The .32 S&W Long as a man-stopper

[Outpost75]

I've found the Beretta 81 to be a stout pistol. Even though it has a light alloy frame, it has a heavy slide and stiff springs. The additional barrel length boosts velocity and its greater magazine capacity is a big plus. Not a concealment firearm in the pocket sense, but a Bianchi M6 IWB is manageable. Loading 3 grains of AutoComp with the 90-grain .309" Hornady XTP gives nearly 1000 fps with decent expansion and without giving up penetration.

Attachment 268457Attachment 274325Attachment 274326

[Drm50]

I have owned and or shot tons of 32 cal pistols and revolvers. From break top 32short to 327mag in revolvers and 7.63mm in pistols. Never experience any that I would rate as uncomfortable to shoot because of recoil.

[Jim22]

I have a S&W stainless J-frame with 4" barrel in .32 H&R Mag. After reading Brian Pearce's article on the cartridge and his experience with it in Ruger revolvers I eased up toward his maximum loads. I was using cast 100 gr. boolits over W296 and CCI 500 primers. Also works with Lil' Gun. With 100 gr Badman boolits I have gotten more than 1100 fps average with no signs of excess pressure. Cases extract easily and primers look normal. 100 gr. boolit at 1100 fps generates 269 ft. lbs energy according to my Hornady manual. I tried it as well with jacketed 100 graniers but think my little S&W is happier with the cast. I retrofitted the revolver with Pachmayr Presentation grips which fit my meathooks better than the factory grips. The muzzle blast and recoil are substantial.



https://www.badmanbullets.com/Online...100+Grain+RNFP

The boolits have a pretty wide meplat. Can any of you identify the mould that throws this boolit?

[shooting on a shoestring]

Oh man. Sounds like you have a S&W Model 631! Good for you! I’d love to have that revolver.

As for the mold, check out the Accurate Molds website. Go to the catalog and look up 31-100C. Looks like it or very similar. Love Accurate Molds. Well worth the money. I have lots.

Personally I prefer full meplat wadcutters pushed hard for defensive boolits. I like all the meplat possible.

Yep I’ve toyed with 32 H&R with H110 in Single Sixes before I got my first 327. Yes in a strong modern revolver the 32 H&R can be loaded to “Fierce”. I found primer pockets loosened pretty quick though. But I had 90 grain wadcutters cracking 1400 fps. Now I use 327’s for that and run my 32 H&Rs in the 1000 fps range.

[sharps4590]

Manstopper? Well, I don't know about stopping him in his tracks. 40+ years ago I was a LEO in Jefferson City, Mo. For a capitol city it's still rather small and back then was a lot smaller and pretty quiet and, I believe still the only state capitol not on an Interstate. I worked one armed robbery that resulted in a homicide and the victim was killed with a 32 S&W Long. Matter of fact that was the only homicide in over a 5 year period. I haven't lived there in over 20 years and I understan things have changed considerably.

[Outpost75]

Here is chronograph data for a 1939 date of manufacture S&W .32-20 Hand Ejector with 4-inch barrel and 0.006" cylinder gap:

Attachment 275014

Factory Loads Reference:

WRA Lubaloy round primer_______867 fps, 60 Sd, 150 ES
Western 100 JSP round primer____921 fps, 61 Sd, 170 ES
Rem-UMC lead “Dogbone” box____889 fps, 16 Sd, 39 ES
R-P Bridgeport 100 JSP_________796, 35 Sd, 91 ES
W-W 100 lead, flat primer_______785 fps, 30 Sd, 76 ES

Avg. of Five Samples of Factory loads = 852 fps


100 grain, .311" Win. JSP "full-charge" handloads

4.9 AutoComp___921 fps, 25 Sd, 61 ES, LD#5 rotor
9.5 IMR4227___1004 fps, 11 Sd, 33 ES, LD#13 rotor

Acc. 31-105T – “factory duplication” loads

Attachment 275015

3.2 TiteGroup____858 fps, 22 Sd, 61 ES, LD#1 rotor
3.4 Bullseye_____867 fps, 28 Sd, 71 ES. LD#5 rotor
4.9 AutoComp___930 fps, 16 Sd, 45 ES, LD#5 rotor
9.5 IMR4227____949 fps, 28 Sd, 87 ES. LD#13 rotor

[shooting on a shoestring]

Here’s a pair of my 32 SWL man stoppers.
They stopped me soon as I spotted them in the gun shop.

