sp101 32 H&R

[Nueces]

10-4 on y’all’s satisfaction with the H&R. I like it, too. Lately, though, I’ve been working with a Freedom FA-97 in 32-20, 7 ½” barrel. With my new CED chronograph, I’ve seen 1500 fps from plain-base 115-grain boolits, without leading. This is field/varmint territory, and there is room for more performance.

For many moons, I’ve wanted a straight case 32 that would offer similar performance and also allow use of boolits of weights >120 gr at velocities achieved by the 100s in the H&R. The sort of thing the 357 Max offered over the 357 Mag. The straight case allows carbide sizing and the smaller base diameter (than the 32-20) allows chambering in smaller revolvers. And, I figure case neck wall thickness will be a good deal greater than that on the 32-20, so cases will be robust and take a firm roll crimp.

I predict a lukewarm market reaction to the 327, but I’m going to stock up on brass and have fun with it.

Mark

[Skrenos]

I predict a lukewarm market reaction to the 327, but I’m going to stock up on brass and have fun with it.

Mark

Why? It doesnt provide anything to the reloader that a .32 mag cant provide. The 327 case is only 1/8" longer. That doesnt provide any appreciable powder capacity increase.

[Bullshop]

Well I wonder, as I recall the differance between the 38/357mag and 44 special/44mag is 1/10" length. But I think for those the length differance was to prevent chambering in the shorter chambers not to gain capacity. The longer cases were loaded to higher pressure but the 1/10 length gain was not in itself to increase case capacity. Still 1/8" is more than 1/10" gain in length/capacity.
BIC/BS

[9.3X62AL]

The idea that the new "Magnum" has a lengthened case to prevent usage in the H&R revolvers of S&W J-frames might be the answer to my "*** for?" posed earlier. The current info--new and sparse as it is--is skewed toward self-defense/CCW orientation. One thing for sure--it has been a LONG time since any 32 caliber handgun cartridge was touted as a "self-defense" caliber.

For me, it remains a "whatzis". Of course, I am pretty "32'd out"--32 SWL, 32 Magnum, 32-20 (2 of those), 30 Luger, 30 Mauser/7.62 Tok (3 of those), 7.62 x 38R Nagant, 32 ACP (2 of them), and even a 7.65 MAS M-1935 pistol. Another 32 caliber or handgun would be like shaving hair from an elephant--not much substantive change.

[lawboy]

A bit more 32 Magnum trivia.
Was out in the shop this evening just winding down a bit. Rummaging through the cabinet where I keep my component bullets, I came across a partial box of Sierra 125 grain jhp softpoints in 125-grain flavor with crimping cannelure. These are part no. 2020 and touted for the 30-30.
So I get to rolling one of those nice, long, sleek pills in my fingers. An idea was forming ever so slowly. Walked over to the lube sizing bench and plucked a Lyman 3118 cast bullet out of a plastic tube full of same awaiting lube sizing to .313 for the sp101. Sat both the Sierra and Lyman down on the bench -- Well I'll be, not very much difference in bullet length surely not enough to prevent chambering in the sp101. AND, the location of the cannelure on the jacketed bullet places almost exactly the same amount of bullet shank inside the case as with the cast bullet. The reduction in bullet diameter should counter any would-be pressure increase due to bullet jacket and the extra 10grs of bullet weight ...
A quick check with a bullet in the muzzle of the revolver indicates that it will grip the rifling enough to to spin ...
Broke out the 30 M1 Carbine loading dies and sized the first half inch of six 32 Magnum cases. Gave them a very slight bell, charged with 4.5 of Green Dot and seated six of the Sierra bullets to OAL of 1.462. Will fire them tomorrow night and report back.
Now I know these bullets are designed to operate at 30-30 velocities but still they sure do look cool in the cylinder of the sp101!

[9.3X62AL]

Lawboy--

I'm glad to know I'm not the only one to do things like that. I call it "Frankensteining".

[lawboy]

Shot the 125-grain sierra jhp 308 bullets today. Offhand, 20 yards, 4-inch group, no keyholing, just six perfectly round holes.

Rummaged a little more in the bullet cabinet and came up with a partial box of OLD winchester jacketed 110-grain 30 Winchester bullets. these are jacketed softpoints and they micced at .311. Loaded them with the same procedure set forth above and will fire them tomorrow night. Loaded 24 rounds with 4.5 of green dot.
fun, fun, fun!

[Newtire]

I like the milder loads myself. Have found a few great ones using heavier charges and still have some experimenting to do that way. That 100 gr. category shoots good slow or fast for me. I have a tendency to get better results with the faster loads but could just be beginner's luck.

