32 Mag power for self defense

Might e a couple of days, things don't happen very fast around here, but I'm sure you will get some opinions. Welcome to the board!
Al

I just know I will get in all kinds of hot water for saying this, but, if a 32 is what you have, then it's your self-defence gun. In this day when we have a multitude of choices from many manufacturers it is hard to imagine that a lowly 32 caliber was at one time considered to be perfectly adequate for defense. My Great Grandfather carried a 32 as a deputy sheriff and 32's were issued to many police departments a long ways back in time. Will a 32 stop an assailant? It depends on how good a shot you are and where you hit him. Would I prefer something bigger? You bet, but I sure wouldn't turn down a 32 if that's all there was. Many a life has been saved with lesser calibers. Is it as good as a 380? Don't know much about a 380 but it's probably a toss-up. Chris

I have other handguns more suitable for carry, but I like this gun. I will probably just carry it when woods bumming or something. Just kinda wondered how it stacked up in the power department.

I'm with Chris, I have carried a 22lr a couple times as I had nothing else. The way I figure it was better to have something over nothing.My opinion is the .32 magnum would be a sweet little fun gun for dinking around in the woods or desert but I wouldn't rely on it for serious self defense unless nothing else were available. However,with the marvels of modern ammunition I think the .32 magnum is a step above the .380.

1150

Thanks for the replies. I agree on the .32 and .380 comparison. Don't look for this to be my primary carry, I have others. But, just wondering if I was carrying it in the woods, how effective it might be if that's all I had with me.

Keep in mind that I have a Colt Ace, Remington .380, and Walther .380. In addition, the first coyote I ever shot was stone dead with one hit from a .380. However, I recommend a good read of Elmer Keith's Sixguns and Hell, I Was There. He describes a bunch of episodes involving bad guys with various small calibers that might make you think, like I do, that any pistol is good as long as it starts with a 4. In addition, remember the Army's problem with .38's in the Phillipines.
I'm not trying to put your revolver down, as I have a S&W j-frame 32 in my bedside table, but I also have a 12 gauge riot gun in the bedframe.
Basically, any gun is good. Some are just more suited.

Mike

True, Mike. I am thinking about that whole '4' thing. Might sell the Walther and get something with a little more ooomph.

I have found that as I got older I regretted every gun I sold or traded away, keep the Walther AND buy a "4" size gun. Chris

#24 Do not attend a gunfight with a handgun, the caliber of which does not start with a "4".

USMC Rules for Gunfighting

Al, good rule. Seems someone forgot it when they adopted the 9mm as the standard handgun for the boys and girls who are in harm's way. .45 ACP, don't leave home without one. Chris

I can't use the force, so I pack a .45!

They must have had their reasons. I understand the Secret Service uses the .357 Sig. !?!?

Same as going from an M1 to a .223...seems that may be why some of the special units go back to the M14 (308) for some work..also could be why they want a 6.5 Grendel on an AR platform or some such wildcat. Chris

I agree with Chris. I never sold or traded a gun that I didn't wish I had back.Just cough up and get what you want. What you think you can afford never matches what you want, so forget money and go for the gold. My old standby is a Model 1950 S&W 44 special. I bought it in the 1970's and have never regretted it.

One of the .32 H&R magnum's favorable attributes is that it offers .38 Special
energy levels and allows a small-frame revolver to hold 6 cartridges,
whereas a similarly sized revolver in .38 special would only hold 5
rounds. Penetration is also increased compared to the .38 special with
bullets of the same weight.
The .32 H&R Magnum is considered by many[weasel words] to be at the lower end of acceptable self-defense cartridges, comparing favorably with the popular .380 ACP and with standard-pressure .38 Special loads, as well as the less powerful .32 ACP.
Max pressure for the .32 H&R Mag is set at 21,000 CUP by SAAMI.[4]
Not my words but it says it all..with todays loads, the cartridge is acceptable for self defense. As others have said it is where you hit that counts.

I have to toss out that the bullet technology has improved greatly in just the last 20 years closing the gap between the "small" rounds of yesterday and the larger rounds with the ammo of yesterday, it's just that it has improved the larger rounds too, so the gap remains, it's just at a higher level. Just an opinion.
I don't like mentioning calibers for thoe "other types of guns" but I didn't own a personal 9mm until well past 40 years of age. The reason? The bullets were terrible when I was younger. The old "Soft Points" that would feed through the 9s were a joke (Just about 1% better than hardball) Compare that to the Speer "Flying ashtray round for the .45 acp of the same era, no wonder the 9 was considered inferior. I changed my mind afew years ago after looking at the current generation of "premium" bullets available.

