.32 S&W long vs. 38 Special

[mstot]

After reading all the posts about the 32 and 38 I would like to share some of my thoughts and experiences I have tested just about every 32 SWL and 38 Special auto loading pistols at 25 and 50 yds and found the best of the 32s is the Hammerli P240 and the best 38 is either a Colt 38 kit gun or a Colt 38 AMU gun. The problem with the P240 is that it is a little to big .The thing that I do not like about the Colt or the S&W 52 is the action seems to be slow. I decided after all of this what I needed was a 1911 in 32 SWL with a blow back action. I spent the next year building the pistol below. The nice thing about this conversion is that it can also handle semi wad cutters that are easier to load and to get to feed in an autoloader. I hope this inspires someone to build a better 32 that anyone can buy and enjoy.
Mark

[6string]

Mstot,

That's impressive!! It appears that the slide has been heavily altered to function as a straight blowback?? Is the barrel fixed in some manner so as to eliminate the pivot pin used to facilitate the more usual locked breach?

[jipe]

After reading all the posts about the 32 and 38 I would like to share some of my thoughts and experiences I have tested just about every 32 SWL and 38 Special auto loading pistols at 25 and 50 yds and found the best of the 32s is the Hammerli P240

Did you also test the P240 in .38WC ? If you did, what were the results ?

[JamesH]

Slightly cheaper than the Manuhrin
~ A$1000 ~U$900
http://www.alfa-proj.cz/en/products/fir ... -380-alfa/

[Mike M.]

The problem with the Manurhin is finding one. I don't think they have a distributor in the United States.

[fsmte]

everything is relative will depend on each one, with its personal characteristics.
sees some tests of precision.
what it lacks is the personal adaptation.

http://hem.bredband.net/nfdt/9x19/index.html

http://hem.bredband.net/nfdt/22lr/index.html

http://hem.bredband.net/nfdt/38special/index.html

http://hem.bredband.net/nfdt/32SWL/index.html

[Brian James]

Does anyone have any contact information for Manhurin? I am struggling to find them on the internet.

thanks

brian

[Guest]

http://www.chapuis-armes.com/-Version-EN-.html

[6string]

fsmte,

Thanks for the links. Are these groups 25m or 50m? I assume from a machine rest?

[Len]

Does anyone have any contact information for Manhurin? I am struggling to find them on the internet.

thanks

brian

If you want one, Victorian Arms Supplies in Melbourne Australia have the Manurhin Match 32s in stock. I've just bought one from them last week and I couldn't be happier with it. The quality is astonishing and it groups amazingly well.

Their website is www.viccityarms.com.au and I'm sure that they export...

[bpbrinson]

Neal Stepp of I.S.S. knows of a mr73 in 38 here in Texas, and also says he can get them,as he has done in the past.

Neal Stepp I.S.S. 877-595-2090 e-mail; i_s_s@sbcglobal.net

[6string]

May I suggest another avenue of pursuit: Those in the USA can get a S&W K frame and have it rebarreled to .32 and have a new cylinder made with a match chamber and short length to match the OAL of a loaded .32 WC round. There are a number of excellent gunsmiths specializing in revolver conversions. Most often they line bore the new cylinder in the frame to ensure perfect alignment. The barrel twist, chamber and throat diameter could be to any spec. Whatever the cartridge is capable of, accuracy-wise, this would probably come closest to meeting that potential. The K-frame is one of the most common revolvers. They are easy to find, fix and maintain. I bet such a custom job could be done $$ competitively to the Manhurin. Just an idea.... In fact, it really has me thinking!
Jim

[gn303]

Reading the posts to this subject, I think there is one item missing: why shooters favoured .32 instead of the .38? S&W offered a K series revolver in .38 and .32, get no .32 was seen on the range.
Manurhin have produced a Match .32 revolver, tailored to ISSF rules, and with a shorted cylinder that made the gun only suitable for wad cutters. It was expensive but very high quality, but not a success.
The change to .32 was inspired by the lighter recoil and the fact that impacts are checked with a .38 gauge. Actually, if the higher ring is not touched by the bullet, but is with the .38 gauge the higher value is recorded. The logic of this is disputable, but it is the rule. Some argument in the rapid fire (duelling) part of the center fire program: a late shot (ovalised) that measures 9.15 mm will be approved. This means that with a .32 you do have higher odds. Also the bullet travels a little faster. Ridiculous? Behaps. But those are the rules of the competition and places at the very top are tight.
Another observation: all competitors from the former USSR shot .32 caliber revolvers?!
The reason auto's are preferred has also to do with the 'duelling' part of the program: re-cocking the revolver forces the shooter to alter his stand between shots.
I hope to have made a little contribution to this item.

