Would you like a Browning 1911 .32 ACP?

[ttarp]

For how low the recoil that .380 produces, I do not see much benefit to shooting .32 ACP over .380 ACP.

To go from 150 to 225 ft-lbs of energy with an almost imperceptible difference in recoil is substantial and that explains why there are so many .380 ACP pocket pistols available and few .32 ACP pistols in general.

Ok, but this almost imperceptible difference in recoil is why I dislike shooting a P-3AT, and don't mind shooting a P-32. Also why I find the 1903 pocket hammerless to be almost like a .22, and way more pleasant than my BERSA .380's. I've never had the opportunity to shoot a 1908 pocket hammerless, but given my experiences with .32's and .380's I would expect there to be a noticeable difference. I might add, if they still imported them I would pick up a BERSA .32 in a heartbeat.

Now I get what you're saying, the difference isn't enough to justify less power, but there's more to picking out a pistol and caliber than having the most power you can shoehorn into the frame.

I think it would be a pleasant shooting pistol, and would buy one(in a metal frame) just to have the set of .22, .32, and .380 Browning 1911s, which are about the same size as the Colt 1903, (so not exactly a fullsize pistol).

Its just a dream folks, not ever going to happen, and wouldn't sell particularly well if they did make them, but it would still be kind of neat just to have the option.

[kannonk]

"The argument for such a pistol seems a bit confused. It's a defense pistol. Arguing for less power in the case of an accidental shooting suggests a rather curious and profound lack of responsibility.
Furthermore, I'd argue that lower velocity cartridges are actually more dangerous since they have a greater risk of ricochet, as demonstrated in the video that you yourself posted."

Actually, I did read a message somewhere (maybe this site) that someone's father was accidentally shot in the leg with a .32 ACP. (He said his father found it painful but didn't say how bad the injury was.) I never said I wanted to intentionally shoot someone accidentally. So I'm not sure why you get the sense I'd want to be irresponsible. One argument that I think is valid though is the idea that if there's less recoil, then it may be much easier to be precise with your shots. That being said, small pocket pistols don't seem ideal, hence the idea of an 85%-sized (more comfortable to shoot) 1911.

I'm a bit confused about the wording of that last sentence I quoted. The video on Youtube of that guy shooting a revolver is someone else. But I posted the link to his video.

I'll see if I have time to answer other comments later...

[James K]

The only reason .32 ACP is something of a rarity is that when GCA 68 was being written, a bunch of self-styled "experts" told Congress that .380 was a proper "sporting" and self defense caliber, while .32 ACP was a worthless "gangster caliber". Since most members of Congress didn't know a gun from a guppy, they eagerly leapt on anything that would satisfy the anti-gun gangsters, while not costing too many votes from the pro-gun side.

Hence, the .32 ACP (and .25 ACP) were banned from importation, while the "powerful" .380 was held to be good enough for shooting bad guys.

Jim

[OldMarksman]

All calibers can and have been deadly.

Lethality has little or nothing to do with practical effectiveness.

Is a 32 a good choice for SD?

I know of no one who would recommend one for primary carry.

...a small 32 is better than nothing.

True. but for most of us, "nothing" is not the only other choice.

[TruthTellers]

Originally Posted by ttarp

Ok, but this almost imperceptible difference in recoil is why I dislike shooting a P-3AT, and don't mind shooting a P-32. Also why I find the 1903 pocket hammerless to be almost like a .22, and way more pleasant than my BERSA .380's. I've never had the opportunity to shoot a 1908 pocket hammerless, but given my experiences with .32's and .380's I would expect there to be a noticeable difference. I might add, if they still imported them I would pick up a BERSA .32 in a heartbeat.

Now I get what you're saying, the difference isn't enough to justify less power, but there's more to picking out a pistol and caliber than having the most power you can shoehorn into the frame.

I think it would be a pleasant shooting pistol, and would buy one(in a metal frame) just to have the set of .22, .32, and .380 Browning 1911s, which are about the same size as the Colt 1903, (so not exactly a fullsize pistol).

