Growing up in the South in the 1950s and 60s, the 32 was as common as mosquitos. A "thuty-eight" was considered a big gun. These typically were either 38 Short Colt, 38 Long Colt, or 38 S&W and should not be confused with the 38 Special. The history of the 38 S&W and 38 Colt (both Short and Long) is a bit confusing because early loads for these cartridges incorporated heeled bullets that were as wide as the case (think 22LR). These old loads will not fit in a 38 Special chamber because they are too wide. Colt later changed their projectile to a more modern inside-lubricated bullet that matched the 38 Special and 357 Magnum in diameter. S&W also switched to a narrower inside-lubricated bullet, but because their cartridge case was always wider than the Colt cases and 38 Special/357 Magnum cases, their 38 S&W round will not fit in any factory 38 Special chamber. As if this topic isn't muddled enough, during WWII the UK acquired a large supply of S&W revolvers chambered for the 38 S&W cartridge (marked 38/200, the British nomenclature for the 38 S&W round). Declared surplus after the war, thousands returned to the USA where enterprising gunsmiths bored out the step in each chamber which prevented the accidental insertion of the narrower but longer and more powerful 38 Special round. Thus modified, these oversized chambers now accepted 38 Special rounds, albeit a bit loosely. When a 38 Special round is fired in them, the case bulges and sometimes splits. Accuracy also suffers due to the barrel having a .361" diameter bore. Any questions?
Good video. When my Dad passed, my step mother decided to get a firearm to carry on their 10 acre ranch in mid state Florida. She lives there alone. She drove the 25 miles into town and a gun shop there sold her a Taurus 2 inch snubby in 32 H&R Magnum. She liked the small size that fits in a pocket. She called me and wanted to go to the range. She had never fired a gun in her life. I picked up a box of 32 S&W Long wadcutter and a box of the RNL load. Not cheap. Since I am a handloader and had a lot of 38 Special on hand, I decided to bring my S&W 38 Special heavy barrel 3 inch Model 64 so she could shoot a bit more. It is a good thing she did not call me before she went to get the gun. I would have suggested she get the 38 Special. At the range, I taught her how to hold the 38 Special with two hands and how to aim. On the first shot with light wadcutter loads, her first round at 7 yards went dead center on a half sized man target. I was impressed as was the other family members that went with us that day. She refused to shoot that revolver again. She said it was too loud even with earmuffs. She did great with the wadcutter and RNL 32 loads. She carries the RNL load today. Best to have something you can shoot well.
The deformation of the .32 S&W fired into the MDF reminds me of the spent, deformed bullets I used to find at the old farm my granddad used to own. My dad had acquired a S&W .32 break top when he was in his teens and apparently shot quite a substantial number of rounds from it before it broke. He managed to get it fixed few years back so maybe I ought to go look for some 32…
38 Short Colt has always been so hard for me to find. Even Online. I was able to secure one single box but that’s all I’ve ever come across. 32 S&W Long is very popular right now and easy to find.
@@327Federal Yes, try "Ammo Seek" While the video says ".38 Short Colt" he is _actually_ shooting .38 Special Short. The .38 Special Short is a little shorter (.754" v .765") than the _actual_ .38 Short Colt. Probably not coincidentally, it has the same case length as the 9x19. A great advantage of the shorter case is that they will extract completely with the short extractor rods of most snub nosed revolvers.
38 special wad cutter. I can shoot very good with those, fast and accurate! Under powered perhaps. But you can hit the target very easy. Thanks Sam. Good as always.
WOW !! Finally someone who is smart enough to make a holder to get the jell up to " standing " , aimed , gun level . Even the " Big " channels haven't done this . Hopefully a 38 short vs 32 H&R mag is in the works . Well done !
Thanks. I actually started with a standup Fackler box holding water jugs in 2019 not long after I found out I had spondylitis. Seems to make shot placement easier.
Both of these are good for people who want low recoil and blast, especially when fired inside a building. The 32 has a 20% capacity edge over the 38 in these small snub revolvers. If K-frame sized steel revolvers with 6 round capacity for both calibers are used, the 38 has the edge due to it larger bullet. In a polymer-steel revolver, the 32 has the edge due to its lighter weight vs the 38 chambering. But shootability comes into play, depending on the shooter's ability to handle recoil and blast.
Great video and good advice. Another advantage of these shorter cases, is they eject completely even with the short extractor rods on snub-nosed revolvers. If you are a handloader, you can easily duplicate any of these loads in standard .38 Special cases...or shorten the cases and load your own. The only issue with shortening the case that much is that .38 Special/.357 Magnum dies sets will not bell/crimp the case properly. You can order a crimping die only from RCBS or LEE. A 9x19 die will bell the cases perfect. The .38 Special Short and 9x19mm have the same case length. FWIW, I also use the shortened cases loaded with 158 gr. cast lead round nosed bullets in a .38 S&W chambered Pocket Hammerless revolver ("Lemon Squeezer"). They work perfectly fine and give acceptable accuracy for plinking and fun shooting. The .38 S&W is nominally slightly larger in diameter than the .38 Special case, but the cases headspace on the rim, and such low pressure loads are perfectly safe. The .358" lead bullets will "bump up" to bore size (.360") on firing and deliver adequate accuracy.
.32 S&W Long is excellent. Very low recoil, even in a snub, and more capable than people give it credit for. I don't understand why so many people today constantly go "IF YOU CARRY SMALLER THAN 9MM YOU'RE ASKING TO GET KILLED"
You had already convinced me to look for WC ammo for my .32 guns, now I will look for short colt ammo for my .38s and .377s. The ladies will like it for sure. I have a few .45 caliber revolvers (S&W) and am waiting to see what you test and the results in that range. Keep up the good work.
There's definitely a trend to more powerful weapons in defense and hunting. European police often carried 32 acp handguns not real long ago. I don't think people have gotten tougher, maybe more drugged up. But in most defense situations anything that makes a loud noise is probably going to work.
