The COVID19 virus has put a real crimp in my ballistics testing, and some calibers present issues of noise and penetration in my shop, so I have been reluctant to test them. My wife needed to go see Joanne, a friend of ours on her farm near Chehalis, where they just happen to have their own shooting range set up. I jumped at the opportunity. It’s a good couple hours drive, so sadly it’s not going to become a regular thing.

I had built up a lot of loads to run over the chronograph, and thought I’d take the opportunity to do some recreational shooting with Joanne’s roommate Steve as well. I was testing a wide variety of handgun calibers, so settle in- this is going to be a long one.

The Chronograph was positioned at approximately 10′ from the muzzle. Five-shot strings were tested in each case.

Use this data at your own risk! The author assumes no responsibility for the use or misuse of this data. In most cases it is prudent to start 10% under the given load and work up, but in the case of very low-powered loads this can be problematic.

Always insure that any gun, particularly antiques, are safe to fire and in good condition before shooting.

.32 S&W

I had one .32 S&W load to test, designed to be a low-powered antique-friendly load. Testing was done with my H&R Model 732 Guardian, which is chambered in .32 S&W Long. All .32 caliber tests today were shot with this gun, actually.

4″ barrel, 75gr. LFP, 2.0gr. Unique, Federal Magnum SP primer

547 fps. 50ft./lbs ES: 30fps

This is an ultra-mild load, well-suited to punching holes in paper at moderate ranges. The load is reasonably consistent, with an extreme spread of only 30 fps. It should be suitable for any gun chambered for this caliber that is in good condition.

.32 S&W Long

Two loads to test in this caliber, either of which is suitable for target shooting or small game. Both loads are well below maximum listed loads for this caliber.

4″ barrel, 75gr. LFP, 3.5gr. of Unique, Federal magnum SP Primer

918 fps. 140 ft./lbs ES: 133fps.

4″ barrel, 90gr. LHBWC, 2.5gr. of Unique, Federal magnum SP primer

916 fps. 168 ft./lbs ES: 142

I can’t account for the large extreme spread with these loads. It appears counter-intuitive that the heavier bullet with the lighter powder charge would produce essentially the same velocity as the lighter bullet, but the hollow-base wadcutter is fully telescoped into the case, providing a much more constricted combustion space. It is actually a higher-pressure load as well; wadcutter loads in this caliber are designed primarily to be fired in semi-automatic target pistols that require more pressure to cycle, but it should be safe to fire in any quality revolver.

.38 S&W

Again, I brought one gun to test in this caliber, a S&W .38 Single Action (2nd model) modified with a 1-5/8″ barrel.

This is another load meant to be ‘antique friendly,’ using a light-for-caliber bullet and a small powder charge to produce modest pressures and mitigate damage from recoil. It ought to be fine in any gun of reasonable quality that is safe to be fired, but that’s going to require a judgement call. Regarding antiques, when in doubt don’t.

1-5/8″ barrel, 125gr LSWC 3.0gr. Unique, Federal magnum SP primer

598 fps. 99 ft./lbs ES: 85 fps.

First thing to note is that these 125gr LSWCs are sized to .360, so they are well-suited to the caliber. Accuracy was very pleasing; while I didn’t shoot groups on paper today I had no difficulty hitting empty spray-paint cans at 30 yards; not bad at all. Recoil is mild, but these loads proved to be quite smokey.

9x19mm / 9mm Luger

I have a couple of Beretta M1951s, and these do not do well with high-powered or +P loads, so I have been seeking some good standard-pressure loads for them. Both of these loads were created with that in mind.

These loads use my ‘COVID-Expedient’ re-swaged Xtreme Bullets copper-plated hollow points, made from their 115gr. target rounds.

The test gun for these loads was the robust Sig-Sauer P6.

3-3/4″ barrel 115gr CPHP 5.3gr. Unique Federal magnum SP primer

1044 fps. 278 ft./lbs ES: 73 fps

This load did not cycle reliably in the P6. It’ll pick up a little velocity in the longer barrel of the Beretta M1951 and may cycle it. I’ll try it, but I think it’s too weak.

3-3/4″ barrel 115gr CPHP 4.9gr. Universal Federal magnum SP primer

1142 fps. 334 ft./lbs ES: 14 fps.

I’m very pleased with this load. It’s very consistent, and when tested by firing through four layers of denim into Clear Ballistics gel it showed adequate penetration and consistent expansion. It feeds well in my guns, too, and cycles very reliably. I’m going to call this one a winner.

