Not a Bulldog - But Maybe a Bargain-Dog:

I bid-on, by mail and won, an auctioned collectible old revolver .. thinking that maybe I'd try it as a shooter (with light loads) as it has a 'New Zealand legal' four inch barrel. - Here is it's Auction description:

Lot 1943.  .32 S&W Calibre Harrington & Richardson Arms Co Top Break 6 Shot Revolver 4" barrel with Harrington & Richardson's name and address. Bore good. Star ejector.  Spurless hammer. Metalwork with approximately 85% finish. Good chequered hard rubber grips with the "H&R" emblem. Overall length 8". S/N 380. G+WO&C. Estimate $100 - $200.

I own it now and it's registered to my target pistol shooting licence. - But I think that I've got more to learn eh.

Two .32" H&R Revolvers - The Blued Example is NZ LEGAL to Shoot ..

 While The Bottom Nickel-Plated Revolver Is Judged NOT Legal to Shoot Here.

Reading a "When Bulldogs Ruled" story in GD 2010. I learned that most 'Bulldogs' had  unlocked cylinders that were free-spinning until the hammer is cocked.. This maybe explains why the larger double-action-only H&R pictured is a free-wheeling spinner that way and perhaps it isn't actually at fault there.

This was a problematic feature for pocket carry guns - as a partially loaded cylinder might rotate in the pocket and put an empty or fired chamber under the hammer at an awkward moment.

 - This one has a horrible & heavy trigger-pull that is not right and seriously needs sorting - plus the automatic ejector isn't and is jamming open.. But the bore is bright and shiny.. so that's something eh.

This latest purchase may properly be known as a 'Police Auto-Ejecting Third Model'? - but I need to do more research (and some work on it).

Ah yes .. that "approximately 85% finish" is cold blue over rust pitting - but it may be fixable!

Marty K.

Over Cautious Pistol Loading Data?

I've just read how one very honest shooter wrote his story about blowing-up his fine bolt-action rifle (in Gun Digest 2010)   .. He carelessly loaded some rifle cartridges with pistol powder and very nearly killed himself in the explosive demolition of an excellent hunting rifle.

- You really have to stay alert and careful when working with firearms .. and when hand-loading ammunition. Check and double-check. 

I found some loaded "dud squib-loads" recently (again) and when I checked the Lee powder charger disc in the press ... it had spider webbing partially blocking the charger feed bore.. I guess that it had been invaded by a wee jumping spider in the weeks since I had previously used the press with this set-up.

______________________

I have an interesting situation with my loads for my 327 Federal Magnum.  I have some .32" S&W "Long" brass that I'm using for lighter target shooting and 'plinking' recreational shooting.

- This is much like using 38 Specials in a 357 Magnum revolver.

I loaded these 32 S&Ws  with 2.6gns of AP70N powder behind Hornady 90gn lead semi-wadcutter pills. The ADI Handloaders Guide lists 2.7gns as a Maximum Load.

- So I used only one tenth of one grain less than the suggested MAXIMUM safe load.

They shoot very nicely and accurately .. no recoil to speak of - BUT ... It's too light a load. The powder charge has enough energy to push the bullet down range and through a paper target - but not enough strength to OBTURATE the Lapua brass cases - and expand the case to seal the chambers against the propellant gasses.

Look at the state of them - This is new brass only fired the one time.

The remedy will be to increase the powder charge by a wee bit - but how much - bearing in mind that I will then be theoretically exceeding the Maximum Load listed there for the .32 S&W Long?

- I'm going to try about half a grain more of the same AP70N powder in a few rounds - going to a charge of say 3.1 grains or even 3.2 grains and I'll have to 'read' the cases and primers for pressure signs such as primer flattening. - There should be no risk of over-stressing the Ruger revolver as it is designed to work with the SAAMI maximum pressure level of 45,000 psi of the 327 Federal Magnum.

I do understand that the US is a very litigious country - and if I was publishing loading data I too would be very careful .. but there is a risk here that the starter loads may be so weak as to cause barrel blockages and possible blow-ups that way.

