I recently acquired a ca. 1891 H&R "large frame" top break in .32 S&W -- it's a black powder only gun, several years earlier than the 1904 introduction of H&R revolvers designed for smokeless ammunition. I plan to shoot it with a substitute, because real black is apparently impossible to come by locally and the hazmat shipping pushes it out of my price range. I'll be shooting .310 round balls initially, but I plan to slug the bore and load with boolits of the correct size when I can get my casting setup back in operation.
Someone suggested, however, that I might be able to paper patch either the round balls or suitably light boolits to get as-cast big enough to fill the grooves. I'm well aware of paper patch, first ran across the idea thirty-five years or so ago -- but I've been under the impression since then that paper patching for a revolver wasn't a great idea; the barrel-cylinder gap (and in the case of my H&R, a little pitting just past the forcing cone) seems likely to strip the patch from the boolit, giving the effect of an undersize slug (poor accuracy and leading).
Was my understanding correct, or is paper patching in a revolver at all practical, and if so, is there any gain in it vs. a properly sized naked boolit? My load would be no more than 5 gr equivalent, most likely APP's so-called FFFg (I'm wanting to try this for its reputed easier cleaning and compatibility with petroleum lubes; I've got a jar of toilet ring/paraffin on hand), giving under 700 ft/s, unless I get some S&W Long cases and trim them to .32 H&R Long dimension (that was a H&R proprietary round longer than .32 S&W but shorter than .32 S&W Long) -- those would hold about 7 gr. equivalent, and probably reach near 800 ft/s.
Edit: Just found an article with information on the .32 H&R (aka .32 Merwin & Hulbert Long), which was not .32 H&R Long -- dimensions and everything.