Why no new 32 h&r revolvers?

R

Radny97

New member
I was just thinking about a new daily carry piece for warmer weather and since I love revolvers I was thinking I might look around for a small carry revolver on par with your common mouse guns. I already have an LCR and I'm looking for something smaller. There are lots of 380 pocket pistols that are under an inch wide and hold six or so. So I was thinking that there really ought to be something comparable in the revolver market. A 38 special is a pretty bulky round that limits both capacity and how small you can make a revolver. I would think that a manufacturer would recognize that there's a lot of space between the NAA 22 caliber miniature revolvers and your standard J frame size revolvers. It seems to me that a six shot revolver chambered in 32 H&R could be smaller than your 38 special and lighter and still pack quite a bit bit of punch. Seems like it would fill a niche. But it appears to me that there's nothing on the market like this. Why not? And should someone start making one?
 
I'm pretty sure the .327 Federal Magnum replaced any of the benefits of using .32 H&R.

You can shoot .32 H&R, .32 S&W, .32 Long and even the semi-rimmed .32 ACP out of a .327 Federal Magnum.
 
Except the 327 Federal runs at like 50,000 PSI. So it requires a heavy sturdy gun to shoot them. Plus the 327 federal loses a lot of velocity and doesn't perform ideally at barrel lengths below 4 inches. I'm talking about a lightweight light carry very small frame snubnose revolver that wouldn't have to be built to meet the pressure specifications for 327 federal.
 
My Taurus 6 shot 327 cylinder is the same diameter as my SP101 5 shot 357. I doubt anyone will ever make a reduced diameter cylinder to accommodate 6 rounds of 32 H&R or Federal Magnum.

Since the machinery is set to make a 5 shot revolver cylinder for 38 Special, or 357, and 6 rounds of 32 whatever fits nicely, you wont see a smaller cylinder, even if 6 rounds fit.

Charter Arms makes a 5 shot 32 H&R Magnum revolver, but I bet its cylinder is the same diameter as the 5 shot 38s... It weighs 12 ounces
 
Finding a used S&W 432 is probably your best bet.

Honestly, .327 is probably going the same way as .32 H&R. I know its popular, but its not popular.

Non-collectors and non-shooter types make up a good portion of the firearms market. They walk into a store and they are going to want something that is common and has easily obtained ammunition. 38/357 are established cartridges which even the average person is aware of.

I am somewhat amazed at how 10mm made a comeback (I'm a big 10mm fan), but there is a reason that HK and S&W don't make 10mm semi-autos, it's just not a bulk seller.
 
A bit of nitpick here, but the cartridge referred to above is the ".32 H&R Magnum." The ".32 H&R" was another name for the .32 Merwin & Hulbert, a 19th century round intermediate between the .32 S&W Short and the .32 S&W Long.

Jim
 
A bit of nitpick here, but the cartridge referred to above is the ".32 H&R Magnum." The ".32 H&R" was another name for the .32 Merwin & Hulbert, a 19th century round intermediate between the .32 S&W Short and the .32 S&W Long.
Click to expand...

Good catch. I suppose it make sense that the .327 Federal Magnum is a classified as a super magnum.
 
Well I have to admit that I have no experience in regards to machining and manufacturing. It is true that the main benefit of an extra small frame revolver could only be accomplished with a smaller cylinder and a correspondingly smaller frame. It just seems to me that the popularity and number of pocket pistols chambered in 380 might be in some part due to the fact that there are not revolvers of similar small size made. J frame revolvers are great but they're still a little bit bigger than the uber-popular pocket pistols chambered in 380.

Also thanks for making it clear that I am speaking about 32 H&R Magnum.

And yes, 10 mm is awesome and I'm glad it has found new lifeblood.
 
The .327 is high enough in pressure that safety probably requires a minimum of a J frame size revolver. A smaller cylinder just might not contain that pressure.

And of course, no company is likely to invest a lot of money to design a new frame size for what was always something of a fad round. I admit I had hopes for it, since it seemed a good idea, but the term "32 caliber" has been associated with cheap, low power guns for so long that the public just could not accept the idea of a hot round in that caliber.

Jim
 
Well, Ruger is still making the Single Seven and the SP101 that can shoot H&R Magnum. You can shoot .327 fed too, but the guns will gladly shoot the H&R too.

I think the J frame model 632 is probably the smallest you are going to find that can still shoot the .32 H&R magnum. 6 rounds in that package.
 
