old Colt and S&W revolters - weak?

[leftiye]

I need some education on the strenght of a new Colt official police revolver that just appeared on my doorstep. Likewise a Fourth change S&W hand ejector. Both in 32-20. I understand about the old metals, and lack of heat treating (possible), and I would like to get a little less nebulous understanding of them before I go reloading for them.

[jh45gun]

I would find out what the factory loads were at the time and load accordingly to that and not go any hotter then that.

[Multigunner]

Well don't be mislead by stories of people firing .357 Magnum loads in the old Colt .38 Long double action army revolvers.
Apparently some have done so and gotten away with it because the larger diameter of the .38 Long bullet requires a throat big enough that most of the gas from a .357 round blows by the bullet before it engages the forcing cone.

On heat treatment of cylinders, seems to me they did heat treat, but the alloy and heat treat probably isn't always up to modern standards.
Fast draw artists often had the cylinders heat re-treated or case hardened on the exterior and at the ratchet to avoid excessive wear. They mostly used blanks or very light loads, and sometimes these re-heat treated cylinders are brittle and fail if full power rounds are used.
A theatrical prop revolver may or may not have a case hardened cylinder, so care should be taken if you ever buy an old motion picture prop revolver.

It just doesn't seem prudent to try to hot rod an antique revolver in any case.
The original loads did the job just fine.
The original Black Powder loads for the .45 Colt out performed most later smokeless powder loads, while generating lower pressures in the old high capacity balloon head case thats unsuited to smokeless loads.

[imashooter2]

I've seen a bunch of posts by a guy that calls himself "Clark" that ran a straight reamer through the cylinders of a bunch of old Colt Police Positives and then shot them to destruction with massive .357 magnum overloads. He posts here...

[Leslie Sapp]

Having just been through the process you are starting on, I have a couple of threads to direct you to.
http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?t=160631

http://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-hand-ejectors-1896-1961/261171-32-20-range-report-questions.html

Judging by my limited range experience, the factory 100gr Remington loads are significantly lighter than the 4gr unique/115gr cast loads that were recommended by several manuals and individuals. Several people warned me about the danger of a squib load from light charges.


Hope this helps.

[Bret4207]

I have a Colt Army Special in 32-20, the forerunner of the Official Police. Same "41 frame" as the OP/Python. While not as robust as the Colt SAA, the OP should digest about any sane 32-20 load you'd care to try. The OP heat treatment...that I'm not too sure about, but I've put a zillion rounds through my older Army Special, and a lot of it was HOT, with no issues.

The Smith I believe is a lighter framed gun. IIRC Deputy Al has one he's done a lot of work with.

Be sure to wear ear protection!!! The 32-20 BARKS!!!

Ken Waters "Pet Loads" has an excellent article on the 32-20 in revolvers and outlines some of the strength parameters of the various guns chambered for it. His data is very, very helpful. And watch your brass, it SHRINKS!

[leftiye]

I have a Colt Army Special in 32-20, the forerunner of the Official Police. Same "41 frame" as the OP/Python. While not as robust as the Colt SAA, the OP should digest about any sane 32-20 load you'd care to try. The OP heat treatment...that I'm not too sure about, but I've put a zillion rounds through my older Army Special, and a lot of it was HOT, with no issues.

The Smith I believe is a lighter framed gun. IIRC Deputy Al has one he's done a lot of work with.

Be sure to wear ear protection!!! The 32-20 BARKS!!!

Ken Waters "Pet Loads" has an excellent article on the 32-20 in revolvers and outlines some of the strength parameters of the various guns chambered for it. His data is very, very helpful. And watch your brass, it SHRINKS!

Thanks Brett, that (strength) was what I was hoping for in buying the Colt. I do have a buckeye special, and a K-frame (model 15) in 32-20 for the nastier loads already, and was hoping to shoot about 900-1000 fps loads in these. Experience will show, I may be happier with milder loads. My 1905 4th change is a 75000 serial number. Don't know the year, but fer sure not 1906.

Mr. Sapp, I had already read the castboolits thread (I read all of the 32-20 and Hornet threads), but the S&W forum thread was a good help.

[Char-Gar]

I have a Colt Army Special (Pre- OP) and a Smith and Wesson M&P, both in 32-20.

