Federal .327

[Scrounger]

Just read the AR article on the Ruger SP101 and the .327 Federal. That gun goes right to the "Got to Have It List." I already have the SP 101 in .357 and it would be one of the last guns I'd get rid of, how could I resist another one in a nice new caliber? I imagine it will be months before the gun is really available everywhere. Dies should be out pretty quick so all we got to do is gather brass and a mold or two. Remington will gear up pretty quick, if we could get a group order together for 10K cases or more, Starline might get interested. Mow a mold... I'm thinking about a 110 to 120 grain semi-wadcutter, sort of like the RCBS 38-162-SWC scaled down to .314. Thoughts on it?

[trickyasafox]

you think the cartridge will take off scrounger? I really don't know enough about it outside of the American Rifleman article to have an opinion.

[Bret4207]

Art- Lyman 311316 or 311631. You'll have to find used but there great in hot 32-20's which is about what this will equal.

If they'd bring it out in an SP101 with a 5 or 6" barrel as some nicer sights I'd even consider it.

[6pt-sika]

I already have one of the little Ruger SP101's in 327 Federal . Along with dies and some suitable jacketed bullets .

However................................

I have no factory ammo or brass !!!!!!!!!!!

My use for this one will most likely be mostly with jacketed bullets I am afraid .

Although I would be happy to see a 5.5" Blackhawk chambered for the round , and THAT would be for cast only [smilie=1:

[Harry O]

6pt-sika: When you shoot it let us know what it sounds like. Many years ago, I shot some 32-20 "rifle only" loads from a Colt SAA 4-3/4". It had the SHARPEST crack of any cartridge/firearm combination I have ever fired -- before or since. It also had a fantastic 3 foot long muzzle flash in the dark.

I won't say it was the loudest. However, it was definitely the sharpest. I now have hearing aids and believe that at least some of the hearing loss I have is due to shooting less than a box of those cartridges in that gun (this was before ANYONE had any hearing protectors).

Ever since I heard about the .327 SuperMag, I have wondered about that. I have some pretty hot 32-20's I shoot and some hot .32 Mag's (more than factory, but not as hot as the 32-20's), but they don't hit anywhere the same note that the old 32-20 "rifle only" loads hit. Could be my ears couldn't hear it, now, but I don't think the stuff I am now shooting is as loud.

That is the downside of pushing a .32 to hypersonic speeds.

[Larry Gibson]

The AR article on the .32 FM was almost a carbon copy of the articles published for the .32 H&R and we all know how it "took off". While I have a two .32 H&R magnums I'm not the least bit excited about the .327. It is going to have tremendous muzzle blast in the short barreled revolvers. Also I'm not sure what math they used but the recoil of a .32 FM 115 gr bullet qt 1300 fps isn't going to be any lighter than that of a .357 mag 125 gr bullet at 1221 fps out of that short snubby revolver. If a person can not "handle" the recoil and muzzle blast of a .38+P from a small revolver then they are not going to do well with the .32 FM either. The advantage of 6 vs 5 shots for a self defence revolver? Is that really an advantage as Colt Detective Specials were far out sold by S&W Chief Specials. I think other than a few counter sales men who really know little most will still sell .38 or 357 revolvers to those who want them for self defence. How many buy .32S&WL revolvers for reasons of "lees recoil and less muzzle blast compared to those who buy .38s? The market is not there.

No, I don't think the .32 FM will "take off". I think the AR correspodance editor, Mark Keefe, will soon have a box of .32 FM sitting on his shelf along side the 9mm Federal that he refers to as a "ballistic novelty". He will then have two such examples.

Larry Gibson

[Scrounger]

Larry, thanks for giving me a wake-up call on that federal .327. I've resisted the Siren Call of the .32 Aficionados here for years, reminding myself that they wouldn't do anything the .357 couldn't do better. I guess pairing it with the SP101 caused me to override my better judgment. I did laugh when I read their claim for light recoil with basically the same load as a .357. A lot of people have tried to break the laws of Physics but nobody has succeeded yet and I'm betting they won't. It is a sexy gun and cartridge combination, but it is redundant.

[Junior1942]

I was looking at the carbine velocities in the article and compared them to my own beer can/bad guy loads in my Rossi M92 357 mag 20":

327 = 100 gr @ 2010 for 897 ft-lbs. (jacketed)
357 = 158 gr @ 1620 for 921 ft-lbs. (plain base cast)

'Nuff said, huh?

[2 dogs]

I have to disagree with most of what I read above. I came late to the 32's and can say they are the most fun I have had with a sixgun in a long time. What they offer that the 357 does not is that they are available in a Single Six package and are more shootable than a 357 as well as excellent for killing small game.

