New Buffalo Bore .32 S&W Long Loads

Buffalo Bore 32 Long

One of the great things about smaller ammo companies is their willingness to support some of the lower volume calibers.  For people that rely on niche calibers, or who enjoy shooting an old family heirloom, finding ammunition can sometimes be a difficult chore.

Buffalo Bore is one of those companies that is willing to support the niche and “forgotten” calibers that other companies may not support like they once did, if at all.

Recently announced by Buffalo Bore are two new loads for the .32 S&W long caliber.  One is a 100 grain hardcast wadcutter rated at 900 fps.  In “real world” testing with actual firearms, the company states velocities of 835 fps to 936 fps depending on the firearm.

Buffalo Bore 32 LongThe second load is a 115 grain hardcast lead, flatnose bullet rated at 800 fps.  Again using actual firearms, the company managed velocities of 715 fps to 840 fps.

The company states these loads are designed for self defense, so they used a hardcast bullet with a flat front to maximize damage.  Buffalo Bore also states they maximized velocity while staying within the relatively low 15,000 psi SAAMI pressure limit.  The company states these loads are perfectly safe for use in any non-top break firearm.

MSRP is $26.53 for a box of 20 on both loads.



Richard Johnson

An advocate of gun proliferation zones, Richard is a long time shooter, former cop and internet entrepreneur. Among the many places he calls home is http://www.gunsholstersandgear.com/.


Advertisement

  • Jeff

    There is no good reason for the .32 S&W to be loaded with ‘hard cast’ bullets. For the pressure range they have loaded to 40-1 lead-tin alloy is sufficient. Overhard and undersized bullets will result in leading. I mention undersized as I suspect for must .32 S&W firearms the bullets will be too skinny. I also note the crimp looks unnecessarily heavy as is the price.

    • Komrad

      They’re probably using the same bullets as their .32 H&R stuff to simplify production.

  • Daniel Watters

    The issue of safety in top-break revolvers is probably a moot point as the average owner isn’t going to pay that much for a box of ammunition.

  • WPZ

    Lots of Smith Terriers out there deserving of a good load.
    I wouldn’t care to have one for a bedside gun, preferring more and bigger bullets, but it can’t be forgotten that not all of our personal-protection-interested gun owners can handle a G34. We run lots of women’s intro classes. We’re seeing enormous numbers of women past 60 in them wanting a home defense gun.
    The revolver is sometimes, unfortunately, the only choice, as slide-racking is simply beyond the hand strength of many of them.
    Yet a 686 is too big and heavy for comfort, they often insist, so the small-frame with six .32s might be one of the better choices.
    I think I’d pick it over the nine-shot .22 or six-shot .22 magnum.
    I see it as a valuable choice for this narrow part of the spectrum.