Vaquero 32HR or 357? Which one?

bedula32 · March 11, 2006, 05:36 PM

I am ready to jump into the world of SA. I am not new to handguns or revolvers in general but totally newbie to SA's.
After some consideration I am pretty sure I will go with a Ruger Vaquero with the Birds Head grip. Now that I have it narrowed down to the make and model I am looking at the calibers. Seems to be a lot of either 32HR Mag and 357 Mags on the auctions with the barrel length I want. I have never shot 32HR Mag. I have shot 357 Mag out of Ruger and SW revolvers. I find the 357 to be fun for about a cylinder and then I revert to 38Special which is actually quite pleasant I think. Can you shoot 38 Special out of ANY revolver set up for 357 Magnum (as in the Vaqueors)? I think you can but not 100% sure on that. I think I might like the 32HR and have heard good things about it but am curious if there is a similar "lower power" (and maybe cheaper) round for 32HR revolvers like there is for 357's in the 38. I think I might maybe have possibly just perhaps have vaguely heard at one time that 32 SW Long usually shoots in a 32HR Mag gun. Is that correct? How is the 32HR recoil versus say a 38 Special out of a similarly sized gun? This is a gun I am buying purely for entertainment and range use and not for anything serious or important.

1tomcat · March 11, 2006, 05:57 PM

I would jump on a 357, that 32 seems a little anemic to me
Just my opinion.

Mastrogiacomo · March 11, 2006, 06:21 PM

+ on the .357 - with a magnum Vaquero you could shoot either the .38 or the .357 so it's really two for the price of one.

gak · March 11, 2006, 06:56 PM

They are really apples and oranges, despite what others might say (e.g., the "anemic" comment). Like anything else, the .32 Mag "is what it is" which is either good or bad depending on your objectives. Like calling an M1 Carbine or even Mini 14 or Mini 30 or 30-30...anemic, yes...next to a Garand or if you're shooting mule deer from 300 + yards...but to someone charging your house, don't think so. You have to decide which end of the spectrum you want. The .32 is much (much) lower in recoil and blast than the .357, and is lower than just about all .38 loads as well. In the Ruger SA world, it also resides in a smaller (Single Six), format - the frame shared with Ruger's .22s which means more compact dimensions and lighter all around. If having a very nice plinker, small game/varmint gun that doesn't make you wince every time fired does it for you - go for it. If you want more oomph...well you have your answer there too. In short, the .32 - for good and "bad" - is much less of a big deal to shoot than either the .357 or .38. Ammo is more scarce - and expensive - with the .32. The Catch 22 there is that the .32 is so much more pleasant to shoot - you can all day long vs the others, but it'll cost you! Unfortunately, neglect by the market (by the bigger is better folks over the years) of this sweet gun/round has made it somewhat of a niche round - still with popularity though as is evidenced (finally) by more companies producing guns in the round. Ironically, Ruger quit production on the .32 Single Six this past year just as others are adding it to their line up. You want "traditional" single action shooting, get the .357 or .45 Vaquero. You want something that's still got that Old West look and feel in a smaller, lighter package - the .32 is awfully nice.

My approach: I like both (actually have a .44 Mag Vaquero and .32 Birdshead) -- and have had the .357 Vaquero (and miss it!) for their different functions and don't try to get into the flaming wars of "this is better than that" without some kind of context. The .32 awfully pleasant to shoot after a couple cylinders-full of the .44--or an afternoon of .38! A .32 100 gr jhp is said to have about the same ballistics as a standard (whatever that is) non-+P .38, in a smaller, lighter recoiling package--which is its primary appeal: definitely know you're shooting something with more whallop than a .22 Mag in a similarly sized 6 shot package -- which if it were a .38/.357 would only allow 5 shots. Yes to the .32 Long (and short) being ok for shooting in all .32 Mag formats.

20BELOW · March 11, 2006, 07:18 PM

I have a 357 birdshead (old model) and love it. I just wish that I would have purchased the stainless version. The color case/blue finish seems to start to rust on the way home from the range.

Tom2 · March 11, 2006, 07:20 PM

If it is a secondary gun that is meant for fun shooting, I would consider the .32 as a good possibility. I am not sure how that birds head grip will work with a heavy recoiling round. Not that target 38's are that much of a kicker. I am considering the .357 here. Would consider a SA .32 as a pretty last ditch defense weapon, but it will surely take out small game nicely. Balance might be different compared to larger cal's on that frame, as the smaller bore and chambers means more metal/more weight. The balance of the thing is why some don't like small bore SA types, I mean smaller than .44! You can find plenty of 32 S&W in the hardware stores or sporting goods around here, for some reason. Would be great plinker but only comes in lead round nose. And how accurate it is in a 32 mag chamber is unknown. Might be like 38/357 combo, some guns works great with 38, some not so good. I think the 32 mag appeals more to handloaders due to uncommon ammo, but I would imagine components not that expensive, compared to uncommon but obsolete/antique cartridges. Sounds like a fun deal to me. You might ask around about shooting thumpers, even 357 with the weird grip shape. Some folks actually have that grip frame on 45 Colt cals. Not alot to hold onto?