I would be all over a group buy for 327 brass. I believe the new cartridge will take off enough that I am having Alan Harton build me a custom 5 shot Single Six in 327 Federal Magnum. I am willing to bet the 327 would also benefit for a bit heavier of a bullet say 125 to 135 grains in a LFN style, possibly with multiple crimp grooves to accomodate the various sixguns that shoot a 32 caliber bullet. It also might make the 327 a bit less loud.

I have a custom 6 shot 32 by Jim Stroh and it is very very accurate.....I use it everywhere I used to use a 22 rimfire for killing. It also outclasses the 22 mag especially in the accuracy dept. The 327 will be a better 32.

[mike in co]

I was looking at the carbine velocities in the article and compared them to my own beer can/bad guy loads in my Rossi M92 357 mag 20":

327 = 100 gr @ 2010 for 897 ft-lbs. (jacketed)
357 = 158 gr @ 1620 for 921 ft-lbs. (plain base cast)

'Nuff said, huh?

but....
in todays platforms...a pocket handgun.....
you only get 5 of those 158's and the 327 gets six...

the round was designed to replace 5 shot 38 special.
as a six shot, it does get the job done.
and who knows what potential exists in a cast boolit.

mike

[bruce drake]

Ok folks,

The 327 Mag in my opinion is just a rehash of the 32-20 and isn't worth the purchase other than you can fire the other 32 cal loadings in it. After the demise of the 32 H&R, they were smart enough to bore the cylinders so you could shoot the smaller rounds through it safely. I think the 327 revolvers will end up being shot on the older calibers long after the 327 Mag shells are a dusty shelf item at the older gunshops.

Now if you need a 32 caliber pistol for rolling bunnys, a 7.62 Nagant is a neat little pistol for around $100 that you can shoot 32 Short, 32 Long and 32 ACP (if you have a conversion cylinder that works) in addition to the original caliber (Starline sells the brass and Lee sells the dies.) that is a nice cracker and has rolled several rabbits and one fox that was a real retard and got close to one of my rabbits as I snowshoed up to collect it.

Oh, and the Nagant has seven shots for all the "Home Defence Rangers" who worry whether they have five or six shots.

Bruce

[9.3X62AL]

Self-admitted 32 fanatic here, so I'll cop to the skewed opinion right up front.

The 327 Federal is what the 32 Magnum should have been the first time around. Some intrepid souls have run the SP-101 variants in 32 Magnum well into high-velocity 32-20 territory--115 grain bullets at or near 1400 FPS/4" barrel--without harm to platform or casings. I don't know that I would try that in a Ruger SSM or my Model 16-4, but it has been tried successfully in selected revolvers.

The 1984 32 Magnum was stunted by the platforms it came chambered in first--the H&R light-framed revolvers. It was marketed as a combination self-defense/field cartridge, and it did not set the world on fire. I feel this new offering from Ruger stunts the cartridge's potential again--it needs a 4" barrel, I don't think ANY revolver says "Trail Companion" like a SP-101/327 Federal/4" barrel. Unfortunately, the revolver is being "niche-marketed" to the CCW folks, who would likely choose the 357 Magnum chambering in a short-barrelled SP-101 for social encounters.

If a shooter didn't get in on the 32 Magnum in its first ideation, the 327 Federal provides an oppurtunity to do so with a wider range of performance possibilities for the reloader. That might be its best selling point to date. Put it up in a 4" barrel, you might get some folding money outta me. Until then, I'll pass.

[Larry Gibson]

Remember also that S&W made several models of .32 H&Rs and Ruger made the Single Six ( I have one of the original run with 6" barrel and it is a very nice "trail gun") so there were, in fact, numerous models other than the H&R top breaks to buy. Still the .32 H&R did not sell well. The .32 H&R is a dandy little cartridge and offers something different than the .38/.357 for field use. The .32 H&R is just a small cartridge trying to be a .357 and really not succeding. If I want .357 magnum performance I'll use a .357 magnum. I do not try to load my .32 H&R into something it is not. Put a 125 gr bullet in a .32 FM? Well it's going to eat up powder space and I'll bet it won't be a bit better than Remington 125 HP .38+Ps Those give you 1030 fps out of real revolver 4" barrels. I just don't see it and I doubt there is a market there.

Larry Gibson

[leftiye]

I guess that for me the most telling point is that my model 10/16 k-frame chambers are a tenth of an inch longer than any self respecting person would have made them. By reaming out to the .327 lenght, I can correct that. Plus, my reaction to the 32 H&R (I refuse to call that a magnum) and all other loadings 32 is that no sane person loads a gun that light when designing a new cartridge.