.41 Special

This is the .41 magnum’s little brother, designed to provide a potent defensive load without the excessive muzzle blast and recoil of the magnum. The test gun for this was a Taurus Model 415 with a 2-3/4″ ported barrel.

2-3/4″ barrel 210gr. Keith bullet 6.0gr. Unique, Federal LP primer

865 fps. 349 ft./lbs ES: 23 fps.

A good, accurate load with plenty of power, but manageable recoil. I think there is room to spice it up a bit, maybe another 50 fps. without notably changing it’s usability.

Currently I am looking into some 200gr. LHPs to load to 900-950 fps. with this gun, but until then this one will do.

.44 Magnum

Looking for a load for Black-Tail deer. They aren’t awfully big so a very powerful load is not needed. The gun for this test was my U.S. Arms Abilene with a 7-1/2″ ported barrel- the same gun I will be hunting with.

7-1/2″ barrel 260gr. Keith bullet 9.2gr. Unique, Federal LP primer.

1038 fps. 622 ft./lbs ES: 56 fps

Recoil is quite mild (for a .44 magnum) and accuracy is excellent. This load would certainly be adequate for Black-Tails, but in the interest of a clean kill I think I’d prefer to err on the side of caution and add a couple of hundred feet per second to this.

.45 Colt

I used two test guns for the first of these loads, a ‘bulldogged’ 1858 with a 2.5″ barrel and a custom Armi San Marco with a 3-1/2″ barrel. The second load was only fired from the 3.5″ gun.

The goal was to produce mild loads for target shooting. the first load uses Xtreme Bullets CPHPs; these are target bullets and aren’t designed to expand. The second uses a lead semi-wadcutter.

2.5″ barrel 200gr CPHP 7.6gr. Red Dot Federal LP primer

660 fps. 193 ft./lbs ES: 34 fps.

3.5″ barrel 200gr CPHP 7.6gr. Red Dot Federal LP primer

714 fps. 226 ft./lbs ES: 36 FPS

This load produces the mild recoil and consistency I was looking for. Ought to be good for target shooting at ranges out to 25 yards. I think I’ll up the charge to 7.8gr. and see what that gets me.

3.5″ barrel 200gr. LSWC 8.0gr. Universal Federal LP primer

476 fps. 101 ft./lbs ES: 136 fps.

This load is a straight-up failure. Too little power, very poor consistency. I’ll be pulling the bullets from the remaining cartridges and reloading them.

.45 ACP

The gun used in this test is an upgraded 1911A1. The goal was to produce a target load with LSWCs and a defensive load with Speer 200gr HPs.

5″ barrel 200gr LSWC 5.6gr Unique Federal LP primer

849 fps. 320 Ft./lbs ES: 64 fps

This seems a fine load for casual practice or plinking. Mild recoil, and economical in terms of both bullets and powder charge.

5″ barrel 200gr JHP 8.0gr. Universal Federal LP primer

881 fps. 345 ft./lbs ES: 128

Not a success; this hollowpoint really needs 900fps+ to expand reliably, and the extreme spread is pretty bad. While upping the charge might produce an acceptable load I’m not going to pursue this one; the load listed below is much more what I am after, and is more economical.

5″ barrel 200gr JHP 6.5gr. Unique Federal LP primer

920 fps. 376 ft./lbs ES: 45 fps.

This is much more the thing. I’ll test it on denim/Clear Ballistics gel and see what’s what, but it looks good so far.

Other Stuff

Steve had his Savage SA .22, and I’d brought a couple of .22 rifles as well.

We fooled about with the rifles quite a bit, shooting up empty spray-paint cans out to thirty yards or so. I’d mounted a set of Ruger 10-22 sights on the rolling-block and had them roughly sighted in using .22 Colibri gallery loads at close range, and I expected them to need further adjustment but nope, it shot just fine. Needed a good cleaning; empties sometimes stuck harder than I could pry out with a fingernail and I had to resort to the pruning blade on my pocket knife, which did the job easily enough.

The Winchester is just a delight. Accurate and fun to shoot. I tried some CCI low-noise subsonic .22 Shorts in it, and it ate ’em up just fine, and they were dead quiet from the long barrel.

Shooting at stuff outdoors is just so much more satisfying than shooting paper on the range with these rifles, and as quiet as the low noise rounds are I can do it without going far from home- a great discovery!

