How is your Ruger Holding up??? I remember you did a buddies SP 101 and didn't you have an LCR or LCRx???? One guy said his LCRx was not as solid as an LCR because it was minus 1 pin where the Hammer and Top strap (???) met?
Giving you a thumbs up. I appreciate that you gave us such a good long close up look of the gun. You’d be surprised how often reviewers blow past that.
While I was buying a p90 in 1992, I saw a used New England Firearms .32 magnum for $19.99 and I bought it too. I love that pistol. It is just as reliable as any high end revolver. Never had any issue with it.
I'm just a tad too young to have got one of those. They had stopped making them before I turned 21 and even looking around I haven't seen one in the wild in over 20 years. Always wanted one.
DANG!!! I KNEW I recognized your voice! I started watching your vids a LONG time ago... like 5 or six Years ago at LEAST! You made some great 22 Rifle videos w/ the Marlin 60, 70 and Ruger 10/22 back then... You did a great job then and your vids are even better now... Which is the OPPOSITE of many guys... I think you may be shadow banned or whatever... I didn't get BUFFALOS either 4 a while Great sight picture and "Video Shots" with those XS sights... I LOVE 'M!!! You may have sold me on them I've been thinking bout getting me an XS front for my 3 inch Ruger GP 100 357 Mag with the rear "Gutter Sights"... They say the J FRAME sights fit the Ruger SP 101 and 3 in GP 100 sights... are those BIG DOT fronts? GREAT WORK!!!!
I definitely have been shadow banned since 2020, but I still like to put out info whenever I can. There are XS sights for the Ruger revolvers, though I am fairly sure they are different than what can go on a Smith. They are out there though!
those big sights are for old people like me so we can still see them. good video. I hope S&W will make these standard items and also make them in all steel or stainless and also with hammer spur exposed like the Chiefs Special). I have a M432 and love it . but wish I had one that was heavier so I can put some of the more powerful versions of the round in it without pounding my hands. and a 3" would also be nice with exposed hammer as well.
That's a slick low recoil little revolver. I like it! It would be perfect for those that are recoil sensitive like new shooters, older folks or those that just cant handle the recoil of a larger cal gun. You can use the 32 H&R Mag, 32 S&W Long. 32 S&W and sometimes guns like this will also shoot but may or may not reliably eject 32 ACP
I plan to try this with some .32 ACP for an article I am working on. From what I understand, the .32 ACP projectiles are a little undersized so accuracy and velocity will be a step down. But it should work.
@@professorpewpuew Sounds like a great vid. Yes, 32 ACP generally run 0.309 -0.310 vs. 0310-0.314 for 32 S&W Long. Generally the larger 0.313-0.314 are soft lead SMC or wadcutters. Some revolvers shoot the 32 ACP pretty decent like my Ruger SP101 in 327 Mag
Thanks for the field test! I like .32 Magnum too. "Placement is better than Power!" I have one of the three inch airweight Centennials from the 1980's, aluminum frame and stainless barrel and cylinder---wonderful gun! It has no problem with HOT loadings from Buffalo Bore, no damage seen. I forget that it is in my pocket!.............................elsullo
I hope this revolver helps this round makes a come back. Its hard to find and expensive when found, but it is a great low recoiling snub nose cartridge. Add in a little popularity and ammo producers will start R&D to improve its capabilities.
Nice review. I love my 3" barrel Charter Arms professional revolver. It is a 7 Shot .32 H&R Magnum with a Blacknitride+ finish and has a LitePipe front sight and a fixed back sight.
I would rather have it in 32 HR Mag myself in an all steel construction with a 2' and 3" barrels. I think to really get all of what the 327 has you need something like COLTs New King Cobra or KIMBERs K variants.
@glennsammon4465 I've seen some testing with 327 getting about 1400fps from a 1.9 inch LCR. It's actually really surprising how capable it is even from a short barrel.
My EDC is a Ruger SP101 3” 327 Fed Mag loaded with Gold Dots. I get 1450 fps out of the 3” barrel and the SP101 handles the recoil well. I have an LCR but that gets loaded with Hydra Shoks as the Gold Dots are too much for reliable follow up shots. I’ve been using the ask the CEO on Rugers website to make a SP101 in a 2 1/4” barrel that would be the absolute perfect carry gun IMO.
Great video. Just found your channel recently and have to say I LOVE the candid and straight to the point style. You come across extremely genuine and not tacticool. Lack of rock or country guitar intro is also a big plus for me. Question, if you had to pick one j frame snub for edc right now would you go with the UC in 32, the UC 38 or save the $250/300 difference and get a 442? I think fun to shoot would be nice (points for the 32) but mainly looking for a carry revolver more than a range toy.
I would have liked to see this gun chambered for the 327 Federal Magnum so you have have used this caliber and the other 32 cartridges like the magnum and long and short.
