Bullets stick out of cylinder.

[Pyro]

No, I did not tell him to shoot a cartridge the gun wasn't designed to shoot. He already told us he was shooting 32 S&W Long ammo in that revolver. What, it's not possible the ammo is out of spec and slightly long?

As far as I can see it's the actual cylinder that is slightly out of spec, not the ammunition.

I just measured some 32 S&W Long cartridges of fairly recent manufacture.

Sellier & Bellot - 1.265
Fiocchi - 1.270
Remington - 1.260
Mag Tech - 1.270

I measured the cylinder and it came to 31 mm or 1.22 inches in length.

All of those bullets he measured would stick out of the front of the cylinder enough to bind against the forcing cone.

 

[Zaydok Allen]

As far as I can see it's the actual cylinder that is slightly out of spec, not the ammunition.

Driftwood was measuring 32 Long ammo. So if your cylinder is too short, doesn't that bring us back to my original answer? The most likely explanation is that the gun is chambered for 32 S&W, not that the cylinder is out of spec. Unless you said that you found a 32 long designation on the gun somewhere and I missed it.

 

[Saleen322]

SAAMI Pressures

SAAMI MAP Pressures for 32s:

32 S&W - 17,000 PSI
32 S&W Long - 15,000 PSI
327 Mag - 45,000 PSI

Surprisingly the 32 H&R mag is listed as "NE" by SAAMI in the latest publication I have but an older version had max at 21,000 CUP.

 

[Jim K]

Note that even if the .32 S&W Long has a lower figure for pounds per square inch pressure than the .32 S&W (I am not sure why, but possibly a different measuring system was used), the longer case means that there are more square inches, so the absolute pressure will still be greater.

Many old revolvers, both .32 S&W and .38 S&W were made without any kind of shoulder in the chamber, so some can accept and fire longer rounds. Another case is the Colt New Army/New Navy series. After c. 1903, Colt advertised them as taking the .38 Special; that was done simply by drilling the chambers straight through with no shoulders. The result is that those revolvers will accept and fire .357 Magnum, a practice that is definitely NOT recommended.

Jim

 

[SlowFuse]

Hey guys, I saw the thread getting sidetracked on the pressure debate but in my post (#16) there's probably your answer. Lots of these revolvers were chambered in 32 m&h.

 

[oneounceload]

Why is it so hard to use the proper ammo in the proper gun,. especially when dealing with old guns of suspect heat treatment?

You willing to possibly risk an eye, finger or more by using the wrong ammo?

 

[Pyro]

There is no ammunition identification markings on the revolver.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

As far as I can see it's the actual cylinder that is slightly out of spec, not the ammunition.

Lets backtrack a little bit.

Here are the lengths I gave for several brands of 32 S&W Long cartridges.

Sellier & Bellot - 1.265
Fiocchi - 1.270
Remington - 1.260
Mag Tech - 1.270

Those are overall lengths. These are rimmed cartridges. Unless the OP's cylinder is counterbored for the rims, they sit behind the cylinder like in this nice old S&W 32 HE 3rd Model:



The rims on all the cartridges are all right around .050 thick.

Sellier & Bellot 1.265-.050= 1.215
Fiocchi 1.270-.050=1.220
Remington 1.260-.050=1.210
Magtech 1.270-.050=1.220

So if the OP's cylinder is 1.220 long, how is that out of spec?

By the way, the cylinder on my little Smith is 1.250 long. So the bullets of the longest rounds are only sitting back .030 from the front of the cylinder.

The cylinder on this nice little Police Positive .32 is 1.245 long.



As I said earlier, SAAMI Max length of 32 S&W Long is 1.280. So with a SAAMI Max round, the length of the cartridge exclusive of the rim is 1.230. So clearly SAAMI Max length cartridges, or cartridges over Max, would be a problem in that revolver.

I'm sure that revolver was made long before SAAMI existed. Cartridge specifications were looser then, who knows what the industry maximum length would have been. The cartridges are simply too long for the gun, that's all.

32 M&H? I doubt it. 32 S&W Long was a much more common round in those days. 32 S&W? Generally speaking, cylinders for that round were much shorter, like on this old S&W Safety Hammerless. Its cylinder is only .925 long.



No need to go for obscure explanations, it is obvious. The gun is meant for 32 S&W Longs, and the rounds the OP has are a little bit too long.

By the way, lots of old pistols did not have the cartridge specified on them, even very high quality pistols. I have 5 large Top Break Smiths; a Schofield, Russian, New Model Number Three and two Double Action 44s. None of them have the cartridge stamped on the gun.

 

[Zaydok Allen]

Interesting thread. Good point on the typical short cylinder when the gun is chambered for .32 S&W.

So perhaps Archangel's suggestion of nipping the tips isn't so bad after all.