Neither of the pistols will digest loads designed for the 32-20 rifle. Back in the day ammo companies sold different 32-20 loads for the rifle and the handgun. Lyman handbooks contained different data for the rifle and the hangun. I would get one of the older Lyman handbook and use that as a loading guide.

Sometime in the early 30's, Smith and Wesson changed the heat treament on their cylinders which made them much stronger, still I would stick to handgun loads.

[Bret4207]

Thanks Brett, that (strength) was what I was hoping for in buying the Colt. I do have a buckeye special, and a K-frame (model 15) in 32-20 for the nastier loads already, and was hoping to shoot about 900-1000 fps loads in these. Experience will show, I may be happier with milder loads. My 1905 4th change is a 75000 serial number. Don't know the year, but fer sure not 1906.

Mr. Sapp, I had already read the castboolits thread (I read all of the 32-20 and Hornet threads), but the S&W forum thread was a good help.

Leftyie, you should have no issue getting 900-1k with 100-115 gr boolits in your OP with complete safety to yourself and the gun. It's those 12-1300 fps loads people tried to get that took those guns apart! I admit I shot some of those with no damage, but they didn't shoot for beans, so I gave up and went back to sane loadings. Some of Elmers loads might have worked for him, but they didn't for me.

The Buckeye is one of the only 2 SA I ever really lusted after. Just can't swing one no matter what! Why Ruger doesn't offer a BH in 30 Carbine/32-20/32Mag is beyond me.

In reference to Chargars post, I have some 32-20 rifle loads that I keep strictly separate from my revolver loads. At my place, if it's in Starline brass, it's a 32-20 rifle load. The WW/Rem brass is revolver stuff. Works for me.

[onceabull]

Bret: My Buckeye Spec. 32/20& 32H&R Mg., NIB with papers sits here waiting until you spring into action. BUT, there is also a Marlin 336 in 219 Zipper that you might want to to be first up..( I see about 2.5 Buckeye sets in that caliber for every 336 Zipper .. )THERE IS ALSO a NIB Buckeye set in 38/40 & 10 MM,that could pair up with baby sister at your place... send $ at your convenience,eh ? Onceabull

[leftiye]

I (like most) never have all the bucks I need. I waited and watched for maybe two years, the buckeye 32s all went over 600, and many up around 800. Finally got one which had been in a house which had a fire for 500. Gun itself had not been in the fire, but the extra .32H&R cylinder was out where it got wet and corroded (chemicals). I had to put the cylinder in the lathe and turn it down as the pits were a little deeper than filing wanted to do (reads I was too lazy). Almost removed the pressed in ring with .32 magnum stamped in it. That having been said, the blackhawks in .32 and .30 are a whole lot of metal to carry around just to shoot something that has as it's chief feature that it hurts your ears a lot. You could probly melt the cases into the chambers without hurting the gun. Probly not much better in an 8 shot.

[Bret4207]

Bret: My Buckeye Spec. 32/20& 32H&R Mg., NIB with papers sits here waiting until you spring into action. BUT, there is also a Marlin 336 in 219 Zipper that you might want to to be first up..( I see about 2.5 Buckeye sets in that caliber for every 336 Zipper .. )THERE IS ALSO a NIB Buckeye set in 38/40 & 10 MM,that could pair up with baby sister at your place... send $ at your convenience,eh ? Onceabull

You are a cruel, cruel man...[smilie=p:

[Bret4207]

I (like most) never have all the bucks I need. I waited and watched for maybe two years, the buckeye 32s all went over 600, and many up around 800. Finally got one which had been in a house which had a fire for 500. Gun itself had not been in the fire, but the extra .32H&R cylinder was out where it got wet and corroded (chemicals). I had to put the cylinder in the lathe and turn it down as the pits were a little deeper than filing wanted to do (reads I was too lazy). Almost removed the pressed in ring with .32 magnum stamped in it. That having been said, the blackhawks in .32 and .30 are a whole lot of metal to carry around just to shoot something that has as it's chief feature that it hurts your ears a lot. You could probly melt the cases into the chambers without hurting the gun. Probly not much better in an 8 shot.

