Will Marlin ever offer an 1894 in .327 Federal?


PDA






Jason_W
January 13, 2011, 10:17 PM
I sure hope so. Seems like it would make a neat carbine round.

If you enjoyed reading about "Will Marlin ever offer an 1894 in .327 Federal?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
NCsmitty
January 13, 2011, 10:37 PM
You could email them with the suggestion. It might be a good little round for the Marlin.



NCsmitty

Jason_W
January 13, 2011, 10:39 PM
I might. But I imagine that many others have done the same by now. Maybe I'll wait until after this year's SHOT show:D

hirundo82
January 14, 2011, 12:43 AM
I thought they would when .327 Federal first came out a couple of years ago. It would make a neat small game gun.

However, the round hasn't taken off the way they hoped. I think it is destined to become a niche round like .41 mag, pretty much limited to those who reload and not a more widely used self-defense round like they tried to make it. Of course, Marlin made a limited run of the 1894 for .41 mag a while back, so I wouldn't be surprised to see them do the same for .327. I would be surprised to see it become a permanent item in their catalog.

SharpsDressedMan
January 14, 2011, 01:21 AM
Could a 1894 be converted/rebarreled to .327 mag?

hirundo82
January 14, 2011, 01:55 AM
Marlin made (makes? (http://www.marlinfirearms.com/firearms/cowboy/1894_32magnum.asp)) 1894's in .32 H&R mag; I suspect those could be rechambered to .327.

Those load from the front of the mag tube instead of having a loading gate though; I'm not sure what is up with that.

Dr.Rob
January 14, 2011, 02:56 AM
They made them in .32-20 as well.

JEB
January 14, 2011, 03:13 AM
i am a little surprised that the .327 hasent taken off more than it has. 6 shot snubbies with more power than the .38spl seem like they would really be a contender in the ccw market. then again i have never seen more than one or two companies supplying .327 ammo and as we all know, the cart aint no good without the horse.

as for a .327 carbine? untill ammo supply becomes common i doubt it will ever go into production and if it does, i doubt it will stay in long. depending on what the ballistics look like out of a rifle, i may be very interested in one. if marlin were to make a 16" barreled .327 lever action, i would buy one in a heartbeat for the truck! really would make an excellent carbine round IMHO!

451 Detonics
January 14, 2011, 07:32 AM
6 shot snubbies with more power than the .38spl seem like they would really be a contender in the ccw market.

The .327 is roughly the equivalent of the old 32/20 round or the 30 Carbine, it has about the same stopping potential as a 9mm loaded with the same weight bullets. However it is not the equal of the 9mm or 38 Spec loaded with heavier bullets like the 125 gr, 147 gr, or the 158 gr. And the 9mm or 38 in +p are much more potent.

The 327 is basically the same case as the 32 H&R, just 1/8 inch longer. However it is thicker brass able to handle higher pressures and in fact the 327 operate at pressures over double that of the 32 H&R. This mean simply converting a 32 HR gun by lenghtening the chamber probably isn't advisable.

oldfool
January 14, 2011, 09:06 AM
the 327 is an "interesting" round, but pretty much a solution looking for a problem
given the wide array of commonly available 38/357s out there
only selling point I can really see in 'em is 6 round vs 5 round snubbies
but a lot snubbie fans just ain't all that worried about "hi capacity"

earlthegoat2
January 14, 2011, 09:28 AM
However, the round hasn't taken off the way they hoped. I think it is destined to become a niche round like .41 mag

It will be eve more niche than the 41 mag.

Manufacturers will soon learn that there is no money to be made developing new calibers unless you can make that new ammo for less than than 9mm or 38 Special.

CraigC
January 14, 2011, 02:25 PM
I'd love to see a .327 levergun. And no, there would be no problem at all converting an 1894 to .327. A .32H&R version would be easiest as all it would require is a rechamber and some action tuning. These guns can handle 40,000psi in the .45Colt so 45,000psi in the little .327 with all its extra meat in the chamber would be no problem.


...unless you can make that new ammo for less than than 9mm or 38 Special.
Well that's never gonna happen. It it were true, then there would NEVER be any more new cartridges introduced.


