Marlin 336 carbine .32 Winchester Special
- Thread starter doceaux
- Start date
I own a 94 in 32 WS and use data from the 30/30s and when I find 30/30 brass I run it thru my 32 WS dies just like it was 32 WS brass. With the 94 the only difference is the twist, 1/16 and I dont know, the 30/30 may be as quick as 1/12. Don't know if the Marlin has a faster twist. Mine is a cast bullet rifle and works well, have never cast for a micro groove barrel.
longranger
New member
.32 Special is slightly more powerful than 30-30 Win. and not near the 35 Rem.Can be a great cast bullet shooter,jacketed bullets are not ready available most of the time.Micro Groove barrels can be a bit of a pain with cast lead,can be overcome with understanding the requirements of the Micro Groove barrels.
I have a 1954 Win. in .32 Special that shoots very well with cast bullets and Trail Boss powder. I would put the value $400.00-450.00 depending on condition.I am not fan of the Micro Groove barrels.
I have a 1954 Win. in .32 Special that shoots very well with cast bullets and Trail Boss powder. I would put the value $400.00-450.00 depending on condition.I am not fan of the Micro Groove barrels.
g.willikers
New member
The micro grooved barrels are supposed to only need a slightly larger diameter cast bullet to be put right.
There is no animal on the planet that will ever know the difference if hit with any of the 3. It offers no advantages over a 30-30, just something unique and different.
If you like it and are willing to spend a little more time and money locating ammo I'm sure it will do just fine, especially if you want something different from the masses. Those 3 boxes of ammo won't last forever.
If you like it and are willing to spend a little more time and money locating ammo I'm sure it will do just fine, especially if you want something different from the masses. Those 3 boxes of ammo won't last forever.
.
The Marlin 336 in .32 Special (post-1948) was a nod the the much easlier introduction of the .32 Special, a few years after the introduction of the .30-30 in 1894, as a sop to shooters that wanted to still use blackpowder in their ammo. (BP does better in a larger bore, than it does in a smaller bore)
After BP was generally dropped from commercial cartridges, the difference between a .30-30 & a .32 Special became virtually identical with the same boolit weight(s).
The .32 was still popular in the 1950's, etc (indicated by it being chambered is more than the Marlin levergun), because some folks just liked the idea of a".32" gun for fun.
.
The Marlin 336 in .32 Special (post-1948) was a nod the the much easlier introduction of the .32 Special, a few years after the introduction of the .30-30 in 1894, as a sop to shooters that wanted to still use blackpowder in their ammo. (BP does better in a larger bore, than it does in a smaller bore)
After BP was generally dropped from commercial cartridges, the difference between a .30-30 & a .32 Special became virtually identical with the same boolit weight(s).
The .32 was still popular in the 1950's, etc (indicated by it being chambered is more than the Marlin levergun), because some folks just liked the idea of a".32" gun for fun.
.
Sure Shot Mc Gee
New member
Over the years I haven't seen all that many 32s marlin levers. In Winchesters lever rifles I'd say the 32 was a bit more popular. Seen quite a few of them around. As far as the difference between a 32 & a 30-30. Very little in speed. In energy 32 has a tad bit more over its rival the 30-30. Twist rates between the two calibers is the factor difference. Keep in mind the faster the twist rate. The heavier the bullet weight can be used. Some fellows shooting cast prefer a heavier bullet thus they prefer the 30-30 over the 32. On the other hand the 32 has a slow lazy twist and the shooting of much a heavier bullet than its preferred 170 gr. seldom pleases its shooter. But lighter weight bullets on the other hand give much better performance verses doing the same in a 30-30.
35 Remington cartridge in the Marlin lever is a {new comer} when compared to the 30-30 & 32 introductions dates. (1948) to be exact and the market date of the Model 336.
I have only one Marlin here. A model 1936 in 30-30. Unlike the 336 with its exposed to the weather ejection port. The model 1936 I have has a flat bolt that keeps its ejection port area closed to the elements. Kind of a handy perk in their day but as usual a flat bolt receiver requires much more machining and tuning than what is needed for the model 336.
35 Remington cartridge in the Marlin lever is a {new comer} when compared to the 30-30 & 32 introductions dates. (1948) to be exact and the market date of the Model 336.
