.32 vs .38

[JHC]

So if you could have an otherwise identical revolver in .38 or .32, which way would you go? Obvious things that come to mind are cheaper ammo and snake shot available for the .38, and an extra cartridge and Buffalo Bore wadcutters for the .32.

Thoughts?

It must be maybe a year ago when DB, Chuck Haggard, and Demonstrated Concepts "Rusty" were on a long podcast. One point that Chuck made and IIRC DB seconded, was that when pulled in real life and death fights, pocket semiautos foul a fair bit of the time. He noted all the dashcame/bodycam examples of full size service pistols malf'ing under pressure and maintained the issue is even more acute with pocket semiautos. He may have speculated as to likely reasons for this but I can't recall it exactly.

But I know myself that under match/demo pressure I've seen my grip foul a G19 running a KKM comp that had previously sailed through several thousand calm training rounds without a malf. Adrenalized I was getting TOO high up on the backstrap.

The grip of a pocket sized semiauto doesn't leave me much room for error in the grip is how I look at it.

[BehindBlueI's]

With the understanding I'm boring:

.38 special. Whatever the .32 does or doesn't offer is not significant enough for me and my intended use of a small revolver to buy a new gun, to buy new reloading dies, to stockpile new brass, stockpile new carry ammunition, and load smaller/fiddlier rounds. If I was starting from scratch, maybe I'd care more.

[Scal]

I am excited about the new Lipsey’s Smith releases, and it seems like the caliber offerings for those guns are maybe prompting some of this interest. It is for me, at any rate. The thing that is stopping me from wanting to go all in on .32s is two things:

I am already well setup for reloading 38/357. I don’t have any 32 dies, and I know that 32 cartridges tend to be a bit more sensitive to error versus .38s. For plinking and practice ammo, I really need to reload, and I have been doing that for .38. So, that’s an extra annoying expense, but potentially doable.

The second and probably bigger thing: Is there a good hollow point load in 32 mag that has decent ballistic performance? I don’t want to carry handloads for defense. Liability and reproducibility of ballistic performance aside, I trust dedicated manufacturers to be able to source better powders and optimize ammunition performance more than I can do on my own. I know that .38 is already a somewhat bottom floor for performance, and if you want a round to meet FBI standards, or at least come close-ish, you have basically the Speer .38 gold dot short barrel load, and not much else. Is there even anything in .32mag that does this that is being produced? It seems like the plan is for hardcast wadcutters, and there’s nothing wrong with a good wadcutter load, but I don’t get warm fuzzies about having ammunition options limited like that. Trying to get good enough factory .38 performance is already quite hard, and it seems like .32mag is just going to be worse in this way. I can’t really see a good business case for a manufacturer to put any serious R&D resources into making .32 mag better performing for the handful of gun nerds that will buy it, versus putting resources into….well, virtually anything else, that would likely have a better ROI.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

I was thinking that a revival of the 32s with reasonable 32 HR mags or SW 32 Longs that are not terrible in recoil could reinvigorate the suggestion that women buy J frames. The argument was that the recoil was fierce, etc. Of course, you have to train to shoot them reasonably by our standards. But for rarely shot gun crowd (Sigh), it might be attractive to them.

Next run with pink grips? I had a friend whose wife made him buy a pink 642 for more money. As far as ammo, if the guns are successful that might increase company runs. If the gun is for the hardly shot crew and not folks here who want to reload many runs, the demand might be met. I know quite a few wives in TX that had Taurus 85s in their purse with some standard HP. If they shot a box every two years, that was a lot.

[Notorious E.O.C.]

I'm all in on .32/.327 for the simple reason that I can run a couple of hundred rounds of .32 through an LCR in a single training session without losing the use of my shooting hand. Whatever's happening inside that complex assembly of tiny bones and connecting bits as it ages, it does not like .38 one bit.

I'd much rather have a gun I can shoot enough to build and maintain skill than a slightly larger-caliber gun I know I won't shoot enough to establish proficiency or trust.

