the forcing cone. I don't like flames or pieces of bullets coming out of the cylinder gap.


William,
My RCBS Uniflow is +/- 20% repeatable with those big flakes.
With 800X I use the big Lee dipper and tap with my finger on it while tipping the dipper over the scale and watch the scale come up.
I AM the powder dispenser.

http://gallery.sixshootercommunity.com/displayimage.php?pid=282&fullsize=1
This was my birthday present last weekend. It started as a Buckeye Special, but an older gentleman who has recently passed away had Cosby Custom Guns turn this into his CAS shooter. It is accurate, and I don't mind the weight. I am only shooting and reloading the 32-20, but will eventually try the H&R.

Dave Beeman




kciH,
The Hodgdon response to email is fast and good.

http://www.hodgdon.com/data/pistol/32hrmag.php

I asked why they did not show cast bullets with LIL'GUN and why the LIL'GUN pressures were lower than other powders for 357 mag, and they said that the LIL'GUN was melting the base of some lead bullets and that was all the powder they could fit.

It would be my guess that the 12 gr. LIL'GUN listed for the 32 H&R Mag and 85 gr. is the same situation.

I know I can fit 13 gr. in the case, and LIL'GUN does not seem to melt my hard cast bullets.

"Lyman's 47th" has loads like 5 gr. 800X for 85 gr. and 4.3 gr. for 100 gr. at the full 20 kcup pressures.

One of the good things about LIL'GUN and 800X in the 32 mag is that the change in powder charge does not cause a big change in pressure and velocity.
I had trouble with Unique and H110 in that the too low, just right, and too high loads were so close together in weight, that I was afraid to load up a batch of good ones.

The 32 mag is easy on the primer and brass, but I have to watch the forcing cone. I don't like flames or pieces of bullets coming out of the cylinder gap.


William,
My RCBS Uniflow is +/- 20% repeatable with those big flakes.
With 800X I use the big Lee dipper and tap with my finger on it while tipping the dipper over the scale and watch the scale come up.
I AM the powder dispenser.

Nice Buckeye! Ours is standard but great fun. The only trouble we have ever had with it is rough chambering in the .32-20 cylinder. The cases begin to stick well before we reach maximum charges. The .32 Magnum cylinder is smoother and we have less problems with it. We shoot the .32 Magnum more anyway so have never bothered to polish the chambers. A fine shooting gun but as you said a bit heavy.

Funny, I thought the 32-20 was a different bore size - like .320 instead of .312 or .311. I wonder what bore size is on a 32 H&R/32-20 convertible. I must have been mistaken.

I am a fan of 30 Mauser and 7.62x25 Tokarev pistols. 30 Mauser in a Broomhandle (my shooter is a 1917 wartime commercial) will get you 1400 fps with an 85 grain bullet. 7.62 Tokarev will get 1600 fps. I have a Czech CZ-52 and a Polish T33 for this round. The 32 H&R Mag is comparable, so I would say it is certainly a practical defense round.

Old gun writers like Elmer Keith would denounce 30 Mauser and 30 Luger, saying they would "slip through" a target without doing much damage. The Soviets didn't seem to have that problem!

My Buckeye seems to pefer .311" cast bullets. It shoots the Speer 110 grain .308" JHP bullet well though.

I like the 7.62 Tok. It is a semi-auto .32 Mag - actualy a little more considering the barrel length. I have several friends with the CZ's. They are cheap here. Good shooters and far more powerful than you would first imagine.

I have found that at .32-20 and .30 carbine velocities the FMJ 110 grain round nose bullets do not have much shock value on jackrabbits. The round nose soft points are a different story. It may be they were shooting FMJ bullets.

No Vaquero here, but just feel like showin' all my 32 mag.

It's a Smith & Wesson model 16 with target hammer,trigger and combat grips. After reading all the post about the 32, I went and tracked this one down.

I'd love to get a rifle chambered in 32 mag as a companion, but then again I'd also like a 32-20 and I'm waiting for Marlin to put em out!