All original.
Good pearls.
Shoot fine.

[Gewehr-Guy]

Last week I bought a perfect match of your top revolver,except for a chipped grip. It shoots fine, but I need a set of regulation police grips to fit my hand better. I believe mine has the heat treated cylinder, so I'm not reluctant to shoot it with a few warmer loads, within reason.

[Outpost75]

New ogival wadcutter for the .32 S&W Long from Accurate, cartridge OAL is 1.245"

Attachment 276528

[EMC45]

Not to go on and on, but..... I shot some 115gr 32-20 bullets over 3.3gr Unique out of 2 3in I frame S&W revolvers on Saturday, and continue to be impressed by this combo. They are quite accurate and the FPS (book data) is impressive. I certainly wouldn't stand in front of one.

[EMC45]

RCBS 32-098 on left 115gr 32-20 bullet on right.

[EMC45]

This how they sit in my I Frames.

[cwlongshot]

Has anyone used these heavier 90+g loads in the 32 "short" cases?

CW

[gun toting monkeyboy]

You know, it is not that often you find a thread that keeps going for more than 10 years, and stays relevant. Most impressive.

I actually stumbled on to this one when I was looking for "manstopper" style bullets for my .32 revolvers. Not so much that they would be actual manstoppers in their function. But I was looking for information on the "manstopper" shaped bullets similar to the old Webley .455 Mk III bullets from the 1890s on. Seeing as you normally wouldn't expect much expansion in a .32 bullet out of a .32 S&W Long gun if the bullet is made from anything harder than the bubblegum hardness of pure lead, I was looking for something without the hollow point. Much like many of the colonial powers used in that era. Several of the posters on here mentioned Accurate Molds. I had used them before when I was doing something similar with .38 caliber revolvers. Long story short (too late, I know) I ended up ordering a custom mold from them. 3 different bullet shapes. The first is 31-100A, which is just a 100 grain wadcutter. I would normally just order these in bulk, made with swaged lead for increased accuracy. But things being covid right now, they are not to be had anywhere for less than a kidney and a few fingers. The second is 31-100x, which is exactly the manstopper shape I was looking for. And is the scaled-down version of the .38 caliber mold I developed with him a few years back. This one lacks the gas check, but considering that I am using it in much lower velocity cartridges, and it isn't a hollowpoint, that doesn't matter a bit. The last one on this mold is 31-105 KG, which is a SWC with a gas check. Mostly because I figured having one with a gas check wouldn't be a bad thing for the H&R magnum guns. And he didn't have any 100 grain bullets that were the shape I was looking for. I will post on here after I get the mold and get some range time in. But hopefully the "manstopper" rounds work as well in this as they do in .38 Special.

-Mb

[gun toting monkeyboy]

Well, I've read the first twelve pages, and skimmed the rest. This thread convinced me of the 32's merit, with a couple of caveats:
1. The 32 S&W long can indeed be pushed quite hard, but to ensure the gun can take the pressure, something in 32 H&R magnum makes more sense to me. At that point, I see no reason not to use 32 Magnum brass for all hot-rodded loads, and reserve the shorter rounds for general plinking.
2. I am now convinced that this caliber can be responsibly recommended for a new concealed-carrier, but only if you point the individual towards the Buffalo-Bore website, or you are willing to load up some defensive rounds for them.
3. I would probably lean toward a bit softer boolit than BB currently offers, if making my own rounds. We still aren't talking about terribly high velocities here, and I think a bit of deformation would be helpful.

I have actually carried a .32 H&R as a CCW gun. Even with the hottest loads, bullet expansion can be somewhat erratic. Especially during the winter, when people tend to wear heavier clothing. Even Buffalo Bore refers to their JHP rounds as being more for varmints than actual self defense. The reason they, and many other people prefer hard-cast bullets with sharp edges over softer lead bullets is because you are more likely to punch leaky holes through people with them than you are to get any kind of meaningful expansion as .32 velocities. Even .32 H&R velocities. The bullets just don't have enough mass to penetrate deep enough if they are soft lead and expand. Remember, we are not generally talking about a lot of energy here. And an expanding .32 100-ish grain bullet will dump most of its energy before it penetrates deep enough to meet the minimum requirements for the FBI standards. A hard cast bullet with a broad, flat nose, and sharp edges will likely only give you a .32 caliber hole. But that hole could very well go completely through the person.

