[Sturmgewher]

While leafing through a gun magazine earlier I came across an article covering the .327 Magnum and the SP101 chambered for it. Up front I'll confess I'm one of those big bore nuts that believes it is simply not a proper handgun if the caliber doesn't begin with a four. That being said, I am intrigued by this combo. The ammo being tested was a 100gr JSP moving at 1400fps and is claimed to have 20% less recoil than the .357, which is apparantly somewhat gnarly to fire in the same 3" SP101 platform and the 327 Ruger has the additional advantage of having a six shot cylinder as opposed to the .357's five. The .327 will also chamber the .32 H&R Magnum, the .32 S&W and .32 S&W Long, quite a list for one wheel gun!
What I would like to know from the forum is whether this chambering offers any additional benifits thay can see to say a .38/.357?

[Standing Wolf]

Remember the .357 maximum?

Didn't think so.

Remember the .45 GAP?

Had a hunch.

[McCall911]

.327 Magnum, the next big thing?

My observation about it is that it is ballistically similar to the 7.62x25 Tokarev. A .312" 85 grain bullet going 1400-1500 fps, vs. a .308" 85 grain bullet going 1400-1500 fps.

Whether it catches on to any extent or not, I don't know. But I tend to doubt that it's the next big thing.

[papajohn]

Despite all the hype, I just can't get excited about this round. It may be what the 32 H & R "Magnum" aspired to be, but it's still a 32. Comparisons are inevitable, but I can't see what is supposed to make this round "Better" than a 357. Less recoil? Sure. Also less frontal area to cause tissue damage. But the operating pressures are so high the muzzle blast is sure to be astoundlingly harsh, especially out of a short barrel.

And don't believe the energy figures, they're horribly skewed in favor of velocity. (Velocity SQUARED times bullet weight). In terms of momentum, the 357 still wins by a long shot. 6 shots vs 5? If you didn't stop the bad guy with 5 rounds of 357, another bullet isn't what you need, marksmanship training is.

This is yet another solution to a problem that has yet to be defined. I think out of a carbine it would be a hoot, but I'm not going to run right out and buy one. Ballistically, the 327 is the equivalent of the .30 M1 Carbine load, and I don't hear anyone calling it the Holy Grail of ANYTHING.

PJ

[Stainz]

A year ago, Ruger had a glut of 3" SP101s in .32 H&RM, a caliber that finally faded into oblivion by the major manufacturers last year. H&R introduced it in 1984 - seen them lately?

The .327 Magnum 3" SP101... let's see, set the .32 H&RM reamers ~1/8" deeper - re-stamp the caliber... hey, now we have 3" SP101s in '.327 Magnum! As to 'power', I have chrono-ed the excellent Georgia Arms 100gr JHP (XTP) in .32 H&RM at 1,186 fps from my 4" SP101 in .32 H&RM - pretty close to what Federal claims, KE-wise, for their 85gr .327 Magnum. Speaking of ammo - try to find it. My dealer has had the SP101s, but no .327 Magnum ammo. He does carry very limited .32 S&WL & H&RM. Want reloading supplies? They abound - in .32 S&WL & H&RM - Federal has a lock on the '.327 Magnum' for a while.

I enjoy plinking with my BHG SSM & 4" SP101 in .32 H&RM, but they were the absolute worst QC nightmares I've ever gotten new from Ruger. Yes, after much TLC, they are good performers - now. I have made a round that hits close enough vertically from 10-25yd to be a fun plinker from both revolvers. Good thing, as the SP101 has the cheesiest windage-only adjustable rear sight I have ever seen. Both suffer from overly large, near SAAMI max, chamber IDs - which 'work' commercial and homebrew ammo's brass excessively - limiting their reloading lifespan. Speaking of reloading, price lead in this size - maybe 10% less than 158gr LSWCs in .38 Special - not a great arguement for 'saving money'. Still, it is fun... making your marksmanship in hitting rebounding plates in the 'sweet spot' just to drop them very important.

Still, if it introduces a few more folks to the venerable .32 - it's a good thing. For goodness sakes, however, keep a good old .38 Special (+P) loaded for defense - lots of good and proven loads for that!

Stainz

[DWFan]

I'll give you a better one, Standing Wolf. How about the 9mm Federal?
Seriously, I don't see anything displacing the .38 Special/.357 Mag for self protection. They've simply been around too long and too many load recipes exist to cover every situation. Yes, you gain one additional round with the .32, but if capacity is your main concern, get a compact semi-auto.

[AirForceShooter]

Let's see if S&W climbs on the wagon.
The gun and caliber are interesting.

AFS

[Ridgerunner665]

It is what they say it is...

A powerful round...with plenty enough speed to do some major damage with a well constructed bullet...all that with something like 20% less recoil than a 357 Mag...and an extra round in the cylinder.

I see it as a "heavy hitter" suitable for even recoil sensitive women (or men)

[BattleChimp Potemkin]

+1 Standing Wolf
An answer to a question never asked. With so many rounds floating out there, whats the point of standardization? :(

The "posted" power figures? What does that mean in real life? NOTHING! Look at Glaser and Magsafe. They have incredible numbers. I have yet to see one of those rounds work effectively against a person. Too many people read one source (*cough* Fackler *cough*) and take that a higher number means better on the street. I will stick to proven designs and calibers, particularly ones that I can obtain when the SHTF. Imagine your "wife" trying to get rounds for that new SP101 when supplies dry up. :(

[Sturmgewher]

Too many people read one source (*cough* Fackler *cough*) and take that a higher number means better on the street.
And internet forums are a much more reliable source of information. There are SOOOO many experts in the forums, why even read a book or magazine any more? In so far as Glaser not being an effective cartridge, based on WHAT?!? Have you seen the round perform in ballistic gel? Effective penetration and wound channel, but it was ballistic gel, not a human torso, so we should ignore the data, right? I haven't seen anyone KO'ed by a Glaser either but I'm not a cop or ER doctor so I'm not likely to.

[rcmodel]

It's running pressure like the handloaded 32-20 WCF or .30 Carbine in a revolver.

Both these rounds are the most unpleasent handgun calibers I have ever shot due to the intense & sharp blast out of the cylinder / barrel gap.

I predect the ear-splitting blast will have most folks shooting .32 H&R mag in them after the paint peels off thier ear-muffs on the first outing.

rcmodel

[Brasso]

(*cough* Fackler *cough*)

Don't you mean "(*cough* Marshall *cough*)" ?