I probably shot the Abilene .44 magnum more today than I have in total previously, and I love it more than ever. The H&R 732 also got a good workout during the fun phase of our shooting, and I put a good few rounds downrange from the little S&W single-action.

Altogether a great day; good company, lots of fun, a lot of shooting and I cleaned up most of my backlog of load-testing.

Michael Tinker Pearce, 12 September 2020

If you like what you see here, please consider clicking the link above and supporting me on Patreon.

As anyone that has ever shot a jug of water with a high-power handgun will tell you, yes. They absolutely do. A more appropriate question is, ‘Does it matter?‘ The answer to that is complicated and more than a little ambiguous.

Now, just so we all know where I am coming from I’m a layman. I’m not a forensic scientist, a trauma surgeon or a medical researcher of any kind. I have made no scientific study of wounds or terminal ballistics. I’ve read a lot, and seen a lot, and am basing my opinion on that. It’s arguably an informed opinion, but it’s no more than that, so take it for what it’s worth and if you’re curious do your own research.

Watching a water bottle explode or high-speed footage of the temporary cavity produced by a high-power pistol bullet is impressive. These are consistent media that respond in a consistent fashion, and can be informative. It is accepted, both in the medical community and gun communities, that bullets travelling over 2200 fps. can create a temporary cavity that exceeds the elastic limits of human tissue, and actually cause permanent damage in tissue that the bullet never actually touches (technically this is Hydraulic shock.) They also reliably create hydrostatic (neural) shock. But after thirty years of study the FBI has determined that this effect either does not occur with standard pistol bullets, or does not do so reliably enough to to be counted when evaluating the potential performance of a pistol bullet.

The thing is that unlike water or ballistic gel, a human body is very much not a consistent media. It’s full of tissues and organs of varying density and elasticity that each respond individually to shock. Some of these organs are full of in-compressible fluids, some have air in them, which changes how they respond to compression. Then there’s bone, which is a whole ‘nuther story. Regardless the FBI has decided that only the permanent wound cavity is a reliable predictor of a bullet’s potential effectiveness.

A survey of the medical literature shows that nerve damage can and does occur at a distance from the bullet’s permanent wound track even with pistol bullets, and it is very likely that the size of the temporary cavity has an affect on this. Small diameter, low velocity bullets that do not expand (.22, .25 & .32) are unlikely to produce this effect. Larger diameter bullets and higher-velocity bullets are more likely to, especially if they expand significantly. This damage is usually mild and often, but not always, temporary. Whether or not this affects whether a person is ‘stopped’ has not been evaluated, but as stated before the FBI has determined that this is not a reliable predictor of a bullets effectiveness.

There are a lot of variables; the exact bullet placement, the individual’s body type. health, weight, body fat, mental preparedness… all of these things and many more come into play.

So in answer to the question ‘Does it matter?’ the answers are, ‘Yes, unless it doesn’t’ and ‘Maybe sometimes.’ Not a very satisfactory resolution, but it’s an honest one, and it’s the one supported by the available data.

On the balance, speaking of defensive handguns, if given a choice between a high-velocity hollow-point with adequate penetration and a bullet that doesn’t expand and/or is low velocity, it would seem prudent to go with the former. The advice to carry the most potent handgun you shoot well and can carry comfortably seems to be well-advised. If hydrostatic shock is going to be a factor, the available information seems to indicate that it will most likely occur with a powerful cartridge, and an expanding bullet will enhance this effect. Probably.

As a caveat, with handguns the most important and reliable predictors of effectiveness are still, in order, Penetration, Shot Placement and Permanent Wound Cavity… but it doesn’t hurt to stack the deck. If you can achieve those three things, adding a large temporary wound cavity certainly isn’t going to make it less effective! In a defensive shooting any advantage is worthwhile, as long as it doesn’t degrade the three factors listed above.

Micahel Tinker Pearce, 1 September 2020

If you like what you see here, please consider clicking the link above and supporting me on Patreon.

In 1871 Frank Wesson joined Gilbert Harrington in establishing a firearms manufacturing company, Wesson & Harrington. In 1874 Gilbert bought Frank out, and Harrington and Richardson was established. They made their fame in the 19th C. by producing an extensive line of top-break revolvers. These guns were not of the highest quality, but they were inexpensive and generally good, serviceable weapons.

By the dawn of the 20th C. they had expanded into shotguns, and then into semi-automatic pistols and solid-frame revolvers. In the post-WW2 period they became best known for their single-shot shotguns, single shot rifles and solid-frame revolvers. All of these weapons were basic, inexpensive and robust, and put meat on the table in many a rural home.