Is the .32 H&R mag. better than the .380 for defense???
Let's look in the Speer #14 loading manual & see what we have.
Speer lists top velocities for the .32 H&R mag with the 85gr JHP as  1240fps, the next highest one is 1198fps  The .32H&R Mag has a 5-1-2" bbl
 They list the .380 with a 90gr Gold Dot HP at 1056fps with the next runner up 1050 the .380 has a 3.8" bbl
The .32H&R Mag with a 100gr bullet is listed at 1140fps for the top velocity with 1110 as second highest.
The .380 is listed with a 95gr total metal jacket (solid)  @ 1027fps with the next highest @ 1019fps 
   The difference for the top velocities in both is the .32H&R mag is 184fps faster with a bit smaller diameter & 5 grain lighter bullet out of a longer bbl. 
  The difference in the next heavier bullet is a pluss for the .32H&R Mag of 113fps with a bit smaller bullet, but a 5 grain heavier bullet.

 Is this enough difference to tell in a fight? Might be, but bullet placement will win a fight. Both should be easy to shoot, but the smaller, usually, .380s migh be harder to hit with.  My guess is the lead would go to the .32H&R mag with the 100gr bullet. Usually the .32H&R mag comes in guns that are a bit easier to shoot.
I think if I was choosing one for defense I'd pick the .32.  The concealibility of the .380 is probably better. I wouldn't pick either as a first choice, but in a real world situation as a last ditch gun I think either is better than a finger in the eye & hopping that'll make the bad guy go away.
   Enjoy Frank

even meet minimum power factor for USPSA of 125, which doesn't mean much, but just saying, you ain't gonna spin the bad guy around in his tracks with any of those loads, and I'm not convinced that much  accuracy will be obtained in a true self defence situation. On the flip side a .45 long slide in the safe ain't gonna do you much good either!
.32 85X1240= 105.4
.380 90X1056= 95.04
.32 100X1140= 114.0
.380 95X1057=97.6
 
 
 
 
 

All the formulas for effectiveness were created by people who made up their minds first and then juggled the figures until they got them to 'prove' what they wanted them 'to prove'. It is like asking a preacher to objectively compare his church and all the others. Guess how it will turn out?
The #1 criterion is BULLET PLACEMENT. It doesn't matter what you are shooting if you miss or hit them in the big toe.

The 32 mag evolved from the 32 Colt and the 32 S&W, both of which are essentially identical save for the headstamp. The 380 evolved from the 9mm Browning Long. What all these cartridges had in common was a different world. The 380 answered a need in Europe for a light handgun with a minimum of recoil and muzzle blast. Eurocops of the between the wars period rarely faced adversaries wielding anything more than a knife-if that, and lots of mega firepower was simply not necessary. Most of these guns rarely left their holsters in anger, as the handgun was more a badge of status and rank.
The 32's in America were popular at a time when crime was not tolerated. Unlike today, it was not considered a punishable offense to shoot someone breaking the law, and a wounded crook would not find help or medical treatment. The 32 did have police application, but it was far more common as a civilian personal defense weapon. Again, like the 380, the 32's did not require large guns.

The point here is that neither the 32's or the 380 was ever intended to stop an attack. They were never considered potent defensive cartridges. In fact, they were designed primarily as a deterrent. Have 32's and the 380 actually put men 6 feet under? Sure they have, and the same could be said for kitchen implements, tire changing tools, and screw drivers. I wouldn't choose any of these for my first line of defense, either.
The "magnum" has done little to change the reality of the 32. H&R wanted a flashy new cartridge for their relatively poorly made revolver, and it was good enough to outlast the gun it was meant for, but never seriously challenged the supremacy of the 38 Special.
Now we have the magnum of the magnum, the 327 Federal, which now has a similar muzzle blast and recoil to the 357-yet with smaller and lighter bullets. Problem is, its still just a 32.
Do I know folks who carry a 380 as their personal defense choice? Yep, they are old, with many health issues, and the 380 is about all they can manage. Better a 380 than nothing. Have I known of folks who have carried the 32 mag? Yep, and they almost universally report that its a great small game cartridge in hunting camp, a fun plinker, and quite accurate, but nothing they want between them and today's bad guys.
If all you can handle is a 380, or a 32, then your choice is made for you. If you can handle more, but choose to pack these for that lifesaving moment, then may God be on your side, because you are going to need him.