[don95sml]

AirForceShooter said:
Let's see if S&W climbs on the wagon.
The gun and caliber are interesting.
That's probably the one endorsement that would establish the .327 Magnum as a viable caliber. But I suspect S&W will not act until some other revolver and/or rifle manufacturers jump on the bandwagon.

[JohnMcD348]

I'm still on the sidelines about this caliber. On paper it sound great. I realy like the idea of the myriad of cartridges it can chamber and fire.

But, it's an unproven cartridge and caliber. When I turned 21 and was leagelly able to purchase and carry a handgun, I chose a .357 S&W 686. I go it becuase it could fire powerhouse .357 loads and still run .38special. The BIG determiner for me was the history behind it and the record of stopping power it has had over the years.
I know that logic kinda goes againt any newcomers but if I had to depend on my firearm for my life, I'd rather go with what's proven than what's theoretically better.

[Oro]

Dead as a dodo...

.all that with something like 20% less recoil than a 357 Mag...

The formula for recoil incorporates the weight of the bullet, the velocity, and the weight of the powder charge. If it has 20% less recoil, it also has 20% less momentum. I can always buy a downloaded .357 cartridge or make one. Yet the round operates at the same pressure with the super-sonic crack and the flash. To me, "20% less recoil" makes the round sound like "80% of a good thing."

I couple that with the fact it's really a .31 caliber round, that's going to open up to a smaller diameter of frontal area upon expansion compared to a .357, making shot placement even more problematic. Yet with the same flash, bang, and theatrics. Hmm, I'm just not feeling the love here...

I guess the aspect of sticking six rounds vs. five in a small frame revolver is interesting, but with the average gun fight running 2 to 2.5 rounds, I'm still carrying twice as much as I likely will ever need with five rounds.

This thing just smacks of marketing gimmick and I think it will sell to some nuggets in the gun stores when salesman twist around the facts to make it look good, but the "gun club" of knowledgeable buyers and shooters isn't going to adopt it, and it will be an orphan pretty soon.

[peyton]

I do not find ammunition available, I thought of rechambering my ruger.32 H&R but no ammo around.

[Bezoar]

doesnt the 44 special have 20% less recoil then a 357? just curious.

[MikePGS]

doesnt the 44 special have 20% less recoil then a 357? just curious.
According to Chuck Hawk's (http://www.chuckhawks.com/handgun_recoil_table.htm)
a 44 oz .357 mag has 8.7 lb's of recoil (a 158 grain travelling at 1250 fps), whereas a 48 oz .44 special has 4.5 lb's of recoil (750 grain traveling at 750 fps), which is 51 or so percent of the recoil. Of course, those bullet and gun weights might not be typical depending on how you load yours, but i think there's a calculator on that site somewhere (if not there you should be able to find one elsewhere) to get specifics.

[Elvishead]

Although I would never get one, I think it a winner in my book. I just try to keep my collcection to .357/.38s and 9mm. Not to mention some 7.62x25s for the fun of it.

[buttrap]

Me I would just load a .357 down a bit vs a frigging 32.

[BBroadside]

It sounds like this is the same argument that happens with most other comparisons of cartridges with different bullet diameters. Some people trust narrow bullets, some don't.

I say "narrow bullets" instead of "light bullets" because the .327 Federal is using some pretty heavy bullets for a handgun in the 7-8mm range. People are scoffing a lot more at the
.327 Mag ... 100-grain ... 1400 fps
than they did at the
7.63mm Mauser ... 86-grain ... 1410 fps.
Then again, times have changed, and ideas about stopping power have too. Just because the Mausers were famous and used by a lot of early 20th C. cavalry units doesn't make them good manstoppers (ditto for the Nagants, early Lugers, French 8mms, etc., all of which are handily beaten by Federal's little sparkplug).

I don't know enough about the difference between rifle and handgun ballistics to know why many put a premium on sectional density for the former and bullet diameter for the latter (obviously the FN Five-seveN isn't a product of that school of thought but it's an exception). I mean, if someone reported a 115-grain bullet at 1200-1300 fps ... that would be hot performance from a 9mm Parabellum, right? But from the .327 it is mainly garnering skepticism.

I think Ruger and Federal may well see this project go down to failure. Europeans don't like revolvers as much as we do and Americans don't like .32s very much. I think this cartridge would be about perfect for silhouette shooting, niche market though it is.

[TnShooter83]

I won't sell my .357 for one.

Just my .2c

[Jim March]

I think it has potential in ONE niche:

People who buy 357s but then buy "downloaded" 357 ammo because they can't cope with full-house recoil.

There's a LOT of these people. Look at the specs for the Speer Gold Dot 135gr "357 Short Barrel" load: it's barely breaking 1,050fps. The Remington Golden Saber and Cor-Bon(!!!) 125gr DPX are also wimped-out loads. Don't get me wrong, they'll work and they're all slightly better than a 38Spl+P, although in the case of a Buffalo Bore 38+P, not by much. Oh, speaking of which: even Buffalo Bore, the "Kings of Gonzo Ballistics", sell down-loaded 357 "tactical" loads now.

The best 327 loads are very similar to these somewhat gelded 357 loads.

So, why not get another bean in the wheel if that's where you're at anyhow?

The problem is, you can't load up the 327 for "bear" (even black bear) the way you can the 357 in a pinch, unless you were dumb enough to buy a 12.5oz S&W Turdium overpriced pocketful of insanity...

[Clean97GTI]

doubt it. The .357 Mag has established itself as THE go-to chambering for wheelguns. It provides all the power you could need and can even accommodate its older predecessor the .38 Special. I don't see this smaller round catching on. Sounds like a gimmick to me.

obviously .357 isn't the only choice. You've also got the .44mag and larger for serious wrist punishment.

[Quoheleth]

But the operating pressures are so high the muzzle blast is sure to be astoundlingly harsh, especially out of a short barrel.

I read the article on the .327 in the new Ruger catalog. IIRC, pressures in this little gem are hotter 'n a Texas sidewalk in July - 45,000 pounds pressure. By comparison, the .357 Mag loads they used in their chart for comparison [read: I don't know whose data this was] showed around 30K pounds pressure.

That's a lot of energy crammed in that case. Does that increase the KB threat/potential?