Let's not forget that there are lots of people that will buy one just to have one, or for novelty. Not everyone is a "one gun wonder" that spends years choosing that single gun that has to compete in all arenas with all other calibers.

Granted 32s are more of a gun nut's toy than anything, but they fit real well in that group of guns like the 30 carbine, and 32-20 that no one really knows what they do better than anything else will do, but they're fun to shoot. Beyond that a 120 grain boolit giong 1200 fps plus ain't to be fooled with, it's lethal. It ain't the caliber of choice for thangs much bigger than porcupines, but it would kill most anything up to Cougar, or @$$h@!* if need be.

[Bret4207]

Another 32 fanatic, I'll admit it. If, IF!, the 327 can duplicate 32-20 ballistics then it's a worthy cartridge and should make a dandy field gun, provided you aren't permanently deefend at the first shot. Thats the only problem with the smaller bore guns loaded hot. You HAVE to wear ear protection. Even a pair of those foam jobs carried in the pocket in the woods would be a help.

Give me a double action with a 4-6" barrel and GOOD sights and I'll find the money for one. I'd prefer a Smith, but my wants are legion.

[Dale53]

Al says it all for me. Anything that I would add would just be redundant.

Dale53

[floodgate]

I think it's clear that the .32 H&R "Magnum" was specced - pressure-wise - for the H&R breakopen revolvers. The .327 is off to a more promising start. Tempting!

floodgate

[2 dogs]

The 32 mag can be loaded in a strong revolver WAY past sane specs. The 327 is going to be a dandy. It IS being marketed wrong as a self defense cartridge, but as a field cartridge my money says it will preform.

My hope is that Marlin comes out with a 1894 in the 327. Then it will really rock.

The 327 has several obvious advantages over the 32-20 not the least of that one can load 327 on a progressive press....

[Junior1942]

>The 327 has several obvious advantages over the 32-20 not the least of that one can load 327 on a progressive press....

I agree 100%. In a pistol...... But in a carbine, the 357 is way better.

[Bret4207]

The 357 will always be more gun, revolver or carbine, than the 327, but thats besides the point. If you WANT a 32 and missed the 32 Mag Smiths and Rugers this is your chance.

As for the 32 in H+R gun- IIRC all the H+R guns in 32 H+R Mag were solid frame, not break opens. The last H+R break open was the Sportsman 999 seriesin 22lr IIRC. Every time I see one it's just been sold!

[2 dogs]

Yes, there were all kinds of Smiths that I didnt get, hopefully they will come out again in 327!

[McLintock]

I load 32-20's on my Dillon 550's, just got to be a little more careful and go a little slower, that's all. Still beats a single stage all to hell though. I've got a Ruger Buckeye Special in 32-20/32 H&R and thinking about getting the H&R cylinder hogged out to .327 Mag. could really tell then if it'll equal the 32-20. My current "hot" 32-20 load is 14.5 grs of H110 with a 115 gr gas checked bullet; haven't chrony'd it yet but it screams pretty good; very accurate also. In the .308 barrel of the Ruger, I size the bullets to .311 and they do really good.
McLintock

[MT Gianni]

Remember also that S&W made several models of .32 H&Rs and Ruger made the Single Six ( I have one of the original run with 6" barrel and it is a very nice "trail gun") so there were, in fact, numerous models other than the H&R top breaks to buy. Still the .32 H&R did not sell well. The .32 H&R is a dandy little cartridge and offers something different than the .38/.357 for field use. The .32 H&R is just a small cartridge trying to be a .357 and really not succeding. If I want .357 magnum performance I'll use a .357 magnum. I do not try to load my .32 H&R into something it is not. Put a 125 gr bullet in a .32 FM? Well it's going to eat up powder space and I'll bet it won't be a bit better than Remington 125 HP .38+Ps Those give you 1030 fps out of real revolver 4" barrels. I just don't see it and I doubt there is a market there.

Larry Gibson

Larry, I believe that S&W "catalogued" them but being in and out of gun shops for most of my life, I never saw a Smith 32 H&R. They were not carried in western MT nor northern ID/Spokane area. I think that they fill a niche as does the .500. How big a niche is up to the market. Gianni

[9.3X62AL]

The only 32-20 WCF that gets high-velocity loads at my house is the Marlin 94CCL. A 1906 Bisley SAA x 4-3/4" or S&W M&P x 5" have no business running anything warmer than 1873-level loads.