Its just a dream folks, not ever going to happen, and wouldn't sell particularly well if they did make them, but it would still be kind of neat just to have the option.

Firstly when I'm talking about recoil, I'm talking about what the recoil would be in a 1911. I said in that post that the .32 has an advantage over .380 when it comes to recoil in pocket pistols, so your P3AT and P32 comparison is what I was talking about.

My point was that IN A 1911, the .380 will be just as "pleasant shooting" a pistol, but it will be a more effective, more reliable pistol over .32 ACP.

Not to mention, .380 ACP ammo prices are dropping due to the popularity of the pocket pistols in .380 today. The price for .32 ACP in the US is going to stay where it is, likely go higher as years go by. The .380 is going to either stay where it is or be going down over time, unless some hot new whizbang cartridge comes out that replaces the .380 ACP.

[ttarp]

So why are you comparing recoil on a fullsize 1911 when the thread is about Brownings 85% scaled down 1911? Its pretty much the same size as a 1903 pocket hammerless, I must have missed where the discussion changed to fullsize 5" Government models.

[kannonk]

"Did it occur to you that the rabbit probably died anyway—just in a location where the hunter couldn't find it?"

Well, I had random thoughts about what happened to the rabbits but didn't seriously think about it. I heard about someone who had a bullet lodged in his body and surgeons thought it was too risky to take it out. I saw a video on Youtube though showing what happens when you shoot a ham with a 10mm caliber handgun. That thing just jumped in the air and was destroyed on the spot. Even the hole left by the .380 ACP was larger than the .32 ACP.

"Theyve got a .22 for plinking, the 380 ACP for people who want a bigger gun with light recoil"

The thing however, is that the .22 lr is so silent and low recoil compared to others that I thought .32 ACP in a reasonable-sized handgun would give you a better "feel" practice for the hi-power guns. Let's look at size for example. The .22 lr, .32 ACP and .380 ACP are all about 25mm long. And the diameters are gradually larger (5.7mm, 7.94mm and 9.00). And the size (let's round out the numbers): 40gr, 70gr and 90gr. That means the .32 ACP is perfectly positioned between the .22 lr and .380 ACP. I took the time to look at a long list of handgun cartridges on Wikipedia and none have the exact characteristics of the .32 ACP. And besides, a lot of other cartridges are no longer made. If some people still find there's too much recoil from a .380 ACP or even .38 Special, then I think .32 ACP at least in a practice gun, I think would be the wise choice. Prices for the .32 ACP ammunition could also come down if it becomes more popular.

I'll see if I can answer more questions later...

[DaleA]

kannonk--this is a serious suggestion. Go shoot a bunch of guns a bunch of times. You'll gain a lot of insight (and have a lot of fun) doing this.

If you've already done this and consider yourself an experienced shooter than accept my apologies and go ahead and state what your experience is...it might lend weight to your statements.

As to how effective different cartridges are I'll just throw this well-known video into the mix of a man shooting himself in the leg with a .45 ACP. An unfortunate, painful, terrible thing to happen but the .45 ACP did not explode the leg or even blow it off his body.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYvAxLX6OzE

And I freely admit the video is a single, isolated incident. It doesn't really prove anything except if you think a .45 ACP will instantly incapacitate anyone no matter where they are hit.

[reteach]

tallball - You're right, there is a CZ 83 in .32 acp.
I have one and it's an absolute pleasure to shoot. It's my most accurate handgun. It's not a 1911, but it's all steel and near as I can tell, it's about 80% the size of a 1911. You can carry it cocked and locked. It takes a double stack magazine that holds 15 rounds. I have carried it as my main (only) ccw and felt very good about it.

[OldMarksman]

I have carried it as my main (only) ccw and felt very good about it.

Many people have voiced similar sentiments about a number of different handguns.

