A bit of historical consideration: .32 acp - eventually outdated?

32

I have a Beretta 90 in 32acp. It is really fun to shoot. My younger daughter wants it bad but I told to "find your own". She thinks I should give it to her because I have a Kel tec 32 that functions perfectly. I did give her my Kahr CW40 because it fit her hand and not mine. I notice sometimes I can get 32 ammo for $15 per box of 50 at the gun show. The Kel tec is very light , easily concealed.
 
I think some consider .32 acp obsolete because guns (in general) get smaller and lighter over time, to the point where today's subcompact 9's can fit in your jeans pocket and a modern .380 acp gun (like lcp) can cover almost everyone's ccw needs.
There is little demand for micro .32 guns that are even more compact, instead, people want guns with .380 power because they are small enough for them. Advances in design technology, precise machinery and light polymers all have their role in that.
 
It is simple fact that .25s can be made smaller than .32s, 32s smaller than .380s, etc. If Keltec decided to build a .25, scaled to the cartridge, it would be tiny, very flat and very lightweight.
 
I like showing all the Glock fans how easy it is to disassemble a Savage .32ACP.

No tools at all to remove barrel, sear, trigger and bolt and about 45 seconds at that.
 
Not sure if it's outdated or not

I collect 'art deco' .32 ACP or 7.65mm (depending on one's schooling) pistols. I don't have quite as many as IBMikey, but my current collection is thirteen. (I suppose with that number I may have to buy more...) I enjoy them on the basis of their historical significance and the engineering involved.

I don't think of them as substantial 'stoppers' in the modern accepted sense. They don't have a great deal of kinetic energy or momentum. (My normal carry gun is a .45 ACP. The smallest gun I normally carry is a pair of 2 inch M&Ps in .38 Special loaded with heavy-duty wadcutters.) What the 7.65mm pistols do have is low recoil and much under appreciated accuracy. I test all the pistols I own. They will all register two to three inch groups at 15 yards - that's minute of schnoz, not minute of head. (Yes, I am aware of movement and the dynamics of an armed encounter; I'm discussing the inherent accuracy of the weapon system. Nor is that statement meant as a general tactic for such difficulties.)

Modern medicine has removed much of the fear factor from being shot. Whereas I agree with BarnBWT, in that I would never consider shooting someone expecting them to expire in a few day's time from 'complications'. However, back in the old days, it was probably on the mind of the shootee. Getting shot with anything was a serious matter, long term.

Another consideration is the effective penetration of the standard round. A 7.65mm round of 6 grams mass is an effective penetrator. A properly aimed round will penetrate to vitals and cause damage. (Which is not to say a 9mm, .40 or .45 caliber won't penetrate better and do more damage.)

When the time comes my .38 Special revolvers generate more recoil than I can tolerate, I consider the humble .32 ACP - probably in a model M Colt or 1935 Beretta - will have to do.

A note about really 'tiny' pistols. Bill DeShivs mentioned the possibility of building a .25 ACP in a "...tiny, very flat and very lightweight" pistol. I am certain he is correct. However, the problem would be similar to that of a calculator build into a watch: How does one hold and operate the device? Aside from the perceived recoil aspect (a thin, light pistol would tend to gouge the shooting hand), how does one aim and fire the device accurately?

Just a consideration.
 
I am reloading .32ACP right now. I took a break to stretch my legs (single stage). The .32ACP has it's place and is fun at the range. The cost of ammo is enough to keep it in the safe but reloading for it allows you to shoot it for the fun it provides. I don't carry it but would, if the need arose, and not feel under-gunned. It's been around for over 100 years for a reason.



 
I think the OP got the history lesson down accurate enough....of course history is constantly being written.

I always thought .380 would be my power floor, but I just had to have that Kel-Tec 32.

Light, thin, "shirt pocket" is a good description. But I don't think I would bite on a .25 ACP.
 
The 32acp is pretty capable. A friend has a 32 revolver and he was shooting 32 longs at a barrel and they just dent it. He went got his moon clips and loaded it with 32acp. They went through the barrel.

Long ago I used to have a 25 and one winter I left a gallon milk jug of water outside and it froze. I shot my 25 through it which surprised me. I would say that a 25 is better than a knife and allows you to keep your distance from a knife wielding BG.

A 32acp is definitely better than a 25.
 
I had a P3AT, but find the P32 much easier on recoil due to the thinness of the grip even though I'm very far from recoil sensitive. I like the .380 in a P238 or BG/Boudyguard 380, but an extra round and even easier pocket carry is why I finally decided on a P32 for that role. My regular IWB is an XDS45 and I only pocket carry when it's 100% necessary.

I also own a 1903 Colt pocket hamerless in .32acp (they made a .380 model as well) that is like shooting a .22, but it is behind the times for a carry gun. I think Colt should reintroduce it in 9mm, but not totally bumble it like Remington and the R51.

I use Fiocchi 73gr. FMJ for carry. I'd use FMJ .380 as well if I still owned anything in that caliber.
C6dmnNg.jpg


I figure I'd throw in a picture of my 1903 with all original bluing.
2SKcnpU.jpg
 
Last edited:
I happen to like the 32acp also. I had a great 1903 (it was part of inheritance and sister now has it) that I loved to shoot. I now have a Frommer Stop (7.65 Frommer) that will shoot 32acp pretty well. This caliber was very effective for many years in europe and I cant imagine that its any less effective now.
1 shot of 32acp (7.65 Browning) from a FN 1910 killed 37m people. Hard to imagine anything else in history that was so powerful.
 
One of the more interesting phenomena I have seen in my nearly 50 years as a shooters is how some cartridges are announced with great fanfare and lots of oohs and aahs and "I want one"-then fade away. The 44 Automag, the 9MM Winchester Magnum, e.g. while changing tastes and new interests lead to a revival for supposedly "obsolete rounds"-the 44-40, e.g. And some seem to survive for apparent reason, although the ammunition manufacturers can no doubt give us one. If there is enough demand, there will be a market.
 
It's really hard to release a new cartridge without a lot of pre-existing guns out there already chambered in it. Who else produced the .45Gap? How many did Glock sell? If you have to find a new gun for a new caliber then you don't have a market and it will take decades to develop one. This is not counting the reloaders who would have to stock new and different bullets, brass and dies. It has to be super special and it will have to do something that none of the existing rounds do before it becomes viable. Otherwise it's just another pretty face in a sea of pretty faces.
 
What about the 9mm AUTO? They did away withe the taper but will it fit our existing 9mms?

EDIT: Nevermind, I answered my own question.
 
Last edited:
Thumbs up on the 32 acp and the P32 KelTec. Also thimbs up on the CZ70, although the CZ is heavier than the KelTec.

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