Can't say as to hi-vel 32-20's in revolvers, but the 30 Carbine in a Ruger Blackhawk I owned briefly was WITHOUT DOUBT the LOUDEST firearm I have ever lit off. Even with plugs AND muffs, it was pretty barkish. I imagine the 327 Federal will be similar in nature. I suspect that if the right 327 comes along, its loads will be much like the 32 Mag gets currently--RCBS 98 SWCs between 800 and 1100 FPS. That is all I really need--and a Kit Gun to contain it.

[Larry Gibson]

Larry, I believe that S&W "catalogued" them but being in and out of gun shops for most of my life, I never saw a Smith 32 H&R. They were not carried in western MT nor northern ID/Spokane area. I think that they fill a niche as does the .500. How big a niche is up to the market. Gianni

Likeany S&Ws in times past some were hard to find. I lived in NE Oregon in the '70s and '80s and saw several for sale. I also shot a couple of them. I had a 4" S&W and had acces to a 6" and 8 3/8ths in the early '90s. When I found an almost new Ruger Single Six in Redmond, Oregon for $200 I bought it imediately. I then sold the S&W. I also have a 10" Contender barrel in .32 H&R and a S&W M31 .32 S&WL. I believe the "niche" is filled by the .32 H&R but they aren't exactly selling like hot cakes are they? The .32 FM is being hyped as also filling the "niche" that the .38 and .357 do much better at, and they have close to a 100 year head start. I just do not think the market is there. If it were we would have seen S&W J frames in .32 H&R and Ruger would not have discontinued the Single Six in the first place.

Time will tell.

Larry Gibson

[JSH]

I see the 327 as a modernized 30-20/32-20. I have shot 100-200+ grain bullets through my 30-20's for quite a while. What game I play is a fairly small circle and I don't think many in the industry area even blink at us much any more.
I will agree to disagree that the 327 may or maynot fill any kind of nitch. Lets see what other kind of flops have shown up in the last few years along with some others.
I figured the 450 Marlin as a complete bomb in the market area. I did and do understand the reasoning behind it. But, how many guys that were loading the 45-70 up and over the limit for most, ran out and bought a 450 Marlin?
The 307 was a good idea, but try and run out and buy some brass now. There are a couple of new ones out that are nothing more than a 300 Savage that has been changed a bit here and there.
The old 5mm rimfire was dead in it's tracks before it got started. Now look at the 17RF's go like crazy. IMHO, the 17HMR will not do one damn thing better than a 22mag will do better. But it is new and a fellow said so in a magazine that it will hit crows with super results farther than one can see.
I pay very little attention to gun writers or their mags any more. I subscribe to nothing any more and grab an occasional Rifle or Handloader mag once in a great while. I can usually find more fact than fiction when I poke around on the net and faster to boot. I new about a couple of new guns before several dealers did. I was about the last one on the net to know!

I have typed and talked to sevral folks on the subject of the 327. If I were to build a new TC or BF to replace my 30-20. I would take a long hard look at the 327. The brass is built for the pressures that I have been running for quite some time. I have really had no brass issues. But there are noticable signs that the design could stand an up grade for that small group that do as I do with the 30-20.
Jeff

[ra_balke]

Maybe I'd get one, if... if , I could get it in a nice old model 19 smith and wesson..

[Bret4207]

That would make it a M-16-?. I'd sure look for one.

[9.3X62AL]

Ra--

The K-frame 32s are SWEET, no doubt about it.

Whether S&W chooses to get on board with the 327 Federal remains to be seen. If they can stuff five 357 Magnum rounds into the J-frame, a five-shot 327 should be zero problem--and a six-shotter should be do-able as well. It stands to reason that the K-frame could be extended to 7 rounds, although a 6-cylinder would be all right too. My own preferences as above posts bear out would be for a J-frame x 4".

[Adam10mm]

When my replacement .327 Mag gets back from Ruger, I have 100rds of 100gr SP Federal ammo to try out.

[9.3X62AL]

Another way too cute pic of that little guy!

Is this real, live, factory ammo?

[Adam10mm]

32 H&R, 327 Fed, 32 H&R
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v239/freakshow10mm/327%20Fed%20Mag/P2190001_01.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v239/freakshow10mm/327%20Fed%20Mag/P2190002_01.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v239/freakshow10mm/327%20Fed%20Mag/P2190003_01.jpg

[Dark Helmet]

Some once fired in stock here- http://www.brassworldeshop.com/ :mrgreen:

[leftiye]

Sorry, not any more, I got the last 300 pieces. Please don't send anyone to break my legs or anything! I was beginning to think this stuff was just a myth. Was getting ready to go back to the 30 carbine rimmed made from 7.62X38R Nagant ideas.