I agree again, MAK; mostly. When I was in college, I bought a High Standard G380. Very rare now, and I lost it through a rusted out floor in an old Ford Pickup. But, while in West Teras, a dumb coyote stood in the road about 50 feet from me. I got out, fired, and the coyote hit the pavement like a sack of flour. I have thought about that many times when people talk about the 380 vs. the 9mm. I think neither one of them is useful for anybody except idiot Europeans who can never win their own wars. However, maybe the relatively low velocity of the 380 makes it seem to hit harder. Quien sabe?
At any rate, I have my Dad's Remington 51 and my PPKS in 380, and I wouldn't be afraid to empty them into any warthead that got in my way. But I think afterward, I might open the holes with a 44 before the coroner got there so I wouldn't be embarrased.
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxgcBKbBb2w&feature=related
 
I'm the guy in the red hat.

I sometimes carry a 9mm. Some of the ammo available today puts the 9 in the class of a good choice for a defensive weapon. Especially the Speer 124gr Gold Dot HP +P. There have been a lot of shootings using this ctg & NYPD uses it with good results.
There are other loadings that will work too. I tested a Buffalo Bore 9mm 115gr JHP +P+ that was advertised at 1400fps (we have all come to expect up to 50fps difference in claimed velocity & real velocity) I chronographed that load at an actual 1477fps out of a real gun. I think the 9 is a viable defensive weapon with todays factory loads.
Frank

Condider that not only is the .32 bullet a little heavier than the .380 its smaller diameter results in a much greater sectional density that should result in better penetration. I shoot both and my .32 will penetrate an engine block at short range. My .380 will not.

To repeat a point often made, but rarely understood, there are cartridges that are shoehorned into purposes outside their original design, because people believe that new bullet technology will overcome any and all obstacles. The 9mm is a controversial cartridge due to its checkered history. Going back to the days of the two great wars, the 9mm was both deadly, and a poor stopper. How can this be? Well, a wound can be inflicted that will result in death, yet allow the adversary plenty of time to be dangerous. Stopping, on the other hand, is just that.

New bullet technology has moved the 9mm into the spotlight for many. However, if we apply reason and evidence rather than wishful thinking, then we all can learn a lot here. Lets take an example from another area that has nothing to do with personal defense; hunting. We find that the best hunting loads today all offer premium bullets. No one who has shot game with a Barnes X, would happily go back to the Core=Lokt, right? Wow, we say, suddenly I can take my 270 afield after all kind of game, certain that the top quality bullets will carry the day. We know this is true because we have plenty of empirical evidence-but wait! Long before the advent of premium bullets, the 270 had proved itself on all kinds of game in the field! The point here is that premium bullets make a great cartridge better, but they do NOT make a so-so cartridge great.
A great cartridge works even with primitive bullets. Its hard to get more primitive than simple lead alloy, and if we honestly look at the track record of handgun cartridges, those with the largest diameter are always the most effective.  We have plenty of empirical evidence supporting this, as well. Now, this does not mean that a smaller caliber will not work-it does mean that a smaller caliber simply will not work as well as a large caliber, period.
Police today appear to be great adherents to the principle of filling the air with as many bullets as humanly possible. Just about every cop shooting from AZ to NJ sets new records for number of rounds expended. NY cops are right up there with the rest of 'em. The Amadu Dialo case saw NYPD throwing 41 shots in the air, less than half actually hit the hit the target, but even so, getting hit with 19-20 9mm rounds put the man 6 feet under. I don't consider this kind of exhibition a record of the effectiveness of a cartridge, but it does make one wonder about the wisdom of these tactics.
Being a civilian, and thus the lowest of the low in regards to the value of my life, and my right to self defense, I find it imprudent to remove any possible advantage, no matter how small, that I might have if and when an encounter materializes. 
Finally, we all seem to have forgotten that this a sixguns forum, not a mouse gun autoloader forum. Ultimately, empirical historical evidence matters to people-or it doesn't. If you actually think that thousands of empirical cases actually mean something, then you will also come to realize that in handguns, and especially in sixguns, the most effective cartridges are over 40 caliber.

Let's be sure we are comparing apples to apples. The wartime ammo (military) is a fmj.  Most know that a fmj or solid isn't the best stopper (except in Africa where they are used against the largest amimals)  & that applies even to the .45 acp. No Police dept. that I know of uses a fmj bullet in their handguns, it'd be foolish. In addition to less stopping ability, you have the possibility of over penetration endangering non combatents.  Modern combat ammo isn't a fmj, it's a soft point or hollow point & those are way more effective. I'm not saying the 9mm is the best defense cartridge to come down the pike, I'm saying that with modern ammo, it's not bad.
We compare hunting to defense, these are two different jobs. In hunting we are trying to kill an animal in the most humane & fastest way. In defense we are trying to stop the fight right now, if the assailant dies because of wounds he caused someone to inflict, that's his bad luck. We taught shoot to stop the fight not to kill our opponent, If he died as a result, it's his loss, he caused it. In the same vein, if one shot is fired & misses or wounds your opponent & causes him to stop his attack you HAVE to stop shooting. If you don't you become the agressor at that point you & can & likely will & should, be prosecuted.
We have two different purposes between hunting & defense.
Frank

