[Guest]

Hmmmmmm....

My latest addition to the herd is a little Single Six, that Ruger converted to a centerfire. Chambered in .32 H&R mag ~ the one cartridge that is most underutilized of them all, in handguns. This is my second .32 and all I can do is sing it's praises. Guess the gunwriter's might have had it wrong, or the guns that really appreciated the load came after the cartridges debut. Gives one hope for the .327 Magnum .


I've heard the old saw...that Rugers are big, blocky, ugly as sin. Boatanchor comes to mind... :mrgreen:

giz

 

[longarm]

VERY pretty! But how the heck are you going to get it to fit in that holster?

 

[DHENRY]

Giz,
I would hope that such a ridiculous statement ("...ugly, blocky...")
was made in jest !
Let's face it...There's more than a little jealousy in the gun hobby, and there's also this fact: Bill Ruger & Company were as good at single action as Mssr's. Smith & Wesson were at double action.
And we all know that a s.a. has certain design perameters that just happen to take up more room! :lol:
The .32 H&R magnum cartridge?
You're right on, IMHO.
I never figured out why it was so universally ignored, especially by the gun writers, who should have known better!
Don

 

[Bob K]

Giz, Since S&W don't make SA revolvers, it isn't a valid comparison. Compare any K or N frame S&W to the comparable Ruger GP100 or Redhawk. Rugers are over engineered to be strong!!! They ain't pretty.....but they are strong! They will take more abuse, and handle heavier loads. Which makes them a very practical revolver to have, if you are a serious shooter, hunter, and handloader.

Perhaps you should compare the SA RUGERS to the SA COLTS! I don't know much....if anything, about SA revolvers......so don't ask me!!!! :roll: Bob

 

[xtimberman]

I wish that the .32 H&R & .327 Mag folks would post some stories about their first hand experiences on game with these cartridges in the hunting forum - and handloading experiences in that forum.

That little revolver really is attractive, Giz!

xtm

 

[Guest]

xtm,

John Taffin and I are debating the .32 H&R and .327 subject on another forum tonight. He's a Grizzly Old F art, and a wonderful guy. Anyrate, seems like after a rocky start we agree...

PM sent with the link...

giz

 

[bmcgilvray]

I seen that already.

It doesn't look built like a tank.

It does look really nice and useful too.

 

[c pierce]

Giz no matter how you describe a ruger, I can't get past the investment cast part. My wife tried to engrave them many times, she kept hitting Pitts and voids that drove her nuts. You can call me all the names you want, They are not a colt.

 

[Tico]

Giz no matter how you describe a ruger, I can't get past the investment cast part. My wife tried to engrave them many times, she kept hitting Pitts and voids that drove her nuts. You can call me all the names you want, They are not a colt.

O Pierce, you should not have your wife on the same forms as you. One of my favorite rifles for engraving was a Ruger #1

 

[c pierce]

Giz no matter how you describe a ruger, I can't get past the investment cast part. My wife tried to engrave them many times, she kept hitting Pitts and voids that drove her nuts. You can call me all the names you want, They are not a colt.

O Pierce, you should not have your wife on the same forms as you. One of my favorite rifles for engraving was a Ruger

Whoops.

 

[Frank V]

Giz, I've never said Rugers are ugly. Frank

 

[flat top]

Giz; Rugers are not ugly....(especially that one). To me a Ruger looks like a Colt SA on steroids...and have to be built the way they are to handle all them hot loads and heavy bullets that we crank through them!