Commercial ammunition sellers are very cautious with calibers that have been around for hundreds of years (.32"Short" since 1878 - "Long" since 1896!) - as they might be used in unsafe very old guns .. but surely that would be the gun owners problem?

This over-cautious light loading of 'Thirty-Twos' may go a long way to explain their shooting magazine reputation as being 'pip-squeeks'.

Marty K.

Is .455" Same As .476" ?:

I was reading a story about the British Webley-Green revolvers and I was becoming more perplexed by the minute - reading how these nicely made old revolvers could use both the .455" and .476" cartridges! .. surely the bigger round would cause problems?

You see .. you can learn something new every day 🙂

- Look .. You don't know what you don't know eh.

For starters - I read that the Webley-Green revolvers are more properly called the 'Webley Government' Model - but I don't get too excited about that sort of thing .. you can call me Marty or Martin - or even "Kav" and I won't object ... Although I did once work with a freak called Tony who insisted that his name was 'An-Thony' as per it's spelling ... so I thereafter made a point to call him "Thony" at every chance.

Well good old Wikipedia came to the caliber-party and explained that the .455" round used a .455" (or .454") diameter bullet - as did the earlier .476 round - which was named after it's .476" diameter case.

It seems that.450 Adams, .476 Enfield (Eley), and .455 Webley cartridges could all be fired in the Webley Government model revolvers - as they all used .450+" - .455" bullets from a similar case.

Confused again by calibers?.. I think that the bore size is or was .450 +". Please note that both bore and cylinder throat sizes are found to be variable - but the generally soft lead projectiles give a degree of flexibility.

This model .455" caliber revolver was bought privately by many British officers and NCOs - and used in the Boer War - plus both WWI & WW2 with whatever iteration of cartridges they might be issued with..

I get the idea that these 'different' cartridges were  various "loadings" from the Black-Powder and  'Cordite', & smokeless-powder change over periods with slightly different case length, bullet weight and shapes, and various powder charges for use in .450" bore revolvers from the 1880s. 

Enfield Cartridges - They Look A Bit Ugly Eh.

There's lots more interesting revolver history and 'battle history' out there but I won't just copy it here.

 - Google is your friend .. Or have a look at this tale about these old .455' & .450" cartridges. Link:

http://cartridgecollectors.org/?page=introduction-to-455-cartridges

Marty K.

Police Firearms Code Withdrawn:

I am somewhat perplexed by the statements and actions of the leadership of our police force over recent weeks.

When visiting the Christchurch District Headquarters Firearms Office a few days ago, I picked-up a printed copy of the new 2017 ARMS CODE .. my interest was to read it thoroughly and absorb any changes to their published firearms policy.

Note: This is Police 'POLICY' - not the LAW.

Starting with the "Commissioner's Message" on the inside front cover .. he incorrectly states that "..the ownership and use of firearms is not an automatic right. It is a privilege."

I noticed new and very different versions of police policy relating to 'SELF DEFENCE' - and on page 41 of the printed version they now say that we are required to justify to police the  number of firearms that we have - when they come to inspect our security .. further, the new definition of a firearm (1a) seems to include anything that might be made into a gun some time in the future!

However - the Police News Site has just published the following statement:

Incorrect version of Arms Code published

Tuesday, 23 May 2017 - 10:15am

National News

The Arms Code was last published in hard copy form in 2013 and is currently being updated.

Unfortunately an incorrect version of a revised Code was published on the Police website recently.

This version contained a number of errors and has subsequently been removed from the website. 

Police apologises for any confusion or concern this may have caused among gun owners.

The Code will be reviewed in consultation with the Firearms Community Advisory Forum before being re-issued. 

A hard copy version is planned for publication in mid-2017.

ENDS

Issued by Police Media Centre

- I'm still confused - as I already have a printed hard copy of the newly published 2017 Arms Code - Is it possible that it too contains "errors" and has been withdrawn ? - That would be an expensive mistake to make.

I understand that there may be consultation shortly... Could be interesting eh.