Might I respectfully suggest that how one "feels" about his or her defensive weapon may not correspond very well to its real effectiveness.

[tallball]

I don't carry or use 32acp for SD either. However, if I "had to", the CZ83 would be a good choice. They have double-stack magazines and would hold a lot of ammo.

[carguychris]

Originally Posted by carguychris

Additionally, AFAIK Canada generally bans the use of firearms in self-defense under almost all circumstances.

Forgot to respond to this one...

My earlier post was incorrect and has been reworded. What I SHOULD have written is that Canada generally bans the CARRYING of firearms for defensive purposes, AFAIK including within private property.

Canadian law DOES allow the use of force—including deadly force—in self-defense. However, the law also imposes fairly stringent storage requirements that effectively prohibit leaving loaded firearms readily accessible. There have been cases in which Canadians who successfully used firearms in self-defense have been subsequently charged (albeit not successfully prosecuted) with violating the safe-storage laws; Google Ian Thomson and Dennis Galloway.

[reteach]

Might I respectfully suggest that how one "feels" about his or her defensive weapon may not correspond very well to its real effectiveness.

True, of course. I was just responding to the OP regarding a .32 that's similar to a 1911 but smaller. Should have made that clearer.
I feel a lot better about my .357 as a ccw, and I'm practiced and accurate with it. However, 15 rounds of .32 that go exactly where you want them to go is not terrible.

[kannonk]

I thought I was going to give up on the accidental shooting idea until I saw these on Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGCKFzGAfQ0
Youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUonA66btgI
Youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=orloQnzBRCw
Youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aDPz4ODYsnw
Youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EK_1yDAqsnM
Youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZcGP0oCQzA
Youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=am-Qdx6vky0
Youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vkDN66XBm2I
Youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rv2YmSJ2itk
The point being this: most of the time, (well maybe not all of the time), when someone accidentally shoots themselves or someone else, it's not always in the head. If you want to shoot at a firing range with a .32 ACP handgun, the statistics I've already posted show even a .22 lr can be more lethal.

"...a Youtube video..." YouTube is not a source of reliable, accurate, info."

I mean looking at gel ballistics at least gives you a visual way of seeing the differences between some gun calibers.

"Long, rimmed, and straight-walled cartridges inherently don't feed well in autoloaders."

I didn't mean to take an actual .38 Special and put in a pistol. I mean along the lines of how they developed the .357 SIG. According to Wikipedia: "...was named "357" to highlight its purpose: to duplicate the performance of 125-grain (8.1 g) .357 Magnum loads fired from 4-inch (100 mm)-barreled revolvers, in a cartridge designed to be used in a semi-automatic pistol..." And if there's something about .32 ACP cartridges that causes rim lock, why doesn't any manufacturer attempt to modify the cartridge to fix this? Actually, I have an idea. They could modify the case of the .32 ACP, round out the bullet diameter to exactly 8.00mm and call it an 8mm ACP. Then they could make the equivalent for revolvers and call it 8mm Special. Then make an equivalent of the .327 Federal Magnum for pistols and call it 8mm Magnum. In my opinion, there would be a case for an 8mm Magnum. Why? Because I read once a police officer had to use a .357 SIG to get someone in a farm tractor because of the thickness of the glass (another officer I think shot with a 9mm but couldn't get him). So if penetration is desired in some cases, then a smaller round than a .357 SIG could penetrate more. And do it with less recoil.

More later I guess...

[TailGator]

when someone accidentally shoots themselves or someone else, it's not always in the head.

Maybe I missed it, but I don't recall anyone advocating otherwise. The point folks are trying to get you to understand is that selecting a less effective ammo does not make it safer in an accidental shooting, just less effective for when you need it. Safety comes from conscientious gun handling; everything else is secondary. Can you imagine defending yourself in a civil suit brought on by your accidental shooting by saying in court, "I shot him by accident, but I used a smaller caliber than I could have?"

I have no idea where to start in answering your ideas for a new cartridge.