Q

[Brian Williams]

For me it would be a great single shot rifle round for ground hogs. I will keep my 357s.

[Tom Servo]

Cost of ammo makes it impractical for me. Sure, it can fire .32 H&R Mag and such, but those are expensive as well. .38/.357 are still cheaper, and they're proven rounds.

OTOH, an 8-shot L-Frame or 10-shot N-Frame in .327 could be interesting...

[Virginian]

It already is the last little thing. I wish it, and all it's proponents well. Heck, I have a couple of 22s myself.
How many 7mm rifle rounds do we have on the market now? The 7x57, the 280/7mm Express Rem., the 7mm Rem. magnum, the 7mm/08, the 7mm Weatherby, the short fat 7mm magnum, and the even shorter even fatter 7mm magnum? The people who make guns and ammo are trying to find ways to sell more of both. More power to them. But I don't need one. But, if they came out with a 44 Grand Magnum, that would still shoot regular 44 Magnum, and 44 Special, and didn't look ridiculous in a Ruger Blackhawk configuration, now I would have to have one of those. That would be practical as all get out.

[moooose102]

i just don't see the point. one of these days, i will replace the model 686 i sold several years ago, and it will be a .357 magnum. the .357 seems to do everything very well, and if you do not like the recoil you can shoot 38 specials, or 38 special +p's. so why would i want to go and take a chance on a cartridge that may fade into oblivion, that really does not do something better than the tried and true .357? actually, i do not see the point of a lot of the "new" cartridges they have come up with in the last 6-8 years. all the wsm's, rum's etc. what do they really offer that the old tried and true originals do not. most of them, the only "advantage" is they fit in a standard length action in stead of a magnum length action. so what does that really do for a shooter. the amount of time it takes a shooter to rack a bolt an extra 3/4" is miniscule. and the same for any supposed weight savings. the only real savings i can see is it is cheaper for the gun manufacturers to make the gun. do they pass that savings on to you? yes, in some of the cases, there is a slight increase in velocity, in calibers that already have enough power to push a rinocerous off a cliff at 100 paces. i just dont get it. am i alone on this?

[evan price]

.41 Action Express.
.45 GAP
.327 Magnum
.480 Ruger

Yawn.

[grimjaw]

My observation about it is that it is ballistically similar to the 7.62x25 Tokarev. A .312" 85 grain bullet going 1400-1500 fps, vs. a .308" 85 grain bullet going 1400-1500 fps.

Yet some people will still tout the Tokarev as the wunderround while saying the .327 Magnum is 'underpowered.' ;)

I'd take a seven or eight shot .327 Magnum revolver over a CZ-52 any day.

jm, never missing an opportunity to bash the CZ-52.

[Fingolfin]

It's actually a round i've wanted to be developed for many years. The reason is 6 shots in a snubbie with more power than the .32 H&R mag. Everything about it, as you would expect from manufacturer info and gun magazine reviews, sounds wonderful. I figure the biggest catch may be the muzzle blast and report. I'm not sure if the extra round is worth it if i've just been flashbang stunned by my own weapon, although .357 mag out of a 2" barrel isn't exactly dainty.

Either way i'm hoping S&W will produce revolvers in this chambering, although i'm happy with my .38spl +P.

[BBroadside]

Virginian makes a good point: "How many 7mm rifle rounds do we have on the market now?"

It seems like rifle-buyers are much more receptive to new cartridges than handgun-buyers. I'm not sure why this is. I used to think there were more rifle cartridges than there needed to be, just because for every "regular" caliber there seemed to be both a Win or Rem magnum caliber and a Weatherby magnum. Then all the short magnums and ultra magnums came out....

And yet handgun sales are comparable to rifle sales ... it's not like there are ten rifle sold very every handgun. So I guess it's common for someone to own, say, ten rifles in eight calibers, and ten handguns in two calibers. Or something like that.

I want a gun-totin' economist (Truman noted they all have two hands!) to come in and explain this to me.

[Shade00]

I won't be adopting this early, but if S&W hops and makes a 6-shot J-frame, I would probably get one. Been meaning to buy another J-frame lately anyway...

[slzy]

why did'nt they produce it in .30 carbine? even with moon clips.

[publiuss]

I will buy one, if, someone makes one with adjustable sights. In my opinion, fixed sights are for combat guns, adjustable for hunting and plinking. I think it would be a great knock around gun for skunks, possums, coyotes, and stuff like that which you might run into around the farm in the off-season. I would like an adjustable sighted J frame Smith or adjustable sight SP101. Less so the SP101, to heavy for round in my opinion. Maybe resurrect the Security Six For the 327. Hell, for that matter please bring it back in the .357.

[outerlimit]

I read about this cartridge in The Shooting Times a while back,

Sounds interesting, maybe light vest penetrating capability as well. A .327 @ 100gr. sounds like a really long bullet, I wonder if tumbling is a problem?

[Diggers]

Charter Arms is producing two revolvers in .327, so there seems to be some interest in this new round.

http://www.charterfirearms.com/products/Charter_New_products.html

[ahpd1992]

There's always room for something new. Yes a .357/.38 will do everything a .327 will do, probably better, but I think there is still a place for the .32 caliber revolvers. I like the idea of an 8 shot L frame s&w or gp100. I also like the 6 shot capacity in a small framed gun. I think you might see Taurus come up with some products before smith commits to the caliber. It kind of builds on itself if more manufacturers make the gun, then more ammo makers will make the ammo. Why not? The wife has a sp101 in .32 mag that she adores (I like shootin it too), I think there is a market. As far as usage, I think for anything up to and including wolves the .327 would take care of and is lighter and a bit easier to carry. Just my thoughts

[outerlimit]

I think a scandium .327 might be a little less harsh to shoot than a .357. And like you mentioned 6 shots instead of 5 in a j-frame.

[zxcvbob]

The industry is trying to reinvent a rimmed .30 Carbine cartridge (like a .32-20). They just don't realize it yet.

[HC_Jack]

What they need to do is chamber the Ruger Model 99 in 327 federal. A rotary mag that fits 4 44mag rounds could probably take 7 or 8 of the 327 Federal. It would be a modern update on the 30 carbine (and a great option for those of us with a local AW ban)

[eliphalet]

The 32's have all died a slow death this one probably will too.

[Mac45]

Next big thing? Nah.
Really fun plinker that could be pressed into service as a SD round? Yup.
I'd love to have a Blackhawk convertible in .327/.32-20.
A J frame would be lots of fun too.