Marty K.

Terminal Ballistics - Unquantifiable Variables:

.. Have you heard there's a new Number 1 out there" - by Donnie T and The Greatest Leaky Hose Band ..

When attempting to study and record the effectiveness of  handguns to indicate the 'best' firearm and ammunition choice - there needs to be accurate records of the primary factors of caliber and shot placement .. But there are many other factors that are not usually detailed for consideration:

A big Thank You is owed to Greg Ellifritz for his following list of  variables that are not generally considered or factored.

1/-  Range at which the shots were fired (terminal velocity)

2/-  The exact body structure hit (as opposed to head, torso, or extremity in the original paper)

3/-  Body size of the person shot. (People have become much larger & heavier in the last 60 years **)

4/-  Any drugs the person shot was taking

5/-  Psychological attitude of the person shot

6/-  Clothing worn by the person shot

7/-  Rate of fire (how quickly or slowly the rounds struck)

8/-  Whether or not the bullets traveled through an intermediate obstacle

9/-  Barrel length of the shooter's gun (impact velocity)

10/- Whether or not the person shot had been shot before and survived

11/- Speed at which emergency medical care arrived on the scene ***

12/- Whether the defender was an armed citizen or a police officer

All of those factors have an effect on how quickly a person stops after being shot.  They may be even more important than the caliber or bullet type used (we don't know) in the shooting.

** I might add further factors such as physical fitness /strength - activity level, and overall health of the attacker.

*** I read that provided the patients heart is still beating on arrival at A&E - there is a 95% chance of survival.

My input (my "pennys-worth") centers on the possibility that while it might become likely that one X Caliber is statistically a superior performer - if they are however difficult guns needing considerable strength and training to control & to keep on target under recoil and blast - their terminal ballistic advantages may be cancelled-out.

Beretta M 9

- The optimum sidearm for use by physically fit Military or Law Enforcement personnel may not be suitable as a carry gun for widely varying citizens in multiple environments.

Modern Chiappa Rhino Revolver.

One classic suggestion that is regularly made by 'experts' is that while a .357" Magnum snubby revolver is powerfully effective .. gun owners are advised to only load "weaker" .38" Special defensive ammunition that is less "shocking" and easier to control.

It is a fascinating issue that will likely never be fully resolved. - So many variables mean that there is room for every-ones informed opinion.

I know that lately I've been advocating for the smaller caliber handgun rounds - but I truly also like big heavy and slow  - especially when it's sub-sonic and silenced. The old 45-70 must hit with one Hell of a smack, and there's no doubt that the full power .308" battle rifle of yesterday was decisive in every way ... but there are reasons that it has been replaced by the 5.56mm - and that the .45" has been displaced by the 9 mm NATO.

- Both large and small enjoy their peculiar SINGULAR benefits that may prove beneficial under the circumstance.

.. Terms & Conditions may apply (Ts & Cs) 😃

If I was forced to have to select one only - I would have trouble making-up my mind .. I used to be indecisive - but now I'm not sure.

Marty K.

After researching & writing 1,036 blogs I've got something NEW to try .. I've signed-up to Patreon. - In over five years I've not made one cent from this .. NOW you can send me a wee support $ - starting from $1. to get all this stuff from New Zealand - over a year that's nearly the price of one Shooting magazine. - Am I worth it?


https://www.patreon.com/posts/24075745

Korth The Most Expensive Revolver:

- Well I've already 'done' the smallest and biggest eh ..

KORTH - these are precision built in Germany - superbly finished in an extensive range of options & made from the highest strength hardened tool-steel parts. - None better.

Cross Sectioned Korth Revolver.

 - Who The Hell Could Afford To Chop One Open Like That?

It seems that these clinically presented examples of German Perfection and Precision will cost you around US$10,000 for the economy starter model - and I would never buy one - even if I came-up on the Lotto.

My reason being that I would never again be able to blame the tool for my bad workmanship! These things are so well made that they will never wear-out.. you'd have to change it when it gets grubby - like the Emerates Nationals changing their Ferraris ... when the ashtrays get full. (- They really replace them when the tyres need changing or a service is due).

