A Pair of 32-20 Revolvers

[bannockburn]

Driftwood

Way to go! You made the right call on that one! See how easy it is to spend your money for you!

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

Howdy Again

Breaking the rules a little bit here, but here is my new 32-20 rifle. Winchester Model 1892, made in 1911. Octagon barrel to boot. I am a bit suspicious of the bright blue barrel and magazine tube vs almost no finish on the receiver. The dealer kept telling me that was because it was carried a lot and the blue was worn off the receiver by somebody's hand. I don't buy it, I think somebody replaced the barrel and magazine at some point. You can see how there is much less finish on the magazine hanger then the magazine tube too. Same with the butt plate, magazine cap, and fore end cap. The wood has been refinished at some point too.

Regardless, it is a real tack driver, capable of shooting much better than my poor eyesight will allow, and I am very pleased with it. I took it to the range yesterday for the first time and put most of a box of Ultramax 32-20 Cowboy loads through it. Sighted it in on paper first. Did not need to move the sights at all, dead nuts at 25 yards. Then I kicked a few soup cans around at the fifty yard berm. Lots of fun, but with my poor eyesight I could barely see the cans. I may put a tang sight on it, just for my old eyes, or I may leave it as it is.

 

[GBExpat]

Congrats on the fine rifle (even if it has been improved), DJ, and thanks for the pics!

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

I forgot to mention, the bore is spotless. Pristine, looks like it left the factory yesterday. Another reason I suspect the barrel is not original. And also probably why it is so accurate.

 

[Gordon]

yeah my original 1892 has quite a worn barrel and I shoot .315" bullets to get decent accuracy with it. I have found .32-20 barrels from pistols and rifles along with .25-20 rifles barrels to have had a hard life with black powder then early smokeless with chlorate primers. Winchester rebarreled a lot of them thru the 1950s, so markings can appear correct. What you have tho is the ultimate shooter and still a valuable desirable piece. Funny how these old pards seemed to be sighted dead on, huf ?

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

Funny how these old pards seemed to be sighted dead on, huf ?

Well, in truth, it's all in how you use the sights. This Winchester has a typical Semi-Buckhorn sight common at the time. There is a teeny, tiny V notch at the bottom of the ears. I shot it by placing the front sight down barely above the little V groove, which was dead nuts for me at 25 yards and 50 yards. A friend tried it and he was shooting high until I told him where to put the front sight. Then he was shooting dead nuts too.

 

[blue32]

Love that hand ejector. If you'd be willing I'm curious to know what the chamber mouths of the Smith measure.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

The chamber mouths of the Smith measure .313-.314. The .313 bullets that I have on hand for when I finally get off my butt and start loading 32-20 slip easily through some of the chambers, are a bit tight in the others.

I took the opportunity to measure the Colt chamber mouths too. Interestingly enough, they are all right at .314, and the same bullets are a nice slip fit through them. Snug, but they slip through.

 

[blue32]

Thanks. Wouldn't have thought the Smith would be so large.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

Thanks. Wouldn't have thought the Smith would be so large.

Just curious. This is my only adventure with 32-20. What diameter did you expect the chamber mouths to be? I have not found any official SAAMI specs for 32-20, so I do not know what the dimensions should be. Most of the loading manuals I have speculate a .313 diameter bullet, which is what I have.

 

[Walkalong]

This Smith will let my .314 minus Pin Gauge pass the throats, but not my .315 minus PG. I no longer have a Colt in .32-20, as I sold or traded it long ago. Wish I hadn't.

 

[blue32]

I would have guessed .312 - .313 max in a production gun from the early 20th century intended for smokeless loads. Unless I missed it, what I gathered from Keith and Taffin was that 32-20 was seldom over sized as compared to say, a 45 Colt. And its not like the varying diameters that the 44-40 has gone through. Then again, yours is a Smith and my only personal experience is with Italian replicas.

I've considered a hand ejector in 32-20, but with adjustable rear. Let us know how it shoots with those .313's.

 

[Walkalong]

I've considered a hand ejector in 32-20, but with adjustable rear.

Like this? It had been refinished and had the wrong grips, which is the only reason I got it at a somewhat reasonable price. I bought a set of correct grips for it. I do need to get a pic.

 

[Shanghai McCoy]

You have the coolest toys!

And now that includes the rifle.

 

[Gun Master]

I am the proud possessor of an old Colt Army Special 6" in .32-20. Doesn't look so good, but in perfect (?) operating condition.
The first HG I purchased was a .30 cal. DWM Luger in very good condition ($32.50).
The first HG I traded for was a S&W Hand Ejector 6" in .32-20 in good condition. I'm not telling what my trade was. I was young and foolish. Weren't we all, once ?
I can't remember which gun came first.
This was approx. 56-57 years ago.
I don't have either one today.

Do you sometimes wish they made a butt-kicking machine ?

 

[GBExpat]

Here is quick pic that I took awhile back of my .32-20 handguns.

I also have a Marlin 27S pump in .32-20. I keep looking for a levergun but so far every one that I have found has commanded far more money than I am willing to pay.

 

[bannockburn]

GBExpat

That's truly a fantastic collection! I especially like the two Colts on the right side. They appear to be Army Special or Official Police models.

 

[GBExpat]

Thank you, bannockburn!

... and, yes, you are correct, one of each .. good eye.