3" or 4" SP101 32H&R ?

[BigSlick]

I went by and took a long look at the SP101's my local dealer has today.

After a up close and personal look at these, a few things are apparent.

The trigger needs some serious help, the stock grips have to go and the sights are definitely minimal. I had hope that the SP101 could accommodate 32-20, but after looking at the cyl, I'm not sure that's possible dimensionally.

I've been recommended a 10lb Wolff spring kit to lighten the trigger from 800lbs down to roughly 10, and grips are available from a variety of reputable sources. The sights are great for concealed carry (as the SP101 was intended) but they are definitely small. A couple of fiber optic front sights available, and it appears different heights as well. The extra/accessory sights aren't cheap, so I might try and see if I can find someone to fit an adjustable set.

I will definitely take the gun out a few times before any permanent mods. With a little luck, maybe the stars will align and my loads will shoot to POA.

I like both, but can't afford both. The 3" feels just about as handy as a third arm and the 4" adds just enough weight to give the gun a little better balance. The 3" is easier to stow when trekking thru the woods, the 4" feels like it would be a better option for a plinker. The extra weight and sight radius et al.

I plan to use this as a range gun, a take a newbie shooting gun, a small game gun, a plinker and all around fun gun. I know the 32 H&R could assume the roll of SD if forced, but I don't see that coming to pass.

My dealer has asked me to make a decision post haste on which one I want, since he has someone else interested in whichever one I don't take.

Dale, Deputy Al, I know you guys have a stable of 32H&R's, any comments ?

Whaddya think guys ?

3" or 4" ?

Thanks in advance ;)

'Slick
________
Chevrolet nomad (http://www.chevy-wiki.com/wiki/Chevrolet_Nomad)

[Lloyd Smale]

I had a 4 inch and didnt like the way it ballanced. If i found another one in 3 inch id probably snatch it up. Your right about the grips and the action work and the fact that 3220s arent going to fly in it. Houge makes a decent feeling rubber grip for them. Cylinder is to short. The one i had was very accurate though.

[Dale53]

I MUCH prefer the 4". That is what I bought. The trigger responded VERY well to a Wolfe spring kit. Mine now has a good trigger. The revolver is extremely well made, very strong, and is a keeper.

The only thing I have a problem with is the sights. They are only adjustable for windage and they were NOT regulated for my loads. That may vary depending on whose gun we're talking about. My problem, other than the fact I am dern near blind (ah-h-h, old age:roll:), is that I work with several different loads in a .32 and I NEED a fully adjustable sight. My solution is "in progress". I like this revolver so well, that I took it to my local pistolsmith and left it to mount an Ultra Dot on it. Of course, that is a rather bulky item on such a small revolver. However, I will now be able to see the sights and shoot it to its potential, adjusting the sights for whatever current load I desire.

Right now, as we "speak" I am running a thousand or so 100 gr GB Keith 100 gr bulleted loads ahead of 2.8 grs of Win 231 in .32 S&W L cases. This is a target load (I haven't chronographed it yet, but should be about 800-850 fps). My club's indoor range is "just over the hill" from me and they have a velocity limit. This load also makes a very nice edible small game load.

This summer, when I might want to trail walk in coyote areas, I'll crank it up to "full" loads and will also be able to sight it in correctly.

As an aside, the magazine "American Handgunner", this month, ran an ad on a new holographic sight that might work just dandy on this particular revolver. It is only about an inch square. It is a bit pricy, but if it works out it will give us both a very compact sight but the ability to fully adjust:

http://www.cheaperthandirt.com/46357-56523-2276.html

See how great this forum is - I started out trying to help you decide what to buy and as a result I ran the sight again on Google and found a discount price.:drinks: The thanks go to YOU!!

Dale53

[Dale53]

I hear mention all the time of people either wanting to or altering a perfectly nice .32 magnum to 32/20. I have no intention of being argumentative, but wonder what all of the fuss is about. I can easily get 1200-1300 fps (and safely) with a 100 gr Keith style bullet in the 32 H&R Magnum (in a strong revolver). All this with the advantages of a very strong straight wall case. It is just delightful. I guess you might be able to drive the 32/20 a bit faster, but WHY? 1200-1300 fps (in a 6" revolver) is fast enough and I don't see another 100-200 fps (if it is even practical) as doing anything needing done.

Now, I freely admit that I am biased (I really like this caliber, the .32 H&R I am speaking of and it may be "turning my head"...[smilie=1:

I do fully understand the phrase, "Because I want to" and if that is the reason, no problem.

Please enlighten me.

Dale53

[Treeman]

Dale, I have to agree with you-The 32-20 has such a reputation as a difficult handloading cartridge I can't understand wanting to modify a 32H&R.....Except that those who own a 32-20 leveraction rifle might desire a matching wheel gun.

[Bret4207]

I think a lot of the ideas for converting 32 mags to 32-20 come from Frank "Paco" Kellys articles over on Leverguns.com . Much as I love the ideas and his articles, I have to wonder at some of the results he reports. He likes to 'em hot fer sure.

