NAA Guardian 25 NAA on gunbroker

[TexicoMike]

Good morning all, first time post here. Just saw several 25 naa listed on gunbroker for sale. If you?re wanting one go check them out

[Uncle_Lee]

Then you will need the nonexistent ammo.

Welcome to TexicoMike.
Good to hear from you.
Jump in and join the asylum.

Don't get mad if you see thread drift.
We are not like any other forum. We are at home.
No cussing.
Post lots of pictures. We like to see what each other has.

[MR_22]

Then you will need the nonexistent ammo.

I have around 400 rounds. Wish I had purchased more when it was available. As you can probably guess, I'm not too excited about letting any of it go at this point.

However, a good reloader should bee able to make some. They start with .32ACP cases, cut and neck them down, and then insert a .25ACP bullet.

[Rick_Jorgenson]

CH4D has the die sets for the .25NAA and the .32NAA available...

https://www.ch4d.com/products/dies/caliber-list?filter-col=caliber&filter=25naa
https://www.ch4d.com/products/dies/caliber-list?filter-col=caliber&filter=32naa

They were in stock, ready to ship when I bought them last year.

Reloading specs are posted here on the Forum...

https://naaminis.com/smf/index.php?topic=25864.msg215642#msg215642

The last time I called NAA they did have several boxes of .25NAA available. I don't remember the price but it was "reasonable".

[RogueTS1]

Reloading is all but the only way to go if one is going to shoot either of these Guardians. Easy to do and the stacks of ammo on the shelves is comforting. Only negative these days is being able to find the certain components needed. Brass and bullets are easy to come by. Powder and primers is another story. 

[TexicoMike]

Wow.  Just checked gunbroker again. All are gone except for one that was in auction format.  They sure didn?t last long.  Glad I got my hands on one !! 

[MR_22]

Here's a bunch of .32NAA on GunBroker, if anybody needs some. I have plenty myself already.

https://www.gunbroker.com/Item/992996665

[bearcatter]

Did we ever hear results of Rick's reloading .32 and .380 NAA ?

[Rick_Jorgenson]

Did we ever hear results of Rick's reloading .32 and .380 NAA ?

I haven't had a chance to do any reloading yet. But when I do I'll post the disaster results for sure! 

[bearcatter]

I'm sure you will be fine. You've researched it well, not Billy Bobbed it like too many do.

[TruthTellers]

I'm sure they're long gone by now, but I just wanted to put in my 1/50th of a dollar on the .25 NAA and the .32 NAA to some extent. I'm not a big fan of the .25 caliber to begin with, it's not enough power over a .22 to make it worth the extra cost, it's only claim is it's more reliable, but that's dubious to me when we're dealing with small semi autos. Between the ACP and NAA, I would much rather have the ACP because even the .25 NAA I don't trust to expand and even if it did, it would not penetrate and I still think the target for the .25 NAA would be the head and face, which is the same target for the .25 ACP and I doubt there's going to be greater effect with .25 NAA.

The ammo situation with .25 NAA really puts it to bed and I do think the .25 NAA is likely to become totally obsolete along the lines of .32 and .38 Rimfire, which actually have more firearms chambered for them than the .25 NAA does.

IMO the .32 NAA is the best of the two and if there was one caliber NAA should have pushed that had its name on the headstamp, .32 NAA should have been it. Expansion and penetration aren't as questioned as .25 is and because of that it takes it out of the class of head/face shots only and they open up center mass as a viable target. Given the numerous .380's that have been sold the past 15 years, there's a huge potential for conversions to .32 NAA with a barrel and recoil spring change. On paper, the .32 NAA has a lot going for it, the only thing it lacks is support by the industry and review by gun media.

When the gun and ammo manufacturers have no interest in producing the .32 NAA and the gun media has no interest in objectively covering the .32 NAA on its merits, it cannot gain any traction among consumers and it gets dropped.

[Rick_Jorgenson]

I'm sure they're long gone by now, but I just wanted to put in my 1/50th of a dollar on the .25 NAA and the .32 NAA to some extent. I'm not a big fan of the .25 caliber to begin with, it's not enough power over a .22 to make it worth the extra cost, it's only claim is it's more reliable, but that's dubious to me when we're dealing with small semi autos. Between the ACP and NAA, I would much rather have the ACP because even the .25 NAA I don't trust to expand and even if it did, it would not penetrate and I still think the target for the .25 NAA would be the head and face, which is the same target for the .25 ACP and I doubt there's going to be greater effect with .25 NAA.