Last edited:
Sp101 in 327 and the single seven are great guns in their own right and the sp101 in 327 is on my short list. But neither of these guns do what I'm talking about. They are both heavy larger guns that can handle 327 pressures. The S&W 432 comes closer but is still built on the same size and scale as other J frames. It just seems to me there is a niche in the revolver market that is not being filled and a smaller revolver chambered in 32 H&R Magnum could fit that niche nicely.
That said, it might be prohibitively risky for a gun manufacturer to tool up to make such a gun if all new machinery is required to accommodate a smaller cylinder and frame. Still I would love to see something like that on the market, and I think there would be buyers. Could it be possible to fit five rounds in an NAA sized cylinder?
 
Something else to consider is that a small gun isn't easy for everyone to handle. The J Frame sized revolver is about as small as the majority of people can handle. There have been revolvers that are between the size of the J Frame, and the NAA Minis. The Rossi Princess comes to mind. I have handled one, and it was difficult for me to manipulate. However, the J Frame, and similar sized revolvers are a nice fit. Small enough to easily conceal, but just large enough to handle quickly, and positively.

IF your proposed small revolver is simply for range enjoyment, thats great, but when you decide its going to be for Self Defense, it needs to be easily, and quickly manipulated, and I see issues with that, in a tiny revolver.

The J Frame sized revolver can be concealed efficiently, but its not a pocket gun in my opinion. Its still too bulky. I use a fabric band holster under my shirt, with the revolver nestled just in front of my left armpit. I carry a snub nose 7 shot .357 easily, and discretely. Its cylinder is much larger than a J Frame, but the frame of the revolver is similar in size.

I recommend finding a revolver that carries a powerful cartridge, and a holster that makes it manageable. I tried every combination I could think of, to make a revolver easy to pocket carry, and after 2 years of struggle, I gave up. It just didnt work for me.
 
Last edited:
Could it be possible to fit five rounds in an NAA sized cylinder?
Click to expand...
Some years ago North American Arms experimented with a small revolver in .32 H&R Magnum. The idea was eventually dropped as they ran into a number of problem which might have been overcome but the associated costs increasingly made the project unfeasable. I don't remember much about it. I think it was break-open or side-opening. I do remember it ended up being larger than they wanted and it was generally considered ungainly in looks. I do believe there are pictures floating around the Internet.

I remember at the time I hoped they would simply scale up their existing mini revolver design to accept .32 acp. I still think that would be a pretty cool mini.
 
I own an S&W I frame, a 22LR Model 34, that's similar in size to the revolver wished for in this thread. I thought it might be interesting to compare it to a Keltec P32:



The S&W is somewhat bigger than the Keltec in profile. The Keltec is about the length of the S&W frame. Even with a snub nose the S&W would be longer.

The I frame window is 1.5 inches long. It would be a tight squeeze to fit a 327 Federal Mag in one. The 32 H&R Magnum, 32 Long or 32 ACP would fit.

There is a significant difference in width.





Due to the cylinder width the S&W is a lot wider, an inch and a half vs. 3/4 inch for the Keltec.

The biggest difference is weight. The Keltec unloaded with magazine weighs 8 ounces. The S&W unloaded weighs a pound and a half, which is three times as much. Now there is room to lighten the S&W; if the barrel and chambers were opened to 32 caliber and the barrel were shorter and it was made with alloy / plastic it could be a lot lighter, maybe enough to get the weight down to a pound.

In which case it would only weigh twice as much.

IMO the only reason to use a cartridge in the 32 ACP class for defense is if you need a gun you can really conceal. That's much easier with a semiauto than a revolver. I can easily conceal the Keltec in a shirt pocket. There's no 32 caliber revolver that can do that.
 
I am also surprised at the scarcity of 32 magnum revolvers. They offer reasonable stopping power with very little recoil. With CC being so popular, and so many more women purchasing handguns, it seems like a logical choice.

I enjoy shooting them. My wife has damaged wrists and my daughter is only 11. They both shoot 32 magnums easily and well. Yet the only brand-new 32 magnum snubs I ever see around here are Charter Arms, and they are few and far between.
 
"The [Charter Arms] Undercoverette in .32 H&R is 6 ¼ inches overall length, 4 ¼ “ H, 1 ¼” W, weighing approx 16 oz. It is about 25% smaller than a J frame.
 
The 32 magnum Undercoverette is my wife's preferred HD handgun. (I have no say in the matter.) She is confident and accurate with it.

It's odd to me that I rarely see it suggested as an option for those who are weak wristed and/or adverse to recoil.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top