.327 Magnum, the next big thing?

[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...

 

[Ivy Mike]

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