Winchester 94 32 special

[DrJay1st]

I bought my first lever gun today on gunbrokers. It's just a shooter...not a collectable but supposed to have a first rate bore, crown, and mechanicals.
I need to know what you guys recommend as far as molds go. Since the gun is not a collectable, I can accurize it should I need to. I would like to dial in as accurate a load as I can and use it for plinking, paper punching, and deer hunting.
Your thoughts please,
Jerry

[Char-Gar]

Well your situation is good news and bad news.

First the bad news! There are very, very few molds offered for the 32 Win. Special. You don't have much choice.

Now the good news! The one available is the 170 RCBS FN and it is a crackerjack and you don't need another mold. Every Winchester 94 in 32 WS known to man, shoots very well with this bullet.

More good news! You rifle has a 1-16 twist barrel and is a cast bullet shooting dream. You can push the aforesaid RCBS bullet at full factory velocity with excellent accuracy.

I have a 1959 vintage Win. 94 in 32 WS and it shoots the 170 RCBS bullets over 30/H335 with splended accuracy and a guestimated velocity of around 2.2K fps.

You can drop the velocity with others powders like 2400, 4759 etc. to around 1.7K fps and have a fine everyday rifle.

You have made a very, very good choice in rifle and caliber.. congradulations!!

[Morgan Astorbilt]

Jerry, Just thought you might like to know, that the .32 Win. Spl. was brought out specifically for cast bullets. The Win 1894 in .30-30 was the first smokeless powder rifle and cartridge to be introduced in this country. When shooters on the frontier tried to reload using bullets they cast out of soft lead, they were disappointed to find the bullets stripped on the fast rifling, and the .30-30 began to get a bad reputation. Winchester increased the bore dia. a few thou., slowed the rifling to 16", and brought out the "new" cartridge, calling it the .32 Winchester Spl.

I've got good news and bad news also. The aforementioned was the good news. The bad news is, that the 16" twist will just barely stabilize the factory jacketed bullet, and when the rifling wears, the accuracy with jacketed bullets deteriorates much faster than a .30-30 will with the same bore cond...
Morgan

[DrJay1st]

I bought it to have a proper cast bullet caliber.
I'm gathering the gear to cast...In fact I've been cleaning up a lyman 450 over the last couple of days...lost one of the little washers...been 3 places trying to get a proper sized o-ring...I could bite a nail into! There's no way that I can justify what I paid and how much time and effort I've put into it...will I ever learn? Now I understand why some of you guys have a different sizer/lubricator for soft and hard lubes...that's the only way to go! These things are a pure bitch to clean up properly. It sat in a flammable liquid last night to soften some of the lube that must have come over on the ark. If I were retired with lot's of time on my hands, it would be different. I sure hope the gun turns out better!
I didn't know that I wouldn't have much choice as to molds. But you know that might not be a bad thing at all. Now I don't have to wade through so many options. This may be a blessing. Maybe this is exactly what I needed to cut my teeth on and have some success. I have been gathering some cast bullets and equipment to try in the guns that I presently have... but they might become frustrating before success...they aren't exactly cast bullet guns.
Any information on the 32 special is welcome...and if any of you guys have moved on to other calibers, maybe I can take some of your 32 stuff of your hands...a win/win...you get to buy something else with the funds.
I'm in the market for a 30-30 as well...don't have to have it today now that I've got the 32 coming...I can hardly wait.

I've cooled down some now...The venting/******** helped. If I don't want to spend the time, then I probably wouldn't enjoy this stuff so much. I really enjoyed reloading and piddling with guns back when I did it a lot...it's therapeutic doing something with my hands...I'm glad to be getting back into reloading, shooting, playing with my guns...and I'm sure I will enjoy casting my own....making tiny little groups, and giving someone that "I told you so" look when I put my next deer down.

Thanks for the info,
Jerry

[DrJay1st]

This one was made in 1954. I hope that is good also?
Jerry

[MTWeatherman]

Jerry, Just thought you might like to know, that the .32 Win. Spl. was brought out specifically for cast bullets. The Win 1894 in .30-30 was the first smokeless powder rifle and cartridge to be introduced in this country. When shooters on the frontier tried to reload using bullets they cast out of soft lead, they were disappointed to find the bullets stripped on the fast rifling, and the .30-30 began to get a bad reputation. Winchester increased the bore dia. a few thou., slowed the rifling to 16", and brought out the "new" cartridge, calling it the .32 Winchester Spl.

I've got good news and bad news also. The aforementioned was the good news. The bad news is, that the 16" twist will just barely stabilize the factory jacketed bullet, and when the rifling wears, the accuracy with jacketed bullets deteriorates much faster than a .30-30 will with the same bore cond...
Morgan

Morgan...
No offense intended here....please don't take it as such.