I have only one Marlin here. A model 1936 in 30-30. Unlike the 336 with its exposed to the weather ejection port. The model 1936 I have has a flat bolt that keeps its ejection port area closed to the elements. Kind of a handy perk in their day but as usual a flat bolt receiver requires much more machining and tuning than what is needed for the model 336.
On paper there isn't much difference between a .30-30 and a .32 Special. In the field...can't say I've noted much difference, but some people believe strongly that the .32 is more powerful.
One fellow I know has both, and calls his .30-30 his deer gun and the .32 his bear gun. Not because the .32 is so much better, simply because, for decades, when he carries the .30-30 he sees deer, and not bear, but when carrying his .32, he sees bear, and not deer!
The "urban legend" from the old days is that while both were loaded with smokeless powder, the .32 Special was made to be more reloader friendly when reloaded with black powder. The slightly larger bore, and particularly the slower rifling twist were held to reduce the effect of black powder fouling in the .32 Special.
Don't know if its true, and a can't say its not, but there's been talk!...
.32 Special ammo is "seasonal" today, meaning the ammo makers only produce runs of it every so often. Might be every other year, or so, or at least it was before our current shortage situation. If you reload, its simple to make out of .30-30 brass.
Most of the .32s I have seen over the years have been Winchesters, but Marlin made some, obviously.
One odd quirk I have personally seen (more than once) in the .32 Special is guns that for no discernible reason just stop shooting accurately. Have seen .30-30s with bores that look almost like shotguns still shoot tolerably well, and have seen good shooting .32s just stop grouping well, for no apparent reason. Its weird.
One fellow I know has both, and calls his .30-30 his deer gun and the .32 his bear gun. Not because the .32 is so much better, simply because, for decades, when he carries the .30-30 he sees deer, and not bear, but when carrying his .32, he sees bear, and not deer!
The "urban legend" from the old days is that while both were loaded with smokeless powder, the .32 Special was made to be more reloader friendly when reloaded with black powder. The slightly larger bore, and particularly the slower rifling twist were held to reduce the effect of black powder fouling in the .32 Special.
Don't know if its true, and a can't say its not, but there's been talk!...
.32 Special ammo is "seasonal" today, meaning the ammo makers only produce runs of it every so often. Might be every other year, or so, or at least it was before our current shortage situation. If you reload, its simple to make out of .30-30 brass.
Most of the .32s I have seen over the years have been Winchesters, but Marlin made some, obviously.
One odd quirk I have personally seen (more than once) in the .32 Special is guns that for no discernible reason just stop shooting accurately. Have seen .30-30s with bores that look almost like shotguns still shoot tolerably well, and have seen good shooting .32s just stop grouping well, for no apparent reason. Its weird.
Jack O'Conner
New member
My Dad and his friend (Arney) drove west to Colorado in the 1960's for an elk hunt. But both would be considered under-gunned by modern outdoor writers. Dad carried his 300 Savage and his buddy was armed with his scoped Marlin in 32 Special. Dad missed a bull in heavy timber but Arney downed a big bull at approx. 150 yards with his 32. His bullets did not bounce off!
32 Special has been slaying big game for over 100 years. A good 32 is a genuine keeper!
Jack
32 Special has been slaying big game for over 100 years. A good 32 is a genuine keeper!
Jack
"The Marlin 336 in .32 Special (post-1948) was a nod the the much easlier introduction of the .32 Special, a few years after the introduction of the .30-30 in 1894, as a sop to shooters that wanted to still use blackpowder in their ammo. (BP does better in a larger bore, than it does in a smaller bore)
After BP was generally dropped from commercial cartridges, the difference between a .30-30 & a .32 Special became virtually identical with the same boolit weight(s)."
Not quite accurate. Not so much a sop tp those who wanted to use black powder but because the ammo makers didn't want shooter reloading with smokeless powder. Smokeless powder in those early day was much more hazardous to work with due to it's beiong fairly fast burning. Gun Writer Dave Scovil did an article on this very subject in, IIRC Handloader Magazine. The reason for the .32 WS was the slightly larger bore was a tad more friendly toward black Powder and the 1 in 16" twist did not foul up like the 1 in 12" twist of the 30-30. Someone mentioned something about the accuracy going sour. IIRC, that was because of how black powder needed to be cleaned and the fact that the cleaning rod had to go through the muzzle. I recently picked up a .32 WS M94 that is for all practical purposes 99 percemt mint with a very shiny bore. Once I find a box of ammo, I'll see if that one will shoot. I did buy it to be a cast bullet shooter but if it doesn.t shoot, it'll go down the road.