[thebaldguy]

I saw the article as well. While I don't think it's a bad idea, I don't think it's a great idea either. Like those Winchester rifle WSSM cartridges, I think this cartridge is an answer in search of a question. I don't see myself buying a gun chambered in this new round.

[cslinger]

I would love for it to take off and be the next big thing but I seriously doubt it will.

Its just hard to go wrong with good ole' .38/.357, 9x19mm or .45ACP. Those three calibers are plentiful, relatively inexpensive, able to be bought anywhere and will do anything one could ever need in a handgun.

Chris

[icebones]

the next little, big thing.

the .32 H&R magnum was somewhat popular for a few years, and i suspest the .327magnum may suffer the same fate.

sad thing, the .327 magnum seems like a idea round fro smaller statured shooters and concealed carry.
a .357 magnum is a big much for a 110lb woman to handle, but the .327 apparently gives a bit more punch without the recoil.

[rockstar.esq]

Personally, I think this round suffers the same marketing faux pas as the FN Five seven. Selling silly small cartridges to CCW folks who haven't seriously considered much below a 9mm for some time isn't good business. In both cases they'd have made a FAR bigger spark selling them as varmint rounds. Seeing as how the .22Mag, and the 17HMR offer about the same level of utility as the 5.7 or the .327 Federal, one would think this'd be elementary.

[jbech123]

Can't blame the manufacturers for trying to sell more stuff, I mean hey they're in business to make money! But in reality they are trying to fill a niche that doesn't exist. Buy a 357, you can shoot buffalo bore or corbon for big power, standard 357 mag, 38+p, and regular 38. With lower ammo cost and an infinite variety of factory loads...I really can't see what the 327 is bringing to the table.

[Markbo]

I think most people are missing the point. The H&R actually makes a fine SD load and the .327 should be even better. But that is not what it's primary attraction is. This is a GREAT small game revolver and rifle round. That is where it will win fans.

And if the muzzle blast bothers you - good. You deserve to lose your hearing if you are not wearing hearing protection EVERY time you shoot.

[Marshall]

I see a place for it and would like to see it succeed. What's it hurt? The more offerings in the firearm industry the better. As long as we see the industry growing I don't care what they call it. Some people will foo foo anything new, nothing new and this industry becomes stagnant, not a good thing.

[gripper]

How would this grab you??...any here remember those 8 shot N Frame .357's that the S&W Custom Shop was putting out a couyple of years back???Apply that concept to a Security Six/GP100...maybe 5 or 6 inch barrel options...I think it could work. Get the ammo available /affordable;and THAT would CERTAINLY be a "must have " for me.
And maybe a Marlin lever gun for a companion piece.That could be methadone for my Milsurp addiction:neener::cool:

[Accordionhero]

I plan on getting one soon.

All you naysayers forget that .45 ACP and .357 mag were once newfangled experimental rounds too.

Sure, it could flop harder than HD-DVD, but I'm going to give it a chance to win my heart. Being able to shoot .32 long and .32 HRmag is nice too. I don't know why anyone would bother to shoot .32 Short, since the ballistics are so laughable.

[RichardInFlorida]

I think it is very easy to be a naysayer about this cartridge. In all honesty, I recall many of the same arguments against the .327 being used against the .40 when it was introduced.

The odds are this cartridge will be around for a few years and then fade away. Personally, I like the look of it, but for me it needs to be in a S&W 642-style platform. I see it as being an excellent BUG.

[papajohn]

I never said it was a lousy cartridge, but I sure get tired of the GunZine Experts telling me every new cartridge is the answer to every Handgunner's/Rifleman's/Big Game Hunter's (pick one) dream. I heard the same shpiel about the 32 H & R Magnum That Ain't, the 9mm Federal, every new 7mm WonderWhizBang that comes out, and I now refuse to believe ANYTHING the pundits say. If it has merit, it will sell, but stop telling me it's the ultimate manstopper when NO ONE has ever been shot with it, okay? :neener:

As I said earlier, I think in a carbine it would equal........the .30 M-1 Carbine. In an accurate gun, it would be fun. But if Attila The Hun knocks down my door and wants a piece of me, I'm not reaching for a 32 ANYTHING.

PJ

[jeepmor]

I have a 10mm and find it hard enough to find ammo for it in all but a few shops like Sportsman's Warehouse. Why would I want another hard to find cartridge.

I like the innovation, if that's really what you wanna call this one. I don't. But really, isn't ammo expensive enough already for common calibers.

[Markbo]

Ahhhhh... the blessings of being a reloader pour all over me! :D

[Legionnaire]

Interesting thread. I like the SP101 a lot (and mine has the 2.25" barrel), but don't see a great deal of advantage to the .327 Mag. I shoot .357s just fine from the platform, and .38s are available for the those who need less recoil. Given the cost of ammo these days, playing with different .357 loads would accomplish much the same purpose.

I'm not a betting man, but if I were, I would not bet on the success of the .327, despite its intriguing qualities. There is a definite power/performance curve in handgun ammunition given current technology, and it is my own belief that the marginal value of trying to fill in every point along that curve has already passed the point of positive net return from a performance perspective. But if marketers of "new" can get people to buy something they didn't know they needed before, more power to 'em.

[freakshow10mm]

I've owned a .327 for a few months. Not too impressed. Hard to control on rapid fire, similar muzzle blast as the 357 Mag. Cases jump the ejector (rim slips under). Cases sticky during extraction. A good deal of recoil for something touted as "perfect for a woman". Sold it. I'd either download the .327 for SD or just carry my hot H&R loads anyways.

[md7]

well, it would be interesting to see a 6 shot 642 in .327, or an 8 shot GP100. that would be cool. and i might would try it out in the j frame platform.

but, imho, it will probably fizzle out.

[BIGR]

Sorry, but I'll stick with my 357's for now. Too many new here today gone tomorrow calibers flooding the market. I guess time will tell.

[gripper]

I will add it to my "when both the funds AND the product are available" list.

[anharmyenone]

I had to get a Hogue grip for it (the one made by Hogue and sold by Ruger on their website) before I was happy, but I'm very happy now. Firing the 100 grain 1400 fps practice ammo feels just right to me. It's within my "sweet spot" for recoil. It's very controllable for me with the Hogue grip and about the maximum recoil I can have without my hand getting numb and tingling. The 85 grain jhp 1330 fps and the 115 grain jhp 1300 fps are ordered and on their way from able ammo and I will see if I like them. Hopefully one or the other will be within the "sweet spot" for me. Your mileage may vary. Your tastes may vary.

