|
|
The Perfect Kitgun (in .32 Magnum)
Like many other handgunners, one of my first (and still one of my favorite) handguns was the S&W Model 34 Kitgun. My father guided me toward the Kitgun over 40 years ago because he believed that the only way to learn to use a handgun well was to practice, practice, and practice even more. He was right. The Kitgun was perfect for this. It was lighter and handier than the K-22 he owned and its inherent accuracy and the low cost of .22LR ammunition encouraged me to shoot. Eventually, I even learned to hit what I was shooting at – usually. Then I started hunting what the State labeled as "pests" (open season all year long and no limit). It was then that the Kitgun’s only shortcoming became apparent. Although the .22LR is a marvel, combining outstanding accuracy with extremely low cost, it lacks killing power when fired from a 4" barrel (this was before hypervelocity .22’s). I also had hunted them with a Marlin 39A (with a peepsight) before the Kitgun. The .22LR’s had plenty of power when shot out of a long barrel, but it was not very challenging. If I could see it, I could hit it with the Marlin. The Kitgun once again gave me something to strive for. However, the Kitgun was even more lacking when I tried it on the larger squirrel and rabbits (considered game, not pests). In order to assure a clean kill, the number of shots had to be severely limited. I began a 30 year hunt for a better Kitgun. One of the first candidates was a 6" barreled Colt Police Positive Special in 32-20 caliber. One of the most important things recommending it was that it was close by – it was owned by my father. All I had to do was buy the cartridges. That was not as easy as it sounds. Back then, 32-20 cartridges were hard to find and expensive when they were found. Actually, cartridges and handloading supplies for the 32-20 are easier to find now than they were back then. It did not take long to find the many shortcomings of the Colt PPS. The Colt is small and light for a service revolver, but is still larger and heavier than a Kitgun. The Colt was accurate with some loads, but would spray loads that it did not like. The fixed sights were a problem. For one thing, they were not mine to file. Anyway, I had a number of loads and could not change the fixed sights to handle all of them. Although the 32-20 was a delightful cartridge to shoot (it anchored any small game that I solidly hit), it had many problems, too. The thin case was difficult to reload and accuracy was a sometimes thing. It took me nearly 30 years to work out all the problems in reloading the 32-20, but I think I have it mastered now. The next gun that I stayed with for any length of time was a 4" barreled H&R 732 with a windage-adjustable rear sight. Although not fully adjustable, the rear sight was still a vast improvement over the Colt. And, I could (and did) file the front sight. The H&R was chambered in .32 S&W Long caliber. The .32 Long was less powerful than the 32-20, but I soon found that I could increase the load to match factory 32-20 loads – a 100gr lead bullet at about 850-900fps. That made it powerful enough for everything that was asked of it. The .32 Long is also a delight to reload. With a relatively thick-walled, straight case, it reminds me of a 3/4 scale .38 Special and is just as easy to reload. The .32 Long cartridges, cases, and bullets were commonly available and relatively inexpensive. In addition to being sold new at most gunshops, there were always a few boxes for sale at nearly every gunshow for much less than retail. Occasionally, a box of Colt cartridges were found. The .32 New Police is interchangeable, but the .32 Long Colt is not. Interestingly, the .32 New Police bullets are almost identical to the newer lead .32 Magnum bullets, being a round nosed bullet with a flat spot on the nose. I collected several published loads for the .32 S&W Long and Red Dot powder. The reason for that was that I could also get that powder from my father – for free. He reloaded shotshells with it. Other that that, it also turned out to be a good choice. It is not a whole lot different from Bullseye. I experimented with several different loads, but soon narrowed them down to three. Two were 2.7gr of Red Dot with either a 95gr lead DEWC or a 98gr lead RN bullet, both at what I would later learn was about 840fps. Originally, the wadcutter shot a little higher than the round-nose. With some experimentation, I was able to get both of them to shoot at the same point of aim, regardless of the distance. With semi-fixed sights, this was a huge advantage. The secret was to keep the distance from the base of the bullet to the top of the powder charge equal for both loads. This meant that the wadcutter was set about 1/3 out of the case while the round-nose was set slightly deeper than normal (crimped on the curve of the nose). The third load was a 77gr lead, round-nose bullet (for the .32 ACP) and 3.0gr of Red Dot at about 920fps. This was a nice flat shooting round, but it was slightly less accurate than the heavier bullets. Taking extra care with the powder during reloading made no difference. I came to believe that the shorter bearing surface on the lighter bullet is the reason for the inaccuracy. I eventually quit using this load. Then, the wadcutter load squeezed out the round-nose load. The wadcutters anchored small game even better than the other two. The loads listed above are more than what is shown for the .32 Long in most handloading manuals. They are undoubtedly too much for old, breaktop or cheap solid frame handguns in this caliber. However, I have fired many thousands of these rounds through the H&R without any problems. In addition, I actually went a little higher (about 10% more) than what is shown here during some experiments, but did not stay with the higher pressure loads since they were not needed, were less enjoyable to shoot, and were sometimes less accurate. I did not back off because of excessive pressure. The only problem was the H&R. I eventually came to believe that it was not capable of reaching the accuracy inherent in the cartridge. The average groups at the range, with factory loads or reloads, were in the 3" to 4" range at 25 yards (from a sandbag rest). I had to limit my targets to less than 25 yards. I learned from this the importance of finding a rest whenever possible. From my experience, most pests have seen you long before you see them and