The ammo situation with .25 NAA really puts it to bed and I do think the .25 NAA is likely to become totally obsolete along the lines of .32 and .38 Rimfire, which actually have more firearms chambered for them than the .25 NAA does.

IMO the .32 NAA is the best of the two and if there was one caliber NAA should have pushed that had its name on the headstamp, .32 NAA should have been it. Expansion and penetration aren't as questioned as .25 is and because of that it takes it out of the class of head/face shots only and they open up center mass as a viable target. Given the numerous .380's that have been sold the past 15 years, there's a huge potential for conversions to .32 NAA with a barrel and recoil spring change. On paper, the .32 NAA has a lot going for it, the only thing it lacks is support by the industry and review by gun media.

When the gun and ammo manufacturers have no interest in producing the .32 NAA and the gun media has no interest in objectively covering the .32 NAA on its merits, it cannot gain any traction among consumers and it gets dropped.

I agree, without support and traction, the calibers did not grow in popularity.

Here is some info on the history of the .25naa and .32naa

https://military-history.fandom.com/wiki/.25_NAA

I found this review and data. It is posted on NAA's website. (I believe the testing was done by Ed Sanow)

"On the average, the 25 NAA has 66% more stopping power than the 25 ACP. No individual 25 ACP load is anywhere close to the 25 NAA 35 grain XTP in effectiveness. On the average, the 25 NAA has the same stopping power as the 32 ACP."
Ref; https://northamericanarms.com/pdfs/sanow32.pdf

It's worth taking a look at. I had an opportunity to acquire both a .25naa and a .32naa Guardian.  I have them because I think it's "neat" and a reason to learn reloading. They are fun to shoot and have quite a "fireball" at the muzzle 

[bearcatter]

Sanow says, "On the average, the 25 NAA has the same stopping power as the 32 ACP."

So long story short, according to Sanow, there's no real advantage to the 25 NAA over the .32ACP, except his data shows 12% less recoil with the NAA.

Yet the Military Wiki page says, "According to NAA's website, the .25 NAA's 35 gr bullet travels faster (1200 f.p.s.) and hits harder (20% more energy on average) than larger, .32 ACP caliber bullets". That sounds like better stopping power to me, but maybe not, with only half the ACP's bullet weight?

The .32ACP is still hanging in there, but harder to acquire. I feel better now that I have 7K rounds, and I stopped buying for now. I know I can get more, the question being which will be the "brand of the month" when I do buy. I'm grateful that I don't find any real difference between the brands I have; Aguila, PMC, and PPU. Aguila is a little dirtier, and I think PPU is a little more accurate. Shame that I rarely see U.S. made, usually Remington, but it's no better and $5-10 more a box. Makes no sense that US ammo is higher than ammo shipped from the middle of Mexico, or Korea, or Serbia.

[TruthTellers]

Sure, the .25 NAA has more power on paper than .32 ACP, but what does that really mean? Does the .25 NAA hollow point expand and penetrate deep enough? IDK, but I get the feeling the .32 ACP fmj bullets penetrate deeper and I'd use FMJ because I know hollow points don't do jack.

Beyond just ballistics, there's a size factor too in that .25 ACP pistols are smaller than .32 ACP pistols are. While I'm fine with a Kel Tec P32 or LCP in .32, some may want smaller and for that they have the Beretta, Colt's, and Browning's available. The .25 NAA would have to go in something like the Kel Tec .32 and I don't think people care to have that large a pistol in a .25 caliber.

[heyjoe]

I'm sure they're long gone by now, but I just wanted to put in my 1/50th of a dollar on the .25 NAA and the .32 NAA to some extent. I'm not a big fan of the .25 caliber to begin with, it's not enough power over a .22 to make it worth the extra cost, it's only claim is it's more reliable, but that's dubious to me when we're dealing with small semi autos. Between the ACP and NAA, I would much rather have the ACP because even the .25 NAA I don't trust to expand and even if it did, it would not penetrate and I still think the target for the .25 NAA would be the head and face, which is the same target for the .25 ACP and I doubt there's going to be greater effect with .25 NAA.

