.32 H&R and .327 Federal - Fun to load?

ligonierbill · May 14, 2014, 11:20 AM

Just added .32 WCF (32-20) to my growing stack of dies, so I now have handguns, tools, and supplies for all the common "old" 32's (.32 S&W, .32 S&W Long, .32 ACP, .32 WCF). My question to the unreformed tinkerers out there is, "Are these hot "new" 32's any fun?" Not asking about their usefulness - I bet they're more useful than a .32 S&W. Now, I understand that the old .32 WCF loads pretty close to the H&R (and I can get a rifle in the old round!) so maybe it's pointless. And I don't know what to make of the hot Federal. Seems like it's main purpose was to fit 6 magnums in a SP-101. And why no rifles? But I'm game to waste some more money at the slightest hint of interest. Or should I just save it for a nice old (or repro) rifle?

FrankenMauser · May 14, 2014, 11:49 AM

I have a Blackhawk (8 shot) and GP100 (7 shot) in .327 Federal.
I shoot everything from .32 S&W/.32 Auto on up to full power .327 loads in them.

My wife's favorite thing to shoot is .32 H&R loaded with an 85 gr XTP on something like 11.0 gr Lil Gun. It's no slouch as an H&R load, but nothing that you couldn't match in .32-20. Although my wife picked out the Blackhawk, she takes over the GP100 any time it comes out. She doesn't particularly enjoy the time it takes to unload and reload 8 rounds in a single-action revolver.

I do occasionally shoot full power .327 loads in both revolvers, but I generally stick to lower powered stuff (.32 S&W or .32 S&W Long). The only downsides to the lighter loads are scrubbing the carbon rings out of the cylinder, and the bullets' long jump to the throat.

I went with .327 for hunting-related reasons (and 1,685+ fps with a 100 gr bullet, out of the Blackhawk's 5.5" barrel), but if I only wanted my .32s for recreational purposes, I'd be perfectly happy with .32 S&W and .32 S&W Long. I wouldn't even have much desire for .32 H&R -- my wife might, but I wouldn't care.

Clark · May 14, 2014, 01:22 PM

The 32 S&W, 32 S&W Long, 32 H&R mag, 327 Federal Mag are all the same diameter but get longer and higher pressure:
.337" diameter 32 S&W long [.920" 15kpsi] -> 32 H&R mag [1.075" 21kcup] -> 327 Fed Mag [1.200" 45 kpsi]

The 32-20 and 30 carbine are of a different shape:

32-20 Win 1882 .351" base, .065"/.408" rim,1.315 case, 1.592" OAL 16kcup * **
30 carbine 1940 .3548" case, .050"/.360"rim, 1.290" case, 1.680" OAL 40kpsi

* Ken Waters 32kpsi for rifles 1989
** Brian Pierce 16kcup for pre 1900 Colt SAA revolvers, 30kcup for post 1900 Colt revolvers, 40kcup for rifles, 2002

I have personally experimented with with overloads in 32 S&W, 32 S&W Long, 32-20, and 30 carbine. I have found that 30 carbine brass has weak primer pockets. I have also found that the top latch in some of the break top 32 S&W revolvers are tiny and cannot take abuse without getting sloppy.
My opinion is the 32-20 is the best of the bunch.

ligonierbill · May 14, 2014, 07:00 PM

Sounds like I should put my energy and money into finding that 32-20 rifle and forget about the new 32's. Plus the folks on Gunbroker offering Ruger 32's of the H&R and Federal variety are really proud of 'em. I am really looking forward to working with the 32-20. As for the others, the .32 S&W is kind of a pain, but I like those old breaktops. It's not quite as weak as some think, and those old "belly guns" are still wicked. The .32 S&W Long is really a nice round. I'm loading a 94 grain hardcast over HP-38 at just over 700 to match commercial ammo, but an "in spec" load of slower AA#9 will drive that bullet to 800 no problem. And I had to try Speer's 60 GDHP, crimped over the ogive, to top 1,000 and act like a hot .32 ACP (check their manual). Mostly, though, I like the slow one that I can load cheaper than current .22 prices with more punch than a .22 from a Bearcat-size pistol (S&W I frame or its Colt counterpart). Still on the prowl for a reasonably priced K-32. The .32 ACP is a lot easier than I thought it would be, and I have not had a feed problem running 60 grain XTP and GDHP through an old CZ 50 and newer Mauser HSc. And of course, still watching for that good deal on a Colt 1903. But no rifles, except for the 32-20. I would love to hear anyone's favorite handgun load for that round. Most of what's published is for rifles.

