32 H&R Mag +P Loads?
- Thread starter jski
- Start date
First, technically, whenever a commercial ammunition maker goes above the SAAMI pressure standards, he calls the load a +P+ load so as not to be using a SAAMI term like +P when SAAMI has no +P standard or when exceeding it if there is one. So I think you can legitimately use the +P+ term.
Second, whenever we discuss loads possibly outside the SAAMI pressure levels and not published by a reputable source of load data, compliance with this board policy is required. Please read that sticky and follow it. I will edit the required text into your first post in this instance but rely on you to do it yourself in the future.
Your objective in a sturdy gun like the Ruger, seems reasonable. The 32 H&R Magnum has only a copper crusher pressure standard, while the 327 Federal has only a transducer pressure standard, so you can't really compare them directly. However, the copper crusher numbers have the 32 H&R Magnum at 1.75 times higher maximum than 32 Long, and if you apply that ratio to the transducer number for 32 Long, which is 15,000 psi, you get 26,250 psi, so it is likely that if SAAMI produced a transducer standard for the magnum, it would land somewhere in that proximity.
I assume the LCR is already chambered in 327 Federal since I don't recall one having been made for the 32 H&R Magnum, but correct me if you know otherwise. The main thing is to have one with the steel rather than the aluminum frame because of gas cutting at higher pressures.
Rechambering the Blackhawk in 327 Federal, assuming the cylinder has the necessary length, would add flexibility. It would also allow you to use 327 Federal brass for your loads in both guns. Using reduced 327 Federal loads rather than +P+ 32 H&R Magnum loads avoids the possibility of the high pressure 32 H&R Magnum loads getting into a gun that isn't suitable for the pressures involved. However, collector's value of the Blackhawk may be lowered by rechambering. Also, if it is exceptionally accurate as it is, you risk upsetting that. These are the only two reasons that come to mind for not doing it.
If you want to avoid the 327 Federal level load because it is too warm and has too much blast, keep in mind 296/H110 cannot be safely loaded much below 90% loading density because of the danger of a round squibbing out and leaving a bullet stuck in the barrel for the next round to fire into. That is an event that usually bulges the barrel but can occasionally burst a gun, depending on where in the barrel the stuck bullet is sitting. So there is a limit to what you can reduce with that powder. Also, it is famous for muzzle blast and fireballs, so it probably embodies all you are trying to avoid. In your shoes, I would be looking at something like Hodgdon Longshot or Alliant 2400 which have loads listed for both 32 H&R Magnum and 327 Federal (H110/296 does not). That's a good clue they will function well at load levels in between the two.
Second, whenever we discuss loads possibly outside the SAAMI pressure levels and not published by a reputable source of load data, compliance with this board policy is required. Please read that sticky and follow it. I will edit the required text into your first post in this instance but rely on you to do it yourself in the future.
Your objective in a sturdy gun like the Ruger, seems reasonable. The 32 H&R Magnum has only a copper crusher pressure standard, while the 327 Federal has only a transducer pressure standard, so you can't really compare them directly. However, the copper crusher numbers have the 32 H&R Magnum at 1.75 times higher maximum than 32 Long, and if you apply that ratio to the transducer number for 32 Long, which is 15,000 psi, you get 26,250 psi, so it is likely that if SAAMI produced a transducer standard for the magnum, it would land somewhere in that proximity.
I assume the LCR is already chambered in 327 Federal since I don't recall one having been made for the 32 H&R Magnum, but correct me if you know otherwise. The main thing is to have one with the steel rather than the aluminum frame because of gas cutting at higher pressures.
Rechambering the Blackhawk in 327 Federal, assuming the cylinder has the necessary length, would add flexibility. It would also allow you to use 327 Federal brass for your loads in both guns. Using reduced 327 Federal loads rather than +P+ 32 H&R Magnum loads avoids the possibility of the high pressure 32 H&R Magnum loads getting into a gun that isn't suitable for the pressures involved. However, collector's value of the Blackhawk may be lowered by rechambering. Also, if it is exceptionally accurate as it is, you risk upsetting that. These are the only two reasons that come to mind for not doing it.
If you want to avoid the 327 Federal level load because it is too warm and has too much blast, keep in mind 296/H110 cannot be safely loaded much below 90% loading density because of the danger of a round squibbing out and leaving a bullet stuck in the barrel for the next round to fire into. That is an event that usually bulges the barrel but can occasionally burst a gun, depending on where in the barrel the stuck bullet is sitting. So there is a limit to what you can reduce with that powder. Also, it is famous for muzzle blast and fireballs, so it probably embodies all you are trying to avoid. In your shoes, I would be looking at something like Hodgdon Longshot or Alliant 2400 which have loads listed for both 32 H&R Magnum and 327 Federal (H110/296 does not). That's a good clue they will function well at load levels in between the two.
Lyman and Speer use 296/H110 in .32 H&R loads.