HAR! Ain't that the truth. Those suckers are LOUD! But, if you have one you can play with the 32-20 and see what it will really do with little to fear. I'm not a fan of the SA platform at all, but since they don't make L frame Smith 32-20's...

[Multigunner]

From what I've read French infantry officers loved the .32-20 because it consistently penetrated the medieval body armor worn by some desert tribesmen.
A local antique store had relic Arab body armor from the time of Chinese Gordon that was extremely unusual. It was a breastplate made from a section cut from the back of a Crocodile, and a huge honking Croc from the looks of the plates. The breastplate was a good three inches thick and hard as a rock.
They'd cut scabbards into the thick flesh before it dried. The central scabbard was for a long slim straight bladed dagger, on either side a broad bladed deeply curved dagger was inserted at angle.
With the daggers in place there would be three layers of highly tempered Damascus steel gaurding the heart and most of the torso would be guarded by at least one of the thick broad blades. The dried Croc hide itself would probably stop most 19th century revolver bullets.
Well into the 20th century well to do Arab warriors still wore chainmail and sometimes plate armour if available. They prefered Chainmail made in India, which used a different method of making the links than that used in Europe, and usually the chainmail itself was in strips that linked together squares of hardened steel plates.
This sort of armor was worthless against 20th century military rifles, and of very limited value against any of the older muskets, but could stop or at least deflect most lead bulleted revolver rounds and smaller caliber auto pistol rounds.

Before the development .38 Super Auto, and .357 Magnum, the .32-20 had a reputation for defeating most of the body armor available to post WW1 "Motorized Bandits" and Chicago gangsters and the sheet metal or glass of the automobile bodies of that era. Penetration was at least superior to that of the lower velocity .32 or .38 S&W or .38 Special revolvers most law officers relied on.

Military revolver cartridges like the 7.5 and 7.62 Nagant and the 8mm Lebel were developed along the same lines as the .32-20 round, giving up bullet mass and diameter in hopes of superior penetration. Use of Manganese steel for WW1 infantry helmets and the discarding of the old cuirass and other pre WW1 body armor due to their ineffectiveness against high velocity rifle fire made the penetration capabilities of smaller bore revolver rounds academic so far as battlefield use went.

Years ago when I had more money to invest in such things I had considered having a custom .32-20 made on the Colt Diamond Back frame. I don't know if it would have worked but my idea was to have a .22 cylinder bored out and rechambered and fitted to the .38 centerfire frame, and the .38 barrel bored out and sleeved to .32.
I still think this would make for a great revolver.
Now days the straight cased .32 H&R and similar "magnum" .32 revolvers seem more practical, unless one also owned a .32-20 rifle as a companion piece.

[gnoahhh]

Google ".32-20 Blues" and read the lyrics and listen to the song. It was by the old blues great Robert Johnson, and is certainly not PC! (He does an interesting comparison to the .38 Special in it, and how he's gonna use his .32-20 to keep his straying woman in line.)

[atr]

I have a old Colt New Army Second issue in .38 SPL and I DO NOT HOTROD THAT OLD ACTION
usually fire 160 gr RN at about 600 fps

[Freischütz]

When dealing with old guns I I try duplicate period factory ballistics with the slowest powder that will produce clean burning.

[leftiye]

Multi, Your idea of using a Colt .22 to make a custom .32 was one that crossed my mind also. I got lucky and a member here sold me a .32 H&R mag barrel and cylinder for a Kframe. In view of the scarcity of S&W barrels and the high cost of stray barrels and Kframe .22s, the colt is very viable as a platform because you can turn out a barrel on a lathe for a Colt, whereas a S&W barrel has that underlug to contend with figgering out how to produce. Getting a S&W .22 barrel and having it rebored and rifled is another method that can work, but as said they're scarce, hard to find, and costly. The reboring and rifling costs much less than the stray barrel does.

One parameter that does work is that any given gun that is produced in .38 special will be safe at proportionately higher pressures in the 32-20 version as there will be more cylinder around the chamber. Also, in these springy cylinders, brass sticking will readily occur. Working up carefully and backing off a grain at the first vestige of hard extraction should result in safe loads in a given gun. These low pressure cartridges don't show pressure signs beyond measureable case expansion. Primer flatness at these pressures is probly not solely due to pressure, but more likely fast powder or some other factor.