Smith And Wesson Forums banner

1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
126 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Simple question: Has anyone loaded bullets labeled for .32 ACP in other .32 cartridges (.32 S&W, .32 S&W Long, .32 H&R Magnum, .327 Federal Magnum)? What are the pros and cons, if any?

Sent from my Commodore 64 running Windoze 95
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
126 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
As long as they are the correct diameter and close to the correct weight for the cartridge being loaded, I don't see any problem.
From what I have seen, all the diameters are .312, it's just that the weight of the ACP bullets I have are 71 gr. and the load data for Hodgdon shows bullet weight for the other .32s between 77-83 grains on the low end. I was figgering the powder charge for the 71 gr. would be different, that's why I was asking if anyone had any experience with that.

Sent from my Commodore 64 running Windoze 95
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,473 Posts
I was figgering the powder charge for the 71 gr. would be different, that's why I was asking if anyone had any experience with that.

Sent from my Commodore 64 running Windoze 95
Lighter bullets always require MORE (or faster) powder to get the chamber pressure up where it ought to be for that particular cartridge. I think these bullets will probably be less accurate, but that's something you'll have to find out by trial & error.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
126 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Lighter bullets always require MORE (or faster) powder to get the chamber pressure up where it ought to be for that particular cartridge. I think these bullets will probably be less accurate, but that's something you'll have to find out by trial & error.
Thanx for your reply. Hodgdon load data using Titegroup shows 4.5 - 5.3 grains with a 77 gr. bullet. I was wondering what the min./max. load would be with a 71 gr. bullet. It might not be a big difference but I wanna be sure to get it right and not guess. I have e-maled Hodgdon the other day about this but haven't heard back yet.

Sent from my Commodore 64 running Windoze 95
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,473 Posts
It might not be a big difference but I wanna be sure to get it right and not guess.

Sent from my Commodore 64 running Windoze 95
When you're trying out non-standard loads, there's no fixed right or wrong answers--it's a matter of (intelligent) trial & error. An underpowered load will result in erratic pressure, unburned powder, & poor accuracy, an overpowered load will show signs like hard extraction, flattened primers, etc. If you get an answer from Hodgdon, it will probably be an educated guess on the conservative side.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
126 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
When you're trying out non-standard loads, there's no fixed right or wrong answers--it's a matter of (intelligent) trial & error. An underpowered load will result in erratic pressure, unburned powder, & poor accuracy, an overpowered load will show signs like hard extraction, flattened primers, etc. If you get an answer from Hodgdon, it will probably be an educated guess on the conservative side.
In my limited reloading experience I have always used published data, whether it's from a manufacturer's web site or a trusty reloading manual. I have heard and read stories of folks experimenting with loads and sometimes things going wrong. Maybe it's an overreaction on my part with only a 6 gr. difference in bullet weight (71 v. 77), but I just wanna be sure, or as sure as I can be.

Sent from my Commodore 64 running Windoze 95
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
Top