.32 H&R Magnum is more than THEY are telling you

Status
Not open for further replies.
I have a Ruger SP-101 in 327. Most of my loads are at 32 H&R levels or slightly hotter. However, I like the fact that my gun is rated for pressures much higher than any of my loads.

I am not sure what the CA Professional can really handle. Published loads are based on the SAAMI limit that was "lower than required" for most guns. However, unless a gun vendor says their product can handle more than the SAAMI limit, you are taking your chances going above published load data. And unfortunately none of the "standard" items (primer appearance, sticky cases, etc) are really of any use in this pressure range.
 
John_R said:
Filing the fiber optic site is a sub-optimal solution. :)

I've found the .32 Magnum Federal cases split more often than desirable; I'd agree they are delicate.
Click to expand...
I was referring to the Undercoverette in the picture rather than the Professional. I don’t own a professional, but I have heard they had sight issues. My Undercoverette shot about 5” low at 25 ft, and I filed the fixed metal sight down to where POI = POA.
 
I've had a half dozen or so .32 H&R Mags over the years, still own 4 of them. In my experience, it's a round with great potential, that was handicapped by the factory from the start. In factory form, it's a .32 S&W Long +P. The bullets are all lightweights, too light.

Handloaded, there is quite a bit of enhanced performance, depending on the gun your shooting it from. But you will not find that performance in the "mainstream" loading manuals, which have all become weak sisters to lame factory ammo (pretty much across the all cartridges sadly).

However, Brian Pearce authored an excellent article in Handloader, Oct/Nov 2018 on the .32 H&R Magnum. It is WELL WORTH buying the back issue, as it really shows what the cartridge is capable of. The number of loads are staggering, and include many bullets and propellants not found in the loading manuals. At least back in 2018, Handloader still had a pair. (I subscribe to their loaddata.com website and the editing out of good traditional loads has been noticeable the past couple of years).

In my testing, I have found three excellent powders. (FYI, I don't use Bullseye and Unique as they are generally not available where I shop, and I'm younger than 75 ;)). Titegroup works very well with cast bullets for moderate loads. Accurate No.5 is outstanding in velocity and accuracy for jacketed and cast HP loads in small defensive guns. Lil'Gun is the champ for highest possible velocity with 100-120 grain bullets, and is best with a minimum 4" barrel. (I've shot lots of the latter and my SP-101 has not melted :)).

Here are some results from my testing:

32HR1.9".jpeg

I have results from the 3" Charter Professional as well. Will post pics after I find them...
 
Last edited:
I have more than a few Charters. I dunno, there's something appealing about them. If they added an extra $50 per firearm of QC I'd willingly pay it. Sadly, they don't. Customer service in past was helpful... but the hassle of sending brand new guns back is growing old.

This is one of the "new" 6-shot .32 H&R Mags. Back in the day....they offered the Undercoverette as a 6-shot. 32 S&W Long, and continued that as a .32 H&R Magnum. Then many moons ago, they turned it into a 5-shot (so no advantage over a .38). Now for 2021 it's a 6-shot again.

IMG_8190.jpeg

Appealing, right? Since S&W stopped producing much of anything unique, interesting or special in the way of revolvers (or any other gun frankly), this seemed like a nice addition. After ordering and paying for it, out of the box, a range rod would not pass through the bore, and every chamber was misaligned, even though the cylinder bolt locked into place. Hmmm.... unsafe to fire.

Sent it back to Charter on their dime. Nothing was replaced, revolver was "adjusted". Maybe I'm old fashioned but when I attended S&W Armorer school, a misaligned cylinder in a brand new gun meant something was bent and needed to be replaced. But rather than replace the yoke, Charter probably whacked it with a babbit until the cylinder aligned. The result to the ejector rod was so tight it was impossible to unscrew without ruining it. Not good.

Less than 400 rounds and 6 months later - mostly mid-range cast bullet loads and factory JHP ammo - b/c gap was .014, five out of six chambers were out of time and shaving bullets, endshake was noticeable, headspace was at the maximum, and the revolver misfired from light hits 20-40% of the time.

