1. Click here to enter the drawing for your chance to win an Ontario Knives Spec Plus SP8 Machete Survival Knife & Ka-Bar Dozier Folding Hunter, , Bladeforums.com swag or memberships!

    Be sure to read the rules before entering, then help us decide next week's giveaway by hitting the poll in that thread! Entries close at midnight, Saturday Sept 7!

    Once the entries close, we'll live stream the drawing on Sunday, Sept 8 at 5PM Eastern. Tune in to our YouTube channel TheRealBladeForums for a chance to win bonus prizes!

    Questions? Comments? Post in the discussion thread here

New professional. 32 mag revolver

Discussion in 'Gadgets & Gear' started by jill jackson, Mar 20, 2019.

  1. jackknife


    Oct 2, 2004
    Oh come off the horsehocky.

    You are some kind of trip that I can't even guess at, but you've contradicted yourself too many times. You say if you can't carry the .357, then you'll leave the guns at home. Well how come on February 16th, in post number 199 in the gun picture thread, you showed a little Ruger bearcat .22 revolver with he statement that it is to be a carry gun? And on March 3d you showed the Hunter 1100-46 holster you just bought for it so you could carry it?

    Come off your hypocrisy trip and get real. You spout off about the .357 being the only gun you consider worthy of carry as any man can learn to shoot, yet you will carry a small .22 revolver on woods walks.

    I know why I'm carrying, but I am getting the idea that you may not. Most people who carry only want to protect themselves, and are not on some trip of the super ego. You come off as a very self righteous sort, and in one thread you give off conflicting information. So, do you carry a .357 or a .22 Ruger Bearcat? The .32 Jill posted about would be a large step up from a single action .22 Bearcat. But if the .32 isn't a 'man's gun', then what is the .22 Ruger?

    That's the trouble with ego trips. Sooner or later they trip you up. I guess I'll go clean my less manly .380.
    Pilsner, sodak, Hard Knocks and 6 others like this.
  2. jill jackson

    jill jackson

    Sep 5, 2006
    That makes zero sense. A .32 mag in a 22 oz revolver barely has any recoil compared to a .357 mag in something about the same weight.

    While felt recoil exceeds that of the .32 H&R, revolvers in .327 Federal are much easier to control than equivalent models chambered in .357 Magnum. Comparing the two calibers, Chuck Hawks says, "There is no doubt that, for most shooters, the .357 Mag. produces uncomfortable recoil and muzzle blast."
  3. jackknife


    Oct 2, 2004
    Again totally not true.

    My wife is a prime example. She cannot shoot my S&W model 66 without discomfort. She hates that gun and the excessive muzzle blast. Yet, she shoots a Glock 17 9mm just fine. When we moved from Maryland to Texas and we got our carry license's, she had a bit of trouble with my Glock 26 being a bit too snappy for her. But she rented a standard Glock 17 and shot an almost perfect score with the larger gun in the same caliber. The little bit less snap made a noticeable difference in her shooting ability with her arthritis. A.32 revolver will have a huge amount of difference to someone that is not a dedicated and experienced shooter, over a .357 revolver. To deny that is akin to trying to claim the sun rises in the west.

    If a 70 year old woman can tell a big difference between a Glock 17 and a Glock 26, then a .32 vs a .357 will be even more marked. And the sun does indeed rise in the east.
  4. jill jackson

    jill jackson

    Sep 5, 2006
    leghog seems to be saying if you can't shoot a .357 with no problem, then you can't shoot anything, even pistols with much less recoil.
  5. jackknife


    Oct 2, 2004
    Jill, he says a lot of things, like a lot of people, that have very little to do with reality. The gun world is full of so much BS you need trout fishing waders to get through it. About 98% of it is pure ego driven bullhocky that has little to do with the real world. And almost all of it is driven by the gun shop and gun magazine guru's who inmost cases know nothing about violence first hand. But by virtue of them being an employee of a gun shop or having a degree in journalism and writing for a gun magazine, they are taken at their word for what they spout. In 99% of the time, they are just parroting what they heard on the 'net or by some wizened old guy on the range that was in WW2.