The ammo situation with .25 NAA really puts it to bed and I do think the .25 NAA is likely to become totally obsolete along the lines of .32 and .38 Rimfire, which actually have more firearms chambered for them than the .25 NAA does.

IMO the .32 NAA is the best of the two and if there was one caliber NAA should have pushed that had its name on the headstamp, .32 NAA should have been it. Expansion and penetration aren't as questioned as .25 is and because of that it takes it out of the class of head/face shots only and they open up center mass as a viable target. Given the numerous .380's that have been sold the past 15 years, there's a huge potential for conversions to .32 NAA with a barrel and recoil spring change. On paper, the .32 NAA has a lot going for it, the only thing it lacks is support by the industry and review by gun media.

When the gun and ammo manufacturers have no interest in producing the .32 NAA and the gun media has no interest in objectively covering the .32 NAA on its merits, it cannot gain any traction among consumers and it gets dropped.

I agree, without support and traction, the calibers did not grow in popularity.

Here is some info on the history of the .25naa and .32naa

https://military-history.fandom.com/wiki/.25_NAA

I found this review and data. It is posted on NAA's website. (I believe the testing was done by Ed Sanow)

"On the average, the 25 NAA has 66% more stopping power than the 25 ACP. No individual 25 ACP load is anywhere close to the 25 NAA 35 grain XTP in effectiveness. On the average, the 25 NAA has the same stopping power as the 32 ACP."
Ref; https://northamericanarms.com/pdfs/sanow32.pdf

It's worth taking a look at. I had an opportunity to acquire both a .25naa and a .32naa Guardian.  I have them because I think it's "neat" and a reason to learn reloading. They are fun to shoot and have quite a "fireball" at the muzzle 

i wonder where Sanow is getting his data on one shot stops and stopping power of the 25 NAA. how many people could possibly have been shot by a 25 NAA?

[bearcatter]

i wonder where Sanow is getting his data on one shot stops and stopping power of the 25 NAA. how many people could possibly have been shot by a 25 NAA?

Probably just comparing ballistic numbers and gel tests. And, he's comparing it to the hotter SD .32 ACPs. I would doubt that many people have been shot with those either.

Sanow's numbers have little bearing with me, as I only shoot 71 grain FMJ .32. I know it's more wimpy than SD designs. I did try Fiocchi 73 grain, but it's a little hotter with higher POI. That increased felt recoil and fouled up my usual sight picture.

[OV-1D]

  O.K. you guys seeing were talking about 32 's from time to time whats the differences between 32 rimfire and 32 acp's . I have a couple of 32 rimfires (1862-1864) with the remanufactured new ammo . Inquiring minds need to know . 

[bearcatter]

The barrel lengths are different, but this is what I found. Different bullet and case diameters. The ACP would have higher numbers in a longer barrel.

.32 rimfire -
Bullet mass/type  80 gr lead
Velocity  945 fps
Energy  126 ft. lb.
Test barrel length: 24 inches
Bullet diameter  .316
Case diameter  .318

.32 ACP -
Bullet mass/type  71 grain FMJ
Velocity  985 fps
Energy   160 ft. lb.
Test barrel length:  6 inches
Bullet diameter .312
Case diameter  .336

[OV-1D]

  Your are just too quick Bear thanks its good info .

[bearcatter]

Easy. The Copy And Paste Poobah looked after me, I just did some rearranging. .. 

[MR_22]

There's another 32NAA on GunBroker, if anybody is looking.

https://www.gunbroker.com/Item/998742777

There's also some ammo available:

https://www.gunbroker.com/item/992726778
https://www.gunbroker.com/item/997517446
https://www.gunbroker.com/item/997643599
https://www.gunbroker.com/item/998416243
https://www.gunbroker.com/item/996729587

[Rick_Jorgenson]

I'm sure they're long gone by now, but I just wanted to put in my 1/50th of a dollar on the .25 NAA and the .32 NAA to some extent. I'm not a big fan of the .25 caliber to begin with, it's not enough power over a .22 to make it worth the extra cost, it's only claim is it's more reliable, but that's dubious to me when we're dealing with small semi autos. Between the ACP and NAA, I would much rather have the ACP because even the .25 NAA I don't trust to expand and even if it did, it would not penetrate and I still think the target for the .25 NAA would be the head and face, which is the same target for the .25 ACP and I doubt there's going to be greater effect with .25 NAA.