Fact is, the .327 fills the considerable performance gap between the .22Mag and .357Mag. It was never meant to replace either. It is what the .32H&R should've been. IMHO, where they screwed up is marketing it as a self defense cartridge. It is better suited as a sporting cartridge, where it fits into the tidy Single Six package with nothing more than a longer cylinder. It shoots flatter and hits harder than the .357 with comparable bullet weights and makes for a superior small game and varmint cartridge. Like the .30-06, the .357 is just too in-between. Folks who arbitrarily dismiss it because they already have a .357 are really missing out on a wonderful cartridge.

earlthegoat2
January 14, 2011, 04:07 PM
What sporting purpose could it serve that a 223 cannot already do in rifle guise?

Who is going to hunt with a 327 single six when there are 17 HMRs and 22 mags already available with cheaper ammo?

I understand there is a significant void where the 327 falls but maybe that void was there for so long for a reason.

jmr40
January 14, 2011, 04:17 PM
If there is enough demand they will build what ever makes money for the company. I doubt if there are more than a dozen or so who would actually put up the money to buy one though.

CraigC
January 14, 2011, 06:41 PM
What sporting purpose could it serve that a 223 cannot already do in rifle guise?
They make traditional leverguns in .223 now? So tell me why exactly we should only be shooting .223's when there are lots of useful and interesting chamberings available?


Who is going to hunt with a 327 single six when there are 17 HMRs and 22 mags already available with cheaper ammo?
Uh, me? You mean to tell me that you see little difference between a 115gr Gold Dot or 130gr LBT at 1600fps and a 40gr at 1400fps???


I understand there is a significant void where the 327 falls but maybe that void was there for so long for a reason.
So if it doesn't already exist, then it couldn't possibly ever have a legitimate use? Do you really understand what you're saying?

W.E.G.
January 14, 2011, 06:47 PM
Anybody who would say "levergun" and ".223" in the same sentence just doesn't understand the concept.

hirundo82
January 14, 2011, 06:57 PM
What sporting purpose could it serve that a 223 cannot already do in rifle guise?

But then you don't get the awesomeness of a levergun.

I understand there is a significant void where the 327 falls but maybe that void was there for so long for a reason.

As .451 Detonics said, it is very similar to the .32-20 Winchester, which was a very popular small game cartridge for a long time.

Ridgerunner665
January 14, 2011, 07:08 PM
45,000 psi is too much for the Marlin...but the 327 would make a fine little lever gun round if the rifle could handle it.

earlthegoat2
January 14, 2011, 09:36 PM
OK, I see.

You want a lever gun.

Obviously 223 chamberings in lever guns are pretty limited.

black_powder_Rob
January 14, 2011, 10:35 PM
what about a 336 in 327 Fed then? I am sure it can handle the pressure.

hirundo82
January 14, 2011, 11:14 PM
Another possibility would be Rossi chambering their Winchester 1892 repro in .327. The 1892 is the only pistol-caliber lever rifle action strong enough to handle .454 Casull, so the .327 Fed Mag wouldn't be a problem.

CraigC
January 14, 2011, 11:27 PM
45,000 psi is too much for the Marlin...but the 327 would make a fine little lever gun round if the rifle could handle it.
The Marlin would have no trouble with the .327.

Jason_W
January 14, 2011, 11:41 PM
Upon reading many threads here, it seems like a lot of people think the .223 is the be all and end all of rifle cartridges for almost all purposes.

The .223 is great if you want to evaporate things you hit and have no interest in casting your own bullets, and have no interest in being able to load more than 2000 rounds on a single pound of powder.

earlthegoat2
January 14, 2011, 11:49 PM
I dont think it is the end all be all but I was merely trying to get a grip on the fascination of a lever gun in 327. People have been talking about it since before it was released. I fail to see what kind of game it could take that a 223 could not at longer ranges as well.

A 327 in a rifle would be good for vermin control and maybe taking a close range jack rabbit. Im not from out west so maybe I could be enlightened on anything else.

