What are your thoughts on .32 H&R Mag?

T

TruthTellers

New member
After seeing how many replies were posted in my thread about people's overall thoughts on .32 ACP, I'd like to hear what others thoughts are on another .32 cartridge that gets easily forgotten: the .32 H&R Magnum.

I'd like to know what are your thoughts on this cartridge for defense and plinking?

Since its introduction in the 1980's, the .32 H&R has flown under the radar of the bigger rimmed calibers, but with the boom in conceal carry the past 20+ years, .32 is still a popular option for small frame revolvers. With its smaller diameter it allows room for an extra shot in the cylinder over .38/.357 and compared to .38 Special, proper .32 H&R ammo can hit harder and penetrate deeper with the correct JHP ammo.

Personally, I really like the .32 revolver cartridges from .32 S&W Long up to .327 Federal.
 
I don't really see the point in a .32 H&R only gun now that the .327 Federal is out, reason being at least in factory loaded ammo, .327 is actually cheaper than the older .32 H&R. I think both really are reloaders cartridges though, they aren't cheap to buy factory ammo for, much more expensive than .38special/.357 magnum. The public just hasn't embraced the modern .32s it seems. I kind of wish they had as both rounds would probably be more available and less expensive if more people were into them (supply and demand etc.).
 
Model12Win said:
I don't really see the point in a .32 H&R only gun now that the .327 Federal is out, reason being at least in factory loaded ammo, .327 is actually cheaper than the older .32 H&R. I think both really are reloaders cartridges though, they aren't cheap to buy factory ammo for, much more expensive than .38special/.357 magnum. The public just hasn't embraced the modern .32s it seems. I kind of wish they had as both rounds would probably be more available and less expensive if more people were into them (supply and demand etc.).
Click to expand...
It's difficult to discuss the .32 H&R without mentioning the .327 Magnum given that the .327 is available in similar sized revolvers and is currently way more widely available than .32 H&R revolvers are. Plus, it's much more powerful and can shoot .32 H&R.

My philosophy with the .32 H&R and .327 Fed is that if I'm just shooting for fun or practicing, I'm going to be shooting with .32 S&W Long. It's cheaper to shoot factory ammo and has low recoil.

I don't really consider shooting factory .32 H&R or .327 unless I want to use them for defense and want to get a feel for their recoil and see how they group at various distances.
 
I am late to the 32cal game but have grown to truly enjoy them. As a reloader they are cheap to reload for and can be an excellent next step for a new shooter moving up from a 22. There is still a strong following the little 32 J frames, just look at what S&W's have sold for lately on GB and other auction sites or the Marlin 1894 32 H&R's, I'm glad Henry started making them in 327. I have been looking to add a Ruger 327 LCR to my collection but haven't been able to find one for a good price yet. I think the 32 is often over looked by a lot of people due to a lot less press/magazine articles and due to less guns and ammo being available.


P.S. I also picked up the little 32's for when my hands will no longer allow me to shoot the bigger boomers. From growing up as an hot rodder and then as an aircraft mech in the AF I already have mild arthritis in my hands and know someday its going to be one of the only guns I can shoot with out pain.:o
 
Last edited:
Well, I recently dropped the 32 H&R, but not because I didn't like it. I needed to sell something, and my little birdshead Single Six was the chosen one. That, and I have a Colt's Official Police in 32-20 for which I finally got a good load worked up. The 32 S&W Long is a neat round, but many wanted something with a little more punch. The 32-20 can be that round, but it was chambered in many old pistols, including some from the black powder era. (My Colt is a youngster - 1923.) So no ammo maker was going to work a "modern" load for it. That's where the 32 H&R fit in, and it still does.

Although 32s have been used defensively for a long time, most consider them under powered by today's standards. That includes the 32 H&R. Enter the 327, a powerful round that, in particular, allows 6 instead of 5 in a SP-101. The H&R "Magnum" (becoming a controversial term) is a great fun, small game round, in my opinion. More punch than the S&W Long with no real downside. The 327 is a different beast altogether.