[random guy]

I'd probably find more interesting a Hi-Power in .30 Luger with improved capacity (at least 15+1) and at a reasonable price. Might as well make the trigger DA/SA while I'm dreaming. Highly unlikely to happen though.

I wonder if anyone makes an M&P conversion barrel.

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by carguychris

I think you would find that, for practical purposes, this theoretical .32 pistol would be almost exactly the same size as the .380 version, because the .32 ACP case head is semi-rimmed and thus almost exactly the same size as a .380 case head. Similarly, the loaded cartridges are almost exactly the same length. This generally means that the breech face, slide (or bolt), and magazines will be near-identical; in fact, for many pistols, they ARE identical.

The Browning 1911-22 is not a 75% replica of the M1911A1. Both the .22 and the .380 are 85% scale. Based on the infor carguychris provided, it would seem that all that's needed would be to sleeve the barrel of a 1911-380 down to .32 ACP and the job's done.

If the silly guns weren't so expensive it might be a fun project to tinker with. Considering that they sell for around $600 and up (street price), they're too expensive to tinker with. Nice little toys, but I've shot both the 1911-22 and the 1911-380 and they just don't feel like "real guns." (That opinion is shared by an NRA instructor friend, who joined me in trying both side-by-side).

[Model12Win]

.32 ACP shells are too expensive for what they are. The .380s and better yet the 9mm Maks hit a lot harder and guess what? They're less expensive.

There is NO point to a .32 ACP IMHO.

[tallball]

There certainly IS a point to 32acp.

I have half a dozen or so and very much enjoy shooting them!

[Bill DeShivs]

There is plenty of point to .32 acp!
There are millions of guns chambered for it.
Because YOU can't see a need for something, doesn't mean there is no need.

[kannonk]

"I'd buy a newly made Colt M1903-with a steel frame."

How about one with a more modern design and modern of safety features?

"ATF handgun import points system and much of the NFA in the United States."

Thanks for letting me know about this because if I ever decide to start lobbying politicians on both sides of the border, I'll know what to start looking at.

"Its the first time though that I've heard someone consider the possibility of shooting themselves ( or others) as a determining factor in caliber selection."

Well, it might be a tiny side argument. Because the .32 ACP to me fits directly between a .22 lr and .380 ACP. It just seems like a reasonable caliber to shoot that gives you enough but not too much recoil.

"I think I will just stick with my Beretta 81..."

Honestly, if Canada would make the .32 ACP legal in Canada again (at least for medium-sized weapons) I wish Beretta could make a 4.2 inch or 107mm barrel version for Canada. The only thing I might be concerned about would be the metal warping inside after several thousand rounds as someone here said. The only other guns I could have considered are now either scarce or discontinued like the Walther PP in .32 ACP, the Sig Sauer P230 (or maybe P232) in .32 ACP and CZ 83 in .32 ACP. There's also the Tanfoglio FT7 made for .32 ACP except I can't seem to find that anywhere in the U.S. There are pretty good reviews overall for guns from Beretta, Walther, Sig Sauer, CZ and Tanfoglio. (Well, there may be some exceptions for Beretta or Walther but it may depend if they either got a defective model or if certain Walther models were made by Umarex.) Anyway, one of the reasons I was asking about a Browning was because I like the 1911 in 85% size and also it's a recognized brand. I wonder if Ruger would ever try it. I mean would anyone be interested if Ruger made a .32 ACP rifle?

"I wouldn't want hurt someone if I shot them??????"

I wonder if they'll reveal what kind of gun calibers were used in the Cincinnati shooting because there's only 1 decease at this time.

"To the OP. Welcome to the forum. I wonder why he hasn't been back?"

I'm back. It just took me time to start reading the responses.

"I can just "feel the bones" of the 1911 in my 03 Colt."

Can you tell me what you mean by "feel the bones"?

[kannonk]

"The best-shooting 32acp I know of is my Beretta Model 100. It is on a light alloy frame, but has a 6" barrel and adjustable sights. It is a tack driver."

