32 s&w long data help requested

[Housecat]

I recently acquired a s&w 30-1, and while I was at the gun show, I purchased 500
cast 100 grain lrnfp bullets. Hodgdon, my Lyman and Sierra manuals have no data.

Does anyone know where to start using Hodgdon HP-38 powder?

Thank you in advance.

[Mk42gunner]

http://www.lasc.us/FryxellThe32S-WLong.htm

Follow the link to a good article on the .32 S&W Long. I started (and stopped) with his load of 2.5 grains of Red Dot for my Model of 1903 Hand Ejector, but HP-38 / W231 should do fine.

Robert

[9.3X62AL]

I'm in process of re-setting my reloading room, and do not have access to my manuals (yet). Winchester 231 powder is the same fuel as your HP-38, see if some online data for 231 is available.

Chances are, data will recommend loads providing 700-725 FPS. This is the caliber's 1900-era capability. Your Model 30-1 can very safely handle 100 grain loads to 850-875 FPS, and that is a conservative estimate. The RCBS Cast Bullet Manual No. 1 (1986) provides a wealth of reloading info for castings in this caliber, and IIRC it uses a S&W J-frame 32 S&W Long as its test bed.

Best of luck with your fine little S&W 32 wheelgun. I am seeking one much like it, preferably with 4" barrel. A Colt D-frame of similar description would do nicely, as well. The 32 S&W Long loaded to its modern maximum is about the most perfect field caliber for small game and small varmints that ever saw light of day. Most of my 32 H&R Mag ammo carries the RCBS 32-98-SWC with enough of several powders to prompt 1000 FPS from my S&W Model 16-4. It 'a do until a 32 Kit Gun lands on the doorstep.

[Outpost75]

HP-38 is the noncanister blend of W231 and starting loads of 231 can be used in the absence of specific HP-38 data, although you might expect a greater lot-to-lot variation than with 231. In your S&W Model 30 a charge of 2 grains will approximate factory ammunition and 2.5 grains is a good field load, about 800 fps, a bit faster than factory. You can probably increase to 3 grains with a 100-grain bullet, but I would approach this with some caution. I use 4 grains in my Ruger, but would recommend that you not exceed 3.5 grs. in your S&W, treating it as a +P for occasional use only!

[Scharfschuetze]

I checked my loading notes for my Model 31 S&W with a 4" barrel. I didn't have any 100 grain boolits listed, but for a 98 grain HBWC, Bullseye produced the best results and for a 115 grain RN (32/20 boolit-sized .314) Unique powder produced great results with upper end loads on the tail of the 32 H&R Magnum.

Unfortunately, I didn't have any personal data for 231 powder. With RP cases and a CCI 500 primers, the RCBS Cast Bullet Manual Number 1 shows a starting load for 231 with a 98 grain SWC at 3.0 grains for a velocity of 842 fps from a 4" Model 31. The max load is 3.5 grains for 965 fps. The HP 38 loads were .4 grains less per charge for minimum and max loads with similar velocities.

A 50' target fired at 50' with the 32/20 115 grain boolit (12 shots) and Unique powder.

[Housecat]

I appreciate all the helpful responses. From the looks of it, I may start at 2.3 grains and go up or down as needed.

[revolvergeek]

Congrats on your 30-1! They are very happy little guns.

[Dale53]

9.3x62AL;
You mean like this?

http://i269.photobucket.com/albums/jj80/Dale53/DalesPistolsRevolvers4Selects-0330.jpg (http://s269.photobucket.com/user/Dale53/media/DalesPistolsRevolvers4Selects-0330.jpg.html)

I concur fully about the usefulness of the .32 S&W Long when it comes to edible small game. There is not a better cartridge in the land. A feller can argue that the .38 Special wadcutter load is equal and I will not argue. Both are top drawer in the hands of a good pistolman (or woman).

I have had many an enjoyable day in the field with those revolvers and they FAR eclipse the .22 rimfire in every meaningful way.