Dr.Rob
January 15, 2011, 03:03 AM
That's exactly what .32-20 was made for.

natman
January 15, 2011, 04:27 AM
I dont think it is the end all be all but I was merely trying to get a grip on the fascination of a lever gun in 327. People have been talking about it since before it was released. I fail to see what kind of game it could take that a 223 could not at longer ranges as well.

The kind of game where you want to save the meat, not spray it around the countryside.

Jason_W
January 15, 2011, 10:15 AM
I dont think it is the end all be all but I was merely trying to get a grip on the fascination of a lever gun in 327. People have been talking about it since before it was released. I fail to see what kind of game it could take that a 223 could not at longer ranges as well.

A 327 in a rifle would be good for vermin control and maybe taking a close range jack rabbit. Im not from out west so maybe I could be enlightened on anything else.

Revolver cartridges chambered in a carbine offer a level of versatility not found in any modern, high pressure, rifle round. They can be loaded to the max with modern bullets for self defense and possible close range deer hunting (in a pinch if no other rifle is available) or loaded down with a cast bullet and a few grains of powder for hunting small game you intend to eat.

Yes, I have a .357 mag carbine, but a .358 diameter bullet, even at low velocity seems a bit too much lead for a rabbit or grouse that is too stupid to fly away.

earlthegoat2
January 15, 2011, 10:16 AM
The kind of game where you want to save the meat, not spray it around the countryside.

That doesnt really help because the 22 has been doing that for years and years.

The 327 would be a hard hitting low velocity round that I can see would be nice for less meat loss sure but where is the utility if you pay 1.50 or more per round than say the pennies per round of the 22.

Now I can also appreciate the "because it is there" mentality as I think this is where the thread is heading. If you just want another lever rifle in a round similar to the old 32-20 or just something else entirely then I appreciate that. I am failing to get good answers though.

So far the only good answer I have is it would be good for vermin control (which meat loss may or may not matter, and jack rabbits) A ranch rifle so to speak.

Is this also the sporting purpose of the 327 in a single six revolver? Vermin & jack rabbits?

I am looking for real answers here not just blanket statements like

It is better suited as a sporting cartridge, where it fits into the tidy Single Six package with nothing more than a longer cylinder. It shoots flatter and hits harder than the .357 with comparable bullet weights and makes for a superior small game and varmint cartridge.

What game will you be hunting? How will it be advantageous over what already exists?

This may be where I will have to agree to disagree to hopefully keep this thread going and not get locked.

earlthegoat2
January 15, 2011, 10:18 AM
Jason_W: thank you, you have given a real world answer. One I have been looking for.

Barr
January 15, 2011, 10:45 AM
Two points to consider here.

1. 35 ksi in a .357 Magnum or 35 ksi in a .44 Magnum exerts considerably more force than 45 ksi in a .327 Magnum.

Thrust Load
Consider .44 Magnum:
.429 diameter
Circumference = (PI)*r^2 = 3.14159*(.429/2)^2 = 0.14455 sq in
Gas thrust force exerted = PSI * A = 35 ksi * 0.14455 = 5,069 lbs force

Consider .327 Magnum:
.327 diameter
Circumference = (PI)*r^2 = 3.14159*(.327/2)^2 = 0.08398 sq in
Gas thrust force exerted = PSI * A = 45 ksi * 0.08398 = 3,779 lbs force

Conservatively the .327 exerts less than 75% (74.55%) of the thrust force generated by the .44 Magnum. I did not take into account the bullet weight or bullet velocity just gas force.

Hoop Force
.44 Magnum
.429 Diameter
Circumference = (PI) * d = 3.14159*.429 = 1.34774 in
Gas hoop force per inch = A * psi = 1.34774 * 35ksi = 47,171 lbs force

.327 Magnum
.327 Diameter
Circumference = (PI) * d = 3.14159*.327 = 1.02730 in
Gas hoop force per per inch = A * psi = 1.02730 * 45ksi = 46,229 lbs force

Wall Thickness Difference
D - d = 0.429 - 0.327 = 0.102
r = (delta d) / 2 = 0.102 / 2 = 0.051"

Conservatively the hoop load per inch length in the .327 Magnum is 98% of the .44 Magnum. The .327 Magnum also has an increased wall thickness of .051" per side assuming the same barrel diameter is used.