Paul B.
After BP was generally dropped from commercial cartridges, the difference between a .30-30 & a .32 Special became virtually identical with the same boolit weight(s)."
Not quite accurate. Not so much a sop tp those who wanted to use black powder but because the ammo makers didn't want shooter reloading with smokeless powder. Smokeless powder in those early day was much more hazardous to work with due to it's beiong fairly fast burning. Gun Writer Dave Scovil did an article on this very subject in, IIRC Handloader Magazine. The reason for the .32 WS was the slightly larger bore was a tad more friendly toward black Powder and the 1 in 16" twist did not foul up like the 1 in 12" twist of the 30-30. Someone mentioned something about the accuracy going sour. IIRC, that was because of how black powder needed to be cleaned and the fact that the cleaning rod had to go through the muzzle. I recently picked up a .32 WS M94 that is for all practical purposes 99 percemt mint with a very shiny bore. Once I find a box of ammo, I'll see if that one will shoot. I did buy it to be a cast bullet shooter but if it doesn.t shoot, it'll go down the road.
Paul B.
I mentioned it, besides hearing it for years as one of the "hunter myths", I've actually seen it, more than once. And in rifles that were treated no differently than an identical gun in .30-30. It even happened to my father's .32 Special.
Back in the late 60s, my father picked up a nearly new (less than a single box of ammo fired) Win 94 .32 Special from the estate of a cousin. He used that rifle during deer season for the next decade, firing less than 10rnds per year with it, on average. A couple or three to verify the sights were still on, and then a few at deer. Never had a single blackpowder round in it.
And, being that my father was an NRA certified instructor for both rifle and pistol, and taught Hunter Safety courses for decades, and owned and used a number of rifles, pistols and shotguns, I think he probably didn't screw up the muzzle by cleaning it wrong.
Then, one season, he pulled it out of storage, and it shot low. WAAY low. Like 6" low at 50yds, with the rear sight run all the way up. And it did it with the ammo it shot well with the year before, and with new ammo we tried in it. No one, including our local smiths could figure out why. I've also seen other .32 Specials do weird things, usually not a radical shift in POI, but a doubling or tripling of group size, for no determinable reason. Bores look good, crowns look good, the rest of the gun well within typical for a Win or Marlin. Makes no sense, but it does happen. Really rare, totally unpredictable, but often enough to keep an inflated urban legend alive.
And as I've said, I've also seen very worn .30-30s keep enough accuracy for woods deer hunting. All I can think of is that sometimes, when the stars line up something between the bore size, twist rate, bullet shape and speed goes sour, in a particular individual rifle. Sure, damage from bad cleaning, or not caring for a black powder bore can do it. probably the most likely cause of the legend, but I have seen rifles where I know for a fact that was not the case, do it, too. ITs just ..weird. Nothing seems wrong, no way to predict it, never happens in probably 99.9% of .32Spls, but does happen sometimes.
One thing I've learned in over a half century of being around, using, working on, and reloading for many guns is, that while some things are rare, and some things are almost unbelievable, I try never to say "never".
longranger
New member
Winchester had rooms full of 32-40 barrels when the 94-30-30 was developed with smokeless in mind.Knowing reloading the 30-30 was going to pose some problems with availability of componets since most riflemen reloaded and cast their bullets on a significant level in those days.The 32-40 was the "accuracy" cartridge in it's day and it was very simple to neck up 30-30 to .32 and use the existing 32-40 barrels.The early .32 Win Specials had a reversible rear sight elevator,one side marked for smokeless the other for B/P. this would satisfy the reloader.Eventually when things caught up and "smokeless" was determined to be the propellant of choice the reversible elevator was discontinued.Both cartridges were introduced nearly simultaneous.
Just checked two different books, both say 1895 for both .30-30 AND .32 Special. One says .30-30 was introduced early in the year, but nothing beyond that as to age.
Neither one was the introductory chambering in the 94 rifle, but showed up the following year.