In the latter half of the 20th C. their solid-frame revolvers in .22LR, .22 Magnum and .32 S&W Long were the quintessential ‘Truck’ or ‘Tackle-box’ gun. Good enough to do the job, cheap enough you didn’t so much mind if you lost them. Double-action triggers were rather famously heavy, but for casual use and plinking most people thumb-cocked them anyway, so that wasn’t much of an issue for most people..

The economically-priced .32s were a popular choice for self defense among the financially challenged, though I knew at least one police officer that carried a Sidekick as a back-up. .32 S&W Long is a mild-shooting and very accurate round, and the longer-barreled .32s were sometimes used as an entry-level target pistols, for small game hunting or, of course, home defense.

These guns have yet to get any real interest from collectors and remain affordable to this day, with decent examples available from $120-$200. I’ve wanted one for some time, but there was always a higher priority. When one came across the counter at McCallen Defense Chris knew just who to call, and in fact he made me a very nice deal on it. When I went in to pick it up I brought a box of target wadcutters to try it out at the attached indoor range. We’ll get to that shortly.

The Guardian has a 4″ Barrel, a rear sight that is adjustable for windage, a solid frame with a swing-out cylinder and a square butt with black plastic grips. There is no removable side-plate; all the internals are inserted into the frame through the hammer-slot or from underneath after the trigger guard is removed. The gun may be fired either single or double action. The small lever at the back of the trigger guard is actually the single-action trigger; when the gun is fully cocked the trigger rests against the lever, and pulling the trigger rotates the lever to release the hammer from the full-cocked position. Earlier guns (like this one) are equipped with a rebounding hammer. When the trigger is released the hammer is held back about 0.10″, preventing it from striking the firing pin if the gun is dropped. Later models were equipped with a transfer-bar safety. The cylinder is opened by pulling the cylinder pin forward, and once the cylinder has swung out this also serves to push out the ejector star. The back of the cylinder is relieved to accommodate the cartridge rims.

The left side of the barrel is marked ‘Model 732′ and ’32 S&W,’ though the gun is actually chambered in .32 S&W Long. The left side of the frame is marked simple ‘H&R INC. U.S.A.’ The serial number is located at the bottom of the grip-frame.

The grip provides a secure two-finger grip; I have large hands and my pinky finger does not fit on the grip, but it’s actually comfortable. The sights are square and give a good sight picture. The trigger pull is heavy, but decently smooth and breaks cleanly. The single action trigger is decently crisp and clean, though again it is not light.

These were a low-priced gun, and the finish reflects that. They are not without flaws, either; the plastic seat for the mainspring is prone to breakage. They are readily available and fairly simple to replace. I haven’t checked this one yet; if it has the plastic seat I will probably fabricate a new one from aluminum, after which the gun will certainly outlast me by a significant margin.

If abused they can go out of time, and internal springs can break. They are not hard to disassemble, but reassembly is a right pain in the posterior. Ask me how I know… then duck.

This gun is in remarkably good condition, with only a small amount of rust pitting on the bottom of the grip frame. Other than that it could be showroom new; the cylinder is unlined and there is no holster wear. Quite remarkable, given that this particular gun was manufactured in 1965!

Shooting the Model 732

As I stated above I went straight to the indoor range at Champion Arms (which shares a building with McCallen Tactical) to try the gun out. I had some 90gr. HBWCs loaded over 2.5gr. of Unique, a fairly typical target load, which gets around 780 fps. from this gun’s 4″ barrel. Recoil was very mild, and the gun was quite pleasant to fire. While the double-action trigger is heavy it was smooth enough to make it easy to shoot good groups at seven yards.

I rolled a target out to 25 yards and, mindful that the gun was shooting high at seven yards, used a 6-o’clock hold, essentially setting the paper on top of the front sight. The results were gratifying- firing single-action, standing/unsupported produced a 1.9″ group (measured edge-to-edge.)

This is a straight-shooting little gun, capable of very respectable accuracy. Overall I’m quite delighted with it; it’s a solid, honest little revolver, and never mind if the finish and looks are a bit rough. It does what it needs to do, and does it well. I expect this gun to get a lot of range time, and might well put some bunnies in the bag as well.

Michael Tinker Pearce, 30 August 2020

If you like what you see here, please consider clicking the link above and supporting me on Patreon.