MAK,
As I have already said it doesn't make much difference what one is shooting if the shot misses all together or hits them in the big toe. By far the vast majority of shots fired by police completely miss the target. Furthermore there is little if any evidence that all the ones that hit were necessary. In a way 'shootouts' often turn into something akin to a feeding frenzy among sharks or piranhas  with many participants simultaneously attacking the same target. It is similar to firing a large clip at full auto.  One never knows if the last 25 shots were even necessary or whether the target was still capable of resisting or even still alive.
This has come about as a result of the adoption of the large capacity S/A pistol. In the days when officers were still armed with revolvers these examples of overkill were much rarer. They fact is that most officers are not skilled shooters or hardened gunfighters. In the heat of the momement there is a tendency to panic and they often equate mere firing back with effective firing. It makes then feel safer whether they are or not. There is no penetalty for laying it on heavy so do it. I imagine if they were charged $50 for every shot fired that missed there would not be so much spraying of the neighborhood thereby endangering innocent bystanders and the bad guys would end up just as dead just as fast.

I helped train Deputy Sheriff's  in handgun shooting for over 12 years, we always strived for accuracy & tried to come up with scenarios that added stress to the firing. I don't dispute that when being shot at Officers sometimes fire as fast as they can. Happily, I've never been shot at, but I'd probably try to get as many hits as fast as I could if I were undre fire. We also taught to shoot till the threat is nullified. Shooting after the threat has ceased is not condoned & any officer (or civilian) found doing so will probably be prosecuted, & should be prosecuted. Officers have to make life & death decisions in fractions of seconds. Lawyers, & critical people have hours, days, weeks, & often months to second guess the officers involved. We see this all the time. It's easy to criticize when you weren't there.  It's unreasonable, I think, to suggest backup officers not fire at a suspect shooting at one of their brother officers. But to suggest officers are just trying to empty weapons is irrisponsibel. Police have long known each shot fired on the street has a lawyer attached to it, & so are the brass. I won't debate a lot of officers are not really good shots. I do take exception to the inference that they just want to hose anyone down, but if you or a fellow officer is being shot at any responding officer who is in position to possibly stop the fight will try to do so.
Frank

Check the facts for the West Los Angeles bank farce a few years ago then tell me they took careful aim and did not fire irresponsibly.

I think a reuirement for discussing sel-defense with BB guns should be either a record of 10 to 0 in shootouts usung a BB gun or a careful read of Keith's Sixguns and Hell, I was there. I think there would be a lot less discussion. Also, from my years of hunting, I have concluded that energy figures are mostly meaningless. They get touted everytime somebody speeds something up. That seems to have started with the .22 Savage High Power. They are always proved exaggerated.
As a physicist, I always think of the natural extension of energy arguments: the cosmic ray. We are pummeled daily with them at hypervelocity, but they don't kill anybody. If you get hit by a train going 10 mph, you will be bouced several hundred feet. It ain't the energy that knocks you to pieces; it's the momentum. Try comparing that sometime. I think John Taylor's Knockout Factor makes a hell of a lot more sense than energy measurements.

It is very true that energy as a measure of effectiveness is a poor fit at best.
It comes to mind that Deer hunters of recent years were fond of their "rule of thumb" that a bullet had to carry one half ton+ of energy to take a deer. The absurdity of this notion was made clear when it was discovered that most 30 WCF rounds-that's the 30-30 to most of us-barely made the grade, and then rarely past 50 yards. Since the 30 WCF had taken literally millions of deer, well past the 50 yard limitation, one wonders if deer have armored themselves, or if as usual big numbers just make some guys go GaaGaa? Energy in handgun rounds especially is misleading, since velocities rarely break 1500 fps.

Momentum as a describer of bullet effectiveness has at times gained popularity, but even this technique is fraught with pitfalls. With the Taylor formula, larger caliber always carries more effectiveness, and for relatively slow projectiles common from handguns, is both an accurate and meaningful describer, but this, as with all formulas, cannot fully address anomalies like the 270 Winchester-a small bore cartridge ridiculously capable.

Still, I do believe energy as a meaningful measure is useless, and find it to be little more than a marketing ploy.