[MolonLabe416]

I’ll be getting one of the new 32 Centennial revolvers. The extra round and improved sights, trigger are nice and the reduced recoil is needed. I just turned 66 and wear and tear on my hands, wrists, and elbows from 55 years of shooting is taking a toll.

[gato naranja]

The grip of a pocket sized semiauto doesn't leave me much room for error in the grip is how I look at it.

This is something I myself have found problematic over the years, and is largely why my DAO SP101 has stayed in the rotation. I used to take out old milsurp autos and get by with atrocious grip compromises, but the flies started showing up in the ointment once I hit the PPK. Things have not improved with age (I am not a fine wine).

Plinking may be a disdained practice among SMEs, but such impromptu casual familiarization has often revealed an issue with some variable that would have otherwise gone unnoticed. A shirt-tail member of the family recently did some cold-weather woodswalking and found that his current go-to subcompact 9 has at least one idiosyncracy that revealed itself. He had never done real any cold-weather work with it up to now.

The stuff you find out...

[BillSWPA]

I was thinking that a revival of the 32s with reasonable 32 HR mags or SW 32 Longs that are not terrible in recoil could reinvigorate the suggestion that women buy J frames. The argument was that the recoil was fierce, etc. Of course, you have to train to shoot them reasonably by our standards. But for rarely shot gun crowd (Sigh), it might be attractive to them.

Next run with pink grips? I had a friend whose wife made him buy a pink 642 for more money. As far as ammo, if the guns are successful that might increase company runs. If the gun is for the hardly shot crew and not folks here who want to reload many runs, the demand might be met. I know quite a few wives in TX that had Taurus 85s in their purse with some standard HP. If they shot a box every two years, that was a lot.

As one who has repeatedly voiced objections to recommending lightweight, small-frame revolvers to women, this makes sense. The changes appear to address the issues which resulted in my opposition to this recommendation, particularly in .32.

I know two female shooters who have hand/wrist issues, and who prefer revolvers to semiautos. They would probably do well with the .32.

[gato naranja]

I was thinking that a revival of the 32s with reasonable 32 HR mags or SW 32 Longs that are not terrible in recoil could reinvigorate the suggestion that women buy J frames.

This. Oh, so, "this!"

The .327 Fed Mag was a bridge too far for most women. Heck, it was a bridge further than even I was willing to go, and it ended my interest in .32s pretty much permanently.

Looking back, I probably advised a number of women who would have likely taken to a lower-horsepower .32 like ducks to water, but the guns were hard to find and I had come to a point where I was recommending very little between .22LR and mild .38 Special simply because these were not hobbyists or gun people.

[Lex Luthier]

This. Oh, so, "this!"

The .327 Fed Mag was a bridge too far for most women. Heck, it was a bridge further than even I was willing to go, and it ended my interest in .32s pretty much permanently.

Looking back, I probably advised a number of women who would have likely taken to a lower-horsepower .32 like ducks to water, but the guns were hard to find and I had come to a point where I was recommending very little between .22LR and mild .38 Special simply because these were not hobbyists or gun people.

The membership here as a group tend toward folks who non-gun folks trust for recommendations and advice. We tend to advise what is readily available because it's...well, readily available. If more usable options become easy to obtain, the better and more fine-tuned our recommendations can be. If these guns become a thing (and it looks like they might if Taurus is going to show what Caleb is hinting at) then we'll see more viable ammunition options as well.

I will be looking into at least one of the .32 variants as well as the .38. I intend to pass on the Model 36 no-dash (that I currently carry every day) to a grandkid within about 5 years, and my hands aren't getting less sensitive with time, either.
Given all the times here and on Instagram/FB etc that DB has mentioned his arthritis issues, I can hear the bass groove he's puttin' down. Herself would probably get on well with a .32 Long or even one of the milder .32 H & R Mag loads.