The ammo situation with .25 NAA really puts it to bed and I do think the .25 NAA is likely to become totally obsolete along the lines of .32 and .38 Rimfire, which actually have more firearms chambered for them than the .25 NAA does.

IMO the .32 NAA is the best of the two and if there was one caliber NAA should have pushed that had its name on the headstamp, .32 NAA should have been it. Expansion and penetration aren't as questioned as .25 is and because of that it takes it out of the class of head/face shots only and they open up center mass as a viable target. Given the numerous .380's that have been sold the past 15 years, there's a huge potential for conversions to .32 NAA with a barrel and recoil spring change. On paper, the .32 NAA has a lot going for it, the only thing it lacks is support by the industry and review by gun media.

When the gun and ammo manufacturers have no interest in producing the .32 NAA and the gun media has no interest in objectively covering the .32 NAA on its merits, it cannot gain any traction among consumers and it gets dropped.

I agree, without support and traction, the calibers did not grow in popularity.

Here is some info on the history of the .25naa and .32naa

https://military-history.fandom.com/wiki/.25_NAA

I found this review and data. It is posted on NAA's website. (I believe the testing was done by Ed Sanow)

"On the average, the 25 NAA has 66% more stopping power than the 25 ACP. No individual 25 ACP load is anywhere close to the 25 NAA 35 grain XTP in effectiveness. On the average, the 25 NAA has the same stopping power as the 32 ACP."
Ref; https://northamericanarms.com/pdfs/sanow32.pdf

It's worth taking a look at. I had an opportunity to acquire both a .25naa and a .32naa Guardian.  I have them because I think it's "neat" and a reason to learn reloading. They are fun to shoot and have quite a "fireball" at the muzzle 

i wonder where Sanow is getting his data on one shot stops and stopping power of the 25 NAA. how many people could possibly have been shot by a 25 NAA?

I believe... Stopping power is a measurement of the foot pounds of energy while running each shot through a chronograph, not necessarily by shooting someone and measuring their demise or lack there of   

Measuring foot pounds of energy is done by the speed out of the muzzle and weight of the bullet gives a figure of the impact of the projectile in foot pounds. So the comparison is the foot pounds of energy.

I welcome someone with more experience and "hands on" information to jump in with a better explanation.

[heyjoe]

I'm sure they're long gone by now, but I just wanted to put in my 1/50th of a dollar on the .25 NAA and the .32 NAA to some extent. I'm not a big fan of the .25 caliber to begin with, it's not enough power over a .22 to make it worth the extra cost, it's only claim is it's more reliable, but that's dubious to me when we're dealing with small semi autos. Between the ACP and NAA, I would much rather have the ACP because even the .25 NAA I don't trust to expand and even if it did, it would not penetrate and I still think the target for the .25 NAA would be the head and face, which is the same target for the .25 ACP and I doubt there's going to be greater effect with .25 NAA.

The ammo situation with .25 NAA really puts it to bed and I do think the .25 NAA is likely to become totally obsolete along the lines of .32 and .38 Rimfire, which actually have more firearms chambered for them than the .25 NAA does.

IMO the .32 NAA is the best of the two and if there was one caliber NAA should have pushed that had its name on the headstamp, .32 NAA should have been it. Expansion and penetration aren't as questioned as .25 is and because of that it takes it out of the class of head/face shots only and they open up center mass as a viable target. Given the numerous .380's that have been sold the past 15 years, there's a huge potential for conversions to .32 NAA with a barrel and recoil spring change. On paper, the .32 NAA has a lot going for it, the only thing it lacks is support by the industry and review by gun media.

When the gun and ammo manufacturers have no interest in producing the .32 NAA and the gun media has no interest in objectively covering the .32 NAA on its merits, it cannot gain any traction among consumers and it gets dropped.