Somebody else reviewing a Korth seems to have also been made to feel small by it's demeanor: Link:

http://www.guns.com/review/korth-combat-revolver-review-a-near-perfect-357-except-for/

- It seems that you may even be able to buy one in Damascus steel ..

- Would Sir like fries with that?

Note: Some years ago - I was driving a wee rental car on an Abu Dhabi multi lane highway, heading for the Oman Border in strong brassy sunshine - it was four lanes plus a service road either side for local traffic - making an 6 lane tarmac ribbon with date palms up the central reservation, through dirty looking desert  ... and I was doing around 150 kph in the fast lane and trying not to delay the overtaking locals too much in their shiny Ferraris, Maseratis, Porches, AMGs etc with their lights full on. - when a vision appeared ahead of a donkey-cart hugely overladen with camel fodder and its white dishdasha clad driver - blithely trotting straight towards me the wrong way in the fast lane.

- Knowing that any broken cartwheels would naturally be the fault of the foreigner - I just braked and changed into the slower lanes to avoid him .. I don't think he even looked at us as I sped on past.

Marty K.

Stopping Power Again:

I'm Posting some correspondence from the 'Comments' section that can be viewed at the end of each post.. in case you haven't been reading these: Here we go..

"Your statement “The mythical .45" seems not to have proven any more decisive against fanatical fighters than .38"s” does appear to be at odds with your later statement “Nobody can deny that a heavier more 'powerful' round will be more certain in it's effect than a weaker one”.

Nothing personal, but in a close encounter situation as American forces in the Philippines frequently found themselves to be, against drugged up fanatics; we just wouldn’t feel comfortable wielding your avowed choice of a .32. as a defensive calibre." ..

- Yeah Col, there seems to be a conflicted argument there.. so I'll try to clarify my argument.

It is apparent that a larger explosive shell or projectile will impose more destruction on a target than a smaller one.. Fact.

However, if the smaller device achieves the destruction of the object .. there is no value in the extra effect from the larger. - Now if individuals are packing devices to stop attacks on themselves and they being weak humans have a limit to what weight and recoil impulse that they are comfortable to withstand while managing a reasonable level of accuracy - they will logically select the most comfortable and usable size to carry THAT WILL ACHIEVE THEIR INDIVIDUAL NEED.

- Otherwise they would be well advised to carry a 40mm grenade launcher attached to a high capacity 12 gauge shot-gun

One indication of what will work might be to go around and personally conduct a 'MAXIMUM KILL RATIO' test as do the military when testing say cluster bombs.. they select their WMDs by determining their MKRs on bombing ranges against tethered agricultural animals. Civilian users of 'carry guns' may not tether live targets to posts and shoot them experimentally in a military manner.

Civilians cannot of course do that - but they CAN read published studies of police records of shootings that have occurred over a statistically reliable period and sample size - For example one such U.S. Study as published by Greg Ellifritz - in which he concludes that the caliber of handgun used in recorded shooting is not a major factor in determining the outcome.

- Indeed that statistical record shows that the 'thirty-two' (both revolver & .32 ACP) has a marginally superior performance record when compared to some larger calibers that are traditionally reputed to be superior 'stoppers'.

My stance is that a defensive shooter should carry and hopefully never need to use - a caliber of weapon as large as she or he can handle and shoot well - as SHOT PLACEMENT seems to be agreed by all experts as the main CRITICAL FACTOR rather than calber.

Military personnel in battle situations are naturally medically A1 physical condition and fully trained competent performers with their issued weapons. Civilians in normal life may not be such .. they may include the physically weak, injured, and handicapped.

I do fully understand that the New Zealand Police do not currently (since 1975) allow the issue of Firearms Licences for defensive purposes.

____________________________________

Any debate on "Stopping Power" must always be subject to many variables that cannot be quantified scientifically - and these must always be considered as 'grey areas' that may always remain.

Marty K.