Why 32 h&r?

PapaG said:

Excellent question. 327 Fed did the trick and deserves to exist.

Click to expand...

You rang?

I got into the 327 Federal magnum a few years ago. I got a Smith a Ruger GP100 a ruger sp101 and a Ruger single seven.
I did buy a Taurus 327 revolver and sold it the next day after I shot it.
I load & shoot 32 S&W, 32 Long, 32H&RMagnum and 327 Federal magnums through these revolvers.
They are fun little range guns.
I like these and enjoy the snot out of them.
To the people who look down on them go play with what floats your boat.
Life is simple if you do things that make you happy.

mcb said:

I want a 32 caliber revolver but I don't want a snub nose. Those are harder to find new.

Click to expand...

Not 32 H&R related but the 4'' S&W 30's and 31's are extremly hard to find. Most were 2" and 3" barrels. I lucked into a 31-1 with a 4" barrel awhile back. I shoot it better than any 38 spl/357 I own. I can say I would have never purchased it if I hadn't planned on loading my own ammo. Brass was scarce for 32's for a long time but with so many 32's hitting the market it will become common again.

All I can say is, just dismissing the cartridge as obsolete or useless is a mistake because 32 is coming back. Both in auto and revolver. Beretta just dropped a new line of 32's. I think people are just tired of trying to make 38 snubbies work.

TTv2 said:

Nobody is making a 5 shot 10oz .32 revolver, hence why it's unrealized, but maybe someday.

Click to expand...

Although it doesn’t satisfy your point directly, an example of what you describe has done by Alan Harton. Harton converted 17oz Ruger Bearcats to 32 H&R and to 327 FM, shoehorning fantastic power into itty bitty revolver cylinder frames. I had the luxury of lusting over one of these for a short time several years ago, and I’ve always wanted to have another made. I've never actually enjoyed handling or shooting any other Bearcat, but that Harton 32 was absolutely sublime, and I was a fool for letting it go.

An airweight J frame in 32 H&R or 327 Federal makes a lot of sense as a pocket gun. One extra round over 38 special might make a bigger difference than the slightly higher KE would. I wish S&W hadn't stopped making them, and I wish I had bought one when they were blowing them out at $400. I bought a used LCR in 327 for $375 but I prefer the S&W platform over the Ruger.

Edit to add: if Colt made a modernized stainless version of the Agent again I would absolutely buy one.

The 32 H&R power level is now consider "good enough" by most. It comes without the muzzle blast of the 327. Many handloaders report that they load less than full power loads for shooting in 327 guns (myself included). The muzzle blast from the 327 has probably done more to turn off folks than anything else.

The higher pressures of the 327 are also an issue with respect to stresses on guns. CA went from 32 H&R to 327 and back to 32 H&R. Ruger has had issues with 327 guns that would probably not have been a problem with 32 H&R pressures.

IMHO, H&R did shooters no favors when they issued the 32 H&R with a MAP of only 21,000 CUP when the 357 rating was 45,000 CUP (later 35,000 psi). The 327 then "overcompensated" by pushing the new rating up to 45,000 psi. Based on comparison to 32 S&W long ratings, that 21,000 CUP is probably somewhere close to 24,000 psi. Had the 32 H&R been rated closer to 30,000 psi, the "need" for the 327 would not have been enough for it to be issued and the 32 H&R would have been much more popular over the long run.

Varminterror said:

Although it doesn’t satisfy your point directly, an example of what you describe has done by Alan Harton. Harton converted 17oz Ruger Bearcats to 32 H&R and to 327 FM, shoehorning fantastic power into itty bitty revolver cylinder frames. I had the luxury of lusting over one of these for a short time several years ago, and I’ve always wanted to have another made. I've never actually enjoyed handling or shooting any other Bearcat, but that Harton 32 was absolutely sublime, and I was a fool for letting it go.

Click to expand...

I had to look that up. Looks like a very impressive Bearcat.

It reminded me of a Hellcat in .32 H&R I saw for sale not too long ago. It was really nice except for some garish white paint inlay. Although, this version looks quite impressive.

The closest I'd ever come would be converting my Bearcat to .22 mag. Call it a poor man's version of all of the above.

chicharrones said:

Although, this version looks

Click to expand...

... Like a typical Reeder revolver...

As long as he's been doing this, man, it's super frustrating to look at his work.

Varminterror said:

Although it doesn’t satisfy your point directly, an example of what you describe has done by Alan Harton. Harton converted 17oz Ruger Bearcats to 32 H&R and to 327 FM, shoehorning fantastic power into itty bitty revolver cylinder frames. I had the luxury of lusting over one of these for a short time several years ago, and I’ve always wanted to have another made. I've never actually enjoyed handling or shooting any other Bearcat, but that Harton 32 was absolutely sublime, and I was a fool for letting it go.

Click to expand...

Ruger does have something with the Bearcat frame in a .32, they also have something in the Super Wrangler and .32 and .38, but they seem real hesitant to make centerfire versions of those single action revolvers.

I have an S&W Model 16-4, 32 H&R Mag. My only 32 H&R Mag revolver at present. I load mostly 32 wadcutters in 32 H&R cases for it.

We have a ground hog problem on our farm and 22LR just takes too many rounds to put the ground hog out of my misery. I have an SP101 chambered in 327 Fed mag but I have 32 H&R Mag loads loaded in 327 cases that I hope will do a better job on the ground hogs. The SP101 is more convenient for carry and shoot than a larger 38 Special K-frame sized gun.