YMMV and if you rechamber it is at your own risk, but I do not see a real danger based on the numbers presented. You could calculate the total hoop force by multiplying the hoop force per inch above by total cartridge length.

2. If people are concerned of significant meat loss by using a .357 Magnum and the .22 Magnum is not powerful enough, why not use a .38 Special 148 grain wadcutter at 1,000 fps?

Cartridge Power

PF = M * V
KE = M * V^2 / (450,900)

Calculated constant (with minor rounding at end)
450,900 = 32.2 (gravity) * 7000 (grains / lb) * 2

.22 Magnum
40 Grains
2,000 fps
355 fpe
80 PF

.357 Magnum
158 grains
1,800 fps
1,135 fpe
284 PF

.38 Special
148 grains
1,000 fps
328 fpe
148 PF

Even though the kinetic energy of the .22 Magnum is slightly higher than the .38 Special, the momentum energy (PF = Power Factor) is significantly higher. The kinetic energy formula is biased towards velocity where the momentum energy is equally weighted with regards to bullet mass and velocity.

Ridgerunner665
January 15, 2011, 10:57 AM
Barr,

The problem with all that is...the 327 operates at 45,000 psi.

Barr
January 15, 2011, 11:12 AM
Thank you Ridgerunner, you are correct. I have updated the numbers accordingly. That is why I wrote out the calculations in case I made a mistake. The numbers still seem to work out as equivalent or better though.

CraigC
January 15, 2011, 11:55 AM
I am failing to get good answers though.
Well, the good thing is that we don't have to justify it to you, only ourselves. Because it doesn't appear as though you 'want' to understand anyway. Some of us have already been doing this very thing for quite a few years, in the form of heavily loaded .32-20's. Some of us handload our cartridges and could care less what factory ammo costs. We also appreciate the far more robust case of the .327 over the paper thin and fragile .32-20. Some of us would rather have a truckload of leverguns than one .223. Some of us already understand that within 150yds, a .327 levergun would offer far more utility than a .223 of any kind.


The problem with all that is...the 327 operates at 45,000 psi.
I respect your opinion but your fears are unfounded. I do believe that if the lowly Single Six can handle the 45,000psi of the .327 with nothing but a longer cylinder, no enlarging the window, no larger cylinder diameter, no five-shot conversion, then the Marlin 1894 should be okay. The Marlin in .45Colt is safe up to 40,000psi, which has much thinner chamber walls and produces much more backthrust, so the .327 would run just fine.

earlthegoat2
January 15, 2011, 02:34 PM
Some of us handload our cartridges and could care less what factory ammo costs. We also appreciate the far more robust case of the .327 over the paper thin and fragile .32-20.

And there you go. A good answer. Thank you.

goon
January 15, 2011, 06:46 PM
I can see why the .327 didn't take off as a defensive round. For my own uses, I already have a .357 in the same gun. I'd gain one round by trying a .327 but lose all the versatility of the gun I already have. IMO, it just doesn't compete with the .357. Sure, maybe it wasn't intended to, but when you're sticking them both in the SP-101, it is in competition with it.

But I also think the Marlin 1894 in .327 would be a really cool rifle. I remember seeing one in .32 Mag and thinking how great it would be as a small game rifle. I wish you guys all the best in lobbying for this to be made. Even a limited run would make a lot of guys happy (but I'd probably still put the money into a .357 version).

Jason_W
January 15, 2011, 07:09 PM
I think one of the ideas behind the .327 was a cartridge that almost hit the terminal performance level of the .357, but in a skinnier case that allowed a greater capacity in both CCW revolvers and full size revolvers.

ssyoumans
January 15, 2011, 08:07 PM
I just wish I could find a Marlin 1894c in 357 Magnum. Seems like all of the shops and distributors are out of them for the past few months. I've seen a few in 44 Mag, but nothing in 357. I haven't even been able to find one in a Trading/For Sale forum.