Enjoy the pic....




http://pic10.picturetrail.com/VOL326/682422/1127617/76830461.jpg

I'll be stuffing my 32-20 cases with H110, and 115gr FNPB cast bullets. I bought a set of the Lyman Cowboy dies in 32-20, hope they work ok, never used Lyman except for casting. Hope to get the conversion kit for my Dillon soon. I plan on getting the Lyman 31108 115gr mould so I can start casting next summer, that is if Christmas is paid off. The Ruger is a stout gun, this one has had the barrel cylinder gap reduced, it wears a custom barrel, and the chambers are super smooth. Can't wait to get it out and run some more rounds through it.

Dave

Wow! I can't believe somebody actually found this old thread and started on it again.

For M-141a,

Marlin already did the .32-20, and 25-20, and .218 Bee. This was several years ago on the 1894CL (Classic). Neat little rifle with a 1/2 magazine. I'd watchthe shows and shops and grab whatever I could find since I doubt Marlin is going to make any more of them for quite a while, if ever.

Well ya see, I was doing a search on the 32-20, and this thread popped up. I didn't pay any attention to the date on it, just replied to it. I ran 100 rounds of 32-20 through my Ruger on Sunday, what a sweet shooter, think I'll have this one for the long haul.

Dave

Years ago both Rossi and Taurus made some very nice little .32 Magnum DA revolvers. I found a NIB one on the internet a few years ago. Unfortunately even used models are now illegal here in Kalifornia. As soon as I get out of this hellhole next March I will begin searching again.

Actually good quality .32 S&W Long revolvers can be significantly improved ballistically.

I am a new 32 magnum fan. I just got a Ruger single six, and I started reloading. My previous loads were 100 gr, and they were great, but I was given a bunch of 78 gr bullets. I have not seen any comments on reloading these bulletrs. Would appreciate any comments...............Thanks

In my wifes Ruger Blackhawk I load the 115gr BearTooth. It is accurate and recoil is (kinda) minimal. She has killed 3 hogs with it so far. These animals were all in the 80-110 pound range and shot at 10-15 yards. All one shot drops/kills.

The other bullets that I have tried is the Hornady 100gr XTP and a 85gr of some sort. Both shot good.

The 78's should be a good,low power,plinker.-----pruhdlr

I totally agree with the premise that the .32 H&R is NOT a magnum. The fact that in certain guns it can be loaded to magnum speeds does not make it a magnum. The .32 S&W long, .38 special, .44 special and .45 Colt can all be loaded hotter in certain guns but they are not magnums either. None of them are factory loaded to magnum speeds for the very good reason that many guns chambered for those cartridges are not strong enough for those loads.

It is not possible to make a specific guess at a load for the 78 grain bullets without more detail about the shape of the bullet and the construction (cast or jacketed) and how deeply the base seats into the case. Pressure goes up fairly rapidly as a bullet is seated deeper in a straight wall case.

Assuming all else to be the same, as bullet weight goes down the amount of powder you need to achieve a specific peak pressure increases. The lower mass offers a lower reaction force to acceleration and, for a given pressure, the acceleration is therefore more rapid. You need more powder burning to have enough gas evolving to keep up when chasing that faster bullet into the tube.

If the bullet bases are seated to the same depth, a crude rule of thumb would be that you could multiply the powder charge for the heavier bullet by the square root of the ratio of the bullet weights to adjust it upward for the lighter bullet. √100/78=1.13 times more powder, though you would want to work the load up to it to be safe. In most situations, however, the lighter bullet is seated less deeply, and that adds more powder space, requiring still more powder to hit a given peak pressure. Again, without details on the bullet and the seating depth of its base into the case and the powder used, it is not possible to make a good estimate of the charge weight difference a given powder would require.

Heh. I'd always thought magnum really just meant that it had more powder capacity, for purposes of increasing velocity, than the predecessor. The predecessors of the .32 H&R Mag drove bullets at, what, up to 900 feet per second?

And here I always thought it had something to do with how much extra champagne it contained?

Actually, I think that after the development of the .357 Magnum and the .44 Magnum people came away with their own ideas of what "magnum" means. You are correct that it literally refers to capacity of the case, but, if you look closely at the .44 Magnum you will see that at SAAMI maximum COL, even though the case is longer the bullet seats deeper with no net increase in powder space. It just runs at higher pressure. The only purpose of the extra case length is to prevent the high pressure load from fitting in a .44 Special chamber.

