Any.32-40 shooters out there?

[Jonnytoobad]

My Girlfriends uncle recently was give an older winchester model 94 in .32-40 and this has always been a cartridge that intrigues me. (I have a .38-55) In any case he wanted some factory ammo so I bought two boxes of the John wayne Commemorative nickle plated cased ammo. Anyone know when the first lots of this ammo was made? i think this was made in 79. Any information about this ammo would be great.

Thanks
Jonnytoobad

[mac266]

I don't know for sure, but that ammo is probably collectible. Anything with John Wayne on it usually is. I'd put that in the closet and hang on to it.

Just cast some boolits, get a set of dies, and make some ammo for it!

[Charley]

Slug the bore before casting anything for it! I have a Marlin 93 in 32/40, bought it from a gunsmith friend who was going to make it his "fun gun". He ordered 5 boxes of cast 170 grain .321s for it, wouldn't shoot for ...well, let's say anything. I slugged the bore, was .322 Tried the Lee .324 8mm mold, shot well, but wasn't comfortable with the nose in a tube magazine. The RCBS 324 FN does well in it, so check the bore! BTW, if you need some .321s, I can sure make you a deal...

[OverMax]

Have a box of John Wayne's 32-40s too. You would think Winchester would have done a better job other than using a pale white box. Anyway I was given that box of cartridges many years ago with the purchase of my 1894 32-40 rifle. (in the early 80s as I recall) and have yet to use any of those 165 gr. I was told some time ago there wasn't much collectors value for those cartridges. I don't believe the box show the year or their (made date.) As far as when Mr. Wayne's shells were first marketed with his photo I wouldn't know. As for a difference between a 32-40 and a 38-55. I've shot both and prefer the 38-55 a little better because of its accuracy.

[Jonnytoobad]

they are collectible but not particularly rare...I paid $55 per box and that is pretty typical price on the internet for them. I just wondered if anyone has actually shot any of this ammo before. If I ever get one of these Ill reload for it...but I already have two .38-55's.

[FromTheWoods]

We have a couple .32-40's--100+ years old. Our John Wayne boxed cartridges are shelved for selling to collectors. Don't know when they were manufactured.

We reload jacketed and lead bullets, and find them to be extremely accurate. OverMax's comment is encouraging. So far, we haven't found a good load for our .38-55, but if we can get it to shoot more accurately than our .32-40's, we'll be stacking lead through one hole in the target!

[fouronesix]

The John Wayne commemorative Winchester levers date to 1981. I imagine the John Wayne commemorative Winchester ammo would date to the same time, as the marketing would have been as a package, so to speak.

[Ballistics in Scotland]

Individual rifles do strange things, but I am sure there is no intrinsic reason for the .38-55 to be more accurate than the .32-40. In its heyday the ultimate in accuracy was achieved by the Scheutzen shooters, with falling- single shot rifles, specially stocked to be shot standing. it is only with the new standards benchresters have set, and mass manufacturers have been obliged to at least part-way follow, that modern jacketed-bullet rifles have done better.

In that discipline the .32-40 was practically the standard cartridge, except for still smaller caliber rifles for those who found recoil uncomfortable. Although the rifles were usually heavy, the buttplate was usually backed up by the arm rather than the hollow of the shoulder.

[Le Loup Solitaire]

The 32-40 was known back in the day for outstanding accuracy and was a very popular cartridge. It would be a test of marksmanship to put it against a 38-55. If you want to do that I would suggest single shot rifles for the contest. As for John Wayne commemorative ammo, If you have any, especially in complete boxes, hang onto it as the price just keeps going up. If you need 32/40 ammo it is easy enough to make it by fire-forming 30/30's or 38/55's. LLS

[Jonnytoobad]

I believe .32-40 still holds some long range records to this day.
As for the two boxes I purchased for my girlfriends uncle. I am certain he is going to shoot them. Looks like the value of all the un fired ones is about to go up.

[catskinner]

In 1988 I chronographed 5 rounds of John Wayne 32-40 in a Winchester 94 26 inch barrel. Average velocity was 1235 fps.

[JHeath]

125433
Individual rifles do strange things, but I am sure there is no intrinsic reason for the .38-55 to be more accurate than the .32-40. .