FrankenMauser · May 14, 2014, 07:57 PM

There was a Colt 1903 and a S&W I-frame at an auction here, recently. Both were pretty well abused and the Colt had some nasty pitting on the left side, but both were still fully functional and appeared serviceable. They didn't sell at $165 apiece (starting bid) in the first auction, so the company put them in the "online bidding only" category for 4 months straight.

I was watching intently, waiting for the starting bids to drop below $125 apiece. But, they never did. Instead, the company kept RAISING the starting bid, with each new weekly auction.

By month three, they were sitting on starting bids of $300+ apiece.

Finally, in April, they dropped the starting bids back to $135 for the I-frame and $155 for the Colt. With no bids on either revolver, I called the shop an hour before the auction closed, and told them I'd pay $200 for the pair, if they didn't sell, and buy a set of antique dining chairs from their showroom (major profit for them).

They told me to pound sand, because they were consignment guns, and both revolvers "sold" with starting bids when the auction closed.

I really want an I-frame, but it may take awhile....

Clark · May 15, 2014, 01:51 AM

I got one in 2000 for $100, but the one in 2012 and the one in 2013 cost my $300 something.

They are getting more expensive.

ligonierbill · May 15, 2014, 06:46 AM

Nice pistols. Yeah, prices are up, especially if it's got that pony stamped on it. Lots more Smiths out there. I have read that those Colt Police Positives in .38 Special would stand up to the 38-44 "heavy duty" loads in the day.

Sevens · May 15, 2014, 02:38 PM

I do a lot with .327 Federal Magnum and nothing with anything else mentioned except for the .30 Carbine. And I do none of any of these in rifles.

In .327 Federal, you get a straight-wall case that's more robust than .32-20 brass will ever be and if working within the confines of published load data is a comfort zone you appreciate, the .327 Federal has far more range than anything we've discussed in this thread. If there's a downside to .327 Federal compared to all others... it's that brass isn't as widely available nor are the guns chambered in this round. Your take that folks on Gunbroker are "proud" of .327 Federal chambered guns does not exactly mirror my perception. What I've seen is that these guns are currently out of production and that often seems to boost prices as folks think they won't get one. (FWIW, Ruger has a long, established history of dropping things out of production... only to start them up again later. We can speculate, but history has shown that Ruger will likely make more of them.)

For a low-cost dinking around load, I make a bunch of 71gr FMJ loads with a small dose of Hodgdon Universal. I run them around 1,250 FPS from my 4.2" barreled Ruger GP-100. I bought a slew of these slugs in bulk, so this load is fun because I have very little money in to them.

Now, if you want to run this chambering to it's limit with jacketed bullets, the cost flies up radically. Fact is, you can't buy (appropriate) jacketed .312" slugs in bulk, and buying them by the hundred is just plain expensive. But if I want to run 85gr XTP's at nearly 1,600 FPS or 100 grain XTP's at over 1,400 FPS, from a handgun, that's easily done with this round.

The load I probably use the most is a 115gr cast lead Penn bullet that runs 1,190 FPS over a charge of Universal. I take down steel plates with this one, and it's a whole lot of fun and also not too spendy.

You never, ever, EVER find .327 Federal brass laying about scattered on a shooting range.

But you also never lose the stuff to ejection as nobody makes a semi-auto to run it.

