32 H&R VS. 32-20

[HEAD0001]

Just looking for comparisons between a 32-20 and a 32 H&R. I know very little about the H&R, and not much more about the 32-20. However I am wanting to put together a calling rifle for raccoons and coyotes in the woods(with cast bullets). And I believe the 32-20 would make a perfect rifle with cast bullets to keep the pelts, and still be very effective to ranges of 100 yards. What do you guys think about the two cartridges in a Marlin 1894 rifle?? Thanks, Tom.

[Griff]

Honestly, my opinion would be meaningless... But, being as, at one time in my life, having thoroughly enjoyed an 1892 Winchester rifle in .32-20, it would always get the nod from me. Whether that's from any advantage the HV version of the cartridge has over the .32H&R or the fact that I don't like the magazine setup on the Marlin in that caliber; I can't really say which. It's strictly a prejudice against that mag setup in a centerfire rifle. I've heard stories that some have trouble reloading the .32WCF due to the thinness of the brass, but... I've not experienced that. Fact is, now that I have the mold for the 115gr GC version... I think I need to locate one again!

[Hobie]

I would think that if you handload you would find a lot of use for the .32-20 1894CL in WV (laws permitting). It is a neat little cartridge. Terry Murbach calls it a centerfire .22 Magnum but I think it can be a step above that. I wouldn't hesitate to use mine on coyotes.

[piller]

The .327 Federal Magnum is much closer to a duplicate of the .32-20, but in a straight wall case. Just look up the velocity levels with the same bullets on Hodgdon's website. Between the .32-20 and the 32 H&R, the .32-20 is faster for the same bullet weight. I would pick the .32-20 over the .32 H&R in a leveraction carbine. With good cast bullets it should be a dandy short to medium range cartridge for even people like me who don't get to the range nearly enough.

[HEAD0001]

Being historically correct is of very little importance to me. I am looking for a fast handling rifle for woods hunting of turkeys, coyotes, and raccoons. The problem with the 32-20 is that everyone wants a substantial premium for a Marlin 1894 chambered in 32-20. Such is not the case for 1894's chambered in 32 H&R. Also the components for the H&R are slighttly less in cost. And I also like the fact that the 32 H&R is a straight walled case instead of a botle necked cartridge. I believe it might work better in a Marlin lever(but that is unsubstantiatied).

It is very difficult to find loading data for a rifle in 32 H&R. I have spent a couple of hours looking for rifle loads on the net, and really haven't found anything very good yet(actually none in rifles). So that is why I am interested in what you guys might think about the cartridge, or any knowledge of loading for the cartridge. Tom.

[BenT]

I play with both of these cartridges. My Marlin 94 in 32-20 with push a 100 grain bullet to 2000 fps . It is a very accurate gun. I have one built in 2005 and my buddy has one in that was made in the 90's. I beleive his has ballard rifling .The 94 is my favorite woods loafing gun. An accurate load is not hard to find.

When reloading the 32-20 just take it slow when seating the bullet and you won't crush any necks. A little powder goes a long way. From what I can tell a hot loaded 32-20 in a rifle is equal to the 327 fed. The loads I use are listed in the speer manual under 32-20 rifle, so nothing crazy. The best performing bulet so far has been the Rainer 100 gr plated bullet,fp or hp. They outperform the XTP's.

The 32 h&r mag is easier to load just because you can use carbide dies and you don't have to lube the cases. Both 32 h&r and 32-20 are loud of a handgun. My buddy has a blackhawk and vaquaro convertables that shoot those calibers. I have a single six in 32 h&r that I keep loads off of max so they are more enjoyable to shoot. The blackhawk is comfortable to shoot and accurate with hot loads. But that is because there is a lot of steel in 32 caliber cylinder, so it is a heavy sixgun.

The Marlins in 32 hr are to spendy for me, plus the the half mag CL just balances better. I'm waiting to see if Marlin puts out a 94 in 327 fed, but that could be awhile. But then i would have a reason to buy the 8 shot Blackhawk in 327 fed. Also the latest Handloader mag which i just got yesterday has a good article on the 32 hr and 327 fed.

[BenT]

Tom , it was the opposite when I was looking for the Marlin in 32 HR two years ago. The h&r were $200 -$300 more compared to the 32-20's. I paid $550 for my CL NIB. I can't tell the difference betweem carrying the 94 and the 39A. It's just a great woods rifle.

The h&r is easier to load. Some guys have converted the H&R to 327 fed. That would put it equal to the 32-20 in a rifle. Plus Brian Pierce did an article in Handloader a couple years ago that listed safe hot loads for Rugers in 32 h&R . I 'll try to find it and see what velocities he was getting.