I read that the .32-40 was less tiring for a schuetzen match than the .38-55. Maybe more people shot the smaller rifle for that reason, with better concentration, skewing the results.

[Ballistics in Scotland]

I believe .32-40 still holds some long range records to this day.
As for the two boxes I purchased for my girlfriends uncle. I am certain he is going to shoot them. Looks like the value of all the un fired ones is about to go up.

H'm well, the late Burt Munro of New Zealand has held some motorcycle speed records since the 1960s with a much modified 1920 Indian. Some records just aren't quite what people are doing nowadays. I could quite believe mid-range records with the .32-40, though.

I don't know the rules for the competitions in which the .32-40 was commonly used. If scoring was by the smallest ring the outer edge of the bullet hole didn't touch, the larget .38-55 would be a liability. But if it was by the ring which the inside edge of the hole did touch, it would confer a slight edge over the .32-40, with no difference in the points of impact of the bullet axis. It was certainly much rarer in scheutzen shooting. Calibres of .28 or so probably ran the .32-40 a close second, especially towards the end of the period.

Both .30-30 and .38-55 are a bit short for making .32-40 brass, the .38-55 case being the better of the two. Both would probably work all right for most people's purposes, depending on the bullet used But I think you would need the right brass to fully exploit its potential.

[JHeath]

Both .30-30 and .38-55 are a bit short for making .32-40 brass, the .38-55 case being the better of the two. Both would probably work all right for most people's purposes, depending on the bullet used But I think you would need the right brass to fully exploit its potential.

Think it is/was common in schuetzen to either separately seat the bullet up to the throat/lands before inserting the case, or to insert the case from breech then seat the bullet from the muzzle, using a false muzzle to start. Perhaps these methods make case length less critical since the case neck does not guide the bullet into the throat (?).

[JHeath]

Neither of which help the OP with his 94 . . .

[rintinglen]

I feed my Marlin 93 with either Winchester brass or 30-30 brass reformed. I had poor sucess with using 38-55 brass in this endeavor and do not recommend that. The necks end up longitudinally wrinkled as often as not. The 30-30 works well if the case necks and shoulders are first annealed. Imperial sizing wax is your friend.

[6.5 mike]

rintinglen hit it bout Imperial wax, all I use to size with. I shoot a Model 1893 Marlin 32-40 & a C Sharps 1885 in 32-40 using a mold I got from a member here. Mtn mold 170 gr using re-formed 30-30's in the Marlin & Win fac brass in the hi-wall.

[EDG]

Both the .38-55 and the .32-40 were Ballard single shot cartridges that were taken over and bastardized by Winchester.

[Ballistics in Scotland]

Indeed they did, and for the reason stated. It was easier on the paper patch too. I think muzzle-loading by use of the false muzzle eventually proved the more popular in circles where competition was hot, since it eliminated finning at the rear of the bullet.

Some modern benchresters make their bullets an easy sliding fit in the case neck, for they need extreme consistency of bullet pull, and there is no surer way of making something consistent, than making it zero.

The original Swiss Schmidt-Rubin, the M1889, has a peculiarly wide chamber neck and throat, compared with the bore. The use of a cast bullet diameter to suit these would probably cause particularly severe finning. My solution was to use a bullet to suit the bore (a true 8mm. under the patch), and incorporate an 8mm. disc, cut from solid rod, behind the bullet. Aluminium won't solder to the bullet, and a drop of superglue should ensure its discarding with the patch. Results were encouraging, but like many another thing I haven't got around to testing it enough to prove it is a success.

[beezapilot]

I ordered one this morning- google the mould number for an accurate photo of the Boolit.

http://www.amazon.com/Lyman-Cavity-319247-Grains-Bullet/dp/B005I0KA8O/ref=sr_1_31?s=hunting-fishing&ie=UTF8&qid=1420241276&sr=1-31&keywords=mould

[catskinner]

I've formed 32-40 from 38-55 and found that the case mouth must be wrinkle free or the case neck will have wrinkles. I spun a needle nose plier in the case mouth to make sure it was round before sizing. Also found that 32-40 cases formed from 30-30 are too short. 32-40 seating and crimping die would not crimp the case mouth. Got around that by using a 32 Special seating and crimping die.