More speed to help the HP expand. More speed to help solid bullets penetrate more.
FrankenMauser
New member
There are standard .32 H&R loads that will exceed 1,200 fps from a 2" barrel, with an 85 gr XTP.
The 85 gr XTP is only rated for 1,000 fps for maximum expansion.
The 100 gr XTP is rated for 750-1,500 fps, but you still don't need "more speed to help" with anything.
Even if velocity is a factor, that is what the .327 Federal chamber is for.
>Buys .327 Federal revolver.
>Tries to turn .32 H&R into .327 Federal.
The 85 gr XTP is only rated for 1,000 fps for maximum expansion.
The 100 gr XTP is rated for 750-1,500 fps, but you still don't need "more speed to help" with anything.
Even if velocity is a factor, that is what the .327 Federal chamber is for.
>Buys .327 Federal revolver.
>Tries to turn .32 H&R into .327 Federal.
As a forum lawyer be sure to take my advice for what it is worth - exactly nothing.
If I were you I wouldn't shoot anything with a pipsqueak round like that. If you intend to harm or kill something or someone, you need a bigger / better caliber. Hot Rodding a little bitty thing like that won't do much except make a big fire ball and a little bit more noise. And for sure don't use a handload as a defense round - that's going to cost you a lot if it ever went to trial.
I have no clue why you're directing that at me. I'm simply responding to 44 AMP's question.
You're right about one thing, your opinion is worth nothing to me.
yes, more speed, thank you, but you missed my point.
UNLESS the "more speed" does something significant, something that makes a noticeable, and not just a measurable difference, what's the point??
jacking up the pressure does give you more, of everything, but is it going to be enough "more" to justify doing it??
There's no free lunch. Are you going to be able to turn your 2" into 4" performance speeds?? And, even if you can, is that going to matter???
Some of us still consider going to a larger, more powerful round to be a better solution to "power problems" than jacking up the pressure of a smaller round.
Beware of the "energy trap", the on paper figures vs. real world performance. There are a LOT of things involved beyond just velocity and calculated energy.
As an illustrative example, you can load a .22-250 and a .45-70 to EXACTLY IDENTICAL energy. However, the results of what either hits with that same amount of energy, will not be the same.
Its just a wee bit more complicated than that....
UNLESS the "more speed" does something significant, something that makes a noticeable, and not just a measurable difference, what's the point??
jacking up the pressure does give you more, of everything, but is it going to be enough "more" to justify doing it??
There's no free lunch. Are you going to be able to turn your 2" into 4" performance speeds?? And, even if you can, is that going to matter???
Some of us still consider going to a larger, more powerful round to be a better solution to "power problems" than jacking up the pressure of a smaller round.
Beware of the "energy trap", the on paper figures vs. real world performance. There are a LOT of things involved beyond just velocity and calculated energy.
As an illustrative example, you can load a .22-250 and a .45-70 to EXACTLY IDENTICAL energy. However, the results of what either hits with that same amount of energy, will not be the same.
Its just a wee bit more complicated than that....
No, I didn't miss your point. More expansion, deeper penetration ARE the things that make a noticeable difference, since these are things that cause more damage. You seem to miss that point.
According to your reasoning, we don't need longer barrels. We should just stick with our 2" guns. But wait, doesn't more velocity get you more expansion and penetration, the things that do matter?
I guess I should now include a rolls eyes
or wink smilie because that somehow makes people think they're clever? I said nothing about energy. Placement is king, so 'they' say. Expansion and penetration help achieve that. Expansion to cause a wider wound channel - damaging more stuff along the way. Penetration to get to the place that matters.
No, that is about the exact opposite of my reasoning.
When you increase the pressure of a load, you get more than just more velocity. You get more of everything, including blast, recoil, while at the same time decreasing the operating margin of the gun and ammo. NOT the SAFETY margin (unless you continue far enough to reach that point) but the operating margin.
How much, and how this will affect operation varies with the individual guns and loads involved.
There is a point (and again, it varies with the gun) where you get cases that stick and do not extract using normal hand pressure.
SO, you have to thread that needle, between enough increased performance and too much, and too much is well below the actual safety limit of the gun (or should be!!)
So, I'm asking what is it you expect to get, and what does the heavier than standard load actually give you??? And, in this case, give you out of a 2" revolver?
What good is higher velocity if you create a snub gun that is more difficult to shoot well, or even worse, one where cases stick and have to be driven out of the cylinder??
Is a handful of fps increase over standard worth it???
And to expand on that, what is the load intended for that you need hollow points? I know my revolvers that are 3" or less are for across the table, belly type guns which means you don't need 'speed' or 'accuracy' (point and shoot) but penetration with a heavy bullet for this small .32 popgun. If for varmints (not the human kind), a longer barrelled revolver is better for two reasons... Higher velocity possible (as 44Amp talks about) and longer sight radius for better accuracy on that charging skunk or ground squirrel digging holes out in your pasture. Do all this while sticking with standard SAAMI loads too. Need more go up in caliber. Don't make the .32 something it isn't. I conceal carry a .44 Special Bulldog (slow and heavy bullet) for that reason around town, but then switch to my .4X BHs (longer barrel) for the woods.
