Author Topic: .32 S&W Short vs. long  (Read 9976 times)

Offline Flinch Morningwood

  • Top Active Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 346
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 1
.32 S&W Short vs. long
« on: December 27, 2009, 08:08:18 PM »
I've seen loading data for the 32 S&W Long...can I use the same loads for the S&W short?

The only difference seems to be the legnth of the case but I wanted to bounce this out to the pards who might know...
"I'll kill a man in a fair fight. Or if I think he's gonna start a fair fight."

- Jayne Cobb

Offline Pettifogger

  • Top Active Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 3613
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 19
Re: .32 S&W Short vs. long
« Reply #1 on: December 27, 2009, 08:39:10 PM »
No!!!!  The .32 S&W (aka short) has a much smaller case capacity than the .32 S&W long.  Smaller capacity = higher pressures for the same quantity of powder and bullet weight.  The only difference between a .38 Special and .357 Magnum or .44 Special and .44 Magnum is case length and if you put .357 charges in a .38 or .44 Magnum charges in a .44 Special case you will have problems.  Most .32 S&W loads go into el cheapo top break antique revolvers.  You don't want to stress those old guns.  The long was used in stronger, more modern guns.

Online pony express

  • Top Active Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 3629
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: .32 S&W Short vs. long
« Reply #2 on: December 27, 2009, 09:11:45 PM »
Not the same! I've got a Hodgon manual(2004 version) that only has one load for each, in the cowboy action load section. Hp38 powder, 1.1 gr starting load for 32 S&W, but 1.6 gr for the S&W long.Velocity listed is 610 for short, and 600 for the long. (long has 5 gr heavier bullet, also). So, case capacity makes a big difference.

I also just checked my old Lyman 47th edition manual, it has several loads for both, but some of them seem a bit too hot, over 800 fps for the 32 S&W, and some at 1050+ for the long! They don't recommend those loads for a top break revolver, and I agree, I'd use the "starting loads" listed in that one as a "Max" load.

Of course, you could just load it with as much 3f as will fit, then seat a bullet. No way to over-charge it that way.

Advertising

  • Guest
Re: .32 S&W Short vs. long
« Reply #3 on: Today at 06:37:22 AM »

Offline litl rooster

  • Retired Cowboy... with saddle a 94 and the good book
  • Top Active Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 11767
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 307
Re: .32 S&W Short vs. long
« Reply #3 on: December 27, 2009, 10:55:41 PM »
 your not going to get enough Black Powder in either case to harm them.....this is the Darkside
Mathew 5.9

Offline Silver Creek Slim

  • Buckaroo
  • Deputy Marshal
  • Top Active Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 18432
  • NCOWS #: 2329
  • GAF #: 144
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 104
Re: .32 S&W Short vs. long
« Reply #4 on: December 28, 2009, 07:28:50 AM »
your not going to get enough Black Powder in either case to harm them.....this is the Darkside
Amen!

Slim
NCOWS 2329, WartHog, SCORRS, SBSS, BHR, GAF, RBCS, Dirty RATS, BTBM, IPSAC, Cosie-in-training
I love the smell of Black Powder in the morning!

Offline Dick Dastardly

  • Master of the Dark Arts - MDA
  • Top Active Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 4629
    • Big Lube molds
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 4
Re: .32 S&W Short vs. long
« Reply #5 on: December 28, 2009, 08:26:44 AM »
I load the .32S&W with Holy Black for my lil spur trigger Remington .31 with Kirst Konverter cylinder chambered in .32 S&W.  My bullet of choice is the Big Lube® 32 80 grain bullet.  I seat it over a compressed charge of FFFFg Schuetzen.  That's the only place I use FFFFg in cartridges.  Since the case holds so little of it, under Three grains, the pressure stays safe and the bullets shoot fine. 

If you have an old break top revolver and want to stay safe with pressure, go with the Big Lube® 32 Cal 80 grain bullet over a compressed charge of FFFg black powder.  It's a fun side match caliber.

DD-DLoS
Avid Ballistician in Holy Black
Riverboat Gambler and Wild Side Rambler
Gunfighter Ordinar
Purveyor of Big Lube supplies

Offline Springfield Slim

  • Top Active Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 769
    • Whyte Leatherworks
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: .32 S&W Short vs. long
« Reply #6 on: December 28, 2009, 01:16:46 PM »
DD, so when is the 32 BL mould becoming available? It has said the same thing on the website for some time now. 
Full time Mr. Mom and part time leatherworker and bullet caster

Offline Mako

  • Shooter of the "holy Black", Frontier Gunfighter #1, STORM, Henry 1860
  • Top Active Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 1710
  • Cowboying since the Mid-20th Century
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: .32 S&W Short vs. long
« Reply #7 on: December 28, 2009, 05:21:17 PM »
Amen!