This information about the .32 Special has been circulating around so long that it has somehow achieved the status of fact. In fact it is "urban legend"...or perhaps could be better called a "rural legend" given the time frame it started in. However, there is simply no evidence whatsoever to support the idea that the .32 was brought out for cast bullets or black powder for that matter. It isn't true that the 16 inch twist will barely stabilize the factory bullet. In fact, a 16 inch twist is the ideal twist for a 170 gr. .32 caliber bullet...the 12 inch of the 30-30 is faster than necessary. There are no small amount of twist calculators out there that will confirm that. The 94 Winchester in .32 Special does have slightly shallower lands that the .30-30 but but by the time the .32 has its accuracy headed downhill...a 30-30 would be well on its way as well.

The .32 Special is basically a .32-40 magnum....same barrel dimensions and twist but upgraded steel and expanded case capacity. Choice of the .32 caliber bullet and twist was mostly likely based on the reputation of that .32-40...a fine target rifle of the first order. Where the .32 Special and cast is concerned, in my opinion, its all good news.

Here's one of the better histories of the .32 Special I've seen. Its a worthwhile read for anyone interested in this fine cartridge...and I consider it to be among the finest cast bullet cartridges ever made...especially when used in combination with that 16 inch twist.

http://www.levergun.com/articles/special.htm

DrJay...Winchester or Marlin?...not really important as 1954 would be an excellent year for either.

[Morgan Astorbilt]

Thanks, no offense taken. This is how we learn. It must have been circulating a long time, I think I first read about it in a Jack O'Connor article in Outdoor Life, back in the fifties. His comments caused me to opt out of the '94, and buy a new Deluxe Mod.71(.348). Paid it of $10 a week ( I was 16yrs old). If I remember, I paid $136 for it new, back in 1956. Every week, I used to bring the $10 to the store, and the owner would take it off the rack and let me fondle it. Kept me going until next week. Still have it, it will be the last gun I let go....

Sorry I got off the subject. I'll check out the site, and also dust off my copy of Winchester by Williamson. It deals mostly with the history of the company in business terms, there may be something in there.
Morgan

[floodgate]

MTWeatherman:

That's a fascinating article, and a good "Snopes' Job" on the .32 Special as a cast boolit rifle story!

One interesting point McPherson omits - when talking about the undersized early .32 Winchester bullets and their failure to stabilize - is that Winchester also specced the .30 WCF (.30-30) to use undersized jacketed bullets: they recommended 0.305" for the nominal 0.308" groove diameter.

Purely my own interpretation, but I suspect they were thinking about an intermediate bullet diameter between the 0.308" groove and 0.300" nominal bore, to allow for LATERAL displacement of the "excess" jacket material. If so, then IF the first .30 WCF's stabilized and the .32 WS's did not, it MIGHT be because the slightly higher pressure in the former (same powder charge; slightly smaller powder space, as McPherson demonstrated), and/or greater resistance from the faster twist, might JUST have been enough to make the .30 WCF obturate, and the .32 WCF fail to do so.

As I said, the last paragraph is pure speculation on my part; but I've long been curious about the early undersized .30 WCF bullets. John K (W30WCF): can you confirm, comment or expand on this??

Morgan: GOOD ON YA', keeping that .348. I sure wish I had kept the two I used to own: one a standard, late short-tang, the other an earlier long-tang Deluxe!

floodgate

[cobbmtmac]

Jerry,

Just wanted to pass on to you, for such things as O-rings, if you call Lyman Customer Service @ 800-275-9626, then press 3, you will reach someone very helpful. They will mail you the proper O-ring at no charge and you will receive it in a few days. The same goes for RCBS @ 800-533-5000. These two companies are awsome

If I understood correctly, you had a hard time cleaning your lube sizer. When I had the same situation, I heated up my B-B-Q, set the lube sizer on an old broiler pan and in a few minutes it was all melted out, then a little wiping and it was ready for a new life.

Hey---floodgate, I think of you often, in fact have your e-mail and phone number on my desk. So sometime I will follow through, give you a call and come by.

[HeavyMetal]

I think you've done well!

A big plus for you is the fact it was made in the 50's! By then all the factory rounds were smokeless so you have less likely hood of a "lazy" shooter not cleaning the corrosive residue out of the barrel.

This is what really hurts the 32 Spec. I have one currently that was made in 1910. I had it rebarreled just after I bought it. The original barrel I spent 10 hours trying to get clean no luck! Found a guy in the gun digest selling new, NOS, still in the wrapper 32 spec barrels from a run made 1959! $125.00! Soon I will get around to finishing it as it has some issues with barrel bands from two different eras!

By the way I sure hope you don't think your 94 is a bench rest gun. It will shoot as well or better than most lever guns but minute of angle at 600 yards? not gonna happen!