@@327Federal Here in MI I can find it at most gun stores. I had never paid much attention to it before, but I was driving along one day where I don't normally even shop, stopped at a small sporting goods store and even they had it. It's roughly as hard to find as .357 Sig, which again most gun stores have at least some of that too. The difference in .32 S&W Long and let's say 9mm, is most physical stores only carry one variety of the .32 S&W Long like you might see Remington, or Fiocchi or Magtech depending on the store.
More... more!! Reviving some of these older cartridges seems a timely idea. With modern steel and better gun designs, we all get more options. I got into 32s recently because I wanted something in between the 22 and the 38 Special. I'm waiting for some manufacturer to realize that the weak old top break revolver no longer has to be weak or old!
Loved this! Thank you. Fired half a box of Short Colts outta my Model 36. Fun at the range, better accuracy left handed or during an arthritis flare. I remember when you did a comparison using 158gn LRN in 2,3, and 4 inch barrel... The difference in penetration wasn't as great as one would think. How about testing the Short Colt in snub, 3, and 4 inch? I'd also love to see Short Colt vs 38 S&W (if you have something that will chamber it). Box velocity are similar but from what I've seen the Wheelgun 146gn rounds are loaded lighter that claimed. ( Remington probably avoiding potential liability if someone blows up a hundred and fifty year old break-top H&R) I just wonder about the penetration & recoil between 125gn running 635fps outta a snub and a 146gn S&W hitting about 585fps... I also have a 3in Rossi Model 69 32. I wonder if that extra inch pushes a 98 or 100gr wadcutter into the FBI 12-18" range... You always inform. And then make me think about other options😂 Thanks again.
Hi Sam, the .38 short may be good but it's very hard to find in Europe, .32 S&W long, on the other hand, is used in centerfire bullseye and every range and gun store has it.
Just saw some of this Short Colt ammo today and considered getting some to play with since I was getting a J Frame. Decided that the wife would be pissed enough already, so I didn’t get any new ammo
Got plans to test 38sc in the 3-inch 856? I'm only thinking that the 6-shot chamber would sort of equalize the capacity issue vs. the .32 caliber revolver. Maybe the 6-shot snub revolvers aren't quite the same in "pocket carry" capacity, but they exist. Taurus 856, Kimber K6S, Diamondback SDR, Rock Island M206 or AL3.1, Charter Arms Professional, Colt Cobra.
Happy to see a test of a more standard 32 long. I have a top break so I can’t use the hotter Buffalo bore rounds and all I could find in store was s&b 100grain LFN though I have a few 85grain xtp’s for loading that I’m curious to the effectiveness of.
I have loaded the 85 gr XTP before in .32 Long and .32 H&R Mag. If I recall the .32 Long maxed out at like 850 FPS but the H&R maxed out at 1,000 FPS from my snub here, both max charges of TiteGroup. I don't think I gel tested the .32 Long, if I had the results with an XTP wouldn't be that great. I think when I tested them in the .32 H&R I got minimal hollow point expansion.
Yup. The 85 gr XTP needs @1050+ fps to expand. The 100 gr needs more than that. Unfortunately I haven't found a load I like in .32 mag for my LCR. Wife carries a 100 gr LFN I load to 950 fps. .32 mag needs a much longer barrel for expansion & penetration. Or you step up to .327 fed.
Yeah, from my understanding the .38 Special and .45 ACP were both created directly because of the Philippine Insurrection and the downfalls of the .38 caliber ammunition as it was. The .38 Colt didn't work right but the .45 Colt did, so juicing up the .38 caliber revolver round and increasing the capacity of .45 caliber handguns came from it.
I know the caliber problems encounters during the Philippine Insurrection helped further the .45 legend, and the .45 Colt was indeed an impressive round. But I have always questioned where the rifles were. But I did read that the Kansas Volunteers who were mustered and sent over still carried 45-70 breach loaders instead of the. 30-40 Krags. Of course before the Colt SAAs were sent over, they were armory refurbished. Never heard if they shipped with .45 Colt or .45 Schofield ammo. But considering that the army was content enough with the .45 ACP which was similar to the Schofield round, they were likely happy with the latter’s performance.
I know you've had a lot of practice. But I'm still impressed that you get hits with snubs at 75 yards. Since you saved the brass for the 38 SC, have you considered using 110gr or 125gr XTPs and loading them using 9mm data? Obviously they would only be safe to fire from the 357 Magnum and not a 38 Spl or an old I-frame.
I still have probably 100 brass from previous tests with ammo like this. I don't plan on doing specifically that, but I did a few years ago load them with 158 gr lead bullets and was achieving like 850 FPS, which is a big jump up from 125 gr at 650 FPS.
@@GunSam My basic thinking is that total powder charge lends a potentially significant factor to recoil. 9mm may have a narrow performance envelope, but it is in about the right place. Ruger also makes an LCR in 9x19mm. It uses moon clips. I think you can get away without using them. Although you would want a pencil or something handy for reloading without using the moon clips. I seem to recall that it doesn't lose a lot of ballistics compared to the LCP. But it is only a five shot. Paul Harrell did a review on it.
How do you feel about the 'Charter Arms PUG .357MAG'? I'm looking at getting a .357MAG hammerless revolver, and I'm torn between getting one soon or saving up for something nice. Maybe you could give me 2 or 3 options? Also, never even heard of .38 Short Colt before. I'll have to try it out eventually. Love the vids as usual.
I own 4 of them and I like them! I've never had problems with them mechanically and they shoot well! I like the fact you can shoot rimless cartridges without moon clips! They are very reasonably priced.
I have a test request for you. The 32 S&W short has been overlooked in a lot of tests. It is a smokeless powder replacement for the 32 cap and ball revolver that soldiers carried as a backup during the Civil War. Something that is low recoil and can be effective.
