30-30 vs. 32 Winchester Special

Here's the first ad that I found that shows the Model 1894 with the .30 WCF cartridge...

That's from 1895.

https://books.google.com/books?id=4CsAAAAAYAAJ&q=winchester#v=snippet&q=winchester&f=false


It's interesting that I'm not finding a lot of advertisements for Winchester in Muncey's, though. It could be that some of the advertising sections don't appear to have been scanned. Damn...

But what there are, in a lot of the fiction/short stories, is countless references to people having and using Winchester rifles.


Interesting...

Here's an advert for the Model 1907 in .351. I hope they're not claiming it was suitable for moose hunting...

https://books.google.com/books?id=q8HNAAAAMAAJ&q=winchester#v=snippet&q=winchester&f=false


I never did find the ad that I linked above, but there are a number of volumes missing in the Google digitization.
 
Also of note is the variety of loads available back in the day. One of which really piques my interest, a factory round specifically designed for small game; of particular importance to depression era farming families who could only afford 1 gun that had to handle everything from moose down to rabbits, squirrels, turkeys, and other critters for meat that you don't necessarily want to be blowing up with the family deer rifle.
Click to expand...

Given this, I bet there must have been many a farmer who opted for a 32/20, 38/40 or 44/40 instead of a 30/30 rifle to harvest table fare from rabbits up to deer (at least). Only one load to worry with and you just shoot whate'er critter the gods of hunting present.
 
My 6th edition 1989 is the first to arrive.
It cost me $86 for the books, but I found the joke.
If there is such a thing as an unnecessary cartridge, the 32 Special would certainly cop the prize. Contrary to popular belief, it was not intended as a more power round than the 30-30. It was originally designed as a smokeless powder cartridge, that once fired, could be reloaded with black powder. It was found that a 32-caliber and a rifling twist of 1 in 16 inches would accomplish this ideal better than the 30-30 and its rifle twist of 1 in 12 inches. The smaller bore and quick twist of the latter fouled so badly that accuracy was completely eliminated within a very few rounds. Apparently the 32-Special appealed to the man with a lot of black powder to use up, or would not accept anything new unless it came in small doses. With a pitted, rusted or worn bore, the 30-30 will continue to deliver reasonable practical accuacy. Once the bore of a 32-Special starts to go, you can't hit a flock of barns with it. Any difference in power between the two exists only in the imagination of the hot stove league. It's a lot better than the 30-30 only if you don't think smokeless powder is here to stay. All this not withstanding, many hunters like the 32 Special, and its actually just as good a deer cartridge as the 30-30.
 
Compare that with the statement for the .32 Special in the 11th edition of Cartridges of the World.

Whomever wrote it disagrees with the 6th edition's commentary pretty much 100%.


In my experience (exceptionally limited) a .32 with a worn bore will continue to shoot jacketed bullets fairly well, but accuracy of lead bullets drops off quickly.
 
The 32 special break comes between the 7th 1993 Barnes with Ken Warner eulogy and the 8th 1997 Mcpherson.

Barnes died in 1992.
 
Two factors I can think of which may have been a consideration in the day of folks choosing the 32 over the 30 bore.

1) Prior to the advent of the velocity potential of nitro powders, velocity was limited to less than 2,000 fps by the nature of gunpowder. Realistically, velocities were around 1,400 - 1,600 fps. Where we today might the discuss the velocity-dependent variables of knock down power, or hydrostatic shock and cavitation, as the characteristics which affect terminal performance, back in the day bullet weight, alloy, nose design, and diameter were really the only variables one could monkey around with in order to affect terminal performance. Hence a larger, heavier, slug would tend to appeal to riflemen of that era. Bigger bullet, bigger hole, faster blood loss = better performance.

2) Riflemen are generally a pretty conservative lot, and suspicious of change. The 32 bore had both tradition and a reputation for accuracy going for it. The 32-20 and the 32-40 were well established performers by the time the 30-30 was introduced, and were even then considered "small bore" chamberings. The 32-40 still holds a number of schuetzen rifle records to this day for accuracy, and was well known as an accurate cartridge. I suspect many folks greeted the 30 bore with the same skepticism that many today hold for the 17 bore. So a rifleman presented with the choice would perhaps say, 32 bore is known for accuracy, I have 32 caliber moulds already while the 30-30 uses jacketed bullets, the 32 Special gives me more velocity than the 32-40, so what's not to like?
 
Last edited:
You really have to put yourself in the context of the times to appreciate the decisions made.

Put yourself in Winchester's place at the time. You make both rifles and ammo for them in fierce competition with the Marlin/UMC/Remington consortium. Marketing and timing and the perception snowball effect (both good and bad) determine who gets rags and who gets riches.

So Winchester markets both the 30 WCF and the 32 Win SPL and beats the true competitor with sales either way. Maybe they compete against themselves somewhat but who cares if its an ultimate win-Win situation.
 
