.32 H&R Magnum Revolver Ammo Questions

Tyro/Jim,

Well, the concept of counter balancing the gun immediately comes to mind.

A gentleman I met counterbalances his 1911 compact in his vest with a combination of magazines and small flat bags containing lead shot.

It seems to work fairly well for him.
 
Mike,

But counterbalancing also adds more weight, and an equal counterbalance doubles the weight. Not good, in my case.
 
"Interesting" dilema (sad to note), tyro.

Since you've (apparently) currently wearing a custom suspender system, would not a "bridge" between the two fronts straps w/a holster hanging between the two do the trick? Would eliminate the counter balance aspects, being centered. Too, an extra belt clip at the bottom of the holster could provide for a more secure/non-flapping "tie-down" when drawing your handgun.

The bridge/holster could have belt clips at both sides as well so as to provide an up/down adjustment simply by unclipping & setting to desired height on your chest/belly. The elastic nature of suspender material gives a bit of leeway & self-adjustment in its own right.

If front carry isn't workable, how 'bout one that suspends a holster centered & between top of shoulder blades? If you can reach just below the back of your neck, it would seemingly keep the handgun off your belly, concealed & still reachable.

I'm pretty handy with a sewing machine (no snickers, please ;) ), have done up some custom jobs for myself & am willing to help with this if you'd like. No charges, nada - just would like to assist on an "interesting" problem. If you'd like, drop me an e-mail & I'll do some graphics up to better show what I'm thinking. Amazing what one can come up with using 1" wide webbing & a little Velcro ...
 
Betcha, tyro. Why else are we on this world? ;)

Think we've already got this thing nailed - just a matter of fitting & details.
 
Gents, remember that there's a risk to carrying in line with the spinal cord - go down hard on your back, and...it could get ugly.

I seem to recall there's been at least one case of paralysis from small-of-back carry during a slip while a detective was walking down the street. Such as accident while "just walking" is very rare, but still possible.

For those who drive motorcycles (like me), ride horses or bicycles or are engaged in other high-risk-of-fall activities, spinal carry must be avoided at all cost! Even carry over the kidney would be a risk for us.

In Tyro's case, spinal carry *might* be worth the risk though. Tyro, am I safe in assuming you're not all that heavy? And if you know of the risk, do you think you can "twist a bit" if you do fall?

You'll have to judge for yourself.

Here's a thought: you're already wearing suspenders, right? OK, anchor the holster to one suspender in the correct orientation, which would still be off-center approximately over the strong-side kidney, but then run straps up to both shoulders for support. Weight distribution would be somewhere around 60/40 per shoulder, versus 50/50 on spinal carry, BUT you'd have the suspender strap helping stabilize everything, and the gun grip would be easier to get to.

Labgrade, one solution would be to give him sections of the correct type of velcro to sew onto his suspender straps at the corrent place once he's hung the main holster once and figured out where it's going to sit vertically. Wouldn't take a whole lot of sewing just to get that velcro on, nor would it need to be all that neat a stitch job :). The inside face of the holster (kydex?) would have the matching velcro type.

One neat thing is that a slight bulge at that location might be noticable sometimes, but it's an unusual enough gun carry location that sheeple won't have much of a clue what's there. If anybody asks, just say "medical device" and drop the subject :D.
 
Good point about the spinal injury, Jim. We had a skiier die couple years back 'cause he fell on his camera - regular carry around his neck & in front. No such thing as "safe." ;) I'll grant you a goodly poke on the backbone's likely worse than in the chest.

To whip up a proto, I was thinking Velcro all along the suspenders, a (perhaps two, depending) cross-piece (forming a triangle with the suspenders' uprights) providing a platform with opposing side Velcro for attaching the holster. Should be very multi-positional & essentially a load-bearing suspension system.

& my stiches are quite even, thank you - a stitch in time, ya know. ;)

Once we get this thing nailed, tyro will even have custom positional speed-strip, Solitaire flashlight & folder placements.
 
Labgrade, what I meant was, give Tyro some velcro so he can put it on the suspenders he already owns - and it would be HIS stitches that don't necessarily have to be clean for that application.

:D
 
We probably should bring this thread to a close, before a moderator does so for us, as we have completely departed from the subject of the thread.

Just one more post to answer Jim's questions:
In Tyro's case, spinal carry *might* be worth the risk though. Tyro, am I safe in assuming you're not all that heavy? And if you know of the risk, do you think you can "twist a bit" if you do fall?
Click to expand...
No, I'm not all that heavy (5' 9", 140 lbs.). And no, it is not worth the risk. And no, I don't think I dare count on being able to control an accidental fall.

Your comments re spinal risks associated with gun carry position re-enforce what I am learning as I experiment with carry options.

Many thanks, Jim. I learn something of value from you every time you contribute a post.

I'll be communicating with you later on other threads . . .
 