If that is the basic .32 S&W, I have tested it a few times. 564 FPS. I did not gel test it, but I tested in water jugs. The reason I have no plan to revisit is because the lead is super soft. They bounced off 14 gauge aluminum I was shooting at, and a pellet gun could easily penetrate that. Granted, they probably would mushroom huge which would be cool, but it's not really on my list of things to re-test.
The 38 Short Colt is Ballistically similar to the 38 Smith Wesson (short) so this might give some insight into the performance of that cartridge. Thank you!
@@GunSam A friend of mine, new to guns, accidentally bought a box of 38 S&W and it shot without incident in a Ruger Security Six 357. The bullet is oversized for most 38s but the cylinder was just sloppy enough and with the soft lead bullets, the moderate power and the very strong revolver it worked in that case. It is a great round in the old I frame Smiths, slightly smaller than J frames. It is easy on the hand, very accurate and with the information from this test, probably an acceptable load for social purposes. That is how Smith and Wesson sold in back in the 40s and 50s!
OK. After viewing, I don't want to be shot in the torso or head with either of those. You've probably tested the 32 S&W magnum? The Buffalo Bore 32 SW magnum is wicked powerful. As you know.
I enjoyed the test! Your study of round nosed bullets makes me wonder if .38 spl RN really deserved the "Widow Maker" moniker. Why was .38 spl RN really being lamented? When did that start? Was the source special bullet or .357 / .41 / .44 / .45 salesman? Was it poor marksmanship? Or was just lamenting having a revolver when a bad guy had a shotgun or machinegun? What I see from your tests is that a 148 / 158 gr LRN from a 4 inch .38 spl at 850 fps is going to be mild on recoil and tumble after penetrating well.
How nobody is mentioning .32-20 Winchester??? It was chambered in swing cylinder as well as 1870 pattern Colt Peacmaker revolvers, too. Amongst other weapons. And was decidedly better than .32 Smith and Wesson Long or Short. Especially in the days before the .32 H&R magnum was a thing. It was also the little brother in Winchester's 1873 and 1892 rifle and carbine line, to the .38-40 and .44-40. And along with Colt's Peacemaker line? And was still being chambered in rifles and swing cylinder revolvers deep into the 20th century. With Smith and Wessons M&P swing cylinder revolver line being a quality vehicle for the .32-20 at least into the 1920s or late 1930s.
@GunSam I've owned two Smith and Wesson Hand Ejector, (aka pre-WW2 M&P revolvers) chambered in .32-20, in recent years. And at one time. .32-20 was used by some early 20th century, smaller, police departments, and was pretty common in the South. Also, Remington did make ammo in the caliber up until at least the early to mid 2000s. Whether Remington still does now or not? I can't say. But from a pure ballistics testing, low recoiling handgun, stand point? It would be interesting to see how a handgun chambered in .32-20 could've been compared to the cartridges you've previously tested. It, along with its bigger brothers, the .38-40 and .44-40, we're at one time quite prolific in the U.S. . With .44-40 still being found in some Italian manufactured copies of Colt Peacemakers and Remington 1875 and 1890, revolvers. And to date? I've not saw anyone test the calibers using the modern FBI lab crieria. Even though these admittedly old time calibers can still be sometimes encountered, either tucked away in dresser drawers or carried in the holsters of modern-day "cowboy action shooting" competitors.
Wouldn't the .32 S&W wadcutter be better for self defense than the LRN? Leroy Brown had a .32 gun in his pocket for fun and my grandpappy kept one on his bed table.
Potentially. The issue is that the LRN will penetrate a bit more than the wadcutter, but it's splitting hairs and the wadcutter does more damage, but you got to be weary of what wadcutter as I once shot Fiocchi 98 or 100 gr WC's that barely did 500 FPS. Buffalo Bore .32 WC's would be great.
And if you have fast wadcutters you still might want some LRN for faster reloads, maybe in a strip or speed loader. Just how fast should one's wadcutters be though? Do you have suggestions besides 500 FPS is too slow?
I use a 5.7. With some ammo the ballastics are close to decent 9mm but the follow up shots are much faster with very little recoil. I'm not sure if hydrostatic shock is a thing, but some ammo does well over 2200fps too, out of pistol.
If one can't find .38 Short Colt then what do you recommend for low recoil for .38s? Also if one has fancy metals in ones gun, what doesn't lead, have lead exposed that you'd recommend, that's jacketed? Again low recoil ideas preferred. So two questions I think others have as well. Thanks in advance. Interesting video!
I would say overall the best low recoil rounds are wadcutters, of course they are lead but leading isn't too bad as the powder charges are low. I used to handload copper plated wadcutters that would cut the leading entirely, but I have not seen loaded ammo like that before. The only real ammo that will give you low recoil with no leading at all is basic FMJ or TMJ ammo.
@@michaelkulman7095 The main reason why a gun like that is labeled jacketed only, is because they are extremely light revolvers and the recoil on a lighter than average revolver could potentially dislodge lead bullets from the remaining cartridge cases in the cylinder (bullet creep), because the surface of lead has less friction and can pull from a cartridge case easier under recoil than if that bullet was jacketed with copper. With a fully inserted in the case lead bullet like a wadcutter with super low recoil, this simply won't happen. Jacketed means FMJ, TMJ or JHP, or any bullet that has copper on the sides of the bullet.
@@GunSam Thanks. So mostly a "prairie dog" worry...they will stick their heads up and jam the action. Are they also worried about leading and the solvents you might use to clean it hurting Titanium or Scandium or other exotic metals and alloys? Therefore they want no naked lead used? I appreciate your expertise.
I think I found my answer about solvent concerns with titanium cylinders in your old video here: m.ua-cam.com/video/i56j3BR_41w/v-deo.html As far as rounds prairie dogging, popping out of their holes, their cases, do you think .38 Short Colt would do that even in a very light revolver (10-12 ounces) as the the recoil impulse is so low with those rounds? I really wonder about that. I think it would be worth a test. It might be the exception that proves the rule, with a revolver that says jacketed only on it. So that may be an exception and as you said wadcutters may be an exception too with a bit more recoil but probably better effect. I'd appreciate your opinion on that.