I belive the load suggested in a previous thread was spot on (the 335 load) and groups in the 1/14 to 1 1/2 are do-able with the right sights.

[DrJay1st]

Thanks guys! This such a helpful group. I'm glad I stumbled upon it. You guys are reponsible for reintroducing me to something that brought me such satisfaction in the past.
Keep it coming,
Jerry

[Morgan Astorbilt]

Thanks, Floodgate, Mine is the short tang. Sure wish it was a long tang, besides having the bolt mounted peep sight, I believe they were made a little better.
Morgan

[MTWeatherman]

Dr Jay:
Didn't really answer your original question. Chargar's advice is spot on...we're lucky that RCBS bullet is such a good one. You'll find universal acclaim for it from .32 Special owners on this board...myself included. I use 31.5 gr. 3031...drives the bullet (actually weights 178 gr with my mould and alloy) at 2080 fps from my '94 with excellent accuracy.

Morgan:
Suffering from a little '71 envy here myself. Wish I had a .348...just know the price I saw on the last one scared me.

Floodgate:
Yep...thought McPherson did a fine job on that one. Interesting that the old .30-30s were .003 undersized also...casts some doubt on the .318 Mauser theory for the .32. A little puzzled why Winchester would see the need to obturate jacketed bullets. However, here's a bit more ammunition (no pun intended) to add to your theory. The .30-30 was designed with .004 lands...while the .32 had .003. A .003 undersized bullet would be even a more serious issue in the .32 when it came to necessary bullet engagement in the rifling to obturate. While a .32 shoots very well with the proper sized bullets, undersized bullets can be more of an issue with it than the .30-30 (talking jacketed here...cast would be bad in either caliber).

I also wonder how many .32 Special owners cussed their .32's accuracy while feeding it 30-30 ammunition. I've known of those who've inadvertently done it...and one who claimed to have done it out of necessity during the depression when he couldn't afford to buy the .32s. Said you had to get really close, but you could do it. Suspect the tumbling bullet was likely pretty devastating.

[hydraulic]

I have a Lyman 323470 mould for 8mm that I use in my Model 8 Remington .32 Remington. I size them .325 because that's the sizer i have, and load 21 grains of AA2230. This powder is between 3031 and 4895 in burning rate. It shoots accurately and the action functions perfectly. I also have a Lee mould that casts a plain base .32 bullet that I have not fired yet, although there are five rounds in the magazine with the rifle lying on the back seat of the pickup just waiting for the creek to go down so I can get out to the ranch. I'll post the results of firing that plain base bullet soon.

[floodgate]

cobbmtmac:

I hope to get to the gunshow in Uke (Ukiah - that's "Haiku", spelled backwards) at the Fairgrounds in N.State Street tomorrow (Sunday) around mid-day. Check with Bob Fowler (usually second table S. of the entrance, against the wall), with a couple of nice single-shots and lots of other "good stuff") and he'll point you to me. I'd like to see ya' there.

Doug/floodgate

[drinks]

I use the Lee 8mm gc in my 1900 , 1894 rifle, shoots nicely.

[cobbmtmac]

floodgte,

I will miss you this time as I am playing in a Club Golf Tournament today. But believe me before to long I will be seeing you.

Thanks, Mac

[sundog]

WxMan, that's a great article. Thanks for the link. I have Mdl 94s in 30 WCF and 32 Win Spl and a Marlin in 35 Rem. My favorite is the 32 Win Spl. Best of breed, best of show.

[mroliver77]

DRJ
I have the 321427 Lyman mold that drops a 140 gr(listed as 134)boolit. A short round nosed gascheck dude that shoots well for me. If you want some give me a yell and I can send a few for you to try out.
J

[bobk]

I had a reloading mistake that taught me a lesson. I usually use Fed 150s for my standard large pistol loads. For some reason, I bought a box of Win large pistol primers, as an experiment. Well Win Large RIFLE primers are something I use a lot of. As it happened, I was working up a load for a .30-30, using a 110gr Barnes X bullet, intending to use it as a two-shooter.

I worked up the load with H-322, and when I stopped I had good velocity, and 1 1/8-1 1/4 groups, with a 4X scope on a Marlin that I sorta rescued. So, I'm all happy, until I realized that I had been using the pistol primers. Crap! I was going to load up a bunch with the "proper" primer, but as a check I figured I'd better try that load, to observe pressures. No pressure problems, but the load grouped 1 3/4-2 inches, consistently. I went back to the pistol primer, and the groups snuggled back up again. It has been my experience that primers usually don't make a big difference, but that doesn't mean that it never does. So, don't be afraid to experiment a little, as long as your base load is not tip-top max to begin with. I just discovered that my 6.5X55 likes Fed 215s. I can't tell you why these things work, though.

Bob K