Dale53

[9.3X62AL]

Dale, EXACTLY. Right down to the Pachmayr Grippers. Last and best one I saw was at a gun show in Boise 3 years ago, shoulda woulda coulda. LNIB or better. Still haunts me, almost as much as the 3-caliber SIG P-210 for under $3K a few years back.

i think the 32 Long ranges better and longer than the 38 wadcutters, the later has a habit of tumbling after 60 yards or so while the 32 SWL's SWC keeps on trucking point forward well past 100 yards. Too many jackrabbits have collapsed for me from 75 to 125 yards with the 32 SWL to ever doubt its efficiency.

[trapper9260]

Here is another link and just go to the one you want .
http://reloadammo.com/reload.htm

[Dale53]

Al;
>>>i think the 32 Long ranges better and longer than the 38 wadcutters, the later has a habit of tumbling after 60 yards or so while the 32 SWL's SWC keeps on trucking point forward well past 100 yards.<<<

When I wrote this, I just KNEW you were going to mention that:p. Where I used to hunt it was always mostly woods and the ranges were not terribly long. Under those circumstances, the wadcutter works beautifully well in both the .32's as well as the .38's. Past fifty yards, of course, a SWC or LFN would be better in either.

I like the .32's so much I had JD Jones make me a custom barrel in .32 H&R for the TC (a Contender Carbine). It shot well and would have been a perfect choice for a edible small game rifle (kind of an American Rook Rifle). Then I lost the vision in my right eye. So much for prior planning, huh?

Dale53

[Housecat]

If you guys keep talking about 32s then I may be forced to pick up a ruger single seven 327 federal magnum. You guys are a terrible influence; I already spend way too much on guns and reloading! (That's okay, that's why I have a job)

[9.3X62AL]

Housecat, welcome to this collective of craze-o's. You will see as the thread continues (and it will, TRUST ME) that there is a sub-set of REAL CRANKS in attendance that favor mid-caliber handguns with fervor. What is a mid-caliber? Between nominal 7mm and 8mm bullet diameter, to my way of thinking. One nice side-effect of the 32 S&W Long is its economical use of lead and reloading components......ingots last a while, as do #1 flasks of powder, and the 22 LR gets put in the shade by its stopping power. These days, ammo costs for refilled 32s beats out those rimfires as well. What's not to like?

[EMC45]

I got to where I shot the .32 caliber J and I frame Smiths so much that when I pick up a K frame now it feels like I am holding a cannon! I have put some serious lead down range with the .32s! Nothing like it!

[Mk42gunner]

The only thing I don't like about the little Model of 1903 is its miniscule fixed sights. They were almost okay back when I could see, now not so much...

Put me down on the list of wanting a .32 Kit Gun. The one Dale showed above would do nicely.

Robert

[Green Frog]

J-frame 32 S&W Long... what's not to love? Although I tease friend Dale53 about the Goodyear Grips on his 631, I notice he always makes sure it's locked away in his safe when I get ready to leave for home!! ;) Between my various I-frame 32s ( I had 4 at last count) and the 30-1 I bought for my littlest niece being cared for and fed, I get to load a pretty goodly number of 32 S&W Longs. I like about 2.2-2.5 grains of Bullseye behind 95-100 grain cast or swaged bullets, but with the results I've gotten with HP38/W231 in target loads for my 38 midrange rounds, I'm pretty sure you'll get great results with that as well, just start low and work up on the charge until you find the sweet spot. :D

Froggie

[35remington]

Having loaded for a 32 long in a very clean I frame 4 1/4" for some time now I've wondered if there's any advantage over a wadcutter in this particular gun.

