Calling all 32-20 handgun shooters.....

[Green Frog]

While I recognize there are metallurgical concerns about original 19th Century Colt SAAs, at this time I have a Navy Arms-marked SAA by Uberti in my safe, built on the same frame and from the same steel as their 44 Spl and 45 Colt versions, so I figure it should be strong enough for all but the most outlandish of 32-20 loads. If I can keep it happy with one or more of the bullets I cast for my 327 FM, this would be the ideal situation.

BTW, has anybody tried 32-20 loads using the bullets from that NOE group buy #314008? They do great in my BH & K-frame 327s, running almost exactly 125 grains using COWW + 2% or or so tin.

Froggie

[salvadore]

I shoot a 3118 style bullet out of my 1931 Colt OP USING 3.5/3.7 gr. of 231. This is a very accurate load in my shooter with .314 throats. As a bonus it also makes a great plinking load in my Marlin CL giving about 1100fps. Hornady hbwc using the same weight charge of 231. I load them out a bit so they run thru Marlin. I recently purchased HP-38 which I'm told is th same as 231.

[Green Frog]

I've got the 3118 mould as well (in an old Ideal DC) but I'm thinking that an extra 10 grains of bullet weight in the similar NOE design might give that round a bit more "authority." Besides, I went crazy on a visit to Dale53 right after I got the NOE mould and cast up a goodly number that are sized and lubed and begging to be loaded and shot. BTW, HP-38=231... they are the same powder in different cans.

Froggie

[RJM52]

I only have a .327 and .30 Carbine but from what I have read AA-9 and Ramshot Enforcer are two of the top powders listed for these rounds. Any reason these two can't be used for .32-20...

Bob

[Dan Cash]

Colt Army Special, Uberty SAA and Marlin 94 .32-20s. Accurate 105 gr mould, 8.8 grains 2400, pistol or rifle primer. Works well in all three guns.

I could load hotter for rifle but one cartridge serves all three guns and my ammo storage is an old leather purse. Grab and go.

[rintinglen]

I only have a .327 and .30 Carbine but from what I have read AA-9 and Ramshot Enforcer are two of the top powders listed for these rounds. Any reason these two can't be used for .32-20...

Bob

The 32-20 is a much lower pressure round than the 30 carbine, much less a 327 Federal. Think 18,000 versus 40,000/45,000. It is much like the difference between a 38 Special and a .357 Magnum.

[smkummer]

This is a good read. I have a 1923 Colt Police positive special coming (I am looking for about 50 cases if anyone can wants to trade for just about any handgun brass) with a 5" barrel. I have Lyman mold 313445 a semi wadcutter that weighs 95 or close to 100 with WW alloy. I have unique, herco, 231, bullseye, red dot, green dot, 700X, 800X and SR7625. Looks like unique will get me at least 900 FPS safely. That's all I need to do out of this small frame gun.

[rintinglen]

I have a Police Positive that is something of a safe queen. I used 3.3 grains of Titegroup under an RCBS 32-98 SWC the first time out, but I have since changed over to a 95 grain round nose for this gun, to avoid the chance of something bending with one of my hotter cartridges that I use in my Browning 53 or Colt Army Special.

There are really 3 levels of power for loading this cartridge, full Rifle, Heavy Handgun, and Light handgun.

Some of the rifle loads, while safe enough in a 92 action, run 30,000 psi plus, way too much for pre-heat treated revolvers, or any Police Positive. Those big Rugers might handle these, and the Freedom Arms guns, but I would draw the line there. The heat-treated Colts and 30's production Smiths, along with the Modern SAA Clones can handle what ought to be considered Plus P loads in the 18,000-22,000 range. The pre-WWI S&Ws, Police Positives, BP Colts, and similar guns need to run with factory equivalent loads=a 100 grain boolit at 900 fps. Still a very useful load for fun plinking or small game. Be aware of what you are loading for and be careful when looking at load Data.

[dtknowles]

I have a Police Positive that is something of a safe queen. I used 3.3 grains of Titegroup under an RCBS 32-98 SWC the first time out, but I have since changed over to a 95 grain round nose for this gun, to avoid the chance of something bending with one of my hotter cartridges that I use in my Browning 53 or Colt Army Special.

There are really 3 levels of power for loading this cartridge, full Rifle, Heavy Handgun, and Light handgun.

Some of the rifle loads, while safe enough in a 92 action, run 30,000 psi plus, way too much for pre-heat treated revolvers, or any Police Positive. Those big Rugers might handle these, and the Freedom Arms guns, but I would draw the line there. The heat-treated Colts and 30's production Smiths, along with the Modern SAA Clones can handle what ought to be considered Plus P loads in the 18,000-22,000 range. The pre-WWI S&Ws, Police Positives, BP Colts, and similar guns need to run with factory equivalent loads=a 100 grain boolit at 900 fps. Still a very useful load for fun plinking or small game. Be aware of what you are loading for and be careful when looking at load Data.

Why wouldn't any gun in 32-20 that is also chambered for .357 Magnum be able to handle the 30,000 psi loads. Like say a Dan Wesson 322. I do wonder about the K frame S&W but that did not handle the .357 Mag. well so there is the revolver that breaks that rule. I don't know that much about Colts so I guess none of the bigger DA revolvers were factory chambered for .32-20. I have an old article about loading the .32-20 to different levels. Yes, I guess it is really about knowing your gun.

Tim

[dubber123]

Why wouldn't any gun in 32-20 that is also chambered for .357 Magnum be able to handle the 30,000 psi loads. Like say a Dan Wesson 322. I do wonder about the K frame S&W but that did not handle the .357 Mag. well so there is the revolver that breaks that rule. I don't know that much about Colts so I guess none of the bigger DA revolvers were factory chambered for .32-20. I have an old article about loading the .32-20 to different levels. Yes, I guess it is really about knowing your gun.

