.327 Magnum, the next big thing?

[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

 

[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?

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!

 

[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 like my .327

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...

 

[XDShooter07]

Gotta build from the ground up....

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?



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?

Papajohn

 

[Slamfire]

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.

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]

.327 Update All Three Cartridges Compared

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!

 

[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.