Tyro, I hear you on the spine risk. So that leaves us with a 60/40 weight distribution towards the strong-side shoulder. Will that do?

Carry over the kidney IS worth the risk, if you're a pedestrian. Even bicyclists moving at a sane pace wouldn't need to worry too much...really damaging the kidney via an impact to a gun hovering over it won't be a risk until you get into motorcycles and maybe horses (more vertical fall).

We're still on-topic for revolver carry, so I wouldn't worry about moderators...besides, the whole point is adapting a self-defense system to your personal needs, whether via caliber or holster setup seems immaterial.

The thread has been very informative...I'd like to continue here. If nothing else, I'd eventually like to point Taurus to this thread. Clearly there's a need for a lightweight yet low-recoil yet effective daily carry gun, and at present there's not a whole lot of choices. If Taurus combined the 8-shot .22Mag with TI, they'd really have something.
 
I'd like to see it continued as well & can't imagine any mod having any problem with doing so. Very informative in many ways I never expected this thread to go.

The Wife's 5', 100 lb & although doesn't have a disability, she gripes about stuff not being made for women - especially those of a more diminuative stature. Can't find any decent holsters that fit her worth beans due to Ladies' small(er) torso (realative to that of the boys) - a high-rise puts a handgun's stock into her arm pit.

This thread's merely that of a "difficult-to-fit" - nothing more.

Jim,

I've one of the S&W 317 - 8-shot, 11.5oz, .22LR DA revolvers. 3" bbl, adjustable sights & actually quite the l'il shooter. Other than the S&W :barf:-factor nowadays, I'd be slurpin' up one (or two) in .22 mag in a heartbeat. Although I believe the .22 mag to be a marginal stopper, I have CCW'd the 317 - beats a sharp stick in the eye or harsh language any day. 4X double-taps to the area of one's choosing .... have actually looked into the fabrication of 8-shot .22 speed strips a la Bianchi. Talk about hide-a-way reloads .... The revolver pretty much does away with the main "rimfire's are inconsistent" re ignition beef. Doesn't go bang = pull the trigger. Although you certainly miss a beat (not to mention a firing round), it sure beats having to rack a slide.
 
There's a couple of .22LR loads that pull over 1,000fps average from a 2" NAA barrel, which would be the best hope you'd have for that S&W .22LR snubbie. The Remington Yellowjacket would be my favorite but others are in the same ballpark.

I wonder if a gunsmith could re-chamber the .22LR cylinder bores to .22Mag, and would it be safe to do so?

I suspect it would be safe...the .22Mag has more case capacity, so you can get more velocity without an equal-ratio jump in peak pressure. I wouldn't shoot huge amounts of 22Mag in such a conversion. I'd want to see how much beef there is between rounds first though. Taurus crams 9 rounds into a similar size package so I would assume S&W did 8 rounds for extra beef with an aluminum cylinder.

Hmmm.

I wonder if a really good gunsmith like Jim Stroh at Alpha Precision could do a custom steel cylinder for the S&W airweight, in .22Mag...THAT would definately hold up. Total weight would rise by what...3oz or so? Still not too bad...
 
& tyro was worried about being "off topic." Still, this is right in the ball park of what TFL is all about - me? I got no worries .... we'll just discuss this aspect till he comes back.

I'm no expert re .22LR vs .22 mag, but I've heard tell that the mag uses a .224" bbl while the .22LR is at .223" - may make a crucial difference re boosted pressures. When I was doing disc drive engineering/gage design, 5 millionths of an inch was sometimes critical ....

Currently stuffin' the 317 with CCI Mini Mag solids or HPs. No idea as to anything performance-wise. It's only what's used in the rest of our .22s Seemingly total reliability (to date) & shiney. ;) Muy scientifico, no? :rolleyes: Any ideas/advice as to how these should perform/rate re your "standard?"

Doubtful a mere cylinder boring would fly for a .22 mag. Think you'd at least have to go oversize & do a steel sleeve/thermal shrink-fit - current cylinder is all aluminum. Only conjecture though. I have no clue as to temper, etc.

I do notice that the 317's cylinder is long enough already for a .22 mag cartridge. Seems simp&woos may have had the idea to take the current design a bit further. Many hopes for that co, & a new revolver is least of these.

Although I do, on occasion CCW w/the 317, its main use is a handy go everywhere "kit gun" thing. I'm a woodsy guy & though the CCI MiniMag's the usual, I do play around a bit with Remington's CBee22 (30 grs, 720 fps muzzle - @ rifle specs) & Aguila's .22 Colibri (that "no powder" thing). Handy to have various loadings that will (more) "silently" dispatch a grouse or rabbit with a 20' headshot. Variety - the spice of life.

Nifty thing about revolvers is that (if you color-code the cartridge head with a marker) you can have 2-3 different type loadings all set to go for most any application.

