Chrono data on "hot" .32 Long

[AZAndy]

I posted this as a response in another thread, and then realized that it might be worth its own thread so that anyone interested in this cartridge might see it.

**This load is 0.3 grains higher than the maximum in the Speer manual for this type of bullet, and I am not recommending that you use this load.**
Having seen references on reloading sites to this load, and loads even a bit hotter, I decided to give it a try, and it's quite possible that I may be a crazy person.

Load: 100 grain MBC RNFP, HiTek coated
3 grains W231
CCI small pistol primer
Starline brass

Firearm: 1924 S&W Regulation Police, 4" barrel

Environment: About 5000' elevation, 82 degrees F, no wind

Distance from Caldwell chronograph: 7 yards

Data for eight rounds total: Minimum 834fps, Maximum 892fps, Average 862, Spread 58fps

Not bad for a usually wimpy round. I didn't see any signs of the pressure getting out of hand, so I may try another tenth or two to push things a little-- I think it'd be interesting to see how it does at around 900fps. Unfortunately, I don't have any accuracy information to offer, as I didn't try it on a target. (I was in a hurry to get back home so I could provide my promised Charter Arms range report.)

 

[tightgroup tiger]

You better be careful!
I'm not sure when S&W got their steel annealing process under control. It was sometime in the 20s as I remember it so if you blow up your little police positive, it's on you.
That's a six shot, so the chambers aren't that thick, and even if you think there is no pressure signs showing with the fired cases, that cylinder may not be made out of good tempered steel, as we know it today, so it may let go on you.
I don't think you should over load that gun no matter what the modern case your shooting in it look like.

Now that's your gun, not mine. I understand that, but your putting this post on a reloading forum and my opinion is to stop what your doing and stick to what the loading manuals say is safe to shoot in that caliber of gun. Especially that gun.

 

[25-20 WCF]

I agree with tiger, the OP has no idea of the pressures he has. Now, exactly what “pressure signs” is he using? What would he consider to be “out of hand”? Clearly he isn’t a very careful tester, not including accuracy data due to ‘being in a hurry”. He really should stick to published data; it isn’t perfect but it’s the best we have for a potentially weak pistol. Does an extra 40 fps even matter?

.

 

[AZAndy]

You better be careful!
I'm not sure when S&W got their steel annealing process under control. It was sometime in the 20s as I remember it so if you blow up your little police positive, it's on you.
That's a six shot, so the chambers aren't that thick, and even if you think there is no pressure signs showing with the fired cases, that cylinder may not be made out of good tempered steel, as we know it today, so it may let go on you.
I don't think you should over load that gun no matter what the modern case your shooting in it look like.

Now that's your gun, not mine. I understand that, but your putting this post on a reloading forum and my opinion is to stop what your doing and stick to what the loading manuals say is safe to shoot in that gun. Especially that gun.

The heat treatment started in 1919, from what I've read. I wouldn't shoot these out of my 1916 Hand Ejector. I think an internet search will take you to several references to the load I just tried; pushing this cartridge a bit seems to have been a fairly common thing back when it wasn't the obscurity it is today. I don't disagree with your concern generally, though, and will add a warning to the bottom of the original post. Thank you.

 

[AZAndy]

I agree with tiger, the OP has no idea of the pressures he has. Now, exactly what “pressure signs” is he using? What would he consider to be “out of hand”? Clearly he isn’t a very careful tester, not including accuracy data due to ‘being in a hurry”. He really should stick to published data; it isn’t perfect but it’s the best we have for a potentially weak pistol. Does an extra 40 fps even matter?
.

You're right, I have no idea what the pressure of this load is, since I can't actually measure that. The cases were easy to eject, and the primers stayed flat and in place, and that's all I had to go by. I didn't shoot it for accuracy because that's not why I was at the range today; I planned to test a different gun with targets, and chronograph this load, and go home. (I'll do some target work with this load next week.) The data I'm using is published on reloading pages from the past, though not in current manuals. I've added a warning and disclaimer to my post, and I surely should have done that in the first place. I'm embarrassed that I didn't. My apologies to you.