But when you run it at high pressure, you will see your share of neck splits, more so in the nickel plated brass than the brass stuff.

Sevens · May 15, 2014, 02:49 PM

Quote:

Seems like it's main purpose was to fit 6 magnums in a SP-101. And why no rifles?

Actually, we have a monstrous discussion thread in the revolver forum that hashes, re-hashes, argues and pontificates on this subject almost without end.

My opinion is that it's "main purpose" was to add that extra round in a small revolver as you said, but to also offer paper ballistics and defense capability that exceeds the .38 Special while also being -FAR- easier to handle than a .357 Magnum. It absolutely does both of those. (on paper... I don't know of a lot of defense shootings with this round)

Why no rifles?!
Probably the same reason there are hardly any handguns made for it, too. Simply, it came out at a rough time in the industry, it wasn't handled well at all by the gun makers and ammo makers and in the ridiculous rush that came over this industry with all the panic buying and dearth of guns & ammo, it just got left by the side of the road as an idea that never got much traction and there wasn't any time or production room to focus on it.

Because of the highly publicized shootings and threats of new anti-gun legislation and the follow-up crazy run on gun EVERYTHING, the ammo makers couldn't even make enough 9mm or .380 ammo, let alone some crazy new boutique round. And the gun makers were spitting out every stinkin' pocket sized .380 mouse gun they could make and selling them before they left the plant. Nobody was sitting in the room planning out new guns in odd calibers -- they were adding employees and shifts, running 24/7 and spitting out any gun they had the materials to produce because it was going to sell.

FrankenMauser and I both watched jacketed .312" slugs disappear from the face of the Earth and placed so far back on the production schedule that they began to estimate it in years rather than months.

Add up all of that and it paints of picture of why the .327 Federal Magnum is where it is the landscape of popularity.

ligonierbill · May 16, 2014, 06:30 AM

I'm glad somebody is enjoying the .327 Federal. Now, I never said putting 6 magnums instead of 5 into a SP-101 was a bad idea. Actually, it's a good idea, and it would be a better idea if Ruger offered their 4" version in .327. Seems like they're made for each other like the GP-100 is made for the .357. By the same reasoning, with all the .357 carbines out there and selling well, a .327 Federal carbine would be nice. But they ain't there, and GB currently has a .327 GP-100 bid at $1k with "reserve not met".

I do enjoy the old rounds, and I like seeing what these old guns will do. Got some Hunter's Supply 115 hardcast that don't look too bad plus some brass and a good selection of powder (probably start with HP-38). Like all old BP rounds, the .32 WCF case gives the flexibility to try some slower powders also. I see loads for AA#5 and #7, and #9 works well with the S&W Long. And Trail Boss is always a possibility with old BP rounds. Results will be reported (unless they're lousy).

Real Gun · May 16, 2014, 09:54 AM

On the issue of 327 Federal Magnum not being used in rifles, I doubt there is much of a niche for it. Remember the justifications for the caliber, and you will see that the caliber is all about revolvers. What niche in rifles would not be adequately served by an existing round? Is the .357 Magnum somehow difficult to handle in a rifle? Probably not.

FrankenMauser · May 16, 2014, 01:58 PM

Quote:

What niche in rifles would not be adequately served by an existing round? Is the .357 Magnum somehow difficult to handle in a rifle? Probably not.

Don't go down that road...
What niche in rifles is not filled by .30-06? Is it too difficult to handle?
Why would anyone need a stupid .270 or .280, or a worthless .30-30? You'd have to be an idiot to want something other than .30-06!

Sarcasm aside....
For starters, most of us that want a .327 Federal rifle want something that isn't currently available. That is, after all, how so many other rifle cartridges came to be, or came to be chambered in rifles.
.357 Mag might be too much, while .32 H&R isn't quite enough (and the rifles are quite difficult to get your hands on, anyway). It's the same old story as .222 Remington versus .222 Remington Mag versus .223 Remington. Some people like 'Baby bear', others like 'Mama bear', and others like 'Papa bear'. And those are ridiculously similar cartridges - notably closer in performance and dimensions than the common ".357 vs .327" comparisons.

