1. Are you a current member with account or password issues? Email us with username, email & what the issue is.

.32 magnum revolver

Discussion in 'Handguns' started by el_diabl0, Jul 1, 2007.

    el_diabl0 Loaded Pockets

    I am thinking of getting a .32 mag revolver to replace my wife's Beretta Tomcat .32. I'm looking at either a Taurus or Charter Arms. Anyone have any experience with this caliber? My wife has a tough time loading the Tomcat and she's had a fire failure-to-fire incidents and stovepipes.

    Jim101 Empty Pockets

    The best I can do is, my summer carry is a KT .32.........I really like it, no problems..

    Jim
    • +2 Supporter

    gadgetjunky Loaded Pockets

    Of the two I would go with a Taurus; generally better QC and much better resale. If you budget allows it the S&W Airweights in .32 mag are well worth looking at. Personally, I would go with a S&W 642 in .38 spl. You can load it light to reduce the recoil, give up one shot but get bigger, heavier bullets with more energy and better penetration, and much cheaper practice ammo.

    0dBm Loaded Pockets

    In the mid to late 80s, I toyed around with the .32 Magnum cartridge, but I cannot remember the rather unattractive-looking handgun from which it was fired. I found the .32 magnum quite pleasant if downright tame.

    I my memory serves me correctly, the calculated ballistics is no better than the 900fps, 110-grain .38 special.

    I really enjoyed plinking with it. I kept hoping for a semi-auto pistol that can accommodate a 20-round magazine.

    I owned a Charters Arms Bulldog in .44 caliber. It took a few hundred dollars of "smithing" to clean it up to be suitable for reliability. I have seen samples of the new Charter Arms and they are worse than the originals!

    I have also owned Taurus pistols and revolvers. Their QC is at least an order of magnitude better that Charter's.

    tvodrd Empty Pockets

    The caliber is technically .32 H&R Magnum. (Harrington and Richardson) It's kind of a shame, but H&R no longer manufactures handguns. They were clunky, but robust designs, and I've owned a couple of their Sportsman 9-shot, .22 revolvers. I have a hundred virgin cases for a custom falling block rifle action awaiting my retirement to finish. You folks are far more up to speed than I am! I always wanted a 6" "plinker" in that caliber!

    Edit: you beat me, OdBm, I too, have a Charter .44 Spl bulldog and it it misfires every other trigger pull, whether in single action or dbl action mode. I sent it in under warranty, but Charco went under during the process. I was lucky to get it back, and it is still junk. I haven't found a revolver smith I trust to fix it yet. It was a Christmas present from a friend!

    Larry
    • Moderator

    Lugsalot Uber Prepared

    At least their heart was in the right place, Larry!

    As for the .32 Mag, I'm not partial to the caliber itself--though it's sure better than the .32 ACP! Given the choice between Taurus and Charter Arms, I'd go with Taurus. Taurus has better warranty service, with the catch being that you'll likely need it; Taurus' QC has improved since they started making guns, but not enough for me to trust them entirely.

    Ruger makes a .32 Magnum version of the SP101. It's available with either a 3" or 4" barrel. That'd be my choice if I were buying a revolver in .32 Mag. It's more expensive than either the Taurus or Charter Arms, but you get what you pay for.

    jggonzalez Loaded Pockets

    I'll second the Ruger. Much sturdier and solid in the hand than the Charter or Taurus. I just got my wife an SP101 in .22lr. Hard to find, but a great learning gun for her and a plinking gun for me. If you can afford customization, Gemini Custom does awesome work on the SP101s and GP100s. Mine will be going there for a trigger job and their gold bead front sight.

    TKC Loaded Pockets

    What about .32 Seecamp? It is much better quality than the Tomcat. It is an excellent gun!

    Phaeton Empty Pockets

    The Seecamp is in fact a fine small autopistol. However, it is .32 ACP as opposed to the desired .32 H&R. They can be quite hard to find and are expensive.

    There are only a few choices in .32 H&R revolvers. While I might select the Ruger as the ultimate of the choices, it is quite heavy. This can be a factor in a purse gun.

    I think the Taurus Model 731 is an excellent choice in this caliber.

    I prefer a small revolver as opposed to a small autopistol for purse use. They are easier to use, especially under stress and are subject to far fewer possible malfunctions. My small Berettas (.25 & .32) function beautifully with some ammo and not at all with others.

    In the end, You might consider DannyJackson's recommendation. .38 Special offers dozens of choices in lightweight, ultra lightweight. Ultra lightweight hammerless is excellent for concealed carry. Harder hitting, many more ammo choices, and bags of cheap range ammo for practice. A very small size and weight penalty, (if any). A few of the alloy hammerless .38's are smaller and lighter than the .32 H&R choices.

    Mark

    TKC Loaded Pockets

    I know the Seecamp isn't .32 H&R. I was just trying to offer an alternative.

    Radio Empty Pockets

    I'll second the Airweight J-frame in Ti O0

    ironraven Empty Pockets

    I've fired a few revolvers in .32 H&R Mag. The cartridge has some serious potential, I'd put it in the same class as a lower range .38 without hesitation for myself. As a "ladies gun", absolutely- recoil should be a little lower than the .38 which will improve her control, thus her confidence, thus her ability. I'm not fond of the airweights for that reason, they aren't as much fun for a casual shooter so they are less likely to get practiced with and they jump about too much- anyone worth shooting is probably worth shooting twice.

    I don't like the way the Ruger SP101 fits the hand, and there is a rather significant difference in terms of finding things like holsters- every one makes J-frame holsters, but a GOOD one for the Rugers is harder to do. I also know that the older Taurus wheel guns would take any sights for a comparable Smith, and I can't think of a reason for it to have changed- for a defense gun of that size, I think that a fiber optic or tritium dot on the front blade is critical. That, and I can't think of any reason why you couldn't use J-frame grips on the Taurus without too my trouble, so you have a world of options there open up for getting a good fit to the hand- you might even be able to get the Lasergrip to work.