Lots of people enjoy the option, but personally I don't shoot 38s in my 357 or Specials in my 44 Mag. There's no problem doing so, but I have pistols for those. There are some nice revolvers available in 32 H&R, and I think they stand on their own merit.
 
The 32 H&R as a cartridge

I have been shooting the 32 H&R since my first Ruger SSM I purchased in 1984. I currently have several revolvers in .327 Fed. and .32 H&R . As a matter of practice I generally shoot 32 H&R loads 80% of the time in all of them. As some of you have said, the full house loads in the .327 Fed are in a league of their own and reserved in my use for self defense and practice for self defense. My Single sevens and SP101 become real firebreathers with factory 327 loads. The 32 H&R on the other hand, even when loaded fairly warm is still quite mild and pleasant to shoot.
 
I carry a Smith 32 h&r magnum revolver - M431PD.

I think carrying 32 h&r magnum is pretty much equivalent to carrying 38 special.

A little smaller/lighter bullet going somewhat faster -- but generally equivalent.

The biggest pro in favor of 32 h&r is 6 shots rather than 5 in my small revolvers.

The biggest con against 32 h&r is fewer ammo choices, harder to find ammo and more expensive.

The 327 federal is a big step up with much higher velocity and energy in the low to mid range 357 Mag level.

I recently acquired a 327 LCR and will start carrying it sometimes after I practice with it a bit more.

But the LCR is four oz heavier than the 431PD so my little 32 h&r will still see some pocket time.
 
I have four 32 mags, three 32 longs and a Marlin CB in 32 mag. I like 32 caliber guns. But the 327 never appealed to me because my 32s are more trail guns than SD guns. I rarely ever load full power 32 mag loads so the 327 is not needed. Plus if I wanted the extra power I would just go up to a 357 mag and get a real step up in power.

But I really enjoy shooting 32s, I reload and cast my own bullets. I guess it may be my favorite handgun caliber.
 
I don't have any experience with any of the .32 calibers on handguns.
So I can't really give you my thoughts on it..

I will say this though, I try to limit the number of calibers my guns are chambered in, I'd rather have very common chamberings, The ammo is generally less expensive the more demand / common it is.. also the more common it is the easier it is to find, and not just find any loading but a greater variety as well.

Now for plinking or a light general purpose round 22lr usually will get the nod.
You're probably not going t hunting with these .32cal handguns.. so what's the leave? self defense?

That probably has "some" merit, Having no experience with them I don't know what the recoil is like, But probably less then the more common .380, 9mm, 38sppl, etc

I suppose that could be of benefit to someone with disability.
Normally I'd just steer such people to a 22lr revolver with CCI stingers or velocitors, though because the 22lr means cheap practice ammo and the revolver brings reliability.

However Im sure the .32's offer more power, But besides disability are they really any better then a .380 or 9mm? they come in small compact sizes these days and while I've not priced any of the various .32 calibers I suspect they're no cheaper and indeed probably more expensive then .380 and 9mm

So I guess my answer and question rolled in one is why would I even look at .32 (besides if I was disabled) over a .380, 9mm, 38spl?

To me even if it's a slightly better fit for a particular purpose it probably would not be worth the added ammo cost and headache of stocking yet another caliber of ammo.
 
My thoughts. Originally, I never thought I'd go for the .32 caliber ... I had .22s, .357s, .44s, .45s ... Why would I need a .32 (or a .41). But then the .22 shortage came along and I wanted a 'reloadable' cartridge that was as close to the .22 as I could get. So settled on the the .32 H&R mag as my reloadable .22LR. I was not after hyper velocity (think .327) ... just something I could cheaply reload and easily get to .22LR velocities.... 78g to 115g bullets. Luckily, Ruger had come out with the Single Seven as there appeared to be no Single Action commercially available that shot the .32 H&R Mag. Starline had brass. Since then I ran onto a Baby Vaquero, and now a Cimarron Lightning. Still on the lookout for a 5 1/2" Single Six .32. Now I won't be without the little .32. A cartridge my wife (and I) can enjoy along with the .22 (when available).
 