Last edited:
The other extreme is when very high-speed varmint bullets blow up and stay under the skin on some game. That's a case where faster does not equal more penetration. I don't think we'll see that here, but I would call the bullet maker of your choice and check that whatever velocity you end up with is one you are using the right bullet for.
Well guys, last week Brownell’s let me know I could purchase 2 lbs of Lil’Gun. So, of course, I did. And whereas there is no Hodgdon reload data for H110 for the 32 H&R, there is for Lil’Gun. This data shows:
85 gr:
Vel. (ft/s) 1,263
Pressure 16,800 CUP
100 gr:
Vel. (ft/s) 1,208
Pressure 19,900 CUP
But these are still mild pressure levels. So I don’t think these quality as +P loads.
85 gr:
Vel. (ft/s) 1,263
Pressure 16,800 CUP
100 gr:
Vel. (ft/s) 1,208
Pressure 19,900 CUP
But these are still mild pressure levels. So I don’t think these quality as +P loads.
Note that the highest max pressure in the Hodgdon data for Lil'Gun is for the 100-grain bullet, at 19,900 CUP, while the 85-grain bullet peaks at 16,800 psi. The reason for that difference is they saw a lot more shot-to-shot pressure variation with the light bullet, so they backed down the load to ensure they weren't normally exceeding the SAAMI MAP with it.
You can estimate from that data that the pressure sigma (population standard deviation) for the 100-grain bullet was about 715 CUP or a coefficient of variance (CV) of 3.7%. SAAMI specs as used by the manufacturer assume not exceeding CV (the amount the standard deviation can vary) of 5% in handgun loading (4% for rifle and rimfire; 7.5% for shotgun).
The number for the 85-grain bullet lets us estimate its sigma at about 2730 CUP for aCV of about 16%. This is more than three times what the SAAMI standard would allow in commercial ammunition, so you may be disappointed by the performance with the light bullet.
If you look back at post #23, you'll see 74A95 found some H110/296 loads in Lyman and Speer for the 32 H&R Mag.
The data 74A95 found for H110/296 is this:
Speer
100-grain JHP Speer #3892 seated to 1.345" COL, CCI 500 primer
H110 (or 296) 9.5 grs. Min. 10.5-grs. Max
No pressure data is given to estimate deviations from.
Lyman
90-grain Sierra JHC #8030 seated to 1.315" COL Federal 100 primer.
296 (or H110) 9.9 grains - fixed load with no starting load options: 19,400 CUP
Estimated SD 1,040 CUP, for a CV of 4.95%
You can estimate from that data that the pressure sigma (population standard deviation) for the 100-grain bullet was about 715 CUP or a coefficient of variance (CV) of 3.7%. SAAMI specs as used by the manufacturer assume not exceeding CV (the amount the standard deviation can vary) of 5% in handgun loading (4% for rifle and rimfire; 7.5% for shotgun).
The number for the 85-grain bullet lets us estimate its sigma at about 2730 CUP for aCV of about 16%. This is more than three times what the SAAMI standard would allow in commercial ammunition, so you may be disappointed by the performance with the light bullet.
If you look back at post #23, you'll see 74A95 found some H110/296 loads in Lyman and Speer for the 32 H&R Mag.
The data 74A95 found for H110/296 is this:
Speer
100-grain JHP Speer #3892 seated to 1.345" COL, CCI 500 primer
H110 (or 296) 9.5 grs. Min. 10.5-grs. Max
No pressure data is given to estimate deviations from.
Lyman
90-grain Sierra JHC #8030 seated to 1.315" COL Federal 100 primer.
296 (or H110) 9.9 grains - fixed load with no starting load options: 19,400 CUP
Estimated SD 1,040 CUP, for a CV of 4.95%
And, you probably won't find data for H110 in that cartridge anywhere else. H110 is simply not well suited to the relatively small case volume of the round.
The Hornady data I have for the .32 H&R Mag shows heaviest charges in the 5 to 6gr range, (and that's for the slowest powder listed, AA No.7) and I doubt you'll find H110 data for any pistol round smaller than the .30 carbine case, other than the .22 Hornet where a starting charge of 7gr is listed. Its just too slow for small cases, and doesn't play well when underloaded, either.
Or they couldn't get more in the case.
Or, as zeke noted, velocity started to go down with higher charge weights.
Last edited:
Lyman reports that with the 90 gr Sierra JHP in the 32 H&R Mag, 296 gave the highest velocity of all the powders they report - by over 100 fps. Sounds like it worked pretty well.