Guns: S&W 632 UC review - The Ultimate Carry?

Introduction

I've been shooting and writing about Smith & Wesson J-frames for 20 years now, so I'm pretty resistant to the "flavor of the month" when it comes to these revolvers.  S&W has put out various iterations of the formula over the decades - the LadySmith models, guns equipped with Crimson Trace LaserGrips, and sundry AirLite versions with scandium and titanium alloys - but I'm still not convinced any of them work better than the good old-fashioned 642.

That being said, when Smith and Lipsey's rolled out a new line of "Ultimate Carry" revolvers, including several chambered in the long-forgotten caliber of .32 H&R Magnum, I just had to see what all the fuss was about:

Revolver Overview

The 632 UC I picked up differs from my 642 Performance Center in a bunch of ways:

First, it's chambered in .32 H&R Magnum, an uncommon caliber that is a little weaker, more expensive, and much harder to find than .38 Special (especially for defensive ammo). The big advantages of a .32 H&R Mag is that it has milder recoil than a .38, you can squeeze a sixth round into a J-Frame-sized cylinder, and you can also shoot .32 Long cartridges, which have even less recoil.

Second, the Ultimate Carry has excellent sights, featuring an XS tritium dot up front, and a black U-notch rear. While perhaps a little imprecise for target work, these are way better than the default sights on the average J-Frame, and comparable to the three-dot night sights on my 640 Pro. The sights are tough and snag free, too.

Third, the 632 UC has some minor upgrades from a normal aluminum frame J-Frame.  It uses the sleeved barrel design of the scandium J-Frames, which gives you a shrouded ejector rod (and theoretically better accuracy), an upgraded "endurance package" action and trigger geometry, and no key lock.  The 632 UC also comes with a set of "high horn" VZ boot grips; I did not care for them, but they'd be great if you have big hands and like to ride high on the gun.

Range Report

Like a lot of gunmakers nowadays, S&W's quality control is hit and miss.  Out of the box, I experienced a lot of failures to fire with pretty standard Magtech wadcutter ammo, so I sent the gun back for repair.  Once I got the gun back, it was reliable, though obviously it's galling to have to do that with a brand-new revolver that retails for well over $600.

At the range, the 632 UC is noticeably easier to control and more accurate than a typical .38 snub. At 10 yards, I could easily get two-to-three-inch groups standing unsupported, which is pretty top-end accuracy for this shooter and this type of gun.  I attribute that mostly to the caliber/ammo and the sleeved barrel, as the trigger, while fine for a J-Frame, was not nearly as smooth as my Performance Center guns.

Fiocchi 97 gr FMJ:

Federal 85 gr JHP:

18 rounds of PPU .32 Long - very low recoil, though I had one flier:

Buffalo Bore 100 gr wadcutter - great ammo, but very expensive and pretty much only available online.  Whether or not a .32 is sufficient for self-defense is a touchy subject.  I will say that whatever load you choose, make sure it has sufficient penetration, like the Buffalo Bore .32 H&R Mag loads:

Magtech 98 gr wadcutters.  There is a decent selection of foreign-made wadcutter ammo for the .32 Long, since it's often used in target shooting internationally:

S&B .32 Long wadcutters:

Conclusion

I appreciate the thought and care that went into the 632 UC, and there is something to be said for a 6-round centerfire snubnose with mild recoil.  But when it comes to actually living with the gun, the esoteric caliber choice is just too hard to deal with.  It certainly might be the "ultimate .32," but I'll stick with my old .38 snubbies, thank you very much.