This may be a superficial question but can you define "tack driver"?

"there must be some serious thinking disability in the Land of the Maple Leaf!"

Well, maybe a couple of my arguments weren't stellar but I'm getting some ideas from comments here.

"At best, the difference in recoil when shooting .32 ACP will be 37% less than .380 ACP, at worst the difference will be 19% less."

This seems like an argument to prefer the .32 ACP for shooting at a range.

"and function reliably with "bunny fart" loads"

What are "bunny fart" loads?

[DaleA]

tack driver---very accurate.
bunny fart---very light, low recoil, low noise load.

kannonk, welcome to the forum, you posed a provocative question.

No offense, just curious, how much shooting experience have you had?

[carguychris]

Originally Posted by kannonk

I didn't mean to take an actual .38 Special and put in a pistol. I mean along the lines of how they developed the .357 SIG.

Such a round would do very little that 9mm Luger won't do, cheaper.

FWIW S&W toyed with such a round in the 1950s, albeit primarily for precision target use. The project was stillborn.

Originally Posted by kannonk

...if there's something about .32 ACP cartridges that causes rim lock, why doesn't any manufacturer attempt to modify the cartridge to fix this?

Because the resultant cartridge would be nearly identical in capabilities to .380 ACP, and there isn't much market demand for a cartridge to fill this tiny niche.

Originally Posted by kannonk

...make an equivalent of the .327 Federal Magnum for pistols and call it 8mm Magnum.

A couple of such cartridges already exist: the 7.65 Parabellum aka .30 Luger—the parent cartridge of 9mm Luger—and the 7.62x25 Tokarev. There is already some latent interest in developing these cartridges for defensive use, as shown by random guy's last post. BTW I believe that both cartridges are legal in Canada.

7.65 Para will fit and function in almost any 9mm pistol with very minor modifications—in some cases, a barrel swap is all that's needed. Interest in 7.62x25 has been stoked by recent commercial sales of many vintage Warsaw Pact surplus pistols; many U.S. shooters bought these pistols to take advantage of abundant and cheap milsurp ammo that has since dried up, leaving some folks searching for another mission for the pistol(s) they already own.

The problem is that there's arguably little civilian justification for a pistol round that penetrates more than 9mm Luger, as evidenced by faltering interest in .357 SIG. Civilians seldom have a legitimate defensive reason to shoot through windows, walls, or heavy vegetation. Although .327 FedMag arguably shares this disadvantage, it also allows a 6th round to be crammed into the cylinder of a small pocket revolver, and some shooters (albeit not many...) are willing to accept the risk of excess penetration in return for 20% more capacity.

Originally Posted by kannonk

...if Canada would make the .32 ACP legal... I wish Beretta could make a 4.2 inch or 107mm barrel version [of the 81] for Canada. The only thing I might be concerned about would be the metal warping inside after several thousand rounds as someone here said.

What you talking 'bout, Willis?

There's no such problem with the Beretta 81, and I don't see where anyone has brought it up here.

Originally Posted by DaleA

bunny fart---very light, low recoil, low noise load.

It should be mentioned that such loads are generally most common for use in revolvers and lever or bolt rifles, since they don't require a certain amount of recoil in order to function properly.

Using such loads in an auto pistol usually requires carefully tuning the recoil spring weight to function properly with a given load. In general, only competitive target shooters have a compelling reason to bother with this.

[tallball]

By "tack driver" I mean "extremely accurate pistol".

It was made by Beretta. It has a 6" barrel. It has nice big adjustable sights. It shoots a round without much recoil. They aren't common. My friend at the LGS had never even seen one before. If you want to do some extremely accurate shooting with a 32acp pistol, this one should be on your list.

I am in no way endorsing 32acp for SD. I don't really care one way or the other about having a 1911 in 32acp. But I do know of at least one model of pistol in that caliber that is inherently accurate.