Hey Sam, nice presentation. I'd love to shoot the .38 short, but they are so hard to find. May I ask as to where you found them? Starting to green up nicely here. All the best ot you and family. "The JJ" SW Penna.
I got mine on the Midwayusa website. They are still available but a bit expensive. I happened to buy mine with a birthday discount I got they offer the week of your birthday and got them for $45.52 instead of the $55.99 they go for.
@@GunSam Thanks for the speedy reply. Yes, a bit expensive but bearable with the birthday discount. I've previously used the discount for purchases. Love Midway for most of my shooting needs. Again, Thanks. "The JJ"
It's funny hearing "practical shootability" and "75 yards" in the same sentence when talking about a snub-nose. Have you compared a .32 S&W Long with a .32 H&R Mag?
I am developing finger arthritis so maybeso I may need low recoil soon . My dad came back from WW2 with a 32 auto in a shoulder holster . But 38 sp looks better .
As far as finding modern hollow point ammo??? Yes. As far as terminal ballistics go?? Almost the same as .380 ACP. If their bullets were FMJ? They might even go about as deep as .380 FMJ. Truth be told, though? The only reason the .380 AUTO or 9mm Kurz is still around today? Is that it could be chambered in semi-auto pistols packing a round or two more than most .32 or .38 caliber "pocket guns" of the era and was able to attain early military acceptance with almost every European military or police agency in existence at the time. A fact that is also a reason for .32 ACP still being with us today, too.
A lot depends on revolver weight, but if I had to pick a couple potent rounds that seem like they would reliable do well they would be .22 Mag in a 3" or longer barrel with a defensive handgun load or a .32 H&R Mag Critical Defense in any length barrel. They seem to be just enough and not have much recoil.
I have experimented with a Colt Python with 4.25 inch barrel, using 38 Special rounds designed for Cowboy Action events. The recoil is quite mild, and the trigger action on the Python is very smooth.
I reload them with a .38 Short Colt die set. You probably could load them with a .38 Special die set, but it would be tricky. If I remember right, I may have loaded some before and the seating worked, but it was impossible to roll crimp, so if I am remembering right - I actually took out the depriming pin from my resizer die and just used it to taper crimp them a tad and it seemed to work.
I'm not Sam but I just got mine , lipseys smith and wesson 632 UC 32 hr mag👍 been wanting one since they started talking about them. It's a great , light well balanced revolver with a great trigger right out of the box.
@@Gieszkanne , I know what you mean. Charter arms makes one for under 400 but it's not a smith and wesson trigger, quality etc. Taurus has one but I prefer concealed hammers. I do like rugers lcr .327 but there's something about the J frame I really love.
I have thought about it, but I just haven't gotten excited enough about something like that to go buy one. A hot rodded .32 revolver cartridge makes sense to get 6 round capacity with up to 450 ft lbs energy from a 2" snub. A .30 SC to me seems like, ehh, go down in power from 9x19mm just to make a subcompact pistol hold 12 instead of 10...I just don't see the point.
Growing up in the South in the 1950s and 60s, the 32 was as common as mosquitos. A "thuty-eight" was considered a big gun. These typically were either 38 Short Colt, 38 Long Colt, or 38 S&W and should not be confused with the 38 Special. The history of the 38 S&W and 38 Colt (both Short and Long) is a bit confusing because early loads for these cartridges incorporated heeled bullets that were as wide as the case (think 22LR). These old loads will not fit in a 38 Special chamber because they are too wide. Colt later changed their projectile to a more modern inside-lubricated bullet that matched the 38 Special and 357 Magnum in diameter. S&W also switched to a narrower inside-lubricated bullet, but because their cartridge case was always wider than the Colt cases and 38 Special/357 Magnum cases, their 38 S&W round will not fit in any factory 38 Special chamber. As if this topic isn't muddled enough, during WWII the UK acquired a large supply of S&W revolvers chambered for the 38 S&W cartridge (marked 38/200, the British nomenclature for the 38 S&W round). Declared surplus after the war, thousands returned to the USA where enterprising gunsmiths bored out the step in each chamber which prevented the accidental insertion of the narrower but longer and more powerful 38 Special round. Thus modified, these oversized chambers now accepted 38 Special rounds, albeit a bit loosely. When a 38 Special round is fired in them, the case bulges and sometimes splits. Accuracy also suffers due to the barrel having a .361" diameter bore. Any questions?
Class dismissed 🤣
Good video.
When my Dad passed, my step mother decided to get a firearm to carry on their 10 acre ranch in mid state Florida. She lives there alone.
She drove the 25 miles into town and a gun shop there sold her a Taurus 2 inch snubby in 32 H&R Magnum. She liked the small size that fits in a pocket. She called me and wanted to go to the range. She had never fired a gun in her life. I picked up a box of 32 S&W Long wadcutter and a box of the RNL load. Not cheap.
Since I am a handloader and had a lot of 38 Special on hand, I decided to bring my S&W 38 Special heavy barrel 3 inch Model 64 so she could shoot a bit more. It is a good thing she did not call me before she went to get the gun. I would have suggested she get the 38 Special. At the range, I taught her how to hold the 38 Special with two hands and how to aim. On the first shot with light wadcutter loads, her first round at 7 yards went dead center on a half sized man target. I was impressed as was the other family members that went with us that day. She refused to shoot that revolver again. She said it was too loud even with earmuffs. She did great with the wadcutter and RNL 32 loads. She carries the RNL load today. Best to have something you can shoot well.
Just got my lipseys smith and wesson 632 UC in .32 H&R magnum. Great video 👍
The deformation of the .32 S&W fired into the MDF reminds me of the spent, deformed bullets I used to find at the old farm my granddad used to own. My dad had acquired a S&W .32 break top when he was in his teens and apparently shot quite a substantial number of rounds from it before it broke. He managed to get it fixed few years back so maybe I ought to go look for some 32…
Love these low recoil comparisons! Good to see there are lots of low recoil options to get the job done!