Now I have a Lee 90 gr. SWC and was hoping someone could give me a starting point for that in the .32 mag. and or .32-20.

[Dale53]

Newtire;
You can use the same loads that I use with the Keith 100 gr GB:

I have a Ruger SP101 and use it quite a bit. My target load is 2.8/ 231 behind a Lee GB 100 Keith (casts .314" and I size to .313") using .32 S&W L cases. If you wish to use the .32 H&R Cases, I use 3.2 in the magnum case.

For a full load, I use a .314/120 RF GB mould bullet ahead of 10.0 H110 (this gives 1100 fps in my 6" barreled S&W 16-4).

I just LOVE the .32's (only have four of them...)


Those are somewhat above the factory .32 S&W L but pleasant to shoot and they shoot quite well in all of my .32's.

Dale53

[BigSlick]

Great thread.

I for one am seriously excited about the .327 Federal.

No, I don't see anything from the limited initial information that I've reviewed that makes me want to go out and buy one, but it IS fantastic news to see a new .32 cal offering.

I really hope this will provide the opportunity for bullet mfrs to introduce a few new options that will be useable in the 32 Mag. Also, more than anything, I'm hoping some new reloading data can come out of all of this.

I've been working with the 32 Mag in my 4" SP101 for about three months now and have been working to try and find where this caliber really performs. Published data, being so weakened to allow for the pot metal and lighter construction guns in 32 H&R is nearly anemic.

I've never been one to hot rod a caliber, and certainly don't have any intentions of doing so with the .32 Mag, but I would *at least* like to have some reasonable published data centered around modern guns of robust construction.

I've been running 100 and 115gr bullets in the 13-1400 fps range for a while in the SP101 32 Mag and have experienced zero problems with pressure signs other than a slightly stick ejection with XTP's past about 1300 fps. With cast boolits, not one problem.

I *might* buy a .327 cylinder *if* it's a straight swap with the .32 Mag SP101, but even if that happens, it will be long after brass and load data is available, and only then if I see something I have to have that I can't achieve with my existing setup.

Maybe, if we're all lucky, Smith (and others) will produce models in the caliber that will open up some options for .32 fans. Something along the line of a 327M&P in 32 or .327 Mag would be a dream gun. This along with a decent lever gun.

I expect Smith will pony up an offering, due to Federal's producing ammo. Probably a CCW offering along the line of a 332/432 J frame. Again, maybe if we're lucky, the caliber will catch on enough to enlighten the masses about the fun/utility factor of a good .32 cal.

Maybe then, some of the mfrs will pull their head out and take advantage of a market largley ignored, the market for a fun gun. No tacticool ninja ****, no game players, or safe queens, something to take advantage of possibly the biggest firearms market that has ever existed.

The 'I shoot for the fun of it' market.

You would think with all their research and marketing geniuses, they would have figured this out a long time ago.

Like the rest of us.
________
Vaporizers

[9.3X62AL]

Hear, hear Slick.

My own thoughts on your "fun gun" assertion is that relatively little honest and objective "market research" goes on at our mainstream gunmakers. It almost seems that an inbred relationship between gunrags and gunmakers exists, in which the gunrags' horrendously inaccurate measure of the consumers' wants and needs is the largest barometer used to assess where the wind lies. In fact, the situation is so inbred that the family tree is beginning to resemble a date palm.

Mainstream gun press--like the rest of the mainstream media--is dying due to inability and/or refusal to adapt to the speed of modern communication, and to the feedback that results from same. Gunmakers need to stop watching that barometer, and get outside and see what the weather is REALLY like.

Good to see you back, sir.

[BAGTIC]

Why? It doesnt provide anything to the reloader that a .32 mag cant provide. The 327 case is only 1/8" longer. That doesnt provide any appreciable powder capacity increase.

It will produce about 25% increase in case capacity, the exact percentage being greater with heavier bullets than with light ones

Consider how many rifle shooters rechamber stand chambers to 'Improved' one that offer far less capacity increase than that.

[Skrenos]

I dont see the .327 mag offering 25% increased case capacity. That would be 125% of the capacity of the 32 magnum. 25% will be 1/8 inch, so you're saying the powder length is only 1/2" in the .32 magnum? From my measurements, it's almost 1 inch. That would equal out to around a 10% increase in powder capacity.

Rifle shooters rechamber to improved versions by blowing out shouders and removing taper. They do it more for case life more than powder capacity.