Returned again to Charter. They noted "b/c gap .009 with is within factory tolerance", "all factory gauging in spec" and no endshake found. Apparently they measure things differently than S&W. After acknowledging that it was out of time and misfiring, more "adjustment" was done. Since "factory gauging was in spec", the revolver apparently misfires as a matter of course. Hmmm... they replaced the hand to correct the timing, replaced the mainspring (it had not been changed or altered), and polished the firing pin hole, mainspring strut ball, and hammer seat. Test fired with no spitting or misfires.

I fired 30 rounds through it without problems. Not sure I trust it as a defensive weapon at this point. I think Charter should have replaced it. Perhaps something was lost in the production translation from 5-shot to 6-shot.

This is not a Charter-bash as I have several other models (Undercover, Bulldog, 41 Mag Pug) that have been really great. But the inconsistency is troubling. You get a great one, then you get something that should have never left the factory. Eg. The whole POI issue with the Professional models I guess still hasn't been resolved. Probably won't be, as it would require a new machining program for the sight channel in the frame and/or a matching machining change to the barrel. Too much effort when 90% of the buyers of these guns either don't shoot them, or have poor ability and have no way of knowing the POI is off, or both. Or want to shoot and cannot find any ammo in .32 H&R Mag, or fire 6 rounds out of the box of 20 they frantically purchased for $40 and call it good enough.

Rant off LOL.
 
Last edited:
Boom Vang said:
I have more than a few Charters. I dunno, there's something appealing about them. If they added an extra $50 per firearm of QC I'd willingly pay it. Sadly, they don't. Customer service in past was helpful... but the hassle of sending brand new guns back is growing old.

This is one of the "new" 6-shot .32 H&R Mags. Back in the day....they offered the Undercoverette as a 6-shot. 32 S&W Long, and continued that as a .32 H&R Magnum. Then many moons ago, they turned it into a 5-shot (so no advantage over a .38). Now for 2021 it's a 6-shot again.

View attachment 1031744

Appealing, right? Since S&W stopped producing much of anything unique, interesting or special in the way of revolvers (or any other gun frankly), this seemed like a nice addition. After ordering and paying for it, out of the box, a range rod would not pass through the bore, and every chamber was misaligned, even though the cylinder bolt locked into place. Hmmm.... unsafe to fire.

Sent it back to Charter on their dime. Nothing was replaced, revolver was "adjusted". Maybe I'm old fashioned but when I attended S&W Armorer school, a misaligned cylinder in a brand new gun meant something was bent and needed to be replaced. But rather than replace the yoke, Charter probably whacked it with a babbit until the cylinder aligned. The result to the ejector rod was so tight it was impossible to unscrew without ruining it. Not good.

Less than 400 rounds and 6 months later - mostly mid-range cast bullet loads and factory JHP ammo - b/c gap was .014, five out of six chambers were out of time and shaving bullets, endshake was noticeable, headspace was at the maximum, and the revolver misfired from light hits 20-40% of the time.

Returned again to Charter. They noted "b/c gap .009 with is within factory tolerance", "all factory gauging in spec" and no endshake found. Apparently they measure things differently than S&W. After acknowledging that it was out of time and misfiring, more "adjustment" was done. Since "factory gauging was in spec", the revolver apparently misfires as a matter of course. Hmmm... they replaced the hand to correct the timing, replaced the mainspring (it had not been changed or altered), and polished the firing pin hole, mainspring strut ball, and hammer seat. Test fired with no spitting or misfires.

I fired 30 rounds through it without problems. Not sure I trust it as a defensive weapon at this point. I think Charter should have replaced it. Perhaps something was lost in the production translation from 5-shot to 6-shot.