[RichardInFlorida]

anharmyenone,

Welcome to the board, and thank you for your impressions. Definitely let us know how the other ammo shoots also.

--Richard

[ylapirrynag]

If you are worried about clip size >_>:
S&W 686: 6 round clip
Taurus Model 66: 7 round clip

[hoptob]

I think in a carbine it would equal........the .30 M-1 Carbine.

+1

Why don't you guys just get 1895 Nagant? It's almost same cartridge and it sure has been "street proven" like nothing else. And it's cheaper too...

:D

[XDShooter07]

I think the reason this cartridge is getting so much flack is because manufactures are putting it in platforms that already work well with the .38/.357 rounds. Obviously they're trying to market it against these rounds but they're not doing it the right way. Why lose a little in bullet weight and transfer energy to save a little in recoil and one round. People that are shooting .38/.357 snubbies have already made peace with the recoil so giving them a one round advantage vs. an already proven stopper doesn't give much incentive.

I think if they market this round to it's own platform it would be much more successful in the self defense market. For instance: lets keep the 5 shot cylinder and shrink the dimensions a bit to give a little thinner cylinder, then use that saved height (since a cylinder's a circle we'd save height and width) and make a little less tall J-frame...... Offer it in barrel lengths from 1-7/8" to 3". Then there you have it an even more concealable J-frame with slightly less recoil, way better ballistics than any pocket auto. Might even win over some of those people that use kel-tecs rather than J-frames because they're smaller.

So rather than one round as an incentive. They've offered better pocketability as an incentive. On top of that it will probably be lighter. And if someone goes IWB then they can get a longer barrel and have improved accuracy out to some longer distances.

Just my thoughts.....

[gizamo]

Guess I'm confused. Anyone thinking that this is not a manstopper?

http://i96.photobucket.com/albums/l163/Gizamo1/MVC-034F1.jpg

The one on the left is the new .327 Federal. It is a .312 diameter as compared to the round on the left that is 1/10 of an inch longer but only .308 in diameter.

Ummm, once again I must be confused...the one the right is the one in the M-1Carbine......


Giz

[papajohn]

XDShooter, you bring up an interesting point about making a smaller gun, I think it DOES have merit..............But. In reality, for someone to do what you suggest, you're talking about completely re-designing a handgun, to make it smaller, to sell it to a fairly small niche market. Not saying that it couldn't be done fairly simply with CADCAM manufacturing techniques, I just don't see anyone doing that to sell MAYBE 10,000 guns.

Personally, I think I'd rather see a reliable 4-shot auto or Derringer-style gun that could shoot something like the 40 or 45. Remember the C.O.P. 4-barrel Derringer-thing? Great concept, HORRID execution.

But back to the 327 Wunderkind........you don't suppose they named it after the big-block engine, trying to give it the illusion of having some cojones, do ya? :neener:

Papajohn

[SlamFire1]

I have always been skeptical about claims that Kinetic Energy somehow equates to stopping power. Shill gunwriters love the KE formula (KE = Mass X Velocity X Velocity) because increasing velocity by 10 fps increases KE by 100. So it makes it easier to shill for higher velocity products, just a little increase in velocity and the number goes up by a huge margin. So it must be that much better! Shill, shill, shill. :barf:

What I recall, from physics, is that momentum is the only energy conserved in collisions. That is Momentum Energy = Mass X velocity.

What the 327 guys did was increase velocity to the point that the KE was equal to a 357 round, and claim that their little round is just as good.

I think history is replete will all sorts of similar high velocity high jinks that were not as good as the marketing.

The debate is never whether bigger is not better, the debate is whether smaller is as good as bigger.

Go with Big. It is the sure thing.

The 32's have all died a slow death this one probably will too.

Shot my 32 S&W Long at the pistol range yesterday. It is so underpowered that when a large lunged individual on the left was talking, I could not hear the bullet impact on my gongs.

However, when I switched to my 357, no matter how loud that guy talked, I heard the ping.

[md7]

xdshooter07,

that is an interesting concept. make a j frame smaller with less weight, and still hold five shots. i would be interested in seeing one.

i think the difficulty in selling them would be getting people to buy a 5 shot .38spl vs. an upstart .327 cartridge. but, i can see where easier concealment could be a seeling point.

good idea!

[XDShooter07]

I would probably buy one and replace me .32 acp kel-tec with the higher velocity round.

And I'm thinking, maybe since a lot of people I see carrying concealed revolvers are carrying .38+P; for instance the 100s in the 642 club. Maybe we should see how this round compares to a .38+P rather than a .357; instead of trying to knock the big dog off the mountain replace the little brother....I know for some people it wouldn't be feasable because they like the .357/.38 interchangeability; but maybe for those that can't tolerate the .357 but can tolerate a .38+P and don't buy a .357 rated gun in the first place, it might offer improved performance with a tolerable recoil level

[anharmyenone]

Okay I've shot all three types of .327 ammo now in my 3-1/16 inch barrel Ruger SP 101 with optional Hogue grip. Like I said before the Hogue grip (sold separately at the Ruger website) is a must if you are recoil-sensitive. If you are interested in the .327 for reduced recoil, don't even waste time with the factory Ruger grip, order the Hogue right off the bat. All results in this post are with the Hogue grip.

For convenience I will assign numbers to the three available .327 cartridges.

#1 * Federal Premium 85 grain Hydra-Shok JHP - MV 1330 fps, ME 334 ft. lbs.
#2 * American Eagle 100 grain SP - MV 1400 fps, ME 435 ft. lbs.
#3 * Speer 115 grain Gold Dot JHP - MV 1300 fps, ME 431 ft. lbs.

The above velocity figures are from Federal for this specific model gun. I did not chronograph anything myself. Speer is a part of the same corporate family as Federal.