 

[Slamfire]

I posted this as a response in another thread, and then realized that it might be worth its own thread so that anyone interested in this cartridge might see it.

I didn't see any signs of the pressure getting out of hand, so I may try another tenth or two to push things a little-- I think it'd be interesting to see how it does at around 900fps. Unfortunately, I don't have any accuracy information to offer, as I didn't try it on a target. (I was in a hurry to get back home so I could provide my promised Charter Arms range report.)

You are using the wrong pistol to push the bullet to 900 fps.

98 LRN  Aguila Factory                                                                                                        
19-Mar-06 T = 51 °F


Ave Vel =665.9                                                                                                
Std Dev =17.52                                                                                                
ES =69.38                                                                                                          
High =697                                                                                                          
Low =627.6                                                                                                        
Number rds =32       

horrible leading

100 gr LBBFP .313"   2.25 grs Bullseye SS Brass WSP                                                                
19-Mar-06 T = 51 °F          
                                                                                                                                          
Ave Vel =693.3                                                                                                                
Std Dev =20.71                                                                                                                
ES =103.9                                                                                                                          
High =721.8                                                                                                                      
Low =617.9                                                                                                                        
N =32                                                                                                                                  

Elevation good, Windage left,  Mild recoil                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                                                

100 gr LBBFP  .313"   2.5 grs Bullseye SS Brass WSP                                                                  
19-Mar-06 T = 51 °F

Ave Vel =768.2                                                                                                                
Std Dev =16.97                                                                                                                
ES =62.06                                                                                                                          
High =807.3                                                                                                                      
Low =745.3                                                                                                                        
N =17


Elevation good, Windage good, Mild recoil, prefer this to 2.25 grain load

Your pistol, was made before heat treated cylinders and all of the pistol is dead soft plain carbon steels. Mine, only the cylinder is heat treated, the rest is dead soft plain carbon steels. I do not recommend shooting any hot loads these old pistols, shoot enough of them and your pistol is pretty much guaranteed to have some sort of mechanical issues. Even if it only goes out of time, you are not going to find parts to fix the thing. And the fact you are not seeing physical signs of pressure means nothing. I have a n old article of a pistol shooter who kept on increasing powder charges, did not see pressure indications, and claimed that pressures went down as charges went up! The gun magazine he wrote, bragging about his discovery, duplicated the load and found the guy was shooting 80,000 psia loads in his S&W.

 

[AZAndy]

You are using the wrong pistol to push the bullet to 900 fps.
Your pistol, was made before heat treated cylinders and all of the pistol is dead soft plain carbon steels. Mine, only the cylinder is heat treated, the rest is dead soft plain carbon steels. I do not recommend shooting any hot loads these old pistols, shoot enough of them and your pistol is pretty much guaranteed to have some sort of mechanical issues. Even if it only goes out of time, you are not going to find parts to fix the thing. And the fact you are not seeing physical signs of pressure means nothing. I have a n old article of a pistol shooter who kept on increasing powder charges, did not see pressure indications, and claimed that pressures went down as charges went up! The gun magazine he wrote, bragging about his discovery, duplicated the load and found the guy was shooting 80,000 psia loads in his S&W.

Thanks for the info, and for that photo of the M31! I'm jealous-- I have a '57 RP from just before model numbers were used, but it's a 4". I'm hoping to someday find a 3".

The when-did-hardening-start question is one I spent an inordinate amount of time on a while back, because I'd bought a Model 1905 that shipped in 10/17 and didn't know if I could shoot standard loads in it. From what I've been able to unearth, it started with just the cylinders in 1917 on the M1917, and at least the cylinders were being done on all models sometime in 1920. From what I could find, the 1905 started in 1919. So I load light for that one, as I also do for my Hand Ejector that shipped in 08/16. The gun we're talking about shipped in 12/23 (all these dates are according to Roy Jinks, the S&W historian, from when I had a membership in the collector's association), and the serial number is about 70,000 past when the hardening started on .32's, so I was willing to take the chance. Since I do have the '57, I'll probably assign this load to that one (and my sole H&R magnum, if it can be repaired). Your point about repairability is well taken, and I'd just as soon not whack the heck out of these older ones, so I do agree that caution should be observed if taking up the hotter loads on a regular basis.