So, the reasoning, if there is demand then maybe they would make it, doesn't seem to apply at Marlin. I love Marlin, I've got (2) 17 HMR's, a 336 in 30-30, a XS7 in 243, a 22LR Bolt 25N, and a 22LR semi 795, but for some reason, Marlin doesn't seem to have the capacity to produce many 1894c rifles. They seem to be stuck in producing other, less expensive rifles. Kind of wierd, since these go for such a premium.

The 327 Federal Magnum seems to be dying off. Taurus already discontinued their line of revolvers for the caliber and they are available at reasonable prices on CDNN.

oldfool
January 16, 2011, 02:26 AM
a more than merely "interesting" thread here

"the .327 fills the considerable performance gap between the .22Mag and .357Mag."
gap, no doubt, unfilled ?????

"They make traditional leverguns in .223 now?
Anybody who would say "levergun" and ".223" in the same sentence just doesn't understand the concept.
But then you don't get the awesomeness of a levergun."

mebbe so
(don't tell them fools what like BLRs and Savage 99s; but I never said I was so old as to think that pointy boolits don't belong in lever actions; somebody oughta' tell Marlin about those pointy boolits, though, 'cause I don't think they got the message ??)

"The 1892 is the only pistol-caliber lever rifle action strong enough to handle .454 Casull, so the .327 Fed Mag wouldn't be a problem."
yup, but so would the Marlin 1894 be strong enough for 327, but a '92 in 327 might well go a tad beyond merely "interesting" in 327... I should need more weight in a carbine with (a little) less strength, to throw a snubbie handgun round down yonder, the recoil being too severe out of a rifle/carbine ??

"The .223 is great if you want to evaporate things you hit"
"The kind of game where you want to save the meat, not spray it around the countryside."
guess I fell asleep somewhere or other during the classic 223 varmint round transforming into a 50BMG for game meat BBQs. Most "less than yote size" edible game I thunk got pretty dead pretty quick with just rimfire stuff, no WSMs req'd
ol' possum be tuff, but ol' wabbit never was, and 223s don't tumble much thru thin meat
(a 17HMR poly-V will blow a pretty messy hole in a squirrel, though, even if sold point WMR tends to go right on through a tad too quick to be truly photogenic; the parts that get sonic boomed ain't what we save for the pot, but 22lr still kills 'em quick enough, no hydrostatic shock req'd, and they really ain't all that tasty nohow)

"If you just want another lever rifle in a round similar to the old 32-20 or just something else entirely then I appreciate that."
never was anything wrong with that

"The problem with all that is...the 327 operates at 45,000 psi."
yep there is that.. but at least the bullet shape is "traditional"

"Some of us would rather have a truckload of leverguns than one .223"
you can have both, believe it not

fun thread though :)

natman
January 16, 2011, 04:53 AM
I dont think it is the end all be all but I was merely trying to get a grip on the fascination of a lever gun in 327. People have been talking about it since before it was released. I fail to see what kind of game it could take that a 223 could not at longer ranges as well.

The kind of game where you want to save the meat, not spray it around the countryside.

That doesnt really help because the 22 has been doing that for years and years.
.........
I am failing to get good answers though.


Perhaps that's because you keep changing the question. Your first question specifically compared the 327 to the 223.

Now you want to compare the 327 to every other cartridge in existence, which is an entirely different question.

CraigC
January 16, 2011, 10:57 AM
I'm just happy to know that I can sell off half a dozen peep-sighted leverguns and buy one scoped .223 boltgun to replace them all. As if I didn't already know it existed. Yeah, that's what I was lookin' for. :rolleyes:

goon
January 16, 2011, 01:08 PM
Perish the thought!
I saw a 1894 Marlin in .357 used one day a few weeks ago... could have probably got the price down to $350, but when I get one I want the Cowboy II with the Ballard rifling. The used one had the old micro-groove. :(

One thing I can see the .327 being utterly useful for... fun! I have to admit that the 1894 I had in .357 was one of the most fun guns I've ever shot and everyone who tried it thought the same thing.

If you enjoyed reading about "Will Marlin ever offer an 1894 in .327 Federal?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!