Okay, #2 is the jacketed softpoint practice ammo and is the one I talked about in my previous post that is just perfect for me. It is in my "sweet spot" for recoil. It is just shy of what would make my hand tingle or sting or feel numb after shooting. It also costs less than the other two versions, around 50 to 55 cents per round. #3 feels exactly like #2 WHEN SHOOTING, but once I put the gun down, I notice that #3 leaves my hand with a mild sting and a subtle tingle that lasts a couple days (but no numbness). This is very interesting. #3 is a serious defensive round that is just a little more punishing to the hand than what I would want to shoot on a regular basis, but WHEN SHOOTING, feels EXACTLY like #2, which does not leave my hand stinging or tingling afterward. I even put some #2 and #3 rounds in the cylinder randomly and fired them and tried to tell which was which and I COULD NOT TELL WHICH WAS WHICH while firing.

It seems to me that since the folks at Federal designed the .327 using the 3-1/16 inch Ruger SP101 and since #2 and #3 feel exactly the same when shooting that Federal was aiming for #2 to be a cheaper and more pleasant-to-shoot practice substitute for #3 that would prepare you just fine to shoot #3 when needed because it feels exactly the same when shooting.

#1 is part of Federal's "Personal Defense low-recoil" line and it is indeed lower-recoil than either of the other two cartridges, but between #2 and #3 I have everything I need so I won't be buying any more of #1.

So, I now will practice with #2 and enjoy the heck out of it, and carry #3 for defense.

Your mileage may vary. Your tastes may vary.

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

The best thing that this cartridge will do is bring out some pre-lock Smiths in .32 H&R mag, for cheap on the used market. :) I say more power to those who want to "upgrade" to a Ruger or if made, a lock Smith in the whizbang caliber, and sell their old gun - thank you Ruger! :p

[ugaarguy]

well, it would be interesting to see a 6 shot 642 in .327, They've offered it in .32 H&R Mag as the model 432. I'd like to see S&W bring it back out in .327 Fed Mag. If there's enough interest I'm sure they would. After all, they need only ream the chambers a bit longer to do it. Otherwise all the tooling is paid for.

XDShooter, you bring up an interesting point about making a smaller gun, I think it DOES have merit..............But. In reality, for someone to do what you suggest, you're talking about completely re-designing a handgun, to make it smaller, to sell it to a fairly small niche market. Not saying that it couldn't be done fairly simply with CADCAM manufacturing techniques, I just don't see anyone doing that to sell MAYBE 10,000 guns.
Here again Smith & Wesson could step up. The J Frame has a predecessor, the I Frame, which is a good bit smaller. With modern metallurgy I don't see why an I frame or lengthened I frame couldn't handle .327 Mag. How much of the tooling and plans for the I frame S&W still has is an important question though.

[MoreCowBell]

I have a new (to me) Model 65 to go alongside my NIB 442. Is there a 357 load that is preferable for HD use to the Cor-Bons I have for the Airweight? Or just stay with the 125 gr JHPs in 38 spcl?
Or something else reasonably findable and not extravagantly spendy?
Pros and cons on 38 +Ps vs 357 mag.
You guys is da men! And Women I spose, can't really tell from most of the monikers.
mcb

[ugaarguy]

Or something else reasonably findable and not extravagantly spendy?
Pros and cons on 38 +Ps vs 357 mag.
Fixed sight S&W revolvers, like your model 65, generally have the sights factory regulated for 158 grain loads. You might take your 65 to the range and shoot both light & heavy .38 Special loads to see how close the POI is to the POA with different bullet weights. If you go with .357 Mag loads stay away from anything under 140 grains since those higher velocity loads are known to crack the forcing cone on K Frames.

For HD I like the much lower flash & blast of .38s as compared to .357s. Your chosen 125gr Cor-Bon 38s should be fine in your 65, but run a few rounds through the gun to see how well it likes them.

Alternately the Remington 158 grain LSWCHP, part number R38S12, also known as "The FBI Load" is a good choice. It ships in 50 round boxes, and isn't terribly expensive. It's old tech that works great, so it's far from exotic. On top of all that I've never met a K Frame that didn't like the load.

Overall, finding a load that's accurate and controllable in your gun is more important than how high or low tech the slug is.

[MoreCowBell]

Oops, I bought a box of 125 gr JHP 357s and shot them at the range tonight. I wouldn't have thought anything would hurt a 357 mag except maybe some super heavy handloads. These shot about like 158 gr FMJ do in the Airweight
I also shot some 148 gr TCJ. I don't know what TCJ means but they look like copper wadcutters. They shot very mild.
I also got some 129 gr +P Federal Hydra-shok in 38 sp. Those and the Cor-Bons seemed about like the TCJ 38s compared to the 357s.

I don't know exactly what 'how well it likes them' means. I didn't shoot straight enough (I was shooting fairly rapid at 10yds) to notice much accuracy difference. The 38s were a good bit milder in recoil but but the mags weren't really aggravating.

Thanks for your insight ugaar, especially about the hi vel 357s. I'll go light on them.
What I was more after in my question is what's the difference in impact, penetration, shock etc. In short what is going to hurt someone the most and quickest if I have to shoot a BG?
And I guess in addition if the high velocity SD rounds are out for 357 magnum, then what exactly are the strong points of the 357 vs the 38? Hunting? Longer range? Shooting out tires?
One more question: The FBI loads to which you referred are for 38 spcl right? Just guessing from the part number.
So I'm not really hearing of anything in 357 mag I should be considering for SD/HD, eh?

And finally an apology. Sorry for the long-winded post and sorry I just noticed this thread is supposed to be about .327s. I read the post last night and the bulk of it referred to 357 so my brain transposed.

Thanks ugaar and anyone else that has insightful info to add.
b

[.38 Special]

Seems to me that almost all of us shoot our handguns at paper, beer cans, and pine cones.

And all of our handguns achieve the objective of making holes in paper, beer cans, and pine cones.

Thus "good" and "bad" are concepts that exist primarily in our minds. We shoot a big magnum and say to ourselves "Yeah! I'm really accomplishing something!". Or we shoot little popguns and say, "Well, it goes 'bang' and hits stuff, I suppose, but..."

I haven't shot one yet, so will withhold judgment. But I'll bet it makes holes in paper, beer cans, and pine cones as well as anything. And yeah, I'll bet it's loud.

[papajohn]

At this point I'm thinking there's not a whole lot more anyone can say about the 327 until somebody actually gets shot with one, and the database of one-shot stops (or lack thereof) begins.

As for light-bullet 357 loads and forcing cones, yes, they can do damage, but it's not automatic. I think any bullet weight over 140 grains should be fine, 357 or 38, and the 145-grain Silvertip comes to mind as a pretty good defensive load. Not overly violent, but better than any 38 load, +P or not.