This is not a Charter-bash as I have several other models (Undercover, Bulldog, 41 Mag Pug) that have been really great. But the inconsistency is troubling. You get a great one, then you get something that should have never left the factory. Eg. The whole POI issue with the Professional models I guess still hasn't been resolved. Probably won't be, as it would require a new machining program for the sight channel in the frame and/or a matching machining change to the barrel. Too much effort when 90% of the buyers of these guns either don't shoot them, or have poor ability and have no way of knowing the POI is off, or both. Or want to shoot and cannot find any ammo in .32 H&R Mag, or fire 6 rounds out of the box of 20 they frantically purchased for $40 and call it good enough.

Rant off LOL.
Click to expand...
You can get a lemon in any mechanical device. Charter should have taken better care of you though. You don’t win repeat customers with poor customer service. That said, it seems customer service is becoming an endangered species in nearly all aspects of life.
 
RCBS Cowboy 32 SWL dies designed for lead bullet diameters work for me and do not give a bullet printing through the case. The expander is .314. Other die sets, certainly sizers, seem to be expecting jacketed bullet diameter. I have been using 95 or 100 grain lead with 3.5 grains of AA#5.
 
Last edited:
pairof44sp said:
.32 H&R Magnum is the most delicate of any brass I've encountered. It's like they're made with brass foil. If you look at a loaded round, you'll see exactly how far down that bullet goes in the case. In good light, you'll see the lube grooves through the case walls.
Click to expand...
Which manufacturer’s brass are you using? This is first I ever heard of this. Just checked on Starline’s webpage for .32 H&R brass and there’s no mention of this.
 
After the 3rd trip back to Charter for misfires, they replaced the steel frame Undercoverette with this one:

IMG_9670.jpeg

This aluminium frame model is noticeably better finished than my previous steel model. No sharp edges or tooling marks. The trigger pull is very smooth. It is also lighter, which can be good and bad depending. Will post some shooting results.
 
My .32 H&R is a 25-year-old + 4” SP-101. I’ve never found brass (FC mostly) to be “delicate” at all, the OP’s source should try .22 Hornet or .32-20 cases if he wants to see delicate cases. I’ve loaded 100-grain XTPs to 1300 fps for decades, accurate and powerful - but then I don’t load for the weak H&R revolvers. Published data has to consider the weak revolvers, like many .45 LC or .45-70 loads. Unlike those cartridges though, no one has published ”Ruger-only” load data, and sadly never will due to the unpopularity of the cartridge.




.
 
25-20 WCF said:
... no one has published ”Ruger-only” load data, and sadly never will due to the unpopularity of the cartridge.
Click to expand...

Boom Vang said:
... Brian Pearce authored an excellent article in Handloader, Oct/Nov 2018 on the .32 H&R Magnum. It is WELL WORTH buying the back issue, as it really shows what the cartridge is capable of. The number of loads are staggering, and include many bullets and propellants not found in the loading manuals.
Click to expand...

All the .32 H&R Magnum +P loads you would need are in there, fired in both a Ruger Single-Six and a S&W 331 Airlite Ti. :)
 
Glad that Charter finally swapped out that gun - I have a couple (a Professional in 32HR and a Bulldog in 44Spl) and they've both been good guns. The Professional does require a strange sight picture...but I could fix it with file if I was willing to lose the fiber front sight.

Curious to get a report of how it shoots!
 
This took awhile, as the replacement Undercoverette had to go back for an issue with sluggish trigger reset after 40 rounds fired. Took about a month, and the revolver came back very nice. I hope Charter can get these issues straightened out prior to the guns leaving the factory initially.

Didn't have much time but fired two handloads @ 50 feet, 5 rounds SA two-hand standing slowfire (60 seconds). The first target shows the results and note the target was inverted for each group. MBC 100 grain FPL-C with 3.2 grains 700-X made 2-1/4". Sierra 90 grain JHC with 6.0 grains HS-6 made 3-1/8". Average for both loads was 2-11/16", which would be equivalent to 4" @ 25 yards, offhand. I think that's very good for an airweight snub. Like most Charters, especially the .32s, it shoots low. I have filed the sight a small amount, may do a slight bit more to move the POI up.