JoeSixpack said:
However Im sure the .32's offer more power, But besides disability are they really any better then a .380 or 9mm?
Click to expand...
.32 H&R is better than .380, absolutely. The only reason .380 is so popular is the faster reload. The issue with .380, at least if you're using hollow points, is that many of them fail to expand or when they do, they expand so much and weigh so little that they don't penetrate deep enough.

The .32 H&R loads generally have the velocity to expand and because the bullet is smaller in diameter, it doesn't expand as much as .380 does and penetrates deeper.

I made a thread on another forum last year asking whether they'd rather carry a .327 LCR or a .380 pocket pistol and the majority of replies were along the lines of the .380 because of the fast reload, but nobody denied that the .327 would be the better stopper and they liked that it had 6 shots in the cylinder instead of 5.

As for 9mm, you're looking at a larger gun in semi auto, but it will have tolerable recoil. But the issue with that is I've yet to find any 9mm pistol that was a true pocket gun that carried as well as a .380 or a snub revolver.

9mm revolvers like the LCR though, the 9mm has some strong recoil and there's a high chance that a bullet will jump crimp and possibly lock up the cylinder after a couple shots. There's also the issue of moon clips and how to carry those in a way that they don't get bent and cause issues. I'm not sure how the Doughboys in WW1 carried around full moon clips in the trenches for their M1917 revolvers without busting them in combat, but I'm not sure they had full moon clips back then, I think they were half moons with 3 rounds and they carried flat in a pocket or something.

Not sure if there are any sort of 2 or 3 round clips for the LCR. In fact, I'm not even sure why Ruger made the LCR in 9mm at all.

Anyway, 9mm is better than .32 H&R, but that's comparing apples to oranges. You could make the same argument against every other rimmed revolver cartridge that semi autos are better.

rclark said:
But then the .22 shortage came along and I wanted a 'reloadable' cartridge that was as close to the .22 as I could get.
Click to expand...
Same exact reason I became enamored with the .32 H&R/.327 Federal. .32 H&R can be very weak, close to .22 up to .38 Special power and the .327 is basically a smaller, lighter .357 with much less recoil in smaller revolvers, but with similar power.
 
Recently bought a Single Six 4 5/8 in 32 H&R at a pawn shop. After some TLC and reaming the very undersized throats, this little revolver is very accurate joy to shoot. I have plenty of 32 H&R and 32 S&W Long brass, these little things are fun to reload! I liked it so much I bought a Single Seven in the same barrel length.
 
my thoughts are...the 32s do not offer anything that would replace or be better for use than what I already have in 380/9mm/38s/357m/44s/44m/45lc/45acp..

oh and lets not forget...22/22mag....
 
Last edited:
I was already a fan of .32 H&R Magnum when the .327 came out. This oversimplifies things a bit but the .32 H&R Magnum is to .38 Special what the .327 Federal is to .357 Magnum. Ideally, I'd choose six shots of smooth-recoiling .32 H&R over five of .38 Special any day. Things are not ideal though. Just as with .327 vs .357, one is much more widely distributed and more widely available than the other. Just consider the choice between a normally priced SP101 or LCR 327 and a rare S&W 431 or 432. Ruger could fit the shorter, lower-pressured .32 H&R Magnums on the lighter LCR 38 frame and that would be a sweet carry gun, but this is already a smaller arena of demand so I doubt we'd ever see it. I also feel like the relatively common 85-grain Hydra-Shoks in .327 do anything I'd ask of the .32 H&R Magnum and do it better. The real draw for .32 H&R Magnum in a .327 gun is if you already have a good source for it or if the flash/bang difference is a major consideration.
 
I would love to hear the argument about when .38 is superior to .32 H&R.

EDIT: And .327 for that matter.
Click to expand...

where to begin....

38s are more available in firearms...

38s are more available in different bullets

38s are more available in different brands

38s are less expensive

38s can be down loaded to bunny farts for those who have weak wrists

38s can up be loaded to blistering performance

38s...can morph into 357 magnums...

38s have been used by many LEOs..and some still do
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top