The sights are very fine and realistically the gun is good to maybe 25 yards due to the sights and 50 feet is probably more like it. Not that the gun isn't capable of more....just me and the sights aren't. The other appealing thing is that with the 98 grain RCBS WC a mere 1.8 grains of Red Dot gets around 740-750 fps and has enough thump for anything within range in the way of small game and varmints. Under this same WC I've shot Red Dot, W231,Titegroup, Universal, Bullseye, WST, Clays, Unique and Herco and all perform well. It's the bullet, not so much the powder. Given my "druthers" and a larger supply of Bullseye than I have on hand (only have 3 pounds left) I would shoot this bullet over 2.0 Bullseye for 750 fps and be done with it, but I've got a whole lot of Red Dot and bunches of odds and ends of other powders, so it served me to see what else shot in the gun, which has been pretty much everything.

The finer metering powders seem to me to have advantages in very small charges, and those advantages pretty much start and end with Bullseye. Nothing else really surpasses it with this bullet. Lower basic cost per pound and more readily available than most powders.....someday soon again, hopefully. With W231 2-2.1 grains approximates the desired target load speeds of around 750.

Never did understand Gil Sengel's comments about shying away from Bullseye in the 32 Long in his writeup of the cartridge about a year ago in Handloader magazine. Never heard of problems using it from anyone else, ever.

The small charges mean that the Lee Pro Auto Disk will not dispense the large flake powders reliably. The large flakes bridge in the small disk openings and throw light charges. The sole exception to this is the .27 cavity in the Micro Disk kit which will reliably dispense 1.8 grain charges of Red Dot and Clays with nary a squib, due to the larger diameter of the cavity and the shallower depth needed to run along the Micro Disk slide. This is good for standard wadcutter velocities of 750 fps with this bullet.

Casting an eye upon the velocities obtained with such small charges and very deep seated bullets (the seating depth is proportionately greater than when the 38 Special is loaded with 148 WC's) gives the distinct impression that pressures generated exceed that of factory loads somewhat and these velocities of circa 750 fps with WC's should not be exceeded in the small I frame revolvers. Some data lists up to 820 fps with these 90-98 grain WC's but I stay away from those, hewing to the spirit of Ed Harris's recommendation not to exceed 850 fps with a 98 grain RN-SWC bullet that seats to a much shallower depth than the WC's do. A deeply seated WC going 800-820 has to be notably higher pressure than a 98 SWC/RN going 850.

If a little more speed is wanted (to arguable purpose, I suppose) 2.5 grains of Bullseye under the same RCBS 98 WC when loaded to 1.198" and crimped over the top of the second band (seated out, in other words) generates 810-820 fps. Seating depth approximates most SWC's and RN's at this OAL. Sized .314" the loaded round is just barely a slip fit in the little revolver's cylinder throats and shoots very well, at the cost of somewhat higher (but still acceptable) velocity variations than a deeper seated WC with a lighter charge.

The bullet that would generate the highest speed at the lowest pressure given a suitable charge is the previously mentioned RCBS 98-SWC which due to the very small shoulder is really a roundnosed flatpoint. It seats quite shallowly in the case and gives more room than nearly any other 98 grain bullet. I shoot this to 850 fps with no qualms.

Given the "short rangedness" of the little revolver and the fine sights, a wadcutter gets it done best for me with the most thump, and I load it the two ways described above. Wandering the banks of the backwater sloughs of the Missouri river and potting bullfrogs, shooting nasty gar in shallow tepid water and using it as a tool to dispatch trapped coons and take care of snapping turtles that swallowed the hooks on my bank lines seems to me to be employing the pistol to its highest purpose.

When I get bored in February and cabin fever sets in I've been known to go after rabbits (the only edible small game still legal in Nebraska this time of year) and wander amongst some brushpiles and briers to get some exercise. Every once in a while I get one or two.

[Tar Heel]

Here you go. The Accurate Mold 313110B is a ROCKING bullet.

128127

128128

[stu1ritter]

Just checked the Accurate catalog and can't find a 31-110B. 313110B isn't an Accurate #. Is it too new for the catalog? I like the look of that one.
thanks,
Stu

[Tar Heel]

It is an Accurate mold. He is cycling molds through the catalog so it may not appear in there. An email to him will get you set straight. Just give him that number. 313110B

128279 128280

Mine is a 3-Cavity with two being the 313110B and one cavity as a 313120B.