 

[Gaucho Gringo]

I have factory(Privi Partizan) .32 S&W LRN ammo I bought a couple of years ago. The OAL of the round is exactly the same length as a .32 S&W Long case loaded flush with wacutters. When the .32 S&W Long case is loaded with a wadcutter bullet set flush with the mouth, the space behind the bullet for powder is the same as the space behind the bullet in a .32 S&W with a LRN bullet. I load mainly BP loads as 2\3rds of my .32 guns are the old BP break top revolvers but it is much easier to load a .32 S&W Long case than a .32 S&W, so my BP .32 S&W revolvers get loaded with a BP .32 S&W Long wadcutter load. Given the low pressure factory smokeless loadings, set to avoid problems with a .32 S&W or .32 S&W Long wadcutter load I wouldn't hesitate to shoot a smokeless .32 S&W Long wadcutter load in a .32 S&W gun provided the gun was proofed for smokeless powder. Bullet weight will figure into pressure curves, the wadcutter being a heavier bullet will up the pressure some but within the safe margin for the load. This is only what I do and have only to be responsible to me

 

[ljnowell]

So perhaps Archangel's suggestion of moping the tips isn't so bad after all.

Poor Arch, he was dragged over the coals in some if these posts and it looks as though his advice was pretty sound.

 

[Pyro]

I forgot to take the rims into account.

I'll measure the ammo next chance I get.

 

[Zaydok Allen]

Autocorrect got me. Moping was supposed to say nipping.

 

[45 Dragoon]

Hind sight being 20/20, at the time the "nipping the bullets " came up, that advice is never a good option when you're not sure of a guns cal. designation (which still seems a little questionable). So, say what you want now (now that you're geniuses* ), I'm older now and dont really care. I was interested in offering sound advice, not WAGs!

Mike
www.goonsgunworks.com

(*specifically 460 Kodiak -
I don't deal in "most likely" s #27, and in #34 you declare it to be 32 S&W.
Ijnowell " poor Arch" I remember kids like you in school . Always ready to jump in AFTER someone points a finger.)

 

[ljnowell]

Hind sight being 20/20, at the time the "nipping the bullets " came up, that advice is never a good option when you're not sure of a guns cal. designation (which still seems a little questionable). So, say what you want now (now that you're geniuses* ), I'm older now and dont really care. I was interested in offering sound advice, not WAGs!

Mike
www.goonsgunworks.com

(*specifically 460 Kodiak -
I don't deal in "most likely" s #27, and in #34 you declare it to be 32 S&W.
Ijnowell " poor Arch" I remember kids like you in school . Always ready to jump in AFTER someone points a finger.)

Ready to jump in after someone points the finger? Someone having a little moment here? I made a statement based in fact. Sorry if you were one of the people that made those comments, perhaps instead of attacking a second person apologizing to the first would be a better course.

 

[45 Dragoon]

Ha! Its easy to see who is having a moment!
Like I said, I dont really care what you say or think of me or what I say, but anyone who suggests cutting the end of a bullet off so they can shoot it in a gun without knowing for sure it is safe to do so is an idiot!
So, I have NOTHING to apologize for!
This forum is suppose to support SAFETY, not " see if this works".

So, what is the FACT that you based your statement on? I missed it.

Mike

 

[ljnowell]

Ha! Its easy to see who is having a moment!

Like I said, I dont really care what you say or think of me or what I say, but anyone who suggests cutting the end of a bullet off so they can shoot it in a gun without knowing for sure it is safe to do so is an idiot!

So, I have NOTHING to apologize for!

This forum is suppose to support SAFETY, not " see if this works".



So, what is the FACT that you based your statement on? I missed it.



Mike

Eh, won't get baited.

 

[Zaydok Allen]

45Dragoon,

Ok, with respect, I really don't appreciate being referred to as an idiot.

My original assertion was not a WAG. It was a conclusion based on the little bit of info the OP offered, one picture, and sound logic. Given the dimensions of both cartridges, and the fact that the ones the OP has do not fit properly in the gun, I don't think my answer was out of line. I'm also not the one who originally suggested just saying the hell with safety, it'll be fine. I'm paraphrasing of course, but you note I agreed with you earlier.

I never claimed to be an expert, or a genius. I stuck to my original assertion because it still seemed the best explanation. However, did you catch my comment earlier?

Proof would be nice though. Where's Driftwood when you need him?

Driftwood Came back in and offered a better explanation than I did. I respect his opinion because it is very obvious to me based on a few years of reading his posts, and seeing the visual aids he uses, which are always excellent, that he knows far far more about old revolvers than I do. I will always defer to his, and several other THR members assessment over my own. That's called common sense. When a more experienced individual refutes an assertion I made, and I can see I was wrong, that's not hindsight being 20/20, or jumping on a band wagon, or whatever other insult you care to cast. That's putting pride aside and accepting that I was wrong based on a more sound deduction than my own. That's why I made the comment that Archangel's comment not being that scary after all.