[Tycho]

The Russkis had no choice - there ain't no such thing as a 9.6mm Nagant, only a 7.62mm Nagant... But they sure have some great shooters there, shooting good results...

[David Levene]

a late shot (ovalised) that measures 9.15 mm will be approved.

It's actually 11mm in the CF Pitol match.

[Capt. William]

Reading the posts to this subject, I think there is one item missing: why shooters favoured .32 instead of the .38? S&W offered a K series revolver in .38 and .32, get no .32 was seen on the range.
Manurhin have produced a Match .32 revolver, tailored to ISSF rules, and with a shorted cylinder that made the gun only suitable for wad cutters. It was expensive but very high quality, but not a success.
The change to .32 was inspired by the lighter recoil and the fact that impacts are checked with a .38 gauge. Actually, if the higher ring is not touched by the bullet, but is with the .38 gauge the higher value is recorded. The logic of this is disputable, but it is the rule. Some argument in the rapid fire (duelling) part of the center fire program: a late shot (ovalised) that measures 9.15 mm will be approved. This means that with a .32 you do have higher odds. Also the bullet travels a little faster. Ridiculous? Behaps. But those are the rules of the competition and places at the very top are tight.
Another observation: all competitors from the former USSR shot .32 caliber revolvers?!
The reason auto's are preferred has also to do with the 'duelling' part of the program: re-cocking the revolver forces the shooter to alter his stand between shots.
I hope to have made a little contribution to this item.

You surely have! :-)

I hadn't known about the ".38 gauge rule" but then I'm not a centerfire competitor.

This being the rule, and as you also mentioned, higher velocity and lesser recoil in the duelling stage favoring the .32: all this, in my opinion, means that the .38 has NO real advantage over the .32 in international centerfire.

So, why are .38 K-frames popular, .32 K-frames not?

Because in the US, until very recently, revolvers were more popular than autoloaders, and ever since the cowboy era and the better performance of .45's over .38's in decking Moro guerrillas in the Philippines. Americans have had a strong cultural affinity for larger pistol calibers.

Also, almost nobody in this country shoots international centerfire, or any of the other international pistol styles. :-(

Put it all together and you get a strong cultural preference for the .38 vs. the .32.

As a practical matter this equates to more guns, ammo, loading components and data, etc., for .38's in this country: which is where these K-frames originated.

International centerfire shooters here just follow suit.

Jim

[David Levene]

Actually, if the higher ring is not touched by the bullet, but is with the .38 gauge the higher value is recorded.

You can get exactly the same thing with a .38 which is just a name. The actual bore diameters are usually in the .354-.358 range.

By the same vagary of naming, .32s are usually in the .308-.314 range.

Gauging to actual diameter would therefore be an impossibility, there are too many variations. IMHO it is much more sensible to base everything on the centre of the hole and gauge at the maximum allowable size (which is what we have now).

[gn303]

a late shot (ovalised) that measures 9.15 mm will be approved.

It's actually 11mm in the CF Pitol match.

Right you are David. It is 11 mm indeed! Which only adds to the argument. I also agree with your line on gauge diameters I can agree with. To compare results you need one standard.

[gn303]

The Russkis had no choice - there ain't no such thing as a 9.6mm Nagant, only a 7.62mm Nagant... But they sure have some great shooters there, shooting good results...

True, but they did shoot Hämmerli's 106 before they had TOZ35 or 207's
On a CISM championship, I have witnessed a your Russian soldier shooting a Nagant 7.62, I wouldn't have taken it out of a trash can... But what groups and what a crack shot. And he even didn’t win!
I think most of the modern guns will out group the shooters' skill. But it's like with a pair of shoes even with the same size they don't always feel comfortable.

[Tycho]

They also shot S&W's until those fell apart. The TOZ36/49 design is not as old as it looks...