The flattest trajectory of most bullets from 600 to 1000 is a 20 yard zero, all possible weight of bullets should never drop below your zero at 20 yards, I think smith and Wesson finally took that into consideration, most handgun manufactures didn't set proper trajectories because for decades no one complained about rounds going low before 20 yards, the test for all good pistols with fixed sights the rounds of any weight don't drop below your 20 yard zero, if so it means its not to spec for trajectory but manufactured with out what it's flattest trajectory it could be for all the different weights of bullets one would use. for those who have fixed sights on a gun it's good if all weight of bullets shoot high before 20 yards and bad if they shoot low at 10 yards. For example a tester to do things right would make Shure all the weight variations shot never go low before 20 yards for the new pistol in production, having a gun shoots a little high is not a bad thing, it's better to have hold under then hold over, hold over puts gun high above target essentially blocking your view of target, while hold under you may have to aim low a bit but not block your target view, so sights were bullet hits the apple off the stick at 20 yards is the best and flattest trajectory for almost all pistols, for defense you simply learn your hold under for those 7 yards and in defense distances. If say you have to shoot out further this is a benefit of any pistol with a 20 yard zero or a bit high, the shooting school for the 432 they were shooting targets at 25 yards getting some better hits then other revolvers and that would be because smith and Wesson finally considered the flattest trajectory of all the weights and types of ammo before making the revolver, or if not flat shooting at 20 yards they at least made shure they were close
Chambering this revolver in 327 would have required going to the scandium frame. I’d rather have a $750 32 H&R than a $1300 327. 327 is also brutal in a snubnose. Most people would just shoot 32 H&R’s in it anyway.
You are correct. These UC J-frames are made of aluminum, not steel. S&W could make a steel 327 J frame, but then it would get to be too heavy for pocket carry. Ruger somewhat gets around this weight issue by having a combination of polymer and metal for their frames. Ruger offers both polymer/aluminum frames (22, 38) and polymer/steel frames (9mm, 357, 327) for their LCR’s, and the steel frames are noticeably heavier than the aluminum frames.
I'm sure I'm not the only one who believes that the tiny sights that come standard on most snubnose revolvers is just downright criminal. This is one of the main reasons I chose the Ruger SP101 Wiley Clapp as my first revolver. A six-shot J-frame in .32 H&R Magnum is novel, but I wonder how large the market for such a cartridge and handgun are. Interesting technique with the HKS speedloader, I might have to try that on mine as well.
I generally like the small sights but that is because I do all my shooting on the square range. I know when I try to shoot quickly, picking those sights up can be tricky. These sights are a great fix for what you would use a snubbie for.
I owned a 432 several years ago and sold it because the ammo was not plentiful and expensive compared to .38spl. I did like that it held 6 rounds and was a very nice gun. This one looks awesome but I'd still be concerned about the cost and availability of the ammo.
Great video. It's nice to see a good close up of the gun, especially those sights! I am very tempted by the sixth shot of the .32 H&R Magnum models, but I already have a decent pile of .38 special, and don't really want to break the bank stocking up on an even more expensive and hard to find cartridge, so I'm going to try to snag a 442UC instead.
My S&W 432 UC has to go back for repair. Has yours held up? S&W 432 Ultimate Carry or Ultimate Fail ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-dc9enKlhNbY.html
I haven't heard of anything new in any .32 cal for quite awhile. Last time I can remember a 32 had to be 20 years or so ago with a little pocket pistol , and I might get this wrong but I think it was the sea camp. I thought the .32 was obsolete but still cool to see and older obscure round make a comeback. I thought the chrono readings for the .32 long was sorta pathetic but when it zipped through all the gel it did I had second thoughts. I think it fair to say this would make a fine effective little carry weapon for those that choose to carry it but this particular gun wouldn't suit my personal taste. Reasons being I don't care for and revolver without an outside hammer and the option to fire single action. I'm a sort of nastalgic minded person and if I were to carry a 32 I'd choose an older style detective special. If someone were to gift me one of these I'd certainly accept it but I would not spend my money on one. At the end of the day this would make a nice weapon for some people and it absolutely has a niche to fill.
I just found this channel. Its terrific content. subbed and liked. See you on the next one pal. p.s i dont know why other gun tubers dont put fabric over the ballistic jellies but its a good idea. it seems like common sense.
They,S and W, might as well have gone the whole hog and made it in .327 Magnum and then you can shoot all of the other .32's although some people debate shooting .32 ACP out of revolvers.
Chambering this gun in 327 would have required them to go to the scandium frame instead of the aluminum frame. I’d rather have a 750 dollar 32 H&R than a 1300 dollar 327.
Good vid. I've had a couple hammer models for several years now. They just get run out every dozen years or more. Get it while you can. It has a serious business end.
@@professorpewpuew great cartridge for it's purposes. Control one more round all good. See the newer 32 mag don't recall it's name at the moment did well for a few years especially in Ruger SSA. And SP101's.
I wish they gave it a longer ejector rod instead of the pretty but overall useless rear sight. I also wish they made it lighter instead of two oz heavier.