This is the updated comparison I’ve been waiting for. Thank you
38 Short Colt has always been so hard for me to find. Even Online. I was able to secure one single box but that’s all I’ve ever come across. 32 S&W Long is very popular right now and easy to find.
The Magtech .38 Special Short, which is ballistically identical to a .38 Short Colt, is easily available online and in most well stocked gun shops.
@@garyK.45ACP I was unaware of this. Thank you for the information!
@@327Federal Yes, try "Ammo Seek" While the video says ".38 Short Colt" he is _actually_ shooting .38 Special Short.
The .38 Special Short is a little shorter (.754" v .765") than the _actual_ .38 Short Colt.
Probably not coincidentally, it has the same case length as the 9x19.
A great advantage of the shorter case is that they will extract completely with the short extractor rods of most snub nosed revolvers.
38 special wad cutter. I can shoot very good with those, fast and accurate! Under powered perhaps. But you can hit the target very easy. Thanks Sam. Good as always.
You've become my favorite channel for wheel guns, loving this content. keep up the good work.
WOW !! Finally someone who is smart enough to make a holder to get the jell up to " standing " , aimed , gun level . Even the " Big " channels haven't done this . Hopefully a 38 short vs 32 H&R mag is in the works . Well done !
Thanks. I actually started with a standup Fackler box holding water jugs in 2019 not long after I found out I had spondylitis. Seems to make shot placement easier.
Gun Sam, yes please do a 32 H&R magnum.vs 38 spl.
Excellent as always. Thanks for posting!
You shot the .32 S&W Long so much better. Thanks for the review!
Both of these are good for people who want low recoil and blast, especially when fired inside a building. The 32 has a 20% capacity edge over the 38 in these small snub revolvers. If K-frame sized steel revolvers with 6 round capacity for both calibers are used, the 38 has the edge due to it larger bullet. In a polymer-steel revolver, the 32 has the edge due to its lighter weight vs the 38 chambering. But shootability comes into play, depending on the shooter's ability to handle recoil and blast.
Great video and good advice.
Another advantage of these shorter cases, is they eject completely even with the short extractor rods on snub-nosed revolvers.
If you are a handloader, you can easily duplicate any of these loads in standard .38 Special cases...or shorten the cases and load your own. The only issue with shortening the case that much is that .38 Special/.357 Magnum dies sets will not bell/crimp the case properly. You can order a crimping die only from RCBS or LEE. A 9x19 die will bell the cases perfect. The .38 Special Short and 9x19mm have the same case length.
FWIW, I also use the shortened cases loaded with 158 gr. cast lead round nosed bullets in a .38 S&W chambered Pocket Hammerless revolver ("Lemon Squeezer"). They work perfectly fine and give acceptable accuracy for plinking and fun shooting. The .38 S&W is nominally slightly larger in diameter than the .38 Special case, but the cases headspace on the rim, and such low pressure loads are perfectly safe. The .358" lead bullets will "bump up" to bore size (.360") on firing and deliver adequate accuracy.
.32 S&W Long is excellent. Very low recoil, even in a snub, and more capable than people give it credit for. I don't understand why so many people today constantly go "IF YOU CARRY SMALLER THAN 9MM YOU'RE ASKING TO GET KILLED"
You had already convinced me to look for WC ammo for my .32 guns, now I will look for short colt ammo for my .38s and .377s. The ladies will like it for sure. I have a few .45 caliber revolvers (S&W) and am waiting to see what you test and the results in that range. Keep up the good work.
Thank You for the short barrels.
There's definitely a trend to more powerful weapons in defense and hunting. European police often carried 32 acp handguns not real long ago. I don't think people have gotten tougher, maybe more drugged up. But in most defense situations anything that makes a loud noise is probably going to work.
Correct
@@guaporeturns9472 yes, it's hard to put down someone who won't acknowledge that he's dead.
People, especially in the US, tend to be much bigger than they were decades ago as well
@@christophernemeth421 that's true but the deer aren't any bigger. A lot of people think you need a 300 magnum for a whitetail.
@@Walter-wo5sz You do, for the really man ones!! ;-)
I have a SW38 from the 1930s it's a wonderful revolver.
32 S&W Long is very popular right now. It’s easy to find and affordable.
Really? Not in my state.
@@SB-mw1bg You’re on the internet right now. Try looking on the internet.
@@327Federal Here in MI I can find it at most gun stores. I had never paid much attention to it before, but I was driving along one day where I don't normally even shop, stopped at a small sporting goods store and even they had it. It's roughly as hard to find as .357 Sig, which again most gun stores have at least some of that too. The difference in .32 S&W Long and let's say 9mm, is most physical stores only carry one variety of the .32 S&W Long like you might see Remington, or Fiocchi or Magtech depending on the store.
@@GunSam I agree. It’s becoming popular and I love to see it.
More... more!! Reviving some of these older cartridges seems a timely idea. With modern steel and better gun designs, we all get more options. I got into 32s recently because I wanted something in between the 22 and the 38 Special. I'm waiting for some manufacturer to realize that the weak old top break revolver no longer has to be weak or old!
Good video Sam, couple of oldie cartridges for sure. I have had 38 S&W and 41 Long Colt but not those two. Interesting for sure!
Great test. Both will do it!
Great video. Thank you Sam. It seems like every one wants to just test semi autos .
Stay safe out yonder.
.32 is known historically as an extremely accurate round.....
Lends that reputation to .32H&R and .327Fed
Loved this! Thank you. Fired half a box of Short Colts outta my Model 36. Fun at the range, better accuracy left handed or during an arthritis flare.
I remember when you did a comparison using 158gn LRN in 2,3, and 4 inch barrel... The difference in penetration wasn't as great as one would think.
How about testing the Short Colt in snub, 3, and 4 inch?
