Ruger Buckeye Blackhawk in 32-20: longest range, heaviest boolits mods?

[Green Frog]

I have been shooting 30-20/32-20 for about 25+years. I didn't acquire my buckeye until a few years back.
I had tinkered with the 32-20 long enough to get it figured out. I initially started playing with the small 30/32's in IHMSA. I played with the 30x221 side by side with the 30-20 on the TC platform. I stayed with the 30-20 because of the rim and ease of extraction with the TC.
I have run bullets from 110-220 in mine,cast and jacketed.
When the Buckeye showed up it was a no brainier. I have a custom 140-145 grain mold,mdepends on alloy. I have shot it in IHMSA matches and it will take a ram over, slowly.
I then picked up a BF pistol in 30-20, so that made three.
As to weak brass.
If you follow the instructions and use the dies the way they tell you too, brass will suffer. It has to be sized to make that specific gun happy, period. Over work it and it will fail.
I myself have specific am land brass for a specific gun. Make it generic so it works in everything, deal with the issues that go with it.
Getting heavy bullets to go slow is easy. In my experience, with an iron sighted gun it is a lesson in frustration. Not a rainbow trajectory,but more like a very step arch. I have see. Bullet splash on steel plates that the bullet actually skidded down them 4-5". Try and get elevation figured out. You are shooting more at the top edge rather than the face.

Folks that use fast powders to get a heavy bullet up to speed are playing with fire. Stay with a slow, magnum type powder. Keep the pressures down! Brass and gun will thank you along with proof on the paper.

A five shot with this cartridge. All you are gaining is weight. There is so much meat around the case in a six shot I would be more inclined to go to a 7 shot on the Blackhawk and still feel perfectly safe.

The 327, is what the 32 mag wanted to be. The 32-20 is what the 327 tries to be.

I have run RP brass for a long long time, only because that was it was easy to find.
I do have some Starline that has been fired a fair bit.
I have a batch of RP that has been subjected to a torture test of sorts. Loads all across the board from mild to wild. It is approaching 25 reloads. Primer pockets are just now getting a bit loose. It has been annealed 5 times. Trimmed 4 times. The batch started at 500. There are about 450 or so left. Most of those were lost or messed up when belling the case or seating a bullet.

WC 820 is a go to powder for me. H110/296, lil gun,2400 and bullseye are what I use the most.

I agree with the first part of this statement, but I'd have to see the numbers to be willing to accept the second assertion. In what was probably his last public appearance, Skeeter Skelton and I discussed the 32-20 and then-new 32 H&R. I was planning on getting started with the former for IHMSA, but he strongly recommended the latter, suggesting that the straight side case would do all the older 32-20 would do and had the additional advantages of longer case life and ease of loading. Since the 327 FM gives even more of the same, I would place them in the following order of preference;
1) 327 Federal Magnum - new kid on the block but performance and flexibility winner by a long way.
2) 32 H&R (they named it "magnum" but it really wasn't) good for medium to warm loads.
3) 32-20 - the sentimental favorite and still fun to shoot, but more trouble than it's worth for serious, high volume work.

Of course this is based on my research and personal experience, and YMMV, but it would appear that the numbers are in my favor. BTW, the stainless RBH that was built for 327 FM was an eight shot. It ain't traditional, but old time cowboys who liked the performance of the 32-20 in their Colt SAAs would have probably loved it. I know I love mine!

Froggie

[Harry O]

I have been shooting 30-20/32-20 for about 25+years. I didn't acquire my buckeye until a few years back.

Thanks for the memory jog. I had forgotten about the 30-20. I had one of the "32-20" labeled barrels with the Thompson Contender back in the 1990's (the one with the 0.308" groove diameter). The gun never shot as well as I thought it should have. I experimented around, but the 30-20 left me cold. I sold off the barrel.

The pressure that the Contender could take matched my Marlin 1894CL. However, the brass was not as much of a problem with the Contender. I am pretty sure the chamber was a good deal tighter in the Contender. Anyway, if you have a .30Carbine cylinder, I would think that would be better for high pressure. It is a much thicker case.

I won't give the amounts of powder I use (they are way over factory loads), but the 32-20 in the Marlin uses the same powder type and within a few 1/10's of a grain and virtually the same bullet weight as my .30Carbine load in a Marlin 62 and an M-1Carbine. I have never had problems with .30Carbine brass separating. I have to keep a close eye on the 32-20 brass to prevent separating.

[JSH]

Froggie, my statement on the 32-20 is for modern guns of course.
These loads would unhinge any older,early variant. I consider them TC and Blackhawk only. OAL length is such that the TC and Blackhawk are the same boy ones they will cycle in,my ever had a DW, but that is another possibility.

Loads, all of the loads I use were worked up by Sierra in the late 80's or early 90's. It was worked up in a TC barrel. Then only to find the same data, mostly OAL would not function in the right chambered BF falling block pistol. I was more in the side lines of this project than anything,this was the go at the super slows for IHMSA. I have the data that was worked up on the TC platform, I have used it in my BF pistol but had to go to a bore riding bullet to get all of the nose out of the case.

Is this an over load of an old cartridge? I don't think so myself, look at the 22Hornet,25-20,45Colt and 45-70, loaded to modern pressures.

Folks that have a lot of issues with this one are using fast powders, as they seem to think the case is to small for slow powders.

I have 32 mag and 327, there is just no way to replace case volume.
My Buckeye will push a 140 class plain base CB at 1400+fps.
I am not home at the moment to have my notes at arms length.

Have had lengthy discussions with others on this subject. Folks keep wanting to throw the old SW and Colts in, well that was not the original platform of the topic. Once again, one has to use caution, extreme caution when using these loads. It is no different than the 45 colt or 45-70 keeping those loads properly labeled as such.

[JSH]

Harry O, I have some RP brass that exhibits the classic ring of a head separation. I got nervous, got the dremel and split several length wise. I found no measurable or visible issue. Over the coarse of a couple of years I split close to 50 with still no issue.
As we know each and every chamber and action will give different results. The reason I keep my brass lotted to a specific gun. Also I seldom FL size every time. The BF gets a FL size or it will not chamber properly, it is set up very tight. The TC sees pretty much neck sizing and that is it. The BH gets partial size so they just drop into the cylinder.

A large majority, if not all of these old design bottle neck type BP cases cause a lot of grief. I think mainly because of well intentioned folks changing the design slightly then the dies remained the same. Just as the great debate on the 45 Colt, is it a straight wall, or is it a tapered case?
Thus me having about a half dozen sets of 32-20 dies and two sets of 30-20 dies.

You mention the 30 carbine, I will say my IHMSA loads are close enough to a 30x221 that there is very little room for argument.