And, I'll stop there, before this thread gets derailed and goes way off track...

Real Gun · May 16, 2014, 08:57 PM

Let's not refer to pistol caliber rifles in the same way as those using bottleneck cartridges. Pistol caliber rifles as a category is collectively a small enough niche as it is. The thread really isn't a list of dream guns that no one makes.

If there was say a Henry in 327 Fed Mag, I would be right there ordering one, because I carry a .327 Fed Mag revolver. Sharing ammo with a sidearm is the premise for pistol caliber rifles. I just don't feel it is realistic to spend any mental energy wishing for such a gun.

May 14, 2014, 11:20 AM	#1
ligonierbill Senior Member Join Date: May 20, 2007 Posts: 2,448	.32 H&R and .327 Federal - Fun to load? Just added .32 WCF (32-20) to my growing stack of dies, so I now have handguns, tools, and supplies for all the common "old" 32's (.32 S&W, .32 S&W Long, .32 ACP, .32 WCF). My question to the unreformed tinkerers out there is, "Are these hot "new" 32's any fun?" Not asking about their usefulness - I bet they're more useful than a .32 S&W. Now, I understand that the old .32 WCF loads pretty close to the H&R (and I can get a rifle in the old round!) so maybe it's pointless. And I don't know what to make of the hot Federal. Seems like it's main purpose was to fit 6 magnums in a SP-101. And why no rifles? But I'm game to waste some more money at the slightest hint of interest. Or should I just save it for a nice old (or repro) rifle?

May 14, 2014, 11:49 AM	#2
FrankenMauser Senior Member Join Date: August 25, 2008 Location: In the valley above the plain Posts: 13,424	I have a Blackhawk (8 shot) and GP100 (7 shot) in .327 Federal. I shoot everything from .32 S&W/.32 Auto on up to full power .327 loads in them. My wife's favorite thing to shoot is .32 H&R loaded with an 85 gr XTP on something like 11.0 gr Lil Gun. It's no slouch as an H&R load, but nothing that you couldn't match in .32-20. Although my wife picked out the Blackhawk, she takes over the GP100 any time it comes out. She doesn't particularly enjoy the time it takes to unload and reload 8 rounds in a single-action revolver. I do occasionally shoot full power .327 loads in both revolvers, but I generally stick to lower powered stuff (.32 S&W or .32 S&W Long). The only downsides to the lighter loads are scrubbing the carbon rings out of the cylinder, and the bullets' long jump to the throat. I went with .327 for hunting-related reasons (and 1,685+ fps with a 100 gr bullet, out of the Blackhawk's 5.5" barrel), but if I only wanted my .32s for recreational purposes, I'd be perfectly happy with .32 S&W and .32 S&W Long. I wouldn't even have much desire for .32 H&R -- my wife might, but I wouldn't care. __________________ Don't even try it. It's even worse than the internet would lead you to believe.

May 14, 2014, 01:22 PM	#3
Clark Senior Member Join Date: December 4, 1999 Location: WA, the ever blue state Posts: 4,678	The 32 S&W, 32 S&W Long, 32 H&R mag, 327 Federal Mag are all the same diameter but get longer and higher pressure: .337" diameter 32 S&W long [.920" 15kpsi] -> 32 H&R mag [1.075" 21kcup] -> 327 Fed Mag [1.200" 45 kpsi] The 32-20 and 30 carbine are of a different shape: 32-20 Win 1882 .351" base, .065"/.408" rim,1.315 case, 1.592" OAL 16kcup * ** 30 carbine 1940 .3548" case, .050"/.360"rim, 1.290" case, 1.680" OAL 40kpsi * Ken Waters 32kpsi for rifles 1989 ** Brian Pierce 16kcup for pre 1900 Colt SAA revolvers, 30kcup for post 1900 Colt revolvers, 40kcup for rifles, 2002 I have personally experimented with with overloads in 32 S&W, 32 S&W Long, 32-20, and 30 carbine. I have found that 30 carbine brass has weak primer pockets. I have also found that the top latch in some of the break top 32 S&W revolvers are tiny and cannot take abuse without getting sloppy. My opinion is the 32-20 is the best of the bunch. __________________ The word 'forum" does not mean "not criticizing books." "Ad hominem fallacy" is not the same as point by point criticism of books. If you bought the book, and believe it all, it may FEEL like an ad hominem attack, but you might strive to accept other points of view may exist. Are we a nation of competing ideas, or a nation of forced conformity of thought?