bedula32 · March 11, 2006, 11:11 PM

20BELOW - Are you joking here? Maybe pulling my leg? Does the 'case hardened' finish really rust? I thought it was supposed to look like an old rusted out finish but in fact was not actually rusting. Kind of like the 'distressed' wood that is supposed to look like termites got to it when they never really did. I really wish I could find one just plain blued as the rustic look does not do much for me (neither does distressed wood or new blue jeans with holes in them that cost twice as much because apparently they figure you're half as smart if you want worn out crap to begin with).

gak · March 11, 2006, 11:56 PM

Tom2, you're quite right about the weight of a .32 - but only in the full size SA. Ruger made a convertible .32-20/.32 Mag Vaquero (full size) that you can still find around out there (not a lot made, but though discontinued not hard to find, a lot of them in stainless)...nice gun but heavy/barrel-heavy due to the "small hole" reason you mention. On the other hand, the .32 Mag in its most prevalent form - the smaller Single Six - is very nicely balanced and, unless they beefed up the frame for the round, should actually be slightly lighter than it's .22 stablemates due to the larger hole in that format--certainly no heavier.

20BELOW · March 12, 2006, 01:04 AM

Unfortunately I was not kidding. I hate rust. I take very good care of all my wepons and have found that the color case finish on my Vaquero is very thin and hard to keep from rusting. Everything else is great. I enjoy shooting full power 357 loads and don't find the birdshead grip to be a problem at all. Like I said before the only thing I would do different is buy it in stainless.
It is also an old model. They may have improved the finish on the New Vaquero.

bermo61 · March 12, 2006, 01:11 AM

Hands down the .357. Like the guy said earlier..you can practice all day with .38 spl (cheap and easy to find) or shoot .32 mag (expensive and not as easy to locate)

I used to have a 10mm and while I loved the ballistics, I could have shot the thing a lot more often if it were a .40!

March 11, 2006, 05:36 PM	#1
bedula32 Senior Member Join Date: July 8, 2005 Posts: 229	Vaquero 32HR or 357? Which one? I am ready to jump into the world of SA. I am not new to handguns or revolvers in general but totally newbie to SA's. After some consideration I am pretty sure I will go with a Ruger Vaquero with the Birds Head grip. Now that I have it narrowed down to the make and model I am looking at the calibers. Seems to be a lot of either 32HR Mag and 357 Mags on the auctions with the barrel length I want. I have never shot 32HR Mag. I have shot 357 Mag out of Ruger and SW revolvers. I find the 357 to be fun for about a cylinder and then I revert to 38Special which is actually quite pleasant I think. Can you shoot 38 Special out of ANY revolver set up for 357 Magnum (as in the Vaqueors)? I think you can but not 100% sure on that. I think I might like the 32HR and have heard good things about it but am curious if there is a similar "lower power" (and maybe cheaper) round for 32HR revolvers like there is for 357's in the 38. I think I might maybe have possibly just perhaps have vaguely heard at one time that 32 SW Long usually shoots in a 32HR Mag gun. Is that correct? How is the 32HR recoil versus say a 38 Special out of a similarly sized gun? This is a gun I am buying purely for entertainment and range use and not for anything serious or important.

March 11, 2006, 06:56 PM	#4
gak Senior Member Join Date: February 28, 2005 Posts: 2,715	They are really apples and oranges, despite what others might say (e.g., the "anemic" comment). Like anything else, the .32 Mag "is what it is" which is either good or bad depending on your objectives. Like calling an M1 Carbine or even Mini 14 or Mini 30 or 30-30...anemic, yes...next to a Garand or if you're shooting mule deer from 300 + yards...but to someone charging your house, don't think so. You have to decide which end of the spectrum you want. The .32 is much (much) lower in recoil and blast than the .357, and is lower than just about all .38 loads as well. In the Ruger SA world, it also resides in a smaller (Single Six), format - the frame shared with Ruger's .22s which means more compact dimensions and lighter all around. If having a very nice plinker, small game/varmint gun that doesn't make you wince every time fired does it for you - go for it. If you want more oomph...well you have your answer there too. In short, the .32 - for good and "bad" - is much less of a big deal to shoot than either the .357 or .38. Ammo is more scarce - and expensive - with the .32. The Catch 22 there is that the .32 is so much more pleasant to shoot - you can all day long vs the others, but it'll cost you! Unfortunately, neglect by the market (by the bigger is better folks over the years) of this sweet gun/round has made it somewhat of a niche round - still with popularity though as is evidenced (finally) by more companies producing guns in the round. Ironically, Ruger quit production on the .32 Single Six this past year just as others are adding it to their line up. You want "traditional" single action shooting, get the .357 or .45 Vaquero. You want something that's still got that Old West look and feel in a smaller, lighter package - the .32 is awfully nice. My approach: I like both (actually have a .44 Mag Vaquero and .32 Birdshead) -- and have had the .357 Vaquero (and miss it!) for their different functions and don't try to get into the flaming wars of "this is better than that" without some kind of context. The .32 awfully pleasant to shoot after a couple cylinders-full of the .44--or an afternoon of .38! A .32 100 gr jhp is said to have about the same ballistics as a standard (whatever that is) non-+P .38, in a smaller, lighter recoiling package--which is its primary appeal: definitely know you're shooting something with more whallop than a .22 Mag in a similarly sized 6 shot package -- which if it were a .38/.357 would only allow 5 shots. Yes to the .32 Long (and short) being ok for shooting in all .32 Mag formats. Last edited by gak; March 11, 2006 at 06:59 PM. Reason: addition