Fer instance, I'll have the 317 staged for initial with 4X MiniMags, thereafter 4X CBee. "Ready" (far as it goes with a .22) for defense (or a long(er) range rabbit. etc. If I come across a close grouse, I'll just open the cylinder & dial in to the CBee & pop 'em up close & quiet. (same-same when carrying woodsy-like w/a .357 = 4X firsters w/a hefty hard cast mag & follow w/2X HBWCs for close & personal for light game).
Depending on what presents itself = just dial it in. Way big advantage over any mag-feeder.

& ya know, the more I think about it, the only reason I'd want a 317 mag is the light weight. Anything it could do really is already covered just as good with a .357 mag/.38 special - sorta.

22 mag is a niche. & I want one - in a very light weight smallish 8-shot package .....

Where is tyro anyway? What's he do? sleep or sumpn'?
:D
 
:)
You fellows really are in my ball park.

Jim March:
So that leaves us with a 60/40 weight distribution towards the strong-side shoulder. Will that do?
Click to expand...
Maybe. I'll have to experiment to find out, which I will do as soon as I receive my order for a few Uncle Mike's holsters.

labgrade:
Although I do, on occasion CCW w/the 317, its main use is a handy go everywhere "kit gun" thing. I'm a woodsy guy . . .
Click to expand...
Me too. My home is in the midst of many, many acres of woodland, with cottonmouths at the creek and beaver pond, and copperheads everywhere else. And an overpopulation of squirrels. And rabid foxes (and other such small animals) on the loose in the county.

The 317 is the gun that my mind has been going round and round over the past few weeks. It's only a 22LR, but it keeps getting my attention for lack of any smooth trigger, double action, minimal weight .22 Magnum on the market. This is the problem that led to the origination of this thread re the .32 H&R Magnum. It remains a problem and an open question because the gun manufacturers are failing to fill a specific need. They keep coming out with more and more light weight .38s - too light for comfortable shooting even in the hands of strong, experienced shooters - and not a single DA .22 Magnum in the minimal weight class.
 
Labgrade, if you slug the barrel, you're as likely to find it at .224 as anything else :). S&W knows some people don't clean their stuff often enough, and go loose on the tolerances.

If it's really a concern because slugging shows it'll be tight, still not a problem, shoot about 10 or 20 .22LRs (while it's still a .22LR) that have had their noses dipped first in Crisco or something, and then into some fine lapping compound. This is called "fire-lapping" the barrel and you can take the bore dimension up by .001" pretty quickly while also smoothing it out. This is an old accuracy technique, among other things. Hmmm. Wait, let's think about that...the cylinder is aluminum, which would get eaten alive by the lapping compou...never mind. Just have the gunsmith who does the cylinder conversion lap the barrel a bit :).

One critical question: at present, do the rims of the .22LRs when loaded come extremely close to touching each other, or is there a bit of gap? If there's gap, on the order of a 16th of an inch or more, then this should be possible.

As to ammo choices: I strongly recomment that anybody who ever carries .22LR or .22Mag for defense go to www.naaminis.com and under "technical" (left-hand column of yellow buttons) look up their velocity tables for tested ammo. It's an eye-opener. They list 1 and 1/8th, 1 and 5/8ths, 2" (Black Widow) and 4" (MiniMaster) tested velocity in a bunch of different brands of both .22LR and .22Mag.

Based both on those specs and performence reviews I've read by people that have tested them in wet newspaper and water jugs (and got good expansion in BOTH from very short tubes), you need to get ahold of some Remington Yellowjackets. Especially in a .22LR revolver - the weird nose can hang up a slidegun.

I wouldn't carry anything else for "social work" in .22LR.
 
tyro & Mike Irwin...

I'd recommend against the use of 32 Short Colt or 32 Long Colt ammunition in a revolver chambered for 32 H&R (or 32 S&W Long).

To complicate the situation, cartridge cases headstamped 32 Colt New Police are dimensionally identical to 32 S&W Long, only the shape of the bullet varied between the 32 Colt New Police & the 32 S&W Long.

If memory serves, the case diameter of the 32 Short & Long Colt cartridges is approximately 0.020" smaller than the 32 S&W & 32 S&W Long. Bullet diameter of both of the Colt & both of the S&W cartridges is similar, but 32 Colt ammunition uses a heel bullet (like a 22 LR). 32 S&W Long ammunition will not chamber in a 32 Colt Long revolver, 32 Long Colt ammunition will chamber in a 32 S&W Long revolver.

As 32 Short Colt & 32 Long Colt cartridges have only very rarely been produced by domestic manufacturers in recent years, and in short runs, and because this is a very thin walled cartridge, it is likely that if you were to find a box of 32 Long or Short Colt ammunition it would be very old. Given the prevalent case head design of 50-70 years ago (semi-balloon), firing potentially age hardened ammunition in an incorrect chamber is not a good idea.

Bob
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top