[HEAD0001]

The Marlins in 32 hr are to spendy for me,

I am not sure where you priced the 32 H&R. But I can buy a 32 H&R for about $200 less than I can buy a used Marlin 1894 in 32-20. And finding a new Marlin in 32-20 is even more than $200. So I do not follow where the H&R's are spendy?? I can buy a 32 H&R for about $560. I would gladly buy a 32-20 for that, but I haven't seen any for less than $750-and that was a used rifle. And I have been looking for a good deal on a 32-20 for a couple of years.

I had a chance to buy a Browning 53 one time for $600. I wish I would have bought it that day. I even had the money in my pocket. but then we all make mistakes. And it was NIB!! Tom.

[JB]

I have the 32 H&R and 32-20, both are fun guns. The H&R can be a little hard to find factory ammo for. Actually I'd probably go with a 357 mag. lever gun. You'd save money on the rifle and ammo.

[Wind]

Hey there HEAD0001 -- I've got a Marlin for sale in the classifieds right now. It is going down the road only because I'm getting another one. I shoot cast bullets (120 grainers from Missouri Bullet Co.) over 4.5 grains of Unique out to 400 yards all day long. Here is a target with that rifle using 115 grain Speer Gold Dots (.312" 327 Magnum) and the resulting divots on a steel plate. They are the ones with the little "dot" in the middle. It is my understanding that Marlin hasn't made these rifles since around 1990 (plus or minus a year) with the exception of a few special limited runs for Ducks Unlimited and such. Good luck. Best regards. Wind

[L_Kilkenny]

I've never owned either caliber in a rifle or any .32-20 for that matter. Just a lowly Single Six in .32M so take this for what you paid for it. I do however do lots and lots of coon and coyote hunting and either would be a great choice and far better than a .22 mag IMO. Everyone has pretty much summed up the comparison of the 2 with the .32-20 being closer balistically to the .327 but don't let that stop you from getting a .32H&R. Either is more than capable of taking coon, fox and coyote out to 100 yards and in a rifle both cartridges would be fine for close in deer IMO. Also, IIRC, the .32H&R shoots flatter than a .357/.38 and it is definetly super easy to reload for. Paired with a Ruger Single Six you would have a great woods critter combo. A .38/.357 may more univeral, easier for ammo and better for deer but the .32's are in a class all their own. I'd like to get a .32 lever if my wallet ever let's me.


LK

[Remington40x]

There is a Shooting Times article from the late 70s or early 80s with very good rifle load data for the .32 H&R. It's by Ross Seyfried, who had a Ruger No. 3 (I think) rebarreled to the cartridge as a companion piece for his Single Six in that cartridge. Loads are much too hot for handguns (except, perhaps, the Contender or the limited run of Blackhawk frames with both the .32 H&R and .32-20 cylinders) and were deliberately loaded long enough that they would not fit into the revolver.

I had a Browning Lo-Wall that started life as a .22 Hornet rebored by Dan Pedersen to .32 H&R for use as a small game rifle in Pennsylvania. Of course, the Game Commission changed the rules and now the only things I can use it on are woodchucks (outside the rimfire only areas) and turkey (fall season only). It's fun to shoot, but best groups so far are in the 2 to 2-1/2 inch range at 100 yards. Sort of a modern rook and rabbit rifle, with about corresponding accuracy.

I like the .32 H&R cartridge and have owned a number of handguns so chambered, including both standard grip and Bisley frame Single Sixes and the SP101 with the 4 inch barrel. Still have a Bisley and the SP101. One of the few remaining "I wants" in handguns is a Freedom Arms Model 97 in .32 H&R, preferably with the 5-1/2 inch barrel.

Since I've never owned a .32-20, I can't really help you with the comparison question.

[Hobie]

One thing not mentioned is that the Marlin .32 H&R guns are MUCH heavier than the .32-20s.

[BenT]

Tom, when Marlin came out with them in 2004 and 2005 , I kept an eye out for one . Never seen one or handled one up. Two years ago when I decided to buy one , distributers had none and the only ones I could find were on the auction sights for $750 to $900 . But when I handled a 32-20 at a local shop the balance was perfect. It was $550, then my buddy wanted one and he ended up buying one off of gunbroker for $600. Times and markets change. I can check a couple shops locally to see if they still have one laying around in 32-20, if you want.

[ollogger]

had a 32 h&r in a ruger wish i still did , have a 32-20 in 73 win have shot yotes with it & used 115 cast in both guns . i have a 30-30 i load with 115 cast and load it to 1700 fps kinda like a 32-20 , cept i can find the brass a lot easier after blasting at something ,also you can load it up to a 30- 30

[Nate Kiowa Jones]

Being historically correct is of very little importance to me. I am looking for a fast handling rifle for woods hunting of turkeys, coyotes, and raccoons. The problem with the 32-20 is that everyone wants a substantial premium for a Marlin 1894 chambered in 32-20. Such is not the case for 1894's chambered in 32 H&R. Also the components for the H&R are slighttly less in cost. And I also like the fact that the 32 H&R is a straight walled case instead of a botle necked cartridge. I believe it might work better in a Marlin lever(but that is unsubstantiatied).

