Not sure what the point would be. How can one tak a 32 H&R “Magnum “ or and “Magnum” Amd brand it a plus P it sort of already is, I mean maybe Mazimum would be a better claim but that’s what the 327 is for
But everyone is free to do whatever
Well , l'll agree so far as shortening .327 brass is pointless .
Despite having the word " Magnum " in its name , it isn't really . SAAMI presure levels are only 21k ( both C.U.P. and Psi . " .32 Special " would have been more fitting .
Bobcats aren’t really a large animal. One will walk across my back fence in Tucson occasionally. Now, if you had said mountain lion..!If you don't (or can't) realize the power of the .32 H&R Magnum in its full-power context, then you haven't been looking. This is typical of the "myopic-American" philosophy-belief that "a bigger bore is a better bore".
Back in the early 1980's, I knew a man who routinely took his S&W revolver out hunting bobcats and had more than one mounted in his house.
Probably the Warner clan over by Douglas. My father knew him (Sorry, can’t remember first name, was in the 50s. Held guided hunts on his ranch, which we visited on occasion).There was a lion hunter in Southern Arizona that used a 22 Mag to take mountain lions trees over dogs. Bobcat are little more than house cats. I have seen several of both around Arizona, while working and hunting...
That's them! Thank you!Probably the Warner clan over by Douglas. My father knew him (Sorry, can’t remember first name, was in the 50s. Held guided hunts on his ranch, which we visited on occasion).
I am just speculating but when the 32 H&R came out in the early-mid 80’s I would bet that the “Magnam” handle was some because if is a lot more zippy yha anything else in its weight class at the time and we’ll Magnam was a good marketing term as 357 wheelguns was still domination LE sales at that moment.
I actually like the round and the whole family of 32’s for that matter
My brother is more up on this than I am. But, I remember they were good folks.That's them! Thank you!
I agree with you , liking the whole Ctg family .
* At the Time of Introduction * , the targeted market segment was the small frame snub .38 . The pitch was to be reasonably close in effectiveness , but with substantily less recoil . ( More about that below .)
But alas , all the factory ammo of the era was 150 - 200 fps below advertised . Plus that incarnation of H&R went under before they could fully promote it . Plus at that point those new fangled selfloading .380 's were getting popular .
H&R had kept the pressure spec low , to be compatable with their line of existing Value Priced revolvers in .32 S&W Long , with only longer chambers .
IF the ammo makers had loaded it even all the way up to the SAAMI spec , it would cought on more .
Just like loading manuals having a data for " Ruger Only " .45 Colt , many manuals had .32 L data for " Modern Revolvers with Swingout Cylinders , that at least equaled .32 Mag factory loads . ( My M31- 1 certainly did . )
The " Medium Velocity " loading for .327 , are what the .32 Mag should have , and could have been , and would have been a hit .
Historical presecedent -
The S&W M&P ( pre Model 10 ) , and Colt's OP and PPS are now thought of as .38 Specials . But pre WWII , about 30% of actual production was in .32-20 . There was demand for , and acceptance of a warm .32 in the place of standard .38 Special . Close enough in performence for SD , lower recoil . And for sportsmen and outdoors people not needing a .44 / .45 , it had flatter trajectory and better penetration than contemporary .38 Specials .