I never had a whole lot of trouble with the 32-20, but then I started out with it and didn't know any better. I may well have forgotten some of the issues.

An SP101 with a S+W J frame sight would work for me.

[Nueces]

Dale, I agree that an SP-101 conversion to 32-20 would gain little but increased muzzle blast. I am a custom revolver maniac, but the 32 H&R is so capable that the 32-20 would show an advantage only in the longer barrels. Minimum of 5", for me. A shorter 32-20 would stand taller with heavier bullets - but there's the 38/357 for that. You really need a very strong 32-20 to beat the H&R.
And, thanks for the Wolfe spring recommendation.

BigSlick, I have both 3 and 4 inch Ruger 32s, and have given a friend the 3". For a size x, like me, there is little increased carriability (Taffin word) in the shorter barrel and I wanted the better performance. Plus, I found a deal on a converted Colt DS, for the short gun. I agree that the 4" hangs a bit heavy (but steady), so I'm toying with machining the underlug some to lighten it. Plus, 3" leather is hard to find!

As for a 32-20 Kit Gun, what about a Smith 5-holer with 4.5 - 5" barrel? :drinks:

Mark

[Dale53]

I have clarified the load above that I am running. I had failed to mention that it was put up in .32 S&W L cases (2.8 grs Win 231 behind a .313" Keith 100 gr Group Buy with CCI 500 SP primers in .32 S&W L cases). If you want to use .32 H&R Mag cases, increase the powder charge to 3.2 Win 231.

If my eyesight was a bit better, Tpr Bret, I would probably have had the S&W J frame adjustable sight added to my revolver. I had considered that but with the way things are, I need some optical help:roll:.

Man, I can't wait to get that little feller back. I guess the truth is I am still just a little boy at heart:Fire:.

Dale53

[KCSO]

I carry a 32 Smith 3" as a woods gun and I love it. The 3" is handy and I can still finish off a wounded deer or drop a porky from the top of the tallest cedar tree. The difference in power and accuracy between the 3 and the 4" is so small you will never notice it. Go for the 3" and KEEP it 32 Mag.

[Dale53]

KCSO;
I have a Stainless, 3" barreled, .38 Special Chief's Special with target sights that makes a "Jim Dandy" trail gun. I have wished many times that it had a 4" barrel as they seem to be a bit easier to hit with than any shorter barrel. However, I must admit that I shoot it well (for me, at least). This is the Chief's Special with full underlug barrel. That full underlug seems to make up at least a bit for the shorter barrel. It is just a bit "barrel heavy" and holds well for being so short.

Dale53

[9.3X62AL]

Slick--

Sorry for the delayed response, sir.

I lean toward the 4", although that's not a strong preference. The 1"-longer barrel will show its value most with the slower powders used in this caliber (AA-7 through 2400) as loaded in high-velocity applications. It will make less difference in 32 S&W Long-type loads using fast powders like BE, 231, HP-38 et al.

No doubt that sight radius with the longer barrel is a plus, and the size of game taken with the 32 calibers argues for all the sighting help possible.

I'm looking at a SP-101 in 32 Mag my own self.......4" barrel.

[BigSlick]

Thanks for the feedback guys ;)

I'm leaning to the 4", but the shop is closed for a few days - owner had a baby.

As far as doing my best to sweeten the SP101 up, I will indeed go to the Wolff spring kit, probably a 10#.

Any suggestions on the return spring ?

This will be my first Ruger revolver, no previous history with them whatsoever, always been a S&W or Colt guy.

This being said, can any of you tell me if the throats/groove measurements are all out of whack or usually fairly good out of the box ?

I've done a few searches here and elsewhere and it seems like the throats in some Rugers can be less than uniform in size and at times not ideally sized vs groove diameter.

My thinking is (please correct me here) I want .313 or .314 throats and groove size *should* be .312.

As cast, my Lee 6 banger drops at .314 + a little. I've shot these as cast out of my J frame and no leading to speak of.

If the throats do indeed turn out to be a mix, with sizes not ~ uniform i will have the cylinder reamed.

What's your experience with SP101's in this regard ?

Jeez, I don't even have the thing yet and I'm worried about the throats.

I'll shut up now and go sit in the corner.

'Slick
________
Anal Double (http://www.****tube.com/categories/85/double/videos/1)

[BigSlick]

Dale,

I checked out the link for the sight.

That's gonna be sweet :mrgreen:

I use a Tasco J Point on a 9mm auto from time to time. Hitting something with it is easy as pie, even with both eyes open. It adds almost zero perceptable weight and holds zero extremely well.

http://www.brownells.com/aspx/ns/store/ProductDetail.aspx?p=7584&title=J+POINT?%20SIGHT

I never considered that these could be mounted to a revolver.

Oh man, you're gonna love that for sure.

Shooting the 9mm with the J Point makes it easy to look like a good shot ;) The only problem I've ever had with it was trying to keep from banging it around too much. It has held up though, in spite of my clumsiness.