I carry Speer Gold Dots at work, since I'm restricted to 38 ONLY. So it makes sense for me to carry them in my off-duty and house guns so chambered. I've tested a bunch of bullets in Duxseal, and they were by far the best of the bunch. Hardly scientific, but it told me what I wanted to know about expansion, penetration, and weight retention. They're not outrageously expensive, compared to some. I've tested them in every caliber I shoot, (38, 40, 44 Spl and 45ACP) and they are consistently the best performers. These are some 38 and 44 slugs I recovered from assorted media.

http://i96.photobucket.com/albums/l195/papajohn428/IMG_0035.jpg

VERY consistent performers. You could do a lot worse. Hope this helps.

Papajohn

[ugaarguy]

I also shot some 148 gr TCJ. I don't know what TCJ means but they look like copper wadcutters. They shot very mild.
TCJ is Total Copper Jacket, which is just another way of saying Full Metal Jacket.
I don't know exactly what 'how well it likes them' means. I didn't shoot straight enough (I was shooting fairly rapid at 10yds) to notice much accuracy difference. The 38s were a good bit milder in recoil but but the mags weren't really aggravating.
How well it likes them - how well the gun groups shooting a particular load. Some guns just group better with certain bullet weights.
Thanks for your insight ugaar, especially about the hi vel 357s. I'll go light on them.
What I was more after in my question is what's the difference in impact, penetration, shock etc. In short what is going to hurt someone the most and quickest if I have to shoot a BG?
Forum member JE223 owns & maintain the excellent ballistic gel test site www.brassfetcher.com. Take a look at the various .357 & .38 loads he's tested.
And I guess in addition if the high velocity SD rounds are out for 357 magnum, then what exactly are the strong points of the 357 vs the 38? Hunting? Longer range? Shooting out tires?
Strong points of the .357 are that even with 158 grain bullets you're still getting very high velocity. If an attacker is turned sideways and you have to shoot through an arm to get the bullet in his chest, if he's trying to use light cover, etc. the .357 is generally going to punch through better than a .38.
One more question: The FBI loads to which you referred are for 38 spcl right? Just guessing from the part number.
Yes, they're a .38 +P
So I'm not really hearing of anything in 357 mag I should be considering for SD/HD, eh?
For the low light and enclosed spaces of a home I like the lower flash & blast of a .38, should, Lord forbid, I have to use it. (I actually prefer a long gun & ear muffs for HD, but we can discuss that in another thread.) For SD factors like heavy winter clothing or would sway me toward a .357.

Overall I wouldn't get hung up on the load you choose. Just find something the gun shoots accurately, and that you're comfortable shooting. Using the gun proficiently is the most important thing.

[MoreCowBell]

OK, uga, that really helps. I'm starting to get the hang of it. You've given me lots to chew on. If you run across a thread that further enlightens this subject please PM me.

For now it'll just be practice practice practice. I probably won't ever load magnum except for a camp pistol when I'm in bear country. We don't really have heavy winter clothing around here but I do some 4wd and camping where the little black bears live.
mcb

[MoreCowBell]

"as for light-bullet 357 loads and forcing cones, yes, they can do damage, but it's not automatic. I think any bullet weight over 140 grains should be fine, 357 or 38, and the 145-grain Silvertip comes to mind as a pretty good defensive load. Not overly violent, but better than any 38 load, +P or not."
Thanks for that PJ. That's also helpful. I'll try some 145 gr Silvertip when I can find some. Seems like since it IS a 357 I should profit from the extra power if I can shoot it straight. If the bullet expands well over-penetration shouldn't really be a problem eh? I mean I'm thinking: Two holes for the price of one.
b
As a matter of interest: How will I know if I've damaged the forcing cone; obvious crack?, extra side blast? blows up in my face?
And is this a major repair job if it happens.
Just thought I'd ask.

[Art Eatman]

:D Thread drift is a way of life, but let's drift back to the .327, okay?

Art

[anharmyenone]

Gunbroker has both Ruger SP101 and Charter Arms for auction in .327. Personally I would get the Ruger, but that is just me. There is also some.327 ammo on there too (a little bit overpriced). For ammo, ableammo still has .327 hollowpoints in stock, just not the softpoint practice ammo.

I have read online where several people have been surprised by how much recoil they experienced shooting .327 and sold the gun, but none of them mentioned getting the Hogue grip. I didn't like shooting .327 either until I got the Hogue grip. If not for that grip, I would have sold mine too.

Your mileage may vary. Your tastes may vary.

[papajohn]

I haven't been online much to read about those trading in the guns over recoil issues, but it doesn't surprise me. How a handgun feels when fired has almost as much to do with gas recoil as it does with bullet weight. Anything that operates at higher pressures is belching more gas out behind the bullet, adding to the recoil. Despite what the ammo-makers would love us to believe, there is still no free lunch, and there is no way to bend the laws of physics. But we keep trying!

I'm still waiting for my handheld, easily-concealed Plasma-Ray Phaser. :neener:

Papajohn

[bunnielab]

I'm still waiting for my handheld, easily-concealed Plasma-Ray Phaser

Ssssssssh. Not so loud dude. Meet me behind the the old Miller place at dusk and we can make the deal then.


But really, I want the .327mag to succeed. I have a fondness for the .32long and would love to be able to buy a revolver that shoots it in addition to a more "serous" round.

Plus, I would think that if one can get a 110g bullet at 1400fps from a 3" barrel an 18" carbine barrel should be able to get those suckers up to around 2000. And if the hand loading data isnt too watered down maybe around 2300. This is all wishful thinking and extrapolation from .357 mag data, but I remain hopeful.

I dont know why I want to try and turn a marlin 1895 into a varmint gun, but I do.

[Sturmgewher]

little black bears liveIf a "little" black bear is sitting on your chest eating your head, does it still qualify as little? Size, while quantative in the sense of measurement becomes quite subjective depending on your point of view, say from beneath a bear! Just the observation of someone who does not have to worry about bears, thank God.

[anharmyenone]

There's a new thread over at Shooter's Forum on the Charter Arms 4" barrell .327 magnum. William Iorg reports on some tests he and his wife did with it. They seem to get some nice velocity with that 4 inch barrell. I wish someone would make a lever gun for .327.

http://shootersforum.com/showthread.htm?p=349232

[munk]

I say yes to the lever gun. A little semi auto carbine too.