IMG_9820.jpeg

The second target is again @ 50 feet, this time draw & fire DA shooting (2 rounds in 4 seconds) with the 100 grain FPL load. Note the POI is much better. I ended with five rounds of DA rapid fire (10 seconds) - those are the circled rounds and they fall into 3-1/2" and are well-centered. For me at least, fast DA firing with an airweight revolver results in a higher POI than SA slow-fire. It is likely the result of using an imperfect sight picture with a deliberately higher front sight when shooting faster. Some heeling due to trigger pull weight and length in relation to overall gun weight might be at play.

IMG_9827 (1).jpeg

So far so good! Windage is perfect. I will try to get out later in the week and test a couple of other favorite loads, if I can sacrifice some primers.;)
 
Buffalo Bore makes a powerful 100gr jhp .32 Mag load that on paper looks like some level of .327 Mag and BB makes sure to tell us the ammo is NOT to be used in H&R/NEF .32 Mag revolvers.

I think that shows how weak the HR .32 mag revolvers were and how strong .32 Mag revolvers are. Unfortunately this is a topic few would be willing to push in going way over the 21K PSI limit that .32 Mag has.
 
TTv2 said:
Buffalo Bore makes a powerful 100gr jhp .32 Mag load that on paper looks like some level of .327 Mag and BB makes sure to tell us the ammo is NOT to be used in H&R/NEF .32 Mag revolvers.

I think that shows how weak the HR .32 mag revolvers were and how strong .32 Mag revolvers are. Unfortunately this is a topic few would be willing to push in going way over the 21K PSI limit that .32 Mag has.
Click to expand...

That load may or may not be over the 21,000 CUP limit. There's no SAAMI ".32 H&R Magnum +P" standard, so the pressure of that BB load is whatever he decides to say it is. But he doesn't say. I've obtained 1270 fps in a 4" Ruger SP-101 with the Hornady 100 XTP and 10.5 grains of Lil Gun powder. That load is only 18,900 CUP is available on the Hodgdon Reloading Data Center webpage.

I fired that Lil Gun handload in the S&W 431PD airweight J frame. It's an experience I won't be repeating. It was accurate if you could grit your teeth and concentrate to shoot it. With small grips, the recoil is punishing, and accurate repeat fire slow. Velocity was 1110 fps with large extreme spreads, and while the energy level was high, the bullet over-penetrated (in my view) 20" and didn't expand any better than a lighter recoiling 85 grain XTP at 1000 fps in the same gun.

I don't see the point of it, as if I wanted that amount of recoil I can load up a .38 Special revolver to +P and have even more power. Most people choose a .32 H&R Mag for a reasonable compromise between power and lighter recoil.

If you had a heavy all-steel frame quality revolver in .32 H&R - Ruger or S&W - and needed a more powerful field load, the BB load or equivalent makes some sense. But for a defensive load in a lightweight snub, I think there are better choices.

The loads tested and shown in the picture above are reasonable choices with moderate recoil. I really like the 116 LHP or 85 XTP in handloads. In factory loads, I would pick the Hornady 80 grain FTX. Another factory load for even lighter recoil would be the BB .32 S&W Long 100 grain cast wadcutter ammo.
 
Boom Vang said:
That load may or may not be over the 21,000 CUP limit. There's no SAAMI ".32 H&R Magnum +P" standard, so the pressure of that BB load is whatever he decides to say it is. But he doesn't say. I've obtained 1270 fps in a 4" Ruger SP-101 with the Hornady 100 XTP and 10.5 grains of Lil Gun powder. That load is only 18,900 CUP is available on the Hodgdon Reloading Data Center webpage.

I fired that Lil Gun handload in the S&W 431PD airweight J frame. It's an experience I won't be repeating. It was accurate if you could grit your teeth and concentrate to shoot it. With small grips, the recoil is punishing, and accurate repeat fire slow. Velocity was 1110 fps with large extreme spreads, and while the energy level was high, the bullet over-penetrated (in my view) 20" and didn't expand any better than a lighter recoiling 85 grain XTP at 1000 fps in the same gun.

I don't see the point of it, as if I wanted that amount of recoil I can load up a .38 Special revolver to +P and have even more power. Most people choose a .32 H&R Mag for a reasonable compromise between power and lighter recoil.