It is very difficult to find loading data for a rifle in 32 H&R. I have spent a couple of hours looking for rifle loads on the net, and really haven't found anything very good yet(actually none in rifles). So that is why I am interested in what you guys might think about the cartridge, or any knowledge of loading for the cartridge. Tom.

Actually it's just the opposite. A bottle neck cart will always feed better than a straight wall. Think about it. You have a smaller dia. bullet going into a much bigger hole then funnelling down.

Also, if you want a light fast handling gun you aren't going to like the 32hr Marlin. It's an oct. barrel with twin mag tube = way front heavy.

[HEAD0001]

If you see a 32-20 in one of the shops for a decent price, then yes, please let me know where it is at.

I do not understand markets and prices. People want a $200 or more premium for a used rifle?? I would like to have on. But I refuse to pay a premium on a used rifle. I just won't do it. Just because it is a particular cartridge??

There may be a collectors market for rifles that are NIB, and come with the box. But I have no interest in those rifles. Every rifle I buy, I use.

I imagine there are some 32-20's still sitting on dealer shelves somewhere. So I guess I might just wait until I find one. But paying $700 or more for a used one?? No way in heck, I refuse to take that screwing. Thanks, Tom.

[olyinaz]

Sorry if this is a silly question, but given the originally stated desire for a mild chambering that wont damage pelts, would not a .38 special in full metal jacket or something hard cast also fit the bill?

Those rifles, at least, are common and I have to say that my 92 shoots like a .22 mag when I put mild .38s in it - I can't see it doing anything but making a small hole through a coyote.

Oly

[BenT]

Tom, I'll keep my eyes open. There is a small local gun show next weekend. I'm like you Tom I use my guns. If it is used I won't pay more than the price of new. With a little patience something will turn up.

I also agree if you don't reload the 357 is better option.

[Nate Kiowa Jones]

Sorry if this is a silly question, but given the originally stated desire for a mild chambering that wont damage pelts, would not a .38 special in full metal jacket or something hard cast also fit the bill?

Those rifles, at least, are common and I have to say that my 92 shoots like a .22 mag when I put mild .38s in it - I can't see it doing anything but making a small hole through a coyote.

Oly

+1

[HEAD0001]

I have thought about the 357. And I have even thought about loading down the 45 Colt. Which I have done. I just like the idea of a new rifle?? Now theres a novel idea!! I actually think the 25-20 would be the ultimate for what I want. But I have no hope of finding and buying one of those for a reasonable price. And like others have said, the weight on the 32-20 really is the optimal rifle. And I want a Marlin because I may put a 2X power scope on this one.

I also bought a 36 caliber MZ for squirrels. I didn't really need that one either, but what the heck. I have saved up a little money and I believe this is the way I want to go. But who knows what may pop up. Tom.

[Hobie]

If you see a 32-20 in one of the shops for a decent price, then yes, please let me know where it is at.

I do not understand markets and prices. People want a $200 or more premium for a used rifle?? I would like to have on. But I refuse to pay a premium on a used rifle. I just won't do it. Just because it is a particular cartridge??

There may be a collectors market for rifles that are NIB, and come with the box. But I have no interest in those rifles. Every rifle I buy, I use.

I imagine there are some 32-20's still sitting on dealer shelves somewhere. So I guess I might just wait until I find one. But paying $700 or more for a used one?? No way in heck, I refuse to take that screwing. Thanks, Tom.

It isn't a bad deal if that is the price the market demands. Remember, ASKING price isn't the FINAL price.

[KirkD]

I don't understand why the 32 HR would be easier to load than the 32-20. I load for the 32-20 and I have never lubed my cases and I cannot remember the last time I damaged a case neck while seating a bullet. I've shot a lot of ground hogs with the 32-20, which are not much different in size than the one coon I've shot with the 32-20. One .312 hole in and one .312 hole out ..... no pelt damage, but they usually drop right there, and that is with 90 grain cast bullets at 1,200 fps. I've since moved to 115 grain bullets for old times sake and for improved accuracy. You should be able to get sub-2" five-shot groups at 100 yards with a 32-20 with iron sights and probably better with a scope.

[BAGTIC]

I have .32 H&R in revolvers, a singleshot pistol, and a singleshot rifle. Never had a .32-20. I like the convenience of being able to use carbide dies and the .32 H&R brass seems tough at least in comparison to another older thinner brass design the .22 Hornet.

I really enjoy shooting .32 caliber handguns and have several. However I could get by without such a rifle. I agree that a lightly loaded .30-30 or .38/.357 rifle would be a much more practical small game rifle.