May 15, 2014, 02:38 PM	#8
Sevens Senior Member Join Date: July 28, 2007 Location: Ohio Posts: 11,756	I do a lot with .327 Federal Magnum and nothing with anything else mentioned except for the .30 Carbine. And I do none of any of these in rifles. In .327 Federal, you get a straight-wall case that's more robust than .32-20 brass will ever be and if working within the confines of published load data is a comfort zone you appreciate, the .327 Federal has far more range than anything we've discussed in this thread. If there's a downside to .327 Federal compared to all others... it's that brass isn't as widely available nor are the guns chambered in this round. Your take that folks on Gunbroker are "proud" of .327 Federal chambered guns does not exactly mirror my perception. What I've seen is that these guns are currently out of production and that often seems to boost prices as folks think they won't get one. (FWIW, Ruger has a long, established history of dropping things out of production... only to start them up again later. We can speculate, but history has shown that Ruger will likely make more of them.) For a low-cost dinking around load, I make a bunch of 71gr FMJ loads with a small dose of Hodgdon Universal. I run them around 1,250 FPS from my 4.2" barreled Ruger GP-100. I bought a slew of these slugs in bulk, so this load is fun because I have very little money in to them. Now, if you want to run this chambering to it's limit with jacketed bullets, the cost flies up radically. Fact is, you can't buy (appropriate) jacketed .312" slugs in bulk, and buying them by the hundred is just plain expensive. But if I want to run 85gr XTP's at nearly 1,600 FPS or 100 grain XTP's at over 1,400 FPS, from a handgun, that's easily done with this round. The load I probably use the most is a 115gr cast lead Penn bullet that runs 1,190 FPS over a charge of Universal. I take down steel plates with this one, and it's a whole lot of fun and also not too spendy. You never, ever, EVER find .327 Federal brass laying about scattered on a shooting range. But you also never lose the stuff to ejection as nobody makes a semi-auto to run it. But when you run it at high pressure, you will see your share of neck splits, more so in the nickel plated brass than the brass stuff. __________________ *Attention Brass rats and other reloaders:* I really need .327 Federal Magnum brass, no lot size too small. Tell me what caliber you need and I'll see what I have to swap. PM me and we'll discuss.

May 14, 2014, 07:00 PM	#4
ligonierbill Senior Member Join Date: May 20, 2007 Posts: 2,448	Sounds like I should put my energy and money into finding that 32-20 rifle and forget about the new 32's. Plus the folks on Gunbroker offering Ruger 32's of the H&R and Federal variety are really proud of 'em. I am really looking forward to working with the 32-20. As for the others, the .32 S&W is kind of a pain, but I like those old breaktops. It's not quite as weak as some think, and those old "belly guns" are still wicked. The .32 S&W Long is really a nice round. I'm loading a 94 grain hardcast over HP-38 at just over 700 to match commercial ammo, but an "in spec" load of slower AA#9 will drive that bullet to 800 no problem. And I had to try Speer's 60 GDHP, crimped over the ogive, to top 1,000 and act like a hot .32 ACP (check their manual). Mostly, though, I like the slow one that I can load cheaper than current .22 prices with more punch than a .22 from a Bearcat-size pistol (S&W I frame or its Colt counterpart). Still on the prowl for a reasonably priced K-32. The .32 ACP is a lot easier than I thought it would be, and I have not had a feed problem running 60 grain XTP and GDHP through an old CZ 50 and newer Mauser HSc. And of course, still watching for that good deal on a Colt 1903. But no rifles, except for the 32-20. I would love to hear anyone's favorite handgun load for that round. Most of what's published is for rifles.