I'm a little surprised to see how many people think this load is over-the-top, though. There's a load in the #47 issue of Handloader that shows a 98 grain cast bullet getting 1040fps with a 4" barrel using Unique. Could that be a data misprint, given that the info is on the loaddata.com site? Sure! But I've seen several references to loads like that from different sources, including with the W231 I used, so I don't think 900fps or so is way out there crazy-wise. If I can get in that vicinity, and if it's accurate enough, I could consider carrying a .32 Long, which is what my goal is here. I'd also like to get somewhere near Buffalo Bore's hardcast .32ACP at 1150fps someday for the same reason, though 1000 would be close enough to suit me. I promise not to use my Colt M1903 from 1922 to test that one.

 

[Walkalong]

You better be careful!
I'm not sure when S&W got their steel annealing process under control. It was sometime in the 20s as I remember it so if you blow up your little police positive, it's on you.
That's a six shot, so the chambers aren't that thick, and even if you think there is no pressure signs showing with the fired cases, that cylinder may not be made out of good tempered steel, as we know it today, so it may let go on you.
I don't think you should over load that gun no matter what the modern case your shooting in it look like.

Now that's your gun, not mine. I understand that, but your putting this post on a reloading forum and my opinion is to stop what your doing and stick to what the loading manuals say is safe to shoot in that caliber of gun. Especially that gun.

Amen to that. Buy a .32 Mag.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

AZAndy, I'm just curious. Why would you want to push a fine old revolver like your 1924 S&W Regulation Police? As you know for the most part replacement parts are no longer available. If it were mine I would be chasing accuracy instead of velocity. The normal 650+ fps is powerful rabbit medicine lol.

 

[Slamfire]

There's a load in the #47 issue of Handloader that shows a 98 grain cast bullet getting 1040fps with a 4" barrel using Unique

Handloader #47 is the Jan 1974 issue and I don't have it. I don't know the pistol that was the test article, I don't know if the author was using pressure tested data or not. If the author was using a modern, say 1960's or later 32 S&W Long pistol built on a K frame, a 1000 fps with a 98 grain bullet probably would not hurt anything. The web claims the last I frame was made in 1957. Your pistol is the I frame, like mine. My first impressions of my I frame was that it was a well built cap gun. The I frames are lightweight, carry a lot, shot seldom pistols. And one from 1924 is very old. I would say safe with low pressure factory loads, after all, what where they firing back then?

Those older magazines have a lot of data, in fact still do, that is not pressure tested. The authors are doing what you are doing, looking for physical evidence of pressure, which is not much better than reading tea leaves. I do have bud's who shoot 32 S&W Long's in 2700 Bullseye competition and while I have asked their loads (and forgotten them).

There are plenty of K frame 32 S&W Long pistols, if you want 1000 fps, that is a far better firearm to try loads that are above the load recommendations in manuals.

I wonder, if anyone with Quick load, or similar computer program, would they provide a pressure estimate of the OP's load?

 

[AZAndy]

AZAndy, I'm just curious. Why would you want to push a fine old revolver like your 1924 S&W Regulation Police? As you know for the most part replacement parts are no longer available. If it were mine I would be chasing accuracy instead of velocity. The normal 650+ fps is powerful rabbit medicine lol.

Because I grabbed it instead of the '57, basically. They're right next to each other in the cabinet. I don't intend for it to be my usual test platform.

The standard loads at around 700fps have been anything but accurate for me, regardless of the projectile, and are too underpowered. So I'm trying out zippier loadings. I'll do some accuracy testing of various loads next week; this session was just a quick chrono check as a sideline to an accuracy test with a new revolver I was doing. The goal is a load that I'd be comfortable carrying-- something along the lines of the BB load, which is a wadcutter at 900fps. If I can get a hundred grains of bullet going at between 850 and 900fps, and it's accurate enough, that would work for me as a carry load. I'll see. (But I think I've just learned not to talk about it here. )

 

[Walkalong]

That might be the answer.