If you had a heavy all-steel frame quality revolver in .32 H&R - Ruger or S&W - and needed a more powerful field load, the BB load or equivalent makes some sense. But for a defensive load in a lightweight snub, I think there are better choices.

The loads tested and shown in the picture above are reasonable choices with moderate recoil. I really like the 116 LHP or 85 XTP in handloads. In factory loads, I would pick the Hornady 80 grain FTX. Another factory load for even lighter recoil would be the BB .32 S&W Long 100 grain cast wadcutter ammo.
Click to expand...
I do agree with you that there's a power range for a .32 revolver where the attempt to maximize power diminishes the intended benefit of lower recoil, especially in lightweight, small frame revolvers.

The issue is always going to revolve around .38+P and. 357 being capable of more power than .32 and. 327 Mag and people have and will continue to go back to that as a means to wholly eliminate a .32 revolver as a potential purchase to own. I will not deny that the bigger bore has more potential power, but it's power I am more than likely never going to need.

For many it's the ability to have more power if needed and the Buffalo Bore loads for .32 Mag have much more than any other I've ever seen and if I didn't have a .327 revolver, I'd keep a box of that ammo... but I do have. 327 guns, so I dont.

And I think that is a major reason why nobody bothers pushing .32 Mag because when you have a proven 45K psi cartridge in .327, what's the point?

As for Lil Gun powder, I was very interested in what that could do in .32 Mag as the books I have showed it was capable of impressive velocities at low pressures. Then everyone told me that powder eats forcing cones and I lost interest.
 
I'd like to find some some data for Ramshot Enforcer in .32 mag.

Full .327 is pretty unpleasant and slows follow-ups from an LCR. I think a milder .327 or very hot .32 mag is the way to go in a lightweight 6-shot snub.

The milder .32 mags and longs are just great for practice.
 
Practice loads are easy in .32 Long and Magnum.

I'd like to have a hot recipe of .32 mags to fire from my .327 LCR or a mild load from a .327 case that does the same thing.

I have some factory .32 mag ammo with 100 gr bullets that gets 1050 fps from my LCR so at least that level is possible. The recoil from them is moderate and controllable.

.327 mag cases are really hard to find and I've got plenty of .32 mag cases.
 
Last edited:
Shivahasagun said:
Practice loads are easy in .32 Long and Magnum.

I'd like to have a hot recipe of .32 mags to fire from my .327 LCR or a mild load from a .327 case that does the same thing.

I have some factory .32 mag ammo with 100 gr bullets that gets 1050 fps from my LCR so at least that level is possible. The recoil from them is moderate and controllable.

.327 mag cases are really hard to find and I've got plenty of .32 mag cases.
Click to expand...
If you're shooting in a .327 and only a .327 I would load some .32 Mag cases above the max with published data. I shoot .45 ACP in a Ruger Redhawk and I'm using standard ACP cases and loading them near .45 Super territory. Kind of have to load them hot to get any decent velocity as the long chamber saps gas pressure, but I personally load .38 cases over published +P data for use in .357 revolvers because I have a lot more .38 brass than .357 and also because the brass can handle it.

The biggest thing is not allowing hot .38 or .32 Mag ammo to be shot in a .38 or .32 Mag revolver, they're meant for .327/.357 Magnum guns only.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

D
  • Locked
32 H&R magnum - Titegroup & MBC 98gr DEWC
Replies
6
Views
564
GeoDudeFlorida
GeoDudeFlorida
A
  • Locked
Lee 90300 mold for 32 h&r magnum?
Replies
2
Views
316
Analogkid
A
S
  • Locked
32 H&R Magnum Reloading Die Question
Replies
8
Views
879
superbee922
S
mdi
  • Locked
32 H&R experience?
Replies
19
Views
785
Shivahasagun
S
TTv2
  • Locked
Load data for full wadcutters in .32 H&R and .327 Magnum?
Replies
2
Views
1K
Mr_Flintstone
Mr_Flintstone
Back
Top