These are all elements of learning, and having a discussion. If you don't like my original assertion, that's fine. If you have better info, then share it please. I'm happy to eat crow on anything if I learn something in the process. I don't know why you felt the need to start name calling.

Also

Like I said, I dont really care what you say or think of me or what I say

Very mature.... Discussions and info sharing is what THR is about. If someone is wrong about something, teach them if you know better. The above comment has done nothing but made you sound like a close minded old prune. I don't think that you are, but you sure are going to limit people's desire to interact with you by being degrading towards people.

To the OP, sorry this one spun out of control. I hope you get it figured out without blowing your hand up. Like I said, I accept Driftwood's assessment. Do as you see fit though.

 

[45 Dragoon]

Kodiak,
I've read your posts in the past and it just threw me a little when you said what Arch said "isn't so bad . ." I was taught by good folks that that is not the way to see if a bullet will shoot in a questionable gun ( or any combo there of). I have enjoyed your posts.
The "idiot" part was to anyone that would offer the advice about shortening bullets to use in a too short cyl with the questions surrounding this particular situation. I apologize for any confusion.
I think it's best for all of us to remain on friendly terms on the forums. It is a great place for info exchange and I have learned much here on THR.
Crow tastes terrible, & I have eaten my share! Thank you for your maturity and I am not really that old, I'm 57 and sometimes I prob come over as an old prune (I'm just practicing for later down the raod!!! Lol) . But, I am old enough and mature enough that when I throw something
out in a post, folks here can take it or leave it, and I can't dwell on if they do or don't because, I cant do anything about it. Thats the thing about these forums, you cant have feelings attached. Some folks dont agree with me all the time (can you believe it?!!) but thats ok. I look forward to your posts.
Btw, Driftwood is fun to read and is obviously a very patient man and has a LOT of knowledge to share!!
Mike
www.goonsgunworks.com

 

[Zaydok Allen]

Fair enough. Moving on now.

Regards

 

[ABTOMAT]

I have nine ancient .32 S&W Short rounds sitting my my ammo locker just in case I ever find one of these guns.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

Ha! Its easy to see who is having a moment!
Like I said, I dont really care what you say or think of me or what I say, but anyone who suggests cutting the end of a bullet off so they can shoot it in a gun without knowing for sure it is safe to do so is an idiot!
So, I have NOTHING to apologize for!
This forum is suppose to support SAFETY, not " see if this works".

So, what is the FACT that you based your statement on? I missed it.

Mike

Since I was the one who suggested nipping the bullet I really don't appreciate being called an idiot, especially when I knew the pressures of both rounds were very similar and the OP told us he already shot 32 S&W Long ammo safely in the gun.

Like I already said, I would never tell anyone to do something dangerous. Like I also said, I wasn't suggesting he shoot a .357 Magnum (35,000 PSI) in a 38 S&W (14,500 PSI), was I? I new the 32 S&W and 32 S&W Long were the same or similar in pressures. I didn't take it as having a moment when proof was posted showing the 32 S&W actually had higher pressures than the 32 S&W Long and I didn't say anything of the sort. since you said your only worry was safety and it was shown what I said was not unsafe there was no real reason to call me an idiot.

I did not tell anyone to do something dangerous and I really don't like being called an idiot. You do owe me an apology but I doubt one will be forthcoming.

 

[ljnowell]

Since I was the one who suggested nipping the bullet I really don't appreciate being called an idiot, especially when I knew the pressures of both rounds were very similar and the OP told us he already shot 32 S&W Long ammo safely in the gun.



Like I already said, I would never tell anyone to do something dangerous. Like I also said, I wasn't suggesting he shoot a .357 Magnum (35,000 PSI) in a 38 S&W (14,500 PSI), was I? I new the 32 S&W and 32 S&W Long were the same or similar in pressures. I didn't take it as having a moment when proof was posted showing the 32 S&W actually had higher pressures than the 32 S&W Long and I didn't say anything of the sort. since you said your only worry was safety and it was shown what I said was not unsafe there was no real reason to call me an idiot.



I did not tell anyone to do something dangerous and I really don't like being called an idiot. You do owe me an apology but I doubt one will be forthcoming.

Wasting your time Arch. It's not worth it.

 

[Walkalong]

I agree. Let's call this one done.

 

[1911Tuner]

anyone who suggests cutting the end of a bullet off so they can shoot it in a gun without knowing for sure it is safe to do so is an idiot!

Respectfully...

There isn't a safety issue with doing this. In days long past, hunters would often create their own dumdums by flattening and scoring the round nose lead bullets of the day.

Reducing bullet mass with a given powder charge reduces peak pressure...so the practice actually makes the gun less likely to kaboom.

There may be an accuracy consequence to this...but certainly not a safety concern.