March 11, 2006, 07:20 PM	#6
Tom2 Senior Member Join Date: June 23, 2004 Location: Ohio Posts: 5,644	Fun or fight? If it is a secondary gun that is meant for fun shooting, I would consider the .32 as a good possibility. I am not sure how that birds head grip will work with a heavy recoiling round. Not that target 38's are that much of a kicker. I am considering the .357 here. Would consider a SA .32 as a pretty last ditch defense weapon, but it will surely take out small game nicely. Balance might be different compared to larger cal's on that frame, as the smaller bore and chambers means more metal/more weight. The balance of the thing is why some don't like small bore SA types, I mean smaller than .44! You can find plenty of 32 S&W in the hardware stores or sporting goods around here, for some reason. Would be great plinker but only comes in lead round nose. And how accurate it is in a 32 mag chamber is unknown. Might be like 38/357 combo, some guns works great with 38, some not so good. I think the 32 mag appeals more to handloaders due to uncommon ammo, but I would imagine components not that expensive, compared to uncommon but obsolete/antique cartridges. Sounds like a fun deal to me. You might ask around about shooting thumpers, even 357 with the weird grip shape. Some folks actually have that grip frame on 45 Colt cals. Not alot to hold onto?

March 12, 2006, 01:04 AM	#9
20BELOW Junior Member Join Date: July 2, 2005 Posts: 11	Unfortunately I was not kidding. I hate rust. I take very good care of all my wepons and have found that the color case finish on my Vaquero is very thin and hard to keep from rusting. Everything else is great. I enjoy shooting full power 357 loads and don't find the birdshead grip to be a problem at all. Like I said before the only thing I would do different is buy it in stainless. It is also an old model. They may have improved the finish on the New Vaquero. Last edited by 20BELOW; March 12, 2006 at 01:38 AM.

March 11, 2006, 05:57 PM	#2
1tomcat Senior Member Join Date: June 27, 2005 Posts: 147	I would jump on a 357, that 32 seems a little anemic to me Just my opinion.

March 11, 2006, 06:21 PM	#3
Mastrogiacomo Senior Member Join Date: October 10, 2002 Location: Boston, MA Posts: 893	+ on the .357 - with a magnum Vaquero you could shoot either the .38 or the .357 so it's really two for the price of one.

March 11, 2006, 07:18 PM	#5
20BELOW Junior Member Join Date: July 2, 2005 Posts: 11	I have a 357 birdshead (old model) and love it. I just wish that I would have purchased the stainless version. The color case/blue finish seems to start to rust on the way home from the range.

March 11, 2006, 11:11 PM	#7
bedula32 Senior Member Join Date: July 8, 2005 Posts: 229	20BELOW - Are you joking here? Maybe pulling my leg? Does the 'case hardened' finish really rust? I thought it was supposed to look like an old rusted out finish but in fact was not actually rusting. Kind of like the 'distressed' wood that is supposed to look like termites got to it when they never really did. I really wish I could find one just plain blued as the rustic look does not do much for me (neither does distressed wood or new blue jeans with holes in them that cost twice as much because apparently they figure you're half as smart if you want worn out crap to begin with).

March 11, 2006, 11:56 PM	#8
gak Senior Member Join Date: February 28, 2005 Posts: 2,715	Tom2, you're quite right about the weight of a .32 - but only in the full size SA. Ruger made a convertible .32-20/.32 Mag Vaquero (full size) that you can still find around out there (not a lot made, but though discontinued not hard to find, a lot of them in stainless)...nice gun but heavy/barrel-heavy due to the "small hole" reason you mention. On the other hand, the .32 Mag in its most prevalent form - the smaller Single Six - is very nicely balanced and, unless they beefed up the frame for the round, should actually be slightly lighter than it's .22 stablemates due to the larger hole in that format--certainly no heavier.

March 12, 2006, 01:11 AM	#10
bermo61 Member Join Date: January 24, 2006 Posts: 80	Hands down the .357. Like the guy said earlier..you can practice all day with .38 spl (cheap and easy to find) or shoot .32 mag (expensive and not as easy to locate) I used to have a 10mm and while I loved the ballistics, I could have shot the thing a lot more often if it were a .40!