I agree, without support and traction, the calibers did not grow in popularity.

Here is some info on the history of the .25naa and .32naa

https://military-history.fandom.com/wiki/.25_NAA

I found this review and data. It is posted on NAA's website. (I believe the testing was done by Ed Sanow)

"On the average, the 25 NAA has 66% more stopping power than the 25 ACP. No individual 25 ACP load is anywhere close to the 25 NAA 35 grain XTP in effectiveness. On the average, the 25 NAA has the same stopping power as the 32 ACP."
Ref; https://northamericanarms.com/pdfs/sanow32.pdf

It's worth taking a look at. I had an opportunity to acquire both a .25naa and a .32naa Guardian.  I have them because I think it's "neat" and a reason to learn reloading. They are fun to shoot and have quite a "fireball" at the muzzle 

i wonder where Sanow is getting his data on one shot stops and stopping power of the 25 NAA. how many people could possibly have been shot by a 25 NAA?

I believe... Stopping power is a measurement of the foot pounds of energy while running each shot through a chronograph, not necessarily by shooting someone and measuring their demise or lack there of   

Measuring foot pounds of energy is done by the speed out of the muzzle and weight of the bullet gives a figure of the impact of the projectile in foot pounds. So the comparison is the foot pounds of energy.

I welcome someone with more experience and "hands on" information to jump in with a better explanation.

the reason i asked that question was because there was someone who did a study on actual shootings, for percentage of one shot stops by caliber

[bearcatter]

I believe... Stopping power is a measurement of the foot pounds of energy while running each shot through a chronograph, not necessarily by shooting someone and measuring their demise or lack there of   

Measuring foot pounds of energy is done by the speed out of the muzzle and weight of the bullet gives a figure of the impact of the projectile in foot pounds. So the comparison is the foot pounds of energy.

I welcome someone with more experience and "hands on" information to jump in with a better explanation.

What you posted makes sense to me. I vaguely remember reading that many times. Measuring velocity, it's easy to understand how a chronograph works. Muzzle energy is apparently one of those equations like Einstein used to write. Velocity vs mass vs Mars aligning with Uranus .. 

Putting a number on stopping power seems to be an indefinite science based on comparison and opinion. A specific bullet design's performance through one of several types of ballistic gel; or Bubba phone books, water jugs, and pine boards. Some testers favor a big channel, some favor penetration. Sounds like a woman describing sex ......

[Rick_Jorgenson]

I believe... Stopping power is a measurement of the foot pounds of energy while running each shot through a chronograph, not necessarily by shooting someone and measuring their demise or lack there of   

Measuring foot pounds of energy is done by the speed out of the muzzle and weight of the bullet gives a figure of the impact of the projectile in foot pounds. So the comparison is the foot pounds of energy.

I welcome someone with more experience and "hands on" information to jump in with a better explanation.

What you posted makes sense to me. I vaguely remember reading that many times. Measuring velocity, it's easy to understand how a chronograph works. Muzzle energy is apparently one of those equations like Einstein used to write. Velocity vs mass vs Mars aligning with Uranus .. 

Putting a number on stopping power seems to be an indefinite science based on comparison and opinion. A specific bullet design's performance through one of several types of ballistic gel; or Bubba phone books, water jugs, and pine boards. Some testers favor a big channel, some favor penetration. Sounds like a woman describing sex ......

Sounds like a woman describing sex ......
Talk about planets aligning! lol!

I think the "go to" measurement is the Ballistics Gel formula for penetration. I believe the FBI has a minimum penetration measured in inches, other departments may have their own requirements.

I have seen some with fabric in front of the gel to simulate clothing and over coats.

You Tube has several channels that have done tests. Some of the most complete tests of calibers and different ammo makers is done by "Lucky Gunner Ammo"
https://www.youtube.com/@LuckyGunner

[Tony Rumore]

Then you will need the nonexistent ammo.

However, a good reloader should bee able to make some. They start with .32ACP cases, cut and neck them down, and then insert a .25ACP bullet.

32ACP cases are only .680" long and semi rimmed.  The 25 NAA is rimless and .745" long.  You could recut the rim/groove of the 32ACP case, but you can't stretch it.
There is no parent case for the 25 NAA.

Tony