I'd also love to see Short Colt vs 38 S&W (if you have something that will chamber it). Box velocity are similar but from what I've seen the Wheelgun 146gn rounds are loaded lighter that claimed. ( Remington probably avoiding potential liability if someone blows up a hundred and fifty year old break-top H&R)
I just wonder about the penetration & recoil between 125gn running 635fps outta a snub and a 146gn S&W hitting about 585fps...
I also have a 3in Rossi Model 69 32. I wonder if that extra inch pushes a 98 or 100gr wadcutter into the FBI 12-18" range...
You always inform. And then make me think about other options😂
Thanks again.
Hi Sam, the .38 short may be good but it's very hard to find in Europe, .32 S&W long, on the other hand, is used in centerfire bullseye and every range and gun store has it.
Very enlightening comments!
Just saw some of this Short Colt ammo today and considered getting some to play with since I was getting a J Frame. Decided that the wife would be pissed enough already, so I didn’t get any new ammo
GS. Good video. Interesting ammo. Thanks for sharing. Take care.
Thank you, take care.
Got plans to test 38sc in the 3-inch 856? I'm only thinking that the 6-shot chamber would sort of equalize the capacity issue vs. the .32 caliber revolver. Maybe the 6-shot snub revolvers aren't quite the same in "pocket carry" capacity, but they exist.
Taurus 856, Kimber K6S, Diamondback SDR, Rock Island M206 or AL3.1, Charter Arms Professional, Colt Cobra.
I saved half a box to test in either my 3" or 4" revolvers, I haven't decided on which one yet.
@@GunSam Okay cool!
Id love to see you test out a cap and ball revolver with round balls.
Happy to see a test of a more standard 32 long. I have a top break so I can’t use the hotter Buffalo bore rounds and all I could find in store was s&b 100grain LFN though I have a few 85grain xtp’s for loading that I’m curious to the effectiveness of.
I have loaded the 85 gr XTP before in .32 Long and .32 H&R Mag. If I recall the .32 Long maxed out at like 850 FPS but the H&R maxed out at 1,000 FPS from my snub here, both max charges of TiteGroup. I don't think I gel tested the .32 Long, if I had the results with an XTP wouldn't be that great. I think when I tested them in the .32 H&R I got minimal hollow point expansion.
@@GunSam they say they will expand at as low as 700fps but I’m hesitant to trust hornadys numbers when it comes to an xtp
Yup. The 85 gr XTP needs @1050+ fps to expand. The 100 gr needs more than that. Unfortunately I haven't found a load I like in .32 mag for my LCR. Wife carries a 100 gr LFN I load to 950 fps.
.32 mag needs a much longer barrel for expansion & penetration. Or you step up to .327 fed.
in 1890s 38 long colt was during Philippines I think 38 special was created afterwards. 32 colts popular in 1900s I think.
Yeah, from my understanding the .38 Special and .45 ACP were both created directly because of the Philippine Insurrection and the downfalls of the .38 caliber ammunition as it was. The .38 Colt didn't work right but the .45 Colt did, so juicing up the .38 caliber revolver round and increasing the capacity of .45 caliber handguns came from it.
I know the caliber problems encounters during the Philippine Insurrection helped further the .45 legend, and the .45 Colt was indeed an impressive round. But I have always questioned where the rifles were. But I did read that the Kansas Volunteers who were mustered and sent over still carried 45-70 breach loaders instead of the. 30-40 Krags. Of course before the Colt SAAs were sent over, they were armory refurbished. Never heard if they shipped with .45 Colt or .45 Schofield ammo. But considering that the army was content enough with the .45 ACP which was similar to the Schofield round, they were likely happy with the latter’s performance.
I know you've had a lot of practice. But I'm still impressed that you get hits with snubs at 75 yards. Since you saved the brass for the 38 SC, have you considered using 110gr or 125gr XTPs and loading them using 9mm data? Obviously they would only be safe to fire from the 357 Magnum and not a 38 Spl or an old I-frame.
You're correct it takes near-.357 mag pressure to get those 125 gr XTP to open up from a short barrel.
I still have probably 100 brass from previous tests with ammo like this. I don't plan on doing specifically that, but I did a few years ago load them with 158 gr lead bullets and was achieving like 850 FPS, which is a big jump up from 125 gr at 650 FPS.
@@GunSam My basic thinking is that total powder charge lends a potentially significant factor to recoil. 9mm may have a narrow performance envelope, but it is in about the right place. Ruger also makes an LCR in 9x19mm. It uses moon clips. I think you can get away without using them. Although you would want a pencil or something handy for reloading without using the moon clips. I seem to recall that it doesn't lose a lot of ballistics compared to the LCP. But it is only a five shot. Paul Harrell did a review on it.
good info thanks!
How do you feel about the 'Charter Arms PUG .357MAG'? I'm looking at getting a .357MAG hammerless revolver, and I'm torn between getting one soon or saving up for something nice. Maybe you could give me 2 or 3 options? Also, never even heard of .38 Short Colt before. I'll have to try it out eventually. Love the vids as usual.
I have never had one to know how I feel about them.
I own 4 of them and I like them! I've never had problems with them mechanically and they shoot well! I like the fact you can shoot rimless cartridges without moon clips! They are very reasonably priced.
I have a test request for you. The 32 S&W short has been overlooked in a lot of tests. It is a smokeless powder replacement for the 32 cap and ball revolver that soldiers carried as a backup during the Civil War. Something that is low recoil and can be effective.
If that is the basic .32 S&W, I have tested it a few times. 564 FPS. I did not gel test it, but I tested in water jugs. The reason I have no plan to revisit is because the lead is super soft. They bounced off 14 gauge aluminum I was shooting at, and a pellet gun could easily penetrate that. Granted, they probably would mushroom huge which would be cool, but it's not really on my list of things to re-test.
Honestly this looks like it would be great for small to medium game in a get hime type bag think rabbits beavers things like that.
The 38 Short Colt is Ballistically similar to the 38 Smith Wesson (short) so this might give some insight into the performance of that cartridge. Thank you!