Tim

If the identical gun was chambered for .357, sure it could handle 30,000 Psi or more. I don't think this scenario happens often, perhaps the DW you mention, and the Rugers. I think there is a bit more leeway than some consider, given the added mass in a 32-20 chamber Vs. say a .38 Spl chamber, not to mention the reduced case head thrust the 32-20 sees.

That said, they aren't making these old guns any more, and some of the weaker specimens have been damaged as witnessed by some of the posters here. As you say, know your gun.

[dtknowles]

If the identical gun was chambered for .357, sure it could handle 30,000 Psi or more. I don't think this scenario happens often, perhaps the DW you mention, and the Rugers. I think there is a bit more leeway than some consider, given the added mass in a 32-20 chamber Vs. say a .38 Spl chamber, not to mention the reduced case head thrust the 32-20 sees.

That said, they aren't making these old guns any more, and some of the weaker specimens have been damaged as witnessed by some of the posters here. As you say, know your gun.

I think your right, age is a big factor. Used to be more old guns in 32-20 than new ones. I don't load my 32-20 Dan Wesson hot but know I could. It shoots smaller groups with the light loads. I don't shoot many hot loads in my .357 Mag. since I got the .357 Max. When you can, if you want more power just go for more gun.

Tim

[9.3X62AL]

All of my 32-20 revolvers date from between 1906 (Colt Bisley x 4-3/4") to the early 1930s (S&W M&P x 5"). There is a Colt Army Special x 5" right in the middle of that yearspan, from 1920. Out of deference to their age and metallurgy I keep their ammo at 1873 intensity levels--which is right useful, BTW--115 to 120 grain bullets just under 1000 FPS in sideiron and a little over 1200 in the Marlin 94. With a 32 Magnum S&W K-frame and a Ruger Blackhawk in 30 Carbine in the safe, there is no need to risk these old irons to intrepid handloads.

Not long after Dan at Mountain Molds got his shop running, I designed a revolver-specific radiused-flatnose bullet tipping the scales at 120 grains in 92/6/2. It has done great service in the 32-20 rollers, and has worked well in the 30 Carb BH up to 1100 FPS. I put these up in Starline brass with CCI 500 primers and 6.0 grains of SR-4756. I claim no credit for the load's good work over many years--I took it from the text of Ken Waters' "Pet Loads" column in "Handloader" many years ago. This same article appears in the Wolfe Publications compendium of "Pet Loads" spoken of earlier as well. A handloader could do far worse than to have a copy of Waters' "Pet Loads" on his bookshelf.

[LabGuy]

S&W .32-20 Hand Ejector Model of 1905 (4th change), RCBS 32-90-CM with 4.9g Unique. I have never used 4756.

[rintinglen]

Why wouldn't any gun in 32-20 that is also chambered for .357 Magnum be able to handle the 30,000 psi loads. Like say a Dan Wesson 322. I do wonder about the K frame S&W but that did not handle the .357 Mag. well so there is the revolver that breaks that rule. I don't know that much about Colts so I guess none of the bigger DA revolvers were factory chambered for .32-20. I have an old article about loading the .32-20 to different levels. Yes, I guess it is really about knowing your gun.

Tim

Well, I suppose the Dan Wesson would do fine, as would most other modern manufactured guns, but I have never seen one in the ferrous flesh. In fact, I've never even seen one in pictures outside of an ad in American Rifleman.

But the older S&W's and Colts were not heat treated prior to WWI, and cylinders were soft, compared to later guns. You can dimple the cylinder wall by bulging the weak spot under the slot cut for the bolt by using warmish loads. I have seen two old M&P's that had this issue and it makes for sticky extraction. S&W began heat treating their K-frames in 1919, Colt began earlier, but exactly when seems to have varied from Model to Model. Regardless though, it took both manufacturers a while to get things perfected. S&W doesn't recommend +p 38 ammo in any of their pre-1950's K frames. I am open to correction on the Italian clones, but at least the older ones were not as strong as the true Colt's. I have a 1960's Dakota made by Uberti that is very soft. Mines a 45 Colt but I would be doubtful that any other contemporary Italian guns were much better.
Consequently I stand by my warning on going easy on the older revolvers. They were not as strong as their successor's, and "they don't make 'em like that any more."

[salvadore]

I have shot my Marlin 94CL loads out of my 1931 Colt OP 25000/30000cup? The revolver handled better than I did. I use my puny 231 loads mostly in both shooters. I consider it my .22LR replacement.

[salvadore]

Just wanted to post a target I shot with the 231 a few years ago.

[Harry O]

Just to remind everyone, the Colt Official Police is a much larger frame than the Colt Police Positive Special. It is also a larger frame than the S&W K-frame. In fact, the S&W L-frame was up-sized to match the Colt 41-frame revolver. Know your guns limitations before shooting a 32-20 load out of it.

[TXGunNut]

Two words: Alliant Unique

[9.3X62AL]

Just to remind everyone, the Colt Official Police is a much larger frame than the Colt Police Positive Special. It is also a larger frame than the S&W K-frame. In fact, the S&W L-frame was up-sized to match the Colt 41-frame revolver. Know your guns limitations before shooting a 32-20 load out of it.

Yessir. These examples don't grow on trees, as a hobbyist respectful of both history and metallurgy we need to conserve the finite numbers of these revolvers still extant so that future generations can enjoy them as we do.

[Harry O]

Thanks for the suggestions, everyone. I think I am going back to the old standby, Unique. I have not been able to track how much Unique I was using when I went to SR4756 20 to 25 years ago, but I am thinking of starting at 4.5 or 5.0gr and go from there.