.32NAA as good as a .38SPL?

S

samsmix

New member
Okay, the title was a little shock and awe to grab attention. I don't REALLY think the .32NAA is just as good as the .38 Special. BUT...
...it DOES look like it's 85gr Hornaday XTP loading from a 2.75" barrel is leaving a similar wound track in ballistics gelatin to some of the 125gr & 135gr .38 Special rounds.

It certainly seems to out perform any .380 load I have seen. These seem to feature either OVER penetration with poor tissue disrupltion with FMJ & Cast bullets, or severe UNDER penetration with Hollowpoints.
I know none of use have been attacked by a block of gelatin, but is seems like the little .32NAA is quite an improvement on the .380, and nipping on the heels of a .38SPL. It seems to have both decent penetration (11") and good energy transfer.

Could this be a lot hotter performer in a pocket pistol than we have ever given it credit for? Should I seriously consider converting my .380?
 
what is it giving you that you can't get elsewhere already?

the ammo availability is one issue to consider. how does that round make that little gun kick? and how much "better" is it than the same sized .380?

seems like a nice gimmick that delivers less than the hype leads one to believe.
 
What is it giving me that a .380 wouldn't? I think I stated that, but...

Wound channel diameter and penetration. The two things that cause an assailant to stop fighting in the absence of a CNS hit. The .380 seems to make it "either/or", while the .32NAA seems to offer both.
We all know the .38spl is a good step better than the .380, and the .32NAA seems to act more like a .38spl.

In Summary:
~ Deeper penetration than .380 Hollowpoints
~ Better energy transfer and tissue disruption than .380 FMJ
~ Adequate penetration (11") without excessive over penetration (31" for .380 95gr FMJ!).
~ Wound ballistics on near-par with Speer "short barrel" 135gr +P, WITH better penetration.
~ Greater reliability...at least it should be. .380s are notoriously unreliable, but the bottleneck of the .32NAA should help with this.
~ Most people are reporting similar or less recoil, but either way I can handle it.
~ Where ammo availability is concerned, I can slip the old barrel in and shoot .380 on the range.

What is not to like here?
 
I think you answered your own question yourself. The bottom line is just about any gun is better then no gun when it comes down to it.
 
The .32 NAA generates 15% less physical recoil than the stock 95 grain .380 JHP (it is fundamental physics). You are engaging in partial trade of mass and frontal area for a healty increase in velocity. The .32 NAA is at it's best in FMJ guise, because in cartridges such as the .380 penetration is it's primary virtue. (They're not travelling fast enough to expand reliably, but if they do, they won't penetrate adequately. (Think of it as putting "speed brakes" on a Yugo). The .32 NAA is travelling fast enough to expand, but you mst consider the sternum and ribs. You may penetrate the bone, but you still have to either deposit energy in the organs, or disable the central nervous system. (I perfer to rely on penetration to get the job done).

I really like the cartridge, because the longer the barrele used, the greater the velocity increase. Ther is no increase in pressure over the standard .380 (Mr. Wood saw to this when he created the cartridge in 2000). After 16 years of shooting there is no difference in barrel/frame life than it would have been in the .380 cartridge.

It is all a matter of what you want. I like the cartrdige and would appreciate a second barrel to shoot the .32 NAA. (I'm a little different that way).
 
I know Kel-tec at one time made a drop in bbl for this round to go with their P3AT. if ammo makers filled the market so this round was on the shelf at places like Wal-Mart.... and NAA wasn't the only game in town..... it would be a consideration of mine. however, the NAA gun is heavy for what it is, and you cannot change bbls. to another more plentiful caliber like kel-tec once put out.
the same can be said for the .25NAA, same size as their ,32acp which is only slightly bigger than the Seecamp .32acp.... yet that round [.25NAA] has stagnated as well.
 
Fantastic performance claims without links to said tests are not very credible.
No pics, no story!
It certainly seems to out perform any .380 load I have seen. These seem to feature either OVER penetration with poor tissue disrupltion with FMJ & Cast bullets, or severe UNDER penetration with Hollowpoints.
Click to expand...
Obviously you haven't seen tests of Speer Gold Dot, or Hornady Critical Defense.:D
 
Last edited:
I'm a pocket gun fanatic. if somebody comes out with a semiauto the same size or smaller than a Seecamp that shoots a ballistically superior round... and can be found readily, I'm all for trying it. the .32NAA is considerably bigger and heavier than a Seecamp .380. the NAA guns are top quality, but their boutique rounds are special mail order only, and priced higher than giraffe parts. this is much along the lines of the .45Gap....
 
I think the cartridge is a neat idea but I don't love their gun for it. If I could get something like the Sig p232 or even a PPK rechambered for it, then I might be on board. Of course, there is a cost consideration...
 
Brass Fetcher reports the following results:

- Hornady .380 ACP 90gr XTP -- 12.0in penetration, 0.140in^2 expanded area
- Hornady .32 NAA 80gr XTP -- 11.8in penetration, 0.120in^2 expanded area.

The .380 has the edge in both penetration and final cross-sectional area, and it makes the deeper, wider hole without the costs of an extra barrel and exotic ammo.

http://www.brassfetcher.com/Ballistic Gelatin Tests/380 ACP 10 Percent Ballistic Gelatin.html
http://www.brassfetcher.com/Ballistic Gelatin Tests/32 NAA 10 Percent Ballistic Gelatin.html
 
Cosmodragon is right. Short barrels are not this cartridge's best "platform". Longer barrels 3.8"- 4" are where this cartridge really shines.

So many attempt to put nitoglycerine-level power into a pistol that fits in a cigarette pack. I don't know how to break it to people but...

It isn't going to happen!