    I stopped reading gun magazines a long time ago, and I don't pay any attention to gun shop guru's. All I can go in is my own experience of running the streets of Washington D.C. in my misguided youth, and what I saw first hand and experienced first hand. Saw a few shootings right up close and it was educational. Just outside Gaffney's Irish Bar on 14th street and Colorado I saw a guy pull a 25 dollar RG 22 revolver and shoot the guy who pulled a strait razor on his while arguing over something. The guy with the cheap .22 shot the razor guy three times, the razor guy fell over and thrashed around a bit, then died. He sure wasn't doing the Walter Houston jig and laughing about how it didn't bother him because it was just a .22. Our friend Al was killed with a little .25acp. He's been dead ever since, in spite of idiots like Jeff Cooper speaking so slight of them and every gun nut has parroted him ever since. A gun is a gun. It shoots a bullet. Bullets penetrating the human body is a very bad thing. People tend to die when vital organs or penetrated by a bullet.

    I need to go to the shed and dig out my hip waders.
    FatRat1, Pilsner, AntDog and 7 others like this.
  6. jill jackson

    jill jackson

    Sep 5, 2006
    I know a guy that was shot through his left arm with a .25 auto and it went deep into his side. A friend and I was talking to him about it. My friend said it really isn't much of a gun is it? He said I nearly died and spent 5 hours in surgery the doctors said if it hadn't went through my arm first it probably would have killed me. It seems like a gun to me!
    benchwarmer380 and Cougar Allen like this.
  7. Charlie_K


    Jul 16, 2012
    And what exactly, to yourself, amounts to either "much time" or even "proper training" with regard to this discussion? How much shooting with .38s, how much with .357s? What's the weight of the gun that's going to be used for the sake of this "proper training"? What's the length of the barrel? What's the length of the guide rod? What size is the grip? Is the barrel ported? Are shooting gloves going to be used for the sake of training or is the person going in bare so they know what they'll be facing? Is the gun a steel frame, aluminum frame, or titanium frame? Will the recoil be sufficient to cause the projectile to come loose from its case crimping?
  8. jackknife


    Oct 2, 2004
    That's good to know, now I won't bother shooting the hot stuff. So far I've only ever fired full wadcutter target loads form my S&W 637. That's whats in it for most use, aside form the CCI snake shot on the first shot. This spring I've dispatched two rattlers so far. The wadcutters are an easy shoot in the aluminum frame gun, and they were good enough for Jim Cirillo.

    I can only wonder of with a 1 7/8th barrel, is there even enough velocity to open up the hollow points reliably?
  9. leghog


    Aug 10, 2013
    The weight of the gun and it's barrel length are whatever the trainee will carry. Train with what you carry. Firearm and ammunition. It truly is that simple.

    I never said any such thing. Mever even implied it. Please don't put words in my mouth.
  10. greater

    greater Platinum Member Platinum Member

    Jul 17, 2006
    The only advantage I see with a .357 magnum is barrier penetration or large animals and more range when using an appropriate long barrel revolver. What you get out of a snub nose is a lot of muzzle flash which could be blinding at night. You also get a lot of recoil whether you can handle it or not does not negate the fact that you have to sight your target in again after every shot (follow up shots) and in an enclosed space it's guaranteed to damage your ears or blow your eardrums. Even outdoors it is loud.

    I wouldn't want a .357 snub if I had to fire from my lap inside a car at a car jacker and in that situation if your revolver is any high powered handgun with magna ports you are going to be in for a world of hurt.

    I firmly belive the .357 magnum is a cartridge made for barrel lengths of 4 inches upward preferably 6 in my view and 3 inches minimum. firing .357 magnums in a revolver with a 2 inch barrel really gives diminished performance to the point where you might as well use hot .38 special loads.

    A .357 is not going to do much more damage to a person (god forbid if you have to) than a good stout 9mm hollow point load or .38 special hollow point load. New studies have proven cavitation damage only happens with rifle velocities so all you get with these handgun magnums are range and barrier penetration. The .327 magnum in it's hotter loadings from what I read is far from tame although I do think it's a great caliber all around but that is another story.