I have heard that the Remington specific brand of the .38 S&W will fit in a .357 Mag revolver. I haven't tried it though.
@@GunSam A friend of mine, new to guns, accidentally bought a box of 38 S&W and it shot without incident in a Ruger Security Six 357. The bullet is oversized for most 38s but the cylinder was just sloppy enough and with the soft lead bullets, the moderate power and the very strong revolver it worked in that case. It is a great round in the old I frame Smiths, slightly smaller than J frames. It is easy on the hand, very accurate and with the information from this test, probably an acceptable load for social purposes. That is how Smith and Wesson sold in back in the 40s and 50s!
I have my dad’s I frame he bought new in 1946. Found a couple boxes by Magtech @ my LGS. Sweet little revolver.
OK. After viewing, I don't want to be shot in the torso or head with either of those. You've probably tested the 32 S&W magnum? The Buffalo Bore 32 SW magnum is wicked powerful. As you know.
I have tested various .32 H&R's and .327 Federal Mag rounds.
@@GunSam that's what I meant H&R 32 Magnum
@@chrish.4067 Yeah their .32 H&R Mag is basically a .327 Federal for energy. 100 gr at like 1,200 FPS
You know what's really cool? Casting your own bullets. Lead or Zinc, different mixtures and hardness.
I enjoyed the test! Your study of round nosed bullets makes me wonder if .38 spl RN really deserved the "Widow Maker" moniker.
Why was .38 spl RN really being lamented? When did that start? Was the source special bullet or .357 / .41 / .44 / .45 salesman? Was it poor marksmanship? Or was just lamenting having a revolver when a bad guy had a shotgun or machinegun?
What I see from your tests is that a 148 / 158 gr LRN from a 4 inch .38 spl at 850 fps is going to be mild on recoil and tumble after penetrating well.
Hi gun Sam awsome and a very interesting video. 😊
Good luck finding them
lol. Well I went out, and I bought them. Not sure that counts as luck.
Compact revolver holds only five short colt rounds but holds six 32 s&w longs.
How nobody is mentioning .32-20 Winchester???
It was chambered in swing cylinder as well as 1870 pattern Colt Peacmaker revolvers, too.
Amongst other weapons.
And was decidedly better than .32 Smith and Wesson Long or Short.
Especially in the days before the .32 H&R magnum was a thing.
It was also the little brother in Winchester's 1873 and 1892 rifle and carbine line, to the .38-40 and .44-40.
And along with Colt's Peacemaker line?
And was still being chambered in rifles and swing cylinder revolvers deep into the 20th century.
With Smith and Wessons M&P swing cylinder revolver line being a quality vehicle for the .32-20 at least into the 1920s or late 1930s.
I have never seen a handgun chambered in it or ammo for it. Even if it were mentioned, what's the point when it's not something that can be tested?
@GunSam
I've owned two Smith and Wesson Hand Ejector, (aka pre-WW2 M&P revolvers) chambered in .32-20, in recent years.
And at one time.
.32-20 was used by some early 20th century, smaller, police departments, and was pretty common in the South.
Also, Remington did make ammo in the caliber up until at least the early to mid 2000s.
Whether Remington still does now or not?
I can't say.
But from a pure ballistics testing, low recoiling handgun, stand point?
It would be interesting to see how a handgun chambered in .32-20 could've been compared to the cartridges you've previously tested.
It, along with its bigger brothers, the .38-40 and .44-40, we're at one time quite prolific in the U.S. .
With .44-40 still being found in some Italian manufactured copies of Colt Peacemakers and Remington 1875 and 1890, revolvers.
And to date?
I've not saw anyone test the calibers using the modern FBI lab crieria.
Even though these admittedly old time calibers can still be sometimes encountered, either tucked away in dresser drawers or carried in the holsters of modern-day "cowboy action shooting" competitors.
Wouldn't the .32 S&W wadcutter be better for self defense than the LRN? Leroy Brown had a .32 gun in his pocket for fun and my grandpappy kept one on his bed table.
Potentially. The issue is that the LRN will penetrate a bit more than the wadcutter, but it's splitting hairs and the wadcutter does more damage, but you got to be weary of what wadcutter as I once shot Fiocchi 98 or 100 gr WC's that barely did 500 FPS. Buffalo Bore .32 WC's would be great.
And if you have fast wadcutters you still might want some LRN for faster reloads, maybe in a strip or speed loader.
Just how fast should one's wadcutters be though?
Do you have suggestions besides 500 FPS is too slow?
32 colt new police works basic same as 32 s&w long
I use a 5.7. With some ammo the ballastics are close to decent 9mm but the follow up shots are much faster with very little recoil. I'm not sure if hydrostatic shock is a thing, but some ammo does well over 2200fps too, out of pistol.
Okay
2200fps out of a handgun. Isnt the blast massive?
Wrong
@@DinoNucci s4 and several others are even faster out of 5.5 inch barrel
@@timrobinson6573 The video is about low recoil. Lowest recoil I've ever felt considering the power
If one can't find .38 Short Colt then what do you recommend for low recoil for .38s?
Also if one has fancy metals in ones gun, what doesn't lead, have lead exposed that you'd recommend, that's jacketed?
Again low recoil ideas preferred.
So two questions I think others have as well.
Thanks in advance.
Interesting video!
I would say overall the best low recoil rounds are wadcutters, of course they are lead but leading isn't too bad as the powder charges are low. I used to handload copper plated wadcutters that would cut the leading entirely, but I have not seen loaded ammo like that before. The only real ammo that will give you low recoil with no leading at all is basic FMJ or TMJ ammo.
Thanks.
If a person had a barrel labelled " .38 SPL +P Jacketed" do they mean FMJ or TMJ or jacketed hollow points or? any of those or ?