May 14, 2014, 07:57 PM	#5
FrankenMauser Senior Member Join Date: August 25, 2008 Location: In the valley above the plain Posts: 13,424	There was a Colt 1903 and a S&W I-frame at an auction here, recently. Both were pretty well abused and the Colt had some nasty pitting on the left side, but both were still fully functional and appeared serviceable. They didn't sell at $165 apiece (starting bid) in the first auction, so the company put them in the "online bidding only" category for 4 months straight. I was watching intently, waiting for the starting bids to drop below $125 apiece. But, they never did. Instead, the company kept RAISING the starting bid, with each new weekly auction. By month three, they were sitting on starting bids of $300+ apiece. Finally, in April, they dropped the starting bids back to $135 for the I-frame and $155 for the Colt. With no bids on either revolver, I called the shop an hour before the auction closed, and told them I'd pay $200 for the pair, if they didn't sell, and buy a set of antique dining chairs from their showroom (major profit for them). They told me to pound sand, because they were consignment guns, and both revolvers "sold" with starting bids when the auction closed. I really want an I-frame, but it may take awhile.... __________________ Don't even try it. It's even worse than the internet would lead you to believe.

May 15, 2014, 06:46 AM	#7
ligonierbill Senior Member Join Date: May 20, 2007 Posts: 2,448	Nice pistols. Yeah, prices are up, especially if it's got that pony stamped on it. Lots more Smiths out there. I have read that those Colt Police Positives in .38 Special would stand up to the 38-44 "heavy duty" loads in the day.

May 16, 2014, 06:30 AM	#10
ligonierbill Senior Member Join Date: May 20, 2007 Posts: 2,448	I'm glad somebody is enjoying the .327 Federal. Now, I never said putting 6 magnums instead of 5 into a SP-101 was a bad idea. Actually, it's a good idea, and it would be a better idea if Ruger offered their 4" version in .327. Seems like they're made for each other like the GP-100 is made for the .357. By the same reasoning, with all the .357 carbines out there and selling well, a .327 Federal carbine would be nice. But they ain't there, and GB currently has a .327 GP-100 bid at $1k with "reserve not met". I do enjoy the old rounds, and I like seeing what these old guns will do. Got some Hunter's Supply 115 hardcast that don't look too bad plus some brass and a good selection of powder (probably start with HP-38). Like all old BP rounds, the .32 WCF case gives the flexibility to try some slower powders also. I see loads for AA#5 and #7, and #9 works well with the S&W Long. And Trail Boss is always a possibility with old BP rounds. Results will be reported (unless they're lousy).

May 16, 2014, 09:54 AM	#11
Real Gun Senior Member Join Date: May 19, 2004 Location: SC Posts: 2,743	On the issue of 327 Federal Magnum not being used in rifles, I doubt there is much of a niche for it. Remember the justifications for the caliber, and you will see that the caliber is all about revolvers. What niche in rifles would not be adequately served by an existing round? Is the .357 Magnum somehow difficult to handle in a rifle? Probably not.

May 16, 2014, 08:57 PM	#13
Real Gun Senior Member Join Date: May 19, 2004 Location: SC Posts: 2,743	Let's not refer to pistol caliber rifles in the same way as those using bottleneck cartridges. Pistol caliber rifles as a category is collectively a small enough niche as it is. The thread really isn't a list of dream guns that no one makes. If there was say a Henry in 327 Fed Mag, I would be right there ordering one, because I carry a .327 Fed Mag revolver. Sharing ammo with a sidearm is the premise for pistol caliber rifles. I just don't feel it is realistic to spend any mental energy wishing for such a gun.