Slim
Hmmm, very true...I wonder if Pettifogger was talking about smokeless powder?
~Mako
A brace of 1860s, a Yellowboy Saddle Rifle and a '78 Pattern Colt Scattergun
NRA, TSRA, MCA, MCAA, ANA, MOAA, ASME, SAME, BMES, STS

44caliberkid

  • Guest
Re: .32 S&W Short vs. long
« Reply #8 on: December 28, 2009, 06:53:19 PM »
The best thing about shooting Holy Black is you don't need load data.  Just put as much powder in as the case will hold, with a little compression when you seat the bullet.   I use 3F for 32 S&W and a lead 70 grain bullet with SPG.   Don't seem to need Big Lube™ capacity in 3 inch barrels.   I think DD's 80 grainer was his Big Lube™ for the 32-20.

Online pony express

  • Top Active Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 3629
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: .32 S&W Short vs. long
« Reply #9 on: December 28, 2009, 07:18:42 PM »
Amen!

Slim

Oops! I forgot which forum I was in before I made my reply....or I would have skipped mright to the 3F answer........

Offline Delmonico

  • Deputy Marshal
  • Top Active Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 23324
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: .32 S&W Short vs. long
« Reply #10 on: December 28, 2009, 07:21:13 PM »
Oops! I forgot which forum I was in before I made my reply....or I would have skipped mright to the 3F answer........

No dessert for you next time. ;)
Mongrel Historian


Always get the water for the coffee upstream from the herd.

Ab Ovo Usque ad Mala

The time has passed so quick, the years all run together now.

Offline Dick Dastardly

  • Master of the Dark Arts - MDA
  • Top Active Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 4629
    • Big Lube molds
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 4
Re: .32 S&W Short vs. long
« Reply #11 on: December 30, 2009, 08:56:06 AM »
Howdy 44caliberkid,

Actually the little DD-32 80 grain pill was developed as a shrunk down PRS.  It is a  compromise bullet intended for .32 H&R Magnum, 32-20 Winchester and .32S&W, both long and short.  Yer rite tho about that short .31 Remington barrel not needing that much lube and the bullet is on the heavy side for that gun, but it shoots very well with it.

I've gotten that mold back in stock now and it's been a brisk seller.

DD-DLoS
Avid Ballistician in Holy Black
Riverboat Gambler and Wild Side Rambler
Gunfighter Ordinar
Purveyor of Big Lube supplies

Offline Springfield Slim

  • Top Active Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 769
    • Whyte Leatherworks
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: .32 S&W Short vs. long
« Reply #12 on: January 02, 2010, 03:18:17 PM »
I just received mine, will be casting some with it this afternoon and see how they look. Cute little bullets. Don't have any 32's to shoot them in myself, unless I go BP Wild Bunch with them in some of my 32 autos just for fun!
Full time Mr. Mom and part time leatherworker and bullet caster

Offline litl rooster

  • Retired Cowboy... with saddle a 94 and the good book
  • Top Active Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 11767
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 307
Re: .32 S&W Short vs. long
« Reply #13 on: January 02, 2010, 05:36:25 PM »
good photo  ;D 
Mathew 5.9

Offline Springfield Slim

  • Top Active Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 769
    • Whyte Leatherworks
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: .32 S&W Short vs. long
« Reply #14 on: January 09, 2010, 03:26:15 PM »
Here is a pic of a Big Lube(tm)  32 next to a "real" bullet, a PRS 45. Man, I really hate casting tiny bullets like this, almost as bad as doing bullets for my .223
Full time Mr. Mom and part time leatherworker and bullet caster

Offline Dick Dastardly

  • Master of the Dark Arts - MDA
  • Top Active Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 4629
    • Big Lube molds
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 4
Re: .32 S&W Short vs. long
« Reply #15 on: January 09, 2010, 05:10:06 PM »
Ja sure Slim,

But they don't take all that much metal and cost about the same as the PRS. . . Of course, labor is about the same.

I like shootn' 'em out of my lil spur trigger Remington via the Kirst Konverter cylinder.  I load 'em in .32 S&W brass with a compressed push of FFFFg under 'em.  I also shoot 'em with a snug load of FFFg 777.  Not much room left in that case under the bullet.

DD-DLoS
Avid Ballistician in Holy Black
Riverboat Gambler and Wild Side Rambler
Gunfighter Ordinar
Purveyor of Big Lube supplies

Offline Springfield Slim

  • Top Active Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 769
    • Whyte Leatherworks
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: .32 S&W Short vs. long
« Reply #16 on: January 10, 2010, 01:52:22 PM »
These would be great out of my 49 Colt if I ever buy a conversion for it. Or a 32-20 rifle with BP.
Full time Mr. Mom and part time leatherworker and bullet caster

 

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk

© 1995 - 2023 CAScity.com