The only thing that has to be considered in all is the 6 year differential between introduction of the .30-30 and the .32 Special.

That says to me that Winchester never considered there to be a need for one when the .30-30 was first introduced, and only introduced the .32 in response to demands from shooters.
 
Mike Irwin
... in response to demands from shooters.
Click to expand...

I try to see the future, but am always getting surprised.
The Taurus Judge 410 revolver looked like V-8 motorcycle novelty to me 10 years ago..... then I saw them selling and I started getting emails asking questions about them.

I love Barnes comments on the 32 Special, as it gives comic relief to a book I read like an obsessed nerd.

But the 32 Special seems to me nowhere near as nuts as the Judge, and the Judge is selling.

I don't own either, but thanks to this thread, I have a pile of copies of Cartridges of the World.
 
There is an old "Story" that Winchester had a lot of .32cal barrels, and the .32-40 wasn't moving them well enough, so they created a new .32cal round, the .32 Winchester Special.

One fellow I knew had both, M94s in .30-30 and .32 Special. The .32 was his "bear gun". Not because it was more powerful, but because for decades, he only saw bear when he was carrying the .32! ;)
 
I know two guys with 94s in both calibers, same story. The 30-30 is in not nearly so good of condition as the 32 and cost nearly the same.
 
"There is an old "Story" that Winchester had a lot of .32cal barrels, and the .32-40 wasn't moving them well enough, so they created a new .32cal round, the .32 Winchester Special."

I'm putting that one in the story camp.

Winchester pioneered nickel steel for its new smokeless powder cartridges, and while I'm not 100% sure, I don't think they ever switched over to the nickel steel for the .38-55 or the .32-40, or at least didn't do so for quite a few years after the .32 Special was introduced.
 
I've owned a model 94 in both 30-30 and .32 Special. They both work well on deer out to 150-200 yards. I no longer own the 30-30, but kept the .32 special because it belonged to my dad. It's still a reliable brush gun for deer and I have no problem getting ammo for it through the internet and some of the larger box stores. I use 170 grain SP. Not a wide selection out there but for what I need it will do. I have been using a 25-06, or .308 bolt action for medium game for quite a while, but will hunt with the .32 in memory of my dad on occasion. It's fun to shoot and I've always used the iron sights.
 
I dissected a number of them and found several rounds that contained 30 grs. +- .5 grs. of a stick type powder which was somewhat translucent in color. Winchester lab. records from 1895 indicate that 30 grs. of DuPont .30 Caliber Smokeless Powder was used in the early loadings.
Click to expand...

That is Dupont #1 powder and I have some loads for it using for many cartridges, BP and Smokeless. #1 was introduced in 1894 and discontinued in 1926. It was designed to be used in case capacity loadings. It has a burn rate close to 4198 but DO NOT substitute the two. I'm betting the guys 30grs was due to moisture as #1 was hygroscopic and would draw moisture. 26.5gr was the recommended loading on a 30-30 Winchester, 29 gr was the recommended loading for the 32 Winchester Special. #1 was replaced with #80 and that was replaced with 4759, which I still use today.

Gun powders in the late 1800's and early 1900's were very "unique" they made semi-smokeless and Lesmoke, many of the Schuetzen shooters, were using #1 as a priming powder and the semi-smokeless and Lesmoke were very volatile. Chemistry and experimentation as come a long way since the beginnings of smokeless powder.
 
I thought my 32wsp shot cast so well was because of the slower twist, now I'm thinking the deeper groove is at least as important. BTW, somewhere I read that 30/30 brass run thru 32 spec. Dies wasn't as accurate as 32spec. because it was shorter. This has not been my experience.
 
Have both. Although quite near the same in ballistics. For some unknown reason on deer the 32 I think is the better of the two. Don't really know why. Just a feeling is all. Yup!! Maybe two calibers larger does make a difference.
 
I have 3 Winchester 94 carbines, One 1894 Rifle and one Marlin 1893 Rifle in 32 Special.

It is my favorite caliber and you can get a deal on them since many people believe that they are an obsolete cartridge you can't find any more.
 
I can't imagine why. The 32 Special may have had a reason to exist back when smokeless powder was a newfangled notion, but any ballistic difference between it and a 30-30 is nonexistant. Unless you are convinced that this smokeless powder fad is about to go away soon, there's no reason to own one,
Click to expand...

OK, a VERY obscure possibility, I admit, but consider this: There may come a day when smokeless powder does go away because of ever increasing, Draconian gun control laws. In that case, black powder could still be fabricated using relatively easily obtainable chemicals.

Just sayin'. :cool:
 
It would seem that the 30-30 is the Everyman's levergun caliber, while the 32 WS is for Special People, and for them, and only them, it may actually be better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top