Battery lasts a zillion years and the dot doesn't have to be centered in the view to be on target. Just put the dot where you want the bullet and squeeze.

Another big benefit (for me), is even with the small area, the glass seems to pick up light allowing for another 10-15 minutes of shooting at dusk.
________
XXX AMATURE (http://www.****tube.com/)

[9.3X62AL]

Slick--

Dunno about the SP-101 in 32, but Sis in MT has one in 357 that all throats are between .357" and .3575". Groove was .357". I left it alone.

A Ruger SSM x 5.5" I once owned had .312" grooves and .313" throats. Whatever you do, run about 200 rounds of J-words through it before taking cutters to anything. Follow the j-words with a couple hundred castings that fit the throats (slug or pin gauge after firing the j-words and cleaning). Based on performance observed, make determination what (if anything) needs doing to the internal dimensions.

As for the trigger tension, ALL the Ruger D/A revolvers benefit some from "wearing-in"--either live or dry-firing about 1000 reps to settle in. The Wolff kit gets my vote, too.

[Bret4207]

Not a 32, but I saw a pic of a 6" round butt J frame stainless 38 S+W someplace. What a trail gun! If only I could find a 32 like that in BLUE. Thats the color God intended guns to be, for me at least.

[C A Plater]

http://tcbunch.com/kiosk/uberti32-sm.jpg

This is my little Uberti 3/4 scale Colt copy. Lots of fun to shoot but needs to get the sights regulated, hits liberal, low and to the left. I haven't played with the .32-20 cylinder because the .32 Mag is so much fun.

[redbear705]

Go with a Ruger GP-100 and you are good to go!

JR

[BigSlick]

I've decided to go with the 4" based on the comments here and the fact that Ruger has discontinued the 4" in 32 H&R.

I may very well end up with a 3" as well, but that will have to in the future when funds recover. Just about everyone I've discussed this with loves the 3" SP101 for all around use. Not too many folks are aware a 4" was made. If the 4" turns out to be too heavy in practical use, I will give someone here first crack at it.

I will know within a couple of weeks how it is going to work out.

Thanks for all the feedback guys, it really helps to have some first hand info ;)
________
CoedCutie (http://www.girlcamfriend.com/cam/CoedCutie/)

[BAGTIC]

"... I would probably have had the S&W J frame adjustable sight added to my revolver. I had considered that but with the way things are, I need some optical help".

Dale53,

Do you actually know someone who can install an adjustable J frame sight on a Ruger 101? I have one and I hate the sight because I can't adjust the sight to different loads.

I was told years ago by a 'local' gunsmith that it couldn' be done. I hope he was wrong.

[Dale53]

BAGTIC;
I have not had the actual installation done. However, even tho' the revolver frame is "two-stepped" I believe that it can be done. In fact, seem to me that I saw one of the big names in custom revolvers had actually done that. Unfortunately, I can not conjure up the site where I saw it. Of course, it requires a milling operation, but that wouldn't stop me.

Frankly, with the small holographic sights available, now, I would seriously consider that. I KNOW that they can be installed. That would just require a blank Weaver style base milled to fit the top of the frame. Then you could use the holograph sight OR an Ultra Dot. I've chosen an Ultra Dot. Hopefully, it'll get here shortly.

If you are interested in the "J" frame sight, I would keep looking. If I can locate the source, again, I'll let you know right here.

Dale53

[32 20 Mike]

http://tcbunch.com/kiosk/uberti32-sm.jpg

This is my little Uberti 3/4 scale Colt copy. Lots of fun to shoot but needs to get the sights regulated, hits liberal, low and to the left. I haven't played with the .32-20 cylinder because the .32 Mag is so much fun.

I bought a Uberti 3/4 a few months ago and had the same problem: Mine was 12 in. low and 8 in. to the right. The fit, finish & timing was outstanding .....But it looked like a shotgun with buckshot. I was not happy!!! I used a small drill press vice clamped and padded to the range bench to hold while filing the sights. I like the 32-20 due to the case capacity and I have an old 115 gr gibbs 10 cavity mold so heaver blts. work better.
I saw an art. by Mike Ventura using oversize cast blts. so I started with .312 and settled with a .314 sized the groups settled to about 1 1/2 inches with 4.2 grains of Unique. I used a fine file to open the rear sight to the left to pull it that way. Then I wound up taking the front down about 1/2 way. You fire five rounds from a rest, and file a LITTLE. Then repeat : after about 200 rounds it is broken in and holds dead on with a six o'clock hold at 50 ft.
I then had a friend cut and inlay a 24 carrot gold line down about 1/16 of in inch below the top of the sight for elevation.

The best part for using the 32-20 is that the old winchester M1884 "tang tools" can be found on Ebay, for about $45 to 60.00, and work great ... but they need oversize blts to crimp properly. Besides its like stepping back in time, not as fast as my dillion, just more fun. Use a Lee trim die stem in M-1 carbine for the decaping pin. It drops right in and works great. Now that's long winded hope it'l help. 32-20 Mike