@@michaelkulman7095 The main reason why a gun like that is labeled jacketed only, is because they are extremely light revolvers and the recoil on a lighter than average revolver could potentially dislodge lead bullets from the remaining cartridge cases in the cylinder (bullet creep), because the surface of lead has less friction and can pull from a cartridge case easier under recoil than if that bullet was jacketed with copper. With a fully inserted in the case lead bullet like a wadcutter with super low recoil, this simply won't happen. Jacketed means FMJ, TMJ or JHP, or any bullet that has copper on the sides of the bullet.
@@GunSam Thanks.
So mostly a "prairie dog" worry...they will stick their heads up and jam the action.
Are they also worried about leading and the solvents you might use to clean it hurting
Titanium or Scandium or other exotic metals and alloys? Therefore they want no naked lead used?
I appreciate your expertise.
I think I found my answer about solvent concerns with titanium cylinders in your old video here:
m.ua-cam.com/video/i56j3BR_41w/v-deo.html
As far as rounds prairie dogging, popping out of their holes, their cases, do you think
.38 Short Colt would do that even in a very light revolver
(10-12 ounces) as the the recoil impulse is so low with those rounds?
I really wonder about that.
I think it would be worth a test. It might be the exception that proves the rule, with a revolver that says jacketed only on it. So that may be an exception and as you said wadcutters may be an exception too with a bit more recoil but probably better effect.
I'd appreciate your opinion on that.
Would be interesting to see this test with full wad cutters
I have done a lot of tests with those already.
Where in the world did you find 38 SC? I was only able to find 38 LC once.
It is currently easier to find .38 Smith and Wesson (not .357 compatible) than .38 Short Colt.
I just realized that I haven't seen a Jug-or-Not video in quite a while. I guess it has been retired in favor of the Jel-or-Not.
Been a couple years. I prefer the gel and my table that held the jug box I just removed the top and replaced it and removed the box too a week ago.
Hey Sam, nice presentation. I'd love to shoot the .38 short, but they are so hard to find. May I ask as to where you found them? Starting to green up nicely here. All the best ot you and family. "The JJ" SW Penna.
I got mine on the Midwayusa website. They are still available but a bit expensive. I happened to buy mine with a birthday discount I got they offer the week of your birthday and got them for $45.52 instead of the $55.99 they go for.
@@GunSam Thanks for the speedy reply. Yes, a bit expensive but bearable with the birthday discount. I've previously used the discount for purchases. Love Midway for most of my shooting needs. Again, Thanks. "The JJ"
It's funny hearing "practical shootability" and "75 yards" in the same sentence when talking about a snub-nose.
Have you compared a .32 S&W Long with a .32 H&R Mag?
I am developing finger arthritis so maybeso I may need low recoil soon . My dad came back from WW2 with a 32 auto in a shoulder holster . But 38 sp looks better .
these make 380 look good!
As far as finding modern hollow point ammo???
Yes.
As far as terminal ballistics go??
Almost the same as .380 ACP.
If their bullets were FMJ?
They might even go about as deep as .380 FMJ.
Truth be told, though?
The only reason the .380 AUTO or 9mm Kurz is still around today?
Is that it could be chambered in semi-auto pistols packing a round or two more than most .32 or .38 caliber "pocket guns" of the era and was able to attain early military acceptance with almost every European military or police agency in existence at the time.
A fact that is also a reason for .32 ACP still being with us today, too.
Hello, how can we compare the 38 short colt with the 38 special wadcutter? Isn't the wadcutter more available than the 38 short?
Yes, it's more available. I have done a lot of tests with them. ua-cam.com/video/_YILp6cVBCs/v-deo.html
Cool
Well, that little .38 SC proved viable! Who'd a thunk?!
Gun Sam, what do you think is the optimum low recoil cartridge/platform for self defense?(weak or arthritic hands).
A lot depends on revolver weight, but if I had to pick a couple potent rounds that seem like they would reliable do well they would be .22 Mag in a 3" or longer barrel with a defensive handgun load or a .32 H&R Mag Critical Defense in any length barrel. They seem to be just enough and not have much recoil.
I have experimented with a Colt Python with 4.25 inch barrel, using 38 Special rounds designed for Cowboy Action events. The recoil is quite mild, and the trigger action on the Python is very smooth.
Shot Placement
Interesting. Will 38 special reloading dies reload the 38 Short?
I reload them with a .38 Short Colt die set. You probably could load them with a .38 Special die set, but it would be tricky. If I remember right, I may have loaded some before and the seating worked, but it was impossible to roll crimp, so if I am remembering right - I actually took out the depriming pin from my resizer die and just used it to taper crimp them a tad and it seemed to work.
Yo big Sam, you been trying to pick up that Lipseys .32 Mag Smith and Wesson carry???
I'm not Sam but I just got mine , lipseys smith and wesson 632 UC 32 hr mag👍 been wanting one since they started talking about them. It's a great , light well balanced revolver with a great trigger right out of the box.
I asked him long time before. His budged is tight!
@Gieszkanne , they list at about 750 but I could only find them at auction selling from 1k to 1300.
@@thomastune776 I dont know why S&W just dont offer some regular models in 32H&R ?
@@Gieszkanne , I know what you mean. Charter arms makes one for under 400 but it's not a smith and wesson trigger, quality etc. Taurus has one but I prefer concealed hammers. I do like rugers lcr .327 but there's something about the J frame I really love.
Now we need a 30 Super Carry vs 32 S&W vs 327 Fed Mag video.
I wonder if a revolver cut for moon clips could take 30 super carry.
I have thought about it, but I just haven't gotten excited enough about something like that to go buy one. A hot rodded .32 revolver cartridge makes sense to get 6 round capacity with up to 450 ft lbs energy from a 2" snub. A .30 SC to me seems like, ehh, go down in power from 9x19mm just to make a subcompact pistol hold 12 instead of 10...I just don't see the point.
@@countryguywithcamera 30SC has higher pressure than 327 mag. I dont know if this would be safe.
@@Gieszkanne it would work once guaranteed 🤣
.357 magnum is pretty low recoil
PizzA