327 Question

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Dec 23, 2017
Messages
944
So bought my first revolver awhile back in 327. Right away I was noticing bulges on the spent brass about a 1/4" above the rim. This was present on all six chambers and in both 327 and 32 long. I sent it back to Ruger to be fixed and they claimed to replace the cylinder and do a test fire. I take it to the range after I get it back and in the first six rounds of 32 long I'm seeing the same bulging on four of the cases. This bulge isn't normal, correct? I normally wouldn't second guess something like that but when Ruger claims they test fired it makes me wonder if this is just somehow characteristic of this family of cartridges.
 
Probably normal.
Most fired high pressure rounds like the .327 exhibit a pressure expansion foward of the case head. The cartridge is sized a few thousandths undersized to allow easy chambering, and the fired brass stretches and then springs back allowing extraction.
Again, it will take a photograph of fired brass to determine if it’s normal, or excessive.
 
Pretty normal with very hot, high pressure loads. 327 runs the pressure up pretty high. It's possible that the chambers are slightly oversized exacerbating the issue.
 
As others have said, pictures are needed to determine the level of bulging before any definitive answer is given. However, I don't necessarily agree with the "It's normal in high pressure rounds." sentiment. I've shot some pretty hot 357 loads and I regularly shoot 454 and 460 magnum. The spent cases in those rounds do not exhibit deformation or bulging. Yes, expansion, and that's why we resize when reloading, but I don't see bulging. Ok, reserving judgement until more info comes in.

Drum roll for the pictures........
 
The bulging 32 long cases would seem to indicate an issue unless they are hot rod handloads.
Factory PPU loads. I intentionally used the 32 long first because if I was getting issues there I'd be fairly certain it wasn't a pressure issue.
 
Keep in mind that high pressure can result from tight throats or fat bullets. It sounds like the question should be pursued with use of the 32 SWL.

I too have had issues with my 327 reloads and did better by using the thinnest shell holder, loading on a Lee Classic Cast Turret. Between Hornady and Lee, the Lee #4 worked the best, allowing the die to get a bit closer to the case head.

As far as the cylinder, you would need to measure chambers to validate what Ruger did to the gun.

I wonder if what you are dealing with is a pressure spike with too fast a powder.
 
KIMG0234[1].jpg
I couldn't quite get the light to catch the brass right but you can see the brass kick out to the left on all three right about where the that black reflection ends. This bump is easily felt with the thumb but the other side of the brass has no such signs. I took my calipers and it looks like the bulge is about .007" larger than above the rim and .002" than the mouth. After actually measuring it I'm doubting more this is actually an issue but still want to hear your guy's thoughts on this.

Also uploading photos is stupid easy on this forum. Why did I wait this long to even try?
 
This sounds like Ruger replaced the cylinder with one that had the same problem, like a bad batch. It would have been repaired by an assembler, not a gunsmith, so I doubt any measurements were taken, but in any actual test firing they should have been looking for the same problem in the spent brass.
 
This sounds like Ruger replaced the cylinder with one that had the same problem, like a bad batch. It would have been repaired by an assembler, not a gunsmith, so I doubt any measurements were taken, but in any actual test firing they should have been looking for the same problem in the spent brass.
I assumed as much and that is what has me so troubled by this situation, on the return ticket is says a test fire and cleaning was performed before being cleared to be sent back. If this is normal operation (as Ruger apparently thinks it is) I don't want to be wasting my time and their money on returns, it clearly won't fix the issue then.
 
What does the buldge measure? SAAMI says the the chamber can have a taper from .3412 in the rear to .3393 right before the throats starts. That's quite a bit of taper for a straightwalled cartridge.
 
I'd say those cases look fine. You should see the bulge on the base on some .357 loads as it is more pronounced and it's always been that way. They always reload fine and chamber fine. Your gun is good to go.
 
Doesn't appear to be that much of a case expansion plus it is too far down to be resized if reloaded hence not working or stretching the brass. Not something I would worry about.
 
What does the buldge measure? SAAMI says the the chamber can have a taper from .3412 in the rear to .3393 right before the throats starts. That's quite a bit of taper for a straightwalled cartridge.
Bulge is at .339 so well within spec. I didnt think to check SAAMI for some reason. The buddy I shoot with and I have both just started reloading and are apparently hyper aware of pressure signs right now. The first cylinder also appeared to have more distinct bulges over time so that is what really spurred all this concern. Unless anyone has anything to add I'll just keep shooting it and watching for any changes in brass. Thanks guys.
 
I started a thread back in February of this year about the problem I was having with my NIB 3" SP 101 .327 not ejecting brass. It took two trips back to Ruger to have the problem corrected by replacing the cylinder. Happy with the customer service but not happy with being w/o my firearm for seven weeks.
When I posted my concerns on the Ruger forum I found that I wasn't the only one having the brass ejecting issue.
 
I assumed as much and that is what has me so troubled by this situation, on the return ticket is says a test fire and cleaning was performed before being cleared to be sent back. If this is normal operation (as Ruger apparently thinks it is) I don't want to be wasting my time and their money on returns, it clearly won't fix the issue then.
I have had a problem or two fixed on the second trip.
 
I just bought an SP101 last week, so I'll keep my eye on the brass for any bulges. I reload, so it's in my interest to not have bulged brass and when it comes to .32 cases, the H&R and .327 cases can get ripples and bulges easy during mouth expansion and bullet seating.

I see where the "bulges" are and agree with the above poster to try some different brass. PPU isn't bad ammo, I like it, but they're gonna pinch pennies and thin brass is one way to do it with weak .32 Long. .327 is a different matter, I assume you shot American Eagle .327 and that's thick brass.

If the chambers are big in one spot a quarter inch down the chamber, it's not an easy thing for a machine operator to find during his quality checks, nor for QC itself. They'd use go/no-go gage pins and the oversize no-go pin only goes in if the hole is larger than it. The base of the brass before the rim looks normal, so a no-go wouldn't pick that up. A CMM machine during QC inspection would... if checking the straightness of the chamber wall is something normally checked. Weird tho how it only happens in one spot and not over the full circumference of the brass.
 
View attachment 812776
I couldn't quite get the light to catch the brass right but you can see the brass kick out to the left on all three right about where the that black reflection ends. This bump is easily felt with the thumb but the other side of the brass has no such signs. I took my calipers and it looks like the bulge is about .007" larger than above the rim and .002" than the mouth. After actually measuring it I'm doubting more this is actually an issue but still want to hear your guy's thoughts on this.

Also uploading photos is stupid easy on this forum. Why did I wait this long to even try?
Now that I'm seeing the pics, I don't think that is anything to worry about, and as has been pointed out, a resizing die is going to really struggle to get that low anyway. None the less, if they replaced the cylinder, obviously they felt something was out of spec.
 
Went back and measured the brass from the first cylinder. Mix of PPU 32 long, Winchester 32 long, and Federal 327 totaling less than 150 total pieces. Bulge was present in all six chambers and from the few I measured where at .337 so actually less pronounced than the current cylinder. I really want to get this figured out now before I start reloading for it. I might just call Ruger and see if I can talk to someone more technical than customer service and see what they think.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top