[Outpost75]

I use Accurate 31-114D in mine and also in the H&R Mag.

128370

[stu1ritter]

I had Tom build the 31-100X for my .32's, both Long and H&R and I've emailed to find out what his designation is for 313110B since that is not how he labels his molds. Outpost75 that 114D looks like a hammer!!
Stu

[stu1ritter]

Tar Heel, it is the 31-110B and now Tom has put it back in the catalog. Tom said it disappeared. Tom mentioned that he marks the mold with the ordered bullet diameter so it becomes 313-110B on the mold but is 31-110B in the catalog.
Stu

[Outpost75]

.....Outpost75 that 114D looks like a hammer!!...Stu

There is also 134D, I use in the H&R Mag Ruger and as a small game bullet for .303 British and 7.62x54R.

128371

The "family" also includes 36-155D for .38 Special, 43-225D for the .44 Special and 45-245D for the .45 Auto Rim.

128372128375128374 128373

[stu1ritter]

Ahh, the 36-155D, I looked at that long and hard before having Tom make the 36-155WT which I use for my carry bullet. I also have that format in .44 as the 43-215W. Sure love those meplats. Here's the .38 and the .44.
Stu
http://imageshack.com/a/img834/2776/z9ytr.jpg

[Tar Heel]

Tar Heel, it is the 31-110B and now Tom has put it back in the catalog. Tom said it disappeared. Tom mentioned that he marks the mold with the ordered bullet diameter so it becomes 313-110B on the mold but is 31-110B in the catalog.
Stu

Thanks for the feedback Stu.

[Housecat]

If anyone is still following, I have had good luck with and settled with 2.2-2.4 grains of hp 38; no leading and good accuracy with mild recoil.

[Outpost75]

Thanks for that feedback. If I ever run out of Bullseye and get HP38 I now have a start load.

[sewerman68]

I just had a cut down police positive follow me home and am working on loads for it with titewad due to the lack of anything better being available. I am using 1.8 gr of titewad under the 98 gr rcbs bnwc with really good results. Does anyone have experience with this powder? Do you think this load would be safe in my old I frame?

[35remington]

What is the velocity? Knowing would help greatly. Old revolvers do not have heat treated cylinders and deep seated wadcutters drive pressures up compared to alternatives.

[Green Frog]

I just had a cut down police positive follow me home and am working on loads for it with titewad due to the lack of anything better being available. I am using 1.8 gr of titewad under the 98 gr rcbs bnwc with really good results. Does anyone have experience with this powder? Do you think this load would be safe in my old I frame?

Titewad or Titegroup? I've heard good things about the latter for 38s, but lost my chance to try it on 32s when I swapped my pound for more Bullseye ("the devil that we know...")

Keep those recipes and results coming! :bigsmyl2:

Froggie

[sewerman68]

TiteWAD I am unfortunately out of titegroup right now. I don't have a chronograph.

[sewerman68]

I have used titewad with a 77gr rf in 32 acp for a couple of years with 1.8 gr in a colt 1903 and it seems to work great.

[35remington]

Well.....then you can't really assess your load at all. Chronographs are admittedly not exact pressure measuring devices, but they're better than no velocity information and therefore no ability to guess at anything.

Extraction may still be easy when pressures are too high for small un heat treated revolvers like old I frames.

[stu1ritter]

I have been loading Titegroup for a while now and really finding it quite good for my guns. 1.8 grains for moderate loadings and 2.1 grains for hot loads for a 100 gr. full meplat bullet from Accurate (31-100X). I'm going to work up some loads for the H&R while I'm at it for the same bullet. It seems fairly accurate out to 50 feet so far. I'll probably go higher than 2.1 for my S&W 16-4, just to see what it can do.
Stu