they follow your every movement. Finding a rest (slowly) usually doesn’t spook them. Although H&R’s have always been known for giving solid value for their price, they have never been known for giving target accuracy. Target accuracy is EXACTLY what is needed when shooting at small game. I reluctantly continued looking. I tried a 3", J-frame revolver in .38 Special for a short while. The .38 Special is too powerful for small game unless it is downloaded or you don’t intend to eat what you shoot. When downloaded to about 600-650fps (to duplicate the damage from a .32 Long), the trajectory resembled that of a basketball. What this meant in the field was that the combination was superbly accurate at exactly the range for which it was sighted, but it would totally miss (above or below) if the target was just a little closer or farther away. The fixed sights were a problem, too. The S&W Model 51 Kitgun in .22 Magnum was strongly considered shortly after it was introduced, but I never bought one. The problems with it were financial. It was expensive (being a S&W and also being new) and the ammunition was no more powerful than my handloaded .32 Longs, but cost more than twice as much. The conclusion I came to was that the ideal trailgun would be a premium-grade, small-framed revolver with a 4" barrel, adjustable sights, in .32 S&W Long caliber. Neither S&W nor any other manufacturer offered this combination. When the .32 H&R Magnum was introduced in 1984, I assumed that S&W would quickly introduce it in the Kitgun. Not as a replacement, but as a "big brother" to the .22 version. It seemed like a natural. Instead, the .32 Magnum became typecast as a self-defense cartridge for women who could not handle the recoil of a .38 Special. NONE of the magazine articles describing the .32 Magnum considered it as a serious small game cartridge. Some writers choked on the word "Magnum". Maybe they would feel better if it was called the .32 Modern. It is the only .32 handgun cartridge that has been introduced in over 100 years (wildcats not counted). Although hunting big game with a handgun has become fairly commonplace in recent years, judging from the lack of magazine coverage, small game handgun hunting must be fairly rare. More people should try it. It is not only a challenge, it is readily available. Since 1984, many small snubnosed revolvers have been introduced in .32 Magnum. I was not even tempted by them. The first premium revolver with adjustable sights offered in this caliber was the Ruger Single-Six. However, I was looking the other way at the time and missed out. They are now collectors items. The new ones (with fixed sights) are useless to me. The next premium .32 Magnum was a S&W NewModel 16. I got one of those, but it was a lot bigger and heavier than needed for the .32 Magnum. I eventually had it rechambered to 32-20 (that is a whole ‘nother article). Occasionally, there were published rumors that S&W was about to introduce a .32 Magnum Kitgun, but the local gunshops were never able to track one down. Finally, in the early 1990’s, I read yet another article about a self defense gun in .32 Magnum – a snub-nose with fixed sights. Almost as an aside, it pictured another gun that was exactly what I was looking for. With the picture and a written description, a local FFL was able to locate one for me. It looks identical to the S&W Model 63, except it is in .32 Magnum. Officially, it is a J-frame, S&W Model 631, in .32 Magnum, stainless steel, with a 4" barrel, and adjustable sights. I believe that this is the perfect Kitgun. So how does it shoot? I bought several boxes of 95gr lead factory loads, then dug out a box of .32 Long factory loads and several boxes of .32 Long reloads. The reputation of S&W accuracy was upheld. The groups generally averaged 2" to 2-1/2" at 25 yards from a sandbag rest. The best group was 1-3/8" and the worst was about 4". When fired offhand, the groups were about the same size at 15 to 18 yards. This is good enough for small game, especially if I can find a rest. I have no doubt that others can do better, but this is about as good as I can do with any gun. The .32 Long factory loads were almost as accurate, but were centered a little lower. The handloads were something of a disappointment. They were wadcutters and Red Dot. Although as accurate as factory loads in the H&R, the groups were noticeably bigger in the S&W. I have read firearms writers that report that they have sometimes had the same problem with wadcutters in short (for the chamber) cases. To test this, I planned to load some wadcutters in .32 Magnum cases. That is where the first unpleasant surprise came to light. At that time, Federal had stopped selling reloading components and no one else made .32 Magnum cases. I would have to fire factory loads and save the cases. Then, the next unpleasant surprise came to light. The Federal factory cases were brittle. I had a few crack at the mouth with the first reload and almost all were cracked by the third reload. A call to Federal did not resolve anything. They said that they were selling cartridges and they worked for that. They did not sell them as reloading supplies. I quickly learned to anneal the mouth of every factory case immediately after it was first fired. This cut down on the losses considerably, but did not end them. So for several years, I used .32 Long cases and saved the .32 Magnum cases for special occasions. Getting back to the "test", using wadcutters in full length cases did tighten up the groups. Then, Starline started making .32 Magnum cases. The cases are a little longer than they should be, but a quick trip through the case trimmer solved that. I now have enough cases to use them for every .32 Magnum load now. I have settled on 3.0gr of Red Dot with the 95gr wadcutter or 98gr round-nose, and 3.3gr with the 77gr round-nose for this gun. These loads are somewhat less than factory .32 Magnum loads, but are perfectly adequate for what I use them for. If I want more power, I use the 32-20 S&W NewModel 16. The only unfortunate thing is that this gun is now even more rare than the original Ruger Single-Six. I have only seen ONE in the years since I bought mine and it had a collectors price on it. That is unfortunate. If more people had a chance to use an ideal gun and cartridge while hunting small game, it might become more popular. .32’s are a hoot to shoot. |
|
Copyright © 2004-2007
The Sixshooter Community
|