    I don't see the .32 magnum as inadequate at all but from what I read options in the configuration of this round is limited compared to the more popular calibers.
    Last edited: Mar 25, 2019
  11. jackknife


    Oct 2, 2004
    Are those your words?
    AntDog, jill jackson and Cougar Allen like this.
  12. greater

    greater Platinum Member Platinum Member

    Jul 17, 2006
    I don't find firing a moderate .357 load out of a 6 inch barrel S&W or Ruger to be difficult at all. I can do it with one hand however I found firing .44 magnums (hot loads???? at the range) out of a 5 inch barrel Ruger Redhawk to be punishing and unpleasant. I never worked up the courage to try it with one hand. All of these are big heavy revolvers with shock absorbing rubber grips that would make for very uncomfortable concealed carry. I can tell you follow shots were difficult with the .44 magnum and would require lots of unpleasant practice to master but I am afraid that the loud noise and muzzle flash are not going to improve with practice.

    I find I can get a lot faster follow up shots with .38special, 9mm, .45, .40, and .22. I doubt I would fare as well with a hot .357 magnum load or perhaps any .357 magnum load fired from a lightweight snub nose or even a heavier snub nose.
    Last edited: Mar 25, 2019
  13. Bigfattyt

    Bigfattyt Gold Member Gold Member

    Jun 23, 2007
    I'm a big guy, with 2xl hands. I have plenty of grip strength to fire higher pressure higher recoil rounds.

    I routinely carry and shoot .357 magnum loads out of my snubbie SP101 with the shortest barrel. I find it plesant and not at all painful, even with hot loaded heavier loads.

    I have shot full house .454 Cassull rounds through the Ruger Super Redhawk. One handed, no problem. No shooting gloves...

    But I am well aware that with my .357 it takes me more time to get off a second, third, etc shot quickly with those full power loads. Currently 130 grain federal hydra shock hollow points in that gun. But I've carried and practiced with 158 grain, 125, and even some fast 110 grain....

    I have a Shield in .40 that feels pretty snappy with 180 grain defensive loads.

    I find small .380's to be harder for me to shoot. My big hands and fingers find the trigger reach awkward on many of the little .380 guns. Ruger's little pair of .380 and 9mm, I'd much rather shoot the 9mm, because it is a tiny bit bigger in the hand.

    My wife would rather shoot my SP101 with .38 loads. She does not like the sub compact .40's.

    Even my kid can shoot the .38's. The ruger is not a lightweight, though. I have seen my wife shoot a hard kicking 10 gage, but she does not like hard kicking handguns.

    Most of the gun experts I know (who can shoot circles arround me) carry .38 specials in their .357 wheel guns when they do carry their revolvers.

    I still carry .357, but realize I'm giving up speed on every follow up shot. Period.
    Last edited: Mar 30, 2019
  14. Charlie_K


    Jul 16, 2012
    What internet warriors don't understand is that they're not dealing with idiots here. In my own case, unlike them, I know the difference between my head and not only a hole in the ground, but also the Ames True Temper shovel that put it there.

    Stupid keyboard warriors going on about stuff that they don't know. To them I say in the name of Elmer Keith, Daniel B. Wesson and Alfred C. Buck, shut the F*** up!
  15. Gurdygurds

    Gurdygurds Gold Member Gold Member

    Aug 10, 2013
    I am a shooting novice, but have found that the Glock 42 shoots much softer than anything else I've tried.
  16. jill jackson

    jill jackson

    Sep 5, 2006
    I didn't have to put words in your mouth, you did. :rolleyes: That is unless you consider the .32 mag to be nearly the equal of a .357 mag. o_O My experience with both bears out that is not the case by no means.
    Cougar Allen and jackknife like this.
  17. Velitrius

    Velitrius Gold Member Gold Member

    Mar 3, 2000
    I like the looks and coating too. I'll bet it'd be a hoot to shoot as well.

    If you would like to try something around the same size and weight of your Smith, you could check out the Charter Arms Undercoverette in .32 H&R Mag.