But now some people think the pressure of a real magnum has to be up at 35KPSI or more. Others think it means muzzle velocity of 1250 and up. The problem is that when you look at high pressure auto pistol rounds they often have the pressures and velocities I just mentioned. The old 7.63 Mauser blows what the .357 and .44 Mags do with 296 and H110 away on those criteria. What the non-magnums lack, by comparison is equal muzzle energy. But that's just energy for the caliber. The .357 magnum has more energy than a 9 mm, but nobody expects it to have the same energy as a .44 magnum. So it isn't some fixed numbers of energy or velocity. And certainly some of the bigger handgun magnums today have even longer cases than the .357 or .44, so you can't base it on proportions.

The only pattern I see at first glance that the case must be longer than its predecessor/parent and the pressure will be higher than the predecessor/parent. But wait. How does that explain the .41 Mag? What's the predecessor? The .41 Special came later. So, I think the bottom line is the inventor gets to name the cartridge and hope nobody laughs at him for using the word "magnum" if he chooses to include it. That's about it for technical definitions. For most people, though, a magnum, like the judge said of obscenity, is just something you know when you see it.

Would someone PLEASE let me know which Factory Ammo can be fired safely in my New Ruger Single-Six .32 Magnum? I have fired .32Longs and .32 Shorts as well as .32 Mag cartridges without problem but I do notice the difference in the fit of each in the cylinder. Am I messing up my revolver in the long run or is this practice O.K.? Also, are there any other cartridges as in .32-20 that I can fire?
Thanks A Million !
teraplanez
60 Minute and .32 Magnum Man:confused:

Would someone PLEASE let me know which Factory Ammo can be fired safely in my New Ruger Single-Six .32 Magnum? I have fired .32Longs and .32 Shorts as well as .32 Mag cartridges without problem but I do notice the difference in the fit of each in the cylinder. Am I messing up my revolver in the long run or is this practice O.K.? Also, are there any other cartridges as in .32-20 that I can fire?
Thanks A Million !
teraplanez
60 Minute and .32 Magnum Man:confused:

.32 S&W (Short) and .32 S&W Long: Yes, but you should clean the chambers really well before shooting anything longer.
.32 H&R Mag: Yes
.32 Fed Mag: NO! Even if you can fit one in, the pressure is something like *double* the pressure of the .32 H&R.

I'm not sure, but I'd be really surprised if you could fit a .32-20 in the chamber for a .32 H&R Mag. Even if you could, I've never heard anyone say that's safe, which basically means it's not.

The .32 H&R Mag and the .32 S&W Long are identical other than case length. Both have 0.337" O.D. case bodies, so both will chamber easily, though any time you shoot the .32 long, same as using .38 Special in a .357 magnum, you tend to build up fouling at the chamber throat which can make it too tight when you go to put the longer magnum load back in. Tightness causes dangerous pressures, so, as KO said, you need to clean the cylinder really well and probably use a lead removing cleaner after firing anything shorter than the magnums.

The .32 S&W Short has a body OD spec of 0.339". That extra 0.002" may make it a little snug. It's rim is also 0.358" instead of 0.355" diameter as with the other two. Again, that could cause a tight fit. It depends on your gun's dimensions. In most instances all three should fit and fire just fine. The same warning about cleaning up after using the longs applies to the shorts. Personally, I just use .32 H&R Mag brass in my little Charter .32 H&R Mag. It isn't expensive and I can load down or up in it. I bought a big bag of cast 95 grain wadcutters from Midway at one point, and mostly just shoot those in it with 2.2 grains of Bullseye.

Thanks a bunch, Ko ! You have been a big help. I figured I could shoot SOMETHING other than the H&R Mags. I like having options. And, thanks for the heads up on the Fed Mags !
tera

Thanks a bunch, Ko and unclenic ! You both have been a big help. I figured I could shoot SOMETHING other than the H&R Mags. I like having options. And, thanks for the heads up on the Fed Mags !
tera

You probably won't find any around, but the .32 Colt ammo shouldn't be used in the .32H&R.