When I carry a .32 revolver for CCW, I always go with hard-cast lead bullets. WC, SWC, whatever. Not RN, and not HP or JHP.

-Mb

[pettypace]

...But hopefully the "manstopper" rounds work as well in this as they do in .38 Special.

-Mb

[Outpost75]

In a strong, modern .32 S&W Long revolver such as the S&W Model 31 you can load 9 grains of IMR4227 with a 100-grain Hornady XTP and get 940 fps from a 4-inch revolver, giving the exact same performance as my .32 ACP "Buffalo Load"

Attachment 276771Attachment 276775

[nhithaca]

You know, it is not that often you find a thread that keeps going for more than 10 years, and stays relevant. Most impressive.

I actually stumbled on to this one when I was looking for "manstopper" style bullets for my .32 revolvers. Not so much that they would be actual manstoppers in their function. But I was looking for information on the "manstopper" shaped bullets similar to the old Webley .455 Mk III bullets from the 1890s on. Seeing as you normally wouldn't expect much expansion in a .32 bullet out of a .32 S&W Long gun if the bullet is made from anything harder than the bubblegum hardness of pure lead, I was looking for something without the hollow point. Much like many of the colonial powers used in that era. Several of the posters on here mentioned Accurate Molds. I had used them before when I was doing something similar with .38 caliber revolvers. Long story short (too late, I know) I ended up ordering a custom mold from them. 3 different bullet shapes. The first is 31-100A, which is just a 100 grain wadcutter. I would normally just order these in bulk, made with swaged lead for increased accuracy. But things being covid right now, they are not to be had anywhere for less than a kidney and a few fingers. The second is 31-100x, which is exactly the manstopper shape I was looking for. And is the scaled-down version of the .38 caliber mold I developed with him a few years back. This one lacks the gas check, but considering that I am using it in much lower velocity cartridges, and it isn't a hollowpoint, that doesn't matter a bit. The last one on this mold is 31-105 KG, which is a SWC with a gas check. Mostly because I figured having one with a gas check wouldn't be a bad thing for the H&R magnum guns. And he didn't have any 100 grain bullets that were the shape I was looking for. I will post on here after I get the mold and get some range time in. But hopefully the "manstopper" rounds work as well in this as they do in .38 Special.

-Mb

Try Matts Bullets
https://www.mattsbullets.com/index.p...ll8jmpe4t86cn7
I got some of these and they are quite soft and very well cast.
Have not shot any yet, but have tried his 45 caliber version in a Charter Arms Pit Bull.

[pettypace]

In a strong, modern .32 S&W Long revolver such as the S&W Model 31 you can load 9 grains of IMR4227 with a 100-grain Hornady XTP and get 940 fps from a 4-inch revolver, giving the exact same performance as my .32 ACP "Buffalo Load"

Attachment 276771Attachment 276775

To bring that 26 grams of wound mass into focus, here's a wound mass table from MacPherson's Bullet Penetration:



If that XTP handles four layers of denim...

[pettypace]

Running the mTHOR with my JHP exponent and your modified JHP exponent, I get respective maximum penetration depths of 18.02'' and 18.16'' and total/maximum wound mass of 31.58 grams to 18'' depth for both exponents instead of the 26 grams you compute. Or are you computing wound mass that occurs only for the first 15 inches of penetration? Am I correct in making that assumption?

Yes, your assumption is correct -- in calculating the "effective" wound mass "as per MacPherson WTI model," I first subtract 3" from the predicted penetration, and if the truncated result is greater than 15", I set it to 15". I think that implements what MacPherson had in mind when he wrote this:

"The final three inches of a 15 inch penetration occurs at velocities less than 250 ft/sec for most bullets; tissue trauma caused by bullet passage at these low velocities is noticeably less severe than in the preceding wound track."

And this:

"Penetration depths greater than 15 inches are not rewarded because these penetration depths are almost always beyond the vital structures in the target body."

For what it's worth, I didn't follow MacPherson's lead in calculating wound mass for under-penetrating JHPs. There, MacPherson used a "Penetration Factor" which he allowed to be "...somewhat subjective and potentially argumentative, but seems to give an emphasis consistent with accepted medical opinion..." This explains the low wound mass values for "JHP 12 inch pen" and "JHP 10 inch pen" in MacPherson's table shown in post #683. I suspect MacPherson was hoping that would discourage production of under-penetrating JHPs.