Legend (history?) has it that the delay was mostly due to delays getting enough of the (then new) smokeless powder for the ammo. Nothing hurts sales like guns, but no shells....and once reputations get started, they are hard to break...
I checked Cartridges of the World, and both Speer and Hornady manuals, all published in the 70s or newer, and all agree on 1895 as the year of introduction for both the .30-30 and the .32 Special.
That's good enough for me.
Also, I think the use of the word "new" is rather flexible, especially in things printed well over a century ago. "New" in ad copy of the day simply means the latest current development. A cartridge can still be "new" a decade after its commercial introduction, if no directly competing round has been introduced since.
Or a specific loading of a cartridge, is "new" (meaning recent), and is referred to as the "new" cartridge.
I managed to find (a minor miracle in itself) my original Winchester Catalogue No. 73 January 1907. Here's what it says on page 42:
"
They just don't write ad copy that way, anymore!
(note this is hand copied, by me, from the actual physical book, no online source available. Care was taken to reproduce the spelling, punctuation and terms exactly as the appear in print)
I regard this as the definitive statement about the reason the .32 Special exists.
Also shows the opinions of the times, rather well, including some things that today, we do not regard as true.
Also, just FYI, for those who think about how expensive ammo is today, in 1907, the .32 Special cost $38.00 for 1,000 cartridges.
While the old Winchester catalogue does not mention date of introduction, the terms "new" and "recently perfected" are marketing, and have a "flexible" relationship to the actual date of introduction, which several other sources list as 1895.
That's good enough for me.
Also, I think the use of the word "new" is rather flexible, especially in things printed well over a century ago. "New" in ad copy of the day simply means the latest current development. A cartridge can still be "new" a decade after its commercial introduction, if no directly competing round has been introduced since.
Or a specific loading of a cartridge, is "new" (meaning recent), and is referred to as the "new" cartridge.
I managed to find (a minor miracle in itself) my original Winchester Catalogue No. 73 January 1907. Here's what it says on page 42:
"
"
They just don't write ad copy that way, anymore!
(note this is hand copied, by me, from the actual physical book, no online source available. Care was taken to reproduce the spelling, punctuation and terms exactly as the appear in print)
I regard this as the definitive statement about the reason the .32 Special exists.
Also shows the opinions of the times, rather well, including some things that today, we do not regard as true.
Also, just FYI, for those who think about how expensive ammo is today, in 1907, the .32 Special cost $38.00 for 1,000 cartridges.
While the old Winchester catalogue does not mention date of introduction, the terms "new" and "recently perfected" are marketing, and have a "flexible" relationship to the actual date of introduction, which several other sources list as 1895.
This thread got me all excited about my Tanker 94, so I included with 3 other rifles and went ot the range yesterday. The group above was my second group from the rifle 1 1/16" @ 50yds with a cast gc bullet....Ok, a called flyer is lhidden under the shooter. I may have to attempt 100yds if I can find a big enough target.
Paul B, I finally located an article in Rifle by John Haviland, January 2011, I wonder if that is the article you remembered?
He also gives a post 1900 introduction date. Guess he didn't get the 1970s publication memo.
If John Haviland says it it's good enough for me....Maybe not, both the 1895/1901 dates can't be correct, but they can both be wrong. I wonder how often Winchester put out their cartridge boards.
As an aside when I first got my 32 WSP it shot very low even with original rear elevated to the max.
I checked with a friend, who has an extensive library, and found well recognized source(s) that contradict Cartridges of the World and several well known reloading manuals.
SO, I don't know what to believe, any more.....
The reference material he has says that the .32 Special was the last of the cartridges introduced for the Model 94 (in that era). Some were sold in 1902, but full commercial sale didn't happen until 1903.
Its sad to think that the mass market books (which I used) are wrong, but my friend has books written by collectors, for collectors, so I think, when it comes to minutia like this, they are probably the most accurate source.
SO, I don't know what to believe, any more.....
The reference material he has says that the .32 Special was the last of the cartridges introduced for the Model 94 (in that era). Some were sold in 1902, but full commercial sale didn't happen until 1903.
Its sad to think that the mass market books (which I used) are wrong, but my friend has books written by collectors, for collectors, so I think, when it comes to minutia like this, they are probably the most accurate source.