The best package for the .32 NAA is a .380 size pistol the size of a Browning 1922 (with a 4.375" barrel). This allows the .32 NAA cartridge, regardless of bullet weight, to unleash its full potential. In this case, the "itty bitty" package hampers it's performance.
 
I never really was interested in NAA's gun, just the cartridge. Launch platform would be my P3AT, or possibly an LCP. I really don't mind the oddball round, because I will KEEP the .380 barrel.


CaptainO,
Longer barrels are better for generating velocity
Click to expand...

I see now what the "O" stands for. Thank you for shouting at me in print and quoting basic sub-elementary ballistics dogma. Paul Vieille, the Mauser brothers, and John Moses Browning didn't buy into your line of thinking, but you have shown me the error of my ways. Specifically, I now know that pocket gun ballistics will never ever improve, EVER. My mind is now as closed as yours, and I will be selling my .380 to acquire a Derringer in .41 Short Rimfire, because it's ballistics are "just as good" and it will never jam.:rolleyes:


Limnophile,
Thank you. It was Brass Fetcher's videos I was looking at for the gel tests, but I missed the 90gr XTP. It seems that would be just as good to maybe a little better, and I wouldn't have to buy anything. I will go have a look.
 
CaptainO,
One more thing: In Limnophile's and my own defense, as well as the FBI's (as if they needed it), ballistics gel is all we have for the purpose of comparison. Your smart aleck comment is only warranted IF you can find human beings willing to volunteer to have bullets fired into them for laboratory testing. As I don't hear YOU volunteering, I would say you are a hypocrite at best.

Basically, I don't mind people who disagree with me, or their opinions. What I do mind is when they are RUDE about it. It offends me, calls your parents into question, and speaks as a very poor ambassador for the firearms community.
 
CaptainO,

You may want to acquaint yourself with scientific terminal ballistics testing protocols. Those in the know do not scoff at proper test results.

samsmix,

It was Brass Fetcher's videos I was looking at for the gel tests, but I missed the 90gr XTP. It seems that would be just as good to maybe a little better, and I wouldn't have to buy anything. I will go have a look.
Click to expand...

Beware, BF's tables for the two calibers (10% gel) do not report expansion in directly comparable units. One is in frontal area, the other in diameter. Hopefully, I converted the diameter to area correctlt.
 
Gentlemen: I never called anyone's parentage into question. Thanks for doing so this exposes your true colors.

I'm sorry, I have to listen to people that worked in morgues and the results of real shootings, instead of the unvarying, static calibrations of the labratory.

I also keep reading the results of barrel-length tests from BBTI. In general, tests of closed breech tests (barrels without a barrel/cyilinder gap) tend to produce higher velocities. John Moses Browning and the Mauser Brothers stopped their testing long ago. (They've been dead for more than 70 years. Time marches on). Propellant and bullet technologies change, physics do not.

The real world has more variables than a violent block of raging ballistic gelatin ever will.
 
Last edited:
BTW, didn't Brass Fetcher use a converted Sig P238? If someone knows a place that does conversion barrels for various guns to .32 NAA, lmk.
 
I have watched the video of the Sig P 238 converted to chamber the .32 NAA. The fire and muzzle blast belching from the pistol's muzzle illustrates the waste of both power and propellent by the shorter barrel.

I have hidden a 7" 1911-pattern pistol under a puffy "taffeta" casual jacket (Butt-down, muzlle up behind my armpit). If I can hide that and not have a single person spot either the piece or the shoulder holster, why does everyone want to carry a little pistol and hamper it's ability to cycle?

Heck, If I wanted to carry a .380 for the purposes of conversion, I would consider buing Browning .380 Black Label. these have a 4.25" barrel. i would like to have one. then I would like a .32 NAA barrel manufactured to the same tolerances as the original. From the 4.25" barrel the .32 NAA cartridge should produce the same nuzzle flash/report as the stock .380 ACP 95 grain load... minimal. It should also allow the .380 to make as much of the cartridge that is present.
 
I have watched the video of the Sig P 238 converted to chamber the .32 NAA. The fire and muzzle blast belching from the pistol's muzzle illustrates the waste of both power and propellent by the shorter barrel.

I have hidden a 7" 1911-pattern pistol under a puffy "taffeta" casual jacket (Butt-down, muzlle up behind my armpit). If I can hide that and not have a single person spot either the piece or the shoulder holster, why does everyone want to carry a little pistol and hamper it's ability to cycle?
Click to expand...

Let's not forget that not everyone has the same body type or mode of dress, that not everyone lives in the same climate, and that there are plenty of other differences in all our lives. I'm a fan of vertical shoulder carry and with the right jacket, it keeps my options very open. The problem is that I'm not always wearing the right jacket. That's why I'm glad to have a few different handguns and different ways to carry them. Thinking back to my youth in scouting, there was something about being prepared... :D Of course, it's taken time and careful budgeting to open up all those options. We all have different financial situations as well.

On wasted energy, this comes up a lot in the revolver forum where the same guns can take vanilla .38 special or full-house .357 magnum, light .44 special or heavy .44 magnum, etc. Yes, more power often comes with more wasted power, as well as more muzzle flash and extra noise. People have to decide where they are comfortable. Personally, I've settled on the new(ish) .327 Federal Magnum. The 85-grain Hydra-shoks are a good fit for the LCR while the 115-grain Gold Dots really shine in the 4" SP101.
 
I think the cartridge is a neat idea but I don't love their gun for it. If I could get something like the Sig p232 or even a PPK rechambered for it, then I might be on board. Of course, there is a cost consideration...
Click to expand...

Consider an FN/Browning 1910: Not only can you have your .32NAA barrel, but you can also have a .32 ACP barrel; AND a .380 barrel, all on the same frame with no permanent alterations. All for the price of obtaining a .32 barrel on eBay and having somebody ream it for NAA.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top