Fortunately I reload so ammo supply is not an issue. When available I buy cases by the 500's or 1000's so as long as primers and powder are available, I'm set. I have moulds for 32 caliber bullets.

chicharrones said:

I had to look that up. Looks like a very impressive Bearcat.

It reminded me of a Hellcat in .32 H&R I saw for sale not too long ago. It was really nice except for some garish white paint inlay. Although, this version looks quite impressive.

The closest I'd ever come would be converting my Bearcat to .22 mag. Call it a poor man's version of all of the above.

Click to expand...

You can see what looks like some serious chunks/chatter with the grips on that one.

Why the Best Snub Nose Caliber is .32​

Bazoo said:

You can see what looks like some serious chunks/chatter with the grips on that one.

Click to expand...

Yes, you and @Varminterror are right. The execution is lacking. I like the idea of .32 mag in a Bearcat though.

The reason that I keep a .32 around is versatility. A revolver chambered in 327FDRL can safely and accurately fire 327FDRL, 32H&R, .32LNG (.32COLTNP), .32ACP (7.65BRWNNG), .32S&W, .32COLT. There is nothing magic about the 327 chambering. It just adds 2 more options to the variety. My actual favorite is the .32ACP in my late fifties .32LNG I frame S&W with a 3inch barrel. A jacketed hollow point at @1000fps is really accurate and a nasty piece of work. I do not currently own a 327, but I am constantly looking for one that checks all the right boxes.

A while back I found this article from a 1984 issue of Guns and Ammo all about the new .32 h&r magnum caliber. I think this thread might be a fun place to share it.

I like 32 revolvers and have a bunch of them.

32 S&W long is great for beginners when they're ready to move on from 22's.

32 H&R magnum is not much of a step up. Most people don't feel a big difference from the longs.

At that point you have a reasonable SD caliber with low recoil fired from a simple-to-understand revolver.

That's a good SD combo for people who aren't "gun people" and aren't really going to practice.

When I'm older and my hands are worse and I can't shoot 38's without pain anymore, I have some nice 32's waiting for me.

I don't generally think of certain cartridges being special, but on consideration I suppose I can think of a few that I use more than others: .22 LR, 9x19, .38 Special, .45 ACP and AutoRim, .44 Magnum, 7.62 & 5.56 NATO -- and .32 H&R.

While I like all kinds of cartridges and revolvers, it just happens that .32s are the most numerous in my safes, partly because of a specific niche collecting interest in military revolvers, but also because handloading the ammo is cheap and easy and the light recoil is pleasant. When introducing a new shooter to centerfire handguns, 32 H&R is my preferred follow-on to .22 LR. It has filled a sweet spot for me, though I'll be the first to admit that .38 Special can do some of the same jobs.

My .32 revolvers basically fall into two groups.

There's the .32 ACP/S&W/S&W Long/H&R/.327Fed family:



Those two Soviet Nagants are fitted with a second cylinder, re-reamed from .32 ACP to .32 H&R. They also make an appearance here with my 32-20 and military 7.5-8mms:



I bought a third Russian Nagant SA since this photo. When all else fails, every revolver from this group will function with a single compromise handload made using shortened 7.62 Nagant Gas Seal brass and HBWC bullets. The expanding base of these bullets addresses the larger bore diameter of the 8mm French M92. I use the same .32 HBWC Lapua bullets in revolvers from both groups.

If I ever get my hands on an Austro-Hungarian Rast & Gasser 8mm, it will go into the first group since .32 H&R brass will chamber in its cylinder.

32 H&R is also a great reduced power cartridge for use with chamber adapters in 7.5-8mm service rifles. I have to think a bit to recall how many rifles I've shot .32 H&R through. I think it's 22 at present, but I may have overlooked a couple.

This, of course, brings up a couple of other questions:

Why shoot with chamber adapters? Because my indoor range permits pistol-caliber carbines but not highpower rifle use. Also, the quiet report and non-existent recoil makes shooting old milsurp rifles pleasant and fun. They'd no doubt make an excellent short range small game option in certain circumstances.

Why not shoot at a proper range that allows highpower rifle use? The nearest one of those requires an additional hour of driving, and too I'm old and lazy to do that very often.

Kookla said:

If you handload, it is an extremely fun catridge to shoot.

Click to expand...

That's an understatement.

Great to see the .32’s getting so much love

PS: lol…as I posted this I looked down and saw the Similar Threads box below my message and the first thread title was “Why no love for the .32 H&R?”. That was back from 2018.

Can you shoot the 32acp in the 327 Federal magnum.

I like shooting different calibers. My 1st 32 was my little 32 SW long H&R. Then a got a Ruger SP101 327 mag with the 4 inch barrel. I like it can shoot the longs and the H&R mag too.

Highland Lofts said:

Can you shoot the 32acp in the 327 Federal magnum.

Click to expand...

It depends on the exact handgun. Some of my 32 magnum revolvers fire 32acp reliably, some fire it unreliably, and some won't ignite it at all.

Highland Lofts said:

Can you shoot the 32acp in the 327 Federal magnum.

Click to expand...

As stated above, it depends, but I will tell you you will lose a tremendous amount of velocity doing so. The .32 doesn't have enough powder to burn properly during the long jump to the forcing cone.