    The ammo is nowhere near as readily available as .38 though. But I'm a sucker for the less ordinary calibers nowadays.
  18. leghog


    Aug 10, 2013
    Nope, never said they were equivalent. I said with proper training you can learn to shoot the .357 Mag well. If you can't, you probably can't handle the .32 Mag either (or any other number of cartridges). Again, it's ALL ABOUT TRAINING.
  19. jill jackson

    jill jackson

    Sep 5, 2006
    I disagree. In fact the .32 magnum has way less than half the recoil of a .357 magnum. This shows the .327 which is loaded to much higher pressure than the .32 has half compared to a .357. A .32 mag can be shot very quickly and no matter what you claim recoil does matter.

    No. 5: Substantially Reduced Recoil

    "When you compare a .357 Mag. load that will deliver the same level of terminal performance as the .327 Federal Magnum, you’ll find it does so with about a 50 percent increase in recoil. The .327 Federal Magnum performs so well because it operates at a higher pressure than the .357 Mag.—45,000 psi as opposed to 35,000 psi. But recoil is reduced because it fires smaller diameter and slightly lighter bullets. The .357 Mag. is a great cartridge, but with 125-grain bullets, the .327 Federal Magnum can match its velocity and terminal performance without the wrist-twisting crunch."
  20. jackknife


    Oct 2, 2004
    You know, the problem with painting yourself into a corner is, theres no way out but to walk on fresh paint and make a mess. To add ridiculous statements on top of the same gets nowhere.

    I've taught a lot of people to shoot in my time. One of my favorite guns to teach with, aside from a Smith and Wesson .22 revolver, was a Smith and Wesson model 66 with a 4 inch barrel. It was loaded with mild target loads, and hardly recoils at all. I've had people ranging from 12 year old girls to a 76 year old grandmother shoot it just fine. But...even after handling it fine, if I put .357 loads in it to try to get them familiar with it, everything goes to hell. This includes a 37 year old construction worker who was a veteran of the fighting in Iraq, a 26 year old sheetmetal worker, and a 48 year old ex Montgomery County retired police officer who was used to 9mm in a standard size service weapon. The veteran ex-cop on shooting the full house .357's was a bit rocked and said "Wow, this thing really kicks a bit." Yet he shot perfect scores with a 9mm for the 20 years he was a cop.

    For the average human being, about 98 out of a hundred, has a limit to what they can handle in noise and recoil. The much esteemed F.B.I is a prime example. They spent many millions of our tax dollars converting over to the .40 caliber. They wanted more power in the aftermath of the Miami shootout thinking that power will make up for poor tactics. Years later, they spend many more millions of our tax dollars going back to 9mm because they found out that most of their agents can't shoot the .40 worth a tinkers damm. Range qualifying scores went down and stayed down. So now we're paying for them to go back to 9mm. But hey, maybe they didn't get the right training at the F.B.I academy at Quantico Virginia? Maybe the instructors at the F.B.I. academy just needed you there to give them the "proper" training? I would guess the F.B.I. agents coming out of the F.B.I. academy are far more trained than the regular Joe walking into a gun shop and buying a handgun for personal defense, yet they couldn't handle the increase in muzzle flash and recoil of a .40 over a 9mm.

    I've been reading The American Rifleman for about 50 years or more. The very first thing I look at is the Armed Citizen page. So typical is the incidents that all kinds of people ranging from grandmothers to teen girls at home, grabbing a gun and shooting an armed intruder with what happened to be around from their deceased husbands old .38 revolver to dad's shotgun in the closet. Most of these people are not gun nuts that practice every weekend. Some have never shot a gun before, or rarely. Yet they managed. Without what you would call proper training. These incidents in the Armed Citizen take place with guns ranging from .22 rifles, to old .38 revolvers, to shotguns.

    To insist that if a person can't handle a .357 then they can't handle a .32 is just plain silly to an extreme. But like they say, opinions are like something else everyone has. Hey, some people still believe the moon landing was faked, and theres a Flat Earth Society. Don't go too close to the edge.
    Last edited: Mar 30, 2019
    Sid Post, sodak, trevitrace and 4 others like this.

Share This Page