>>>>>>>>>>>

I wonder how Federal and Ruger did their marketing research for this round? The resistance amongst the shooting community is strong. ( I haven't seen this much resentment or dismissal out of hand since the 41 mag was made, and there's a bigger niche to fill for the 327 than the 41 ever had.) Given that- why did Ruger and Federal go ahead?

No, the 327 is not a 357 I could understand the dismissals and jokes if this were yet one more 30 calibre magnum rifle round... But its not, and there is a place for a revolver that is light to carry, simple to use, has less recoil than the 357 and can do the defense thing adequately. Factory loads for the 38 Special are not special- they're weak and not even up to the Plus P ratings SAAMI established. So for one not wanting a true powerful revolver like a 357, 41, or 44, there might be this new 327. There are a whole host of new people out there trying shooting sports for the first time. This might be a good round for a beginner, or just someone unwilling to invest a lifetime of interest and effort into the shooting sports.
And it would make a great trail gun should Ruger ever put a longer barrel on a revolver so chambered.

The most popular chambering at the begining of the former century, in one of the most popular handguns of all time, the Colt single action, was the 32/20; not the 45 Colt as many might surmise. It was fun to shoot, effective on small game, and used for self defense. The 327 puts the 32/20 in a small package. That's it. It's not to replace the 357. It's not 'better' than the 357

I doubt it'll make it. 'We' are those buying guns, and 'We' not impressed. Too damn bad. Many of the guns 'we' didn't like are great;- the 358 Winchester, 41 mag, 35 Rem, 32 HR, 10mm, 35 Whelen....

When the 40 SW came out I wasn't enthused; it wasn't the wonderful 10mm. But it could be chambered in smaller packages, and many more people could be taught to shoot them comfortably over the full house 10mm.....

I think it was Layne Simpson who once opined that if the shooting public had taken to the 375 Winchester, we'd have a 40 calibre on the 30/30 case by now: Winchester had the plans on the board. But we didn't, and it never happened. That was the last 'woods cartridge' the manufacturers took a chance on giving to us.

Maybe there won't be any new revolver handgun cartridges, other than picking up crumbs from the 500 Smith near the top of the power game...here we are, revolver fans, and we're killing the first new offering in a long time to come our way. The 500 made it, the 480 dwindled, and that's all she wrote for us.

munk

[peyton]

It is the chicken or the egg argument. A good platform (revolver, lever, auto will help a good cartridge, and also the opposite. I love the .32's, I do not own a .38/.357. If I can not find ammo it will kill this off but without good platforms to shoot it out of the ammo will sink. Think .45GAP or even the .25ACP. I like the versatility the .327 will give. I have been buying S&w 631/331/332's because in the .32 H&R caliber because I do not see s&w making a .327. I look forward to getting out of the sandbox and handling the charter arms Patriot .327. PS It is plenty hot and dusty in Baghdad right now!!

[Evyl Robot]

AirForceShooter said:
Quote:
Let's see if S&W climbs on the wagon.
The gun and caliber are interesting.
That's probably the one endorsement that would establish the .327 Magnum as a viable caliber. But I suspect S&W will not act until some other revolver and/or rifle manufacturers jump on the bandwagon.

...still didn't help the .41 Mag much...

./Michael

[munk]

The 41 had a very small slice of the pie to carve. What exactly, is there for a double action revolver between the .22 and the 38? There's a .312 that never really caught on in the larger world outside the shooting club, and not all through the club, either.

Are those of us who shoot revolvers happy enough with the 38's that nothing is needed below?

And I too am one of those people who buy big, 41, 44 or 45 Colt.

So that's it; double action revolver shooters can choose the .22, and the next stop up is the 38, nothing else is neccesary or wanted inbetween? Very strange. For those who insist upon a .30, you can scrounge up a Ruger BlkHk in .30 carbine.
Maybe the revolver really is dead. It has the accepted territory and no other is neccesary nor wanted.

Maybe that's the way it should be. I'm just wondering if that's really what people want- nothing else. It may be that straight walled cartridge's development is built around having enough diameter to produce sufficient capacity for a range of bullet weights. The smaller the case opening, the narrower the choices become in bullet weights and velocities/performance. A weak hand held tool's primary advantage is the diameter of the case.

The 327 was not given the same case length as the other traditional magnum rounds..and that probably has to do with the platform it was built around.
Is there any place for say, a .275 small game revolver round? You'd want it long enough to stick enough powder in it do accomplish something worth doing. We and the public are letting these 30's die; why? Because a handloaded 38 can do the same job? So can a handloaded 44, or 475.

Don't bother us with the small fry??


munk

[gripper]

Isn't Charter Arms offering a 2.2 and a 4 inch barreled revolver in this caliber???If their quality control( and durability issues ) has/have improved;they may have opened the gates for other makers who "see the writing on the wall" RE this caliber and possible applications.

[Stainz]

Historically, the .32 H&R Magnum just didn't make it. It started life when the .32 S&WL was still a recent memory (1984). The .327 Magnum followed too closely the near industry wide demise of the .32 H&RM. I will restate the obvious - it was an inexpensive way for Ruger to introduce a new caliber offering, requiring only ~1/8" deeper reaming - and restamping the caliber - on existing 3" .32M SP-101s. Their fancy 'cowgirl' CAS-style adverts for the SSM (.32 SS) can't be faulted - the short BH-style and BHG .32s don't have the room within the grip for the hammer strut lock, so don't expect to see them back.

Since this thread started, I have divested myself of my .32 Rugers and ammo/reloading supplies - and even the dies. The .32 was fun here - and a 100gr JHP (XTP) making 1,186 fps was quite potent for many beasties. I just wanted, and had to fund, another .38/.357 Magnum purchase (627 Pro).

Believe me, a .38 is a lot more fun to shoot. The ammo and reloading supplies are cheaper, more widely available, and varied. Of course, the oversized chambers on the Ruger .32s meant more working the brass as well as difficult spent case extraction. The cheesy windage-only adjustable sight on the SP101 doesn't win it high marks, either.

Yesterday found me plinking away at several types of targets, with everything from wimpy .38s to mild .357Ms with my new 627 Pro - a definite keeper. I, for one, do not miss my .32s. Think it through before you break that piggy bank for a .327 Magnum. Of course, try to find the ammo, too.

Stainz