[Dark Helmet]

Ammo at Midway- For the moment- act fast ! http://www.midwayusa.com/eproductpage.exe/showproduct?saleitemid=462443
Brass at Brassworld- shows 500 more in stock-http://www.brassworldeshop.com/

P.S. I received my brass from Brassworld today (ordered it Sunday). Watch out for rimfire cases inside of the 327's!!!!!!!!!

[leftiye]

I got my Federal 327 brass this afternoon, and promptly pulled the rims off of the first two that I sized. Never had this problem with anything before. Is Federal brass known for being soft? I guess I'll make a knock out rod and use a flat plate in place of the shell holder. The cases were pretty well blown up (once fired with hot loads), but I didn't put nearly the force on them to retract them from the die that I have in the past on other calibers, even the Hornet. They DO have a pretty narrow rim, and the metal does seem soft.

[Adam10mm]

Federal is pretty soft. I had the rims jump the ejector wheel on the gun under fire. Cases were sticking. I think 45K psi might be a little hot.

[leftiye]

Freakshow, I definitely agree about 45,000 being too hot, especially for these cases. Actually, I don't run that kind of pressure even in my 454 (don't like the recoil), or anything else. Mostly because almost all of my loads are cast, and I believe in low pressures for lead (maybe 30,000 mx.). A few exceptions for 1500 fps .44 mags though. I solved my problem by using a shell holder for a 221 fireball (RCBS #10). A little tighter. Nice looking dummy round! 115 grain RNFPGC Lyman 311316. Chambers only have to be made about .050" deeper and they'll fit. Set the barrel back one thread (.027"), and turn the back of the barrel off .020", and install that Millett rear sight, and I'll be in Business.

[Dark Helmet]

Freak, could you measure the largest diameter of your once fired cases out your SP101 for me? These once fired cases that I have are measuring .340-.341 just in front of the web. Thanks!!!

Think I'm gonna use a little case lube when I size mine down!

[Dark Helmet]

Leftiye, you don't already have a .327 reamer do you?

[leftiye]

D.H., My chambers measure .340" That's in a S&W model 16 cylinder.

I'm going to use a .339 chucking reamer. As I said I've only got to extend my chamber about fifty thou. shouldn't be any problemo. I believe one could modify a chucking reamer to have a short pilot on the front to make these chambers. Just grind down the flutes at the front (toolpost grinder - has to be concentric) and put a sleeve of the correct O.D. over the shaft created. Doesn't need to be more than 1/2" long. Then you only need to resharpen the cutting edges of the front end of the flutes and you have a .32 straight chamber reamer. You'll have to utilize some method of controlling how deep to cut. Like maybe a stop on the quill of your drill press or mill.

My big problem when I explored the 32-20 caliber rechamber from the 32 H&R magnum chamber was that the necks on 32-20 are only .006 thick. Firing in a .339 chamber would expand the necks about .015" from about .325 to .340", and blow the shoulder forward to within a quqrter inch of the case mouths. Not really germaine here, but if you have .339 chambers (neck dimension), you need .012 thick necks. .013 is better.

[Kuato]

To me, Its just another example of reinventing the wheel.

There aint much new tech in the form of wheelguns so they make "new & improved" calibers that dont really fit ANY niche.:groner:

As for the fellas that think 6 rounds is better than 5 in a snubbie, if your first 5 didnt hit anything, that last one won't matter much.

I'll stick to the tried & true 357 mag. Better ballistics, better availability, better price.

327Mag.....Hmmmm, Marketing anyone?:roll:

[leftiye]

Kuato borada nickto. Some guns are just fun. Plus they sometimes are functional too. I think the .32 is a fine caliber for a survival weapon on everything up to deer sized dinners. Everything smaller suffers on any large target, and anything bigger is way more than needed for small game.

[jack19512]

I'll stick with my 38/357.

[2 dogs]

I hope you guys take the time to TRY out a 32/327....I too was a great champion of the 38/357 platform for a field gun and spent much time arguing with guys who belive that if it dont start with a 4 it aint worth a hoot. The 32/327's have alot to offer. First is shootability. Even the 357 with a 1400 fps load starts to get nasty...with a 32/327 its just loud....but remains very easy to shoot well. Another is the ability to get the 32/327 on the Single Six platform....just a wonder package that his plenty hard....and lots more compact than most 357's available.

[Kuato]

Kuato borada nickto. .


KLATU, VERATA, NIK cough cough......


LOL!! Good call bud!

[Dark Helmet]

Do you think a "D" reamer would work to go from 32 H&R to 327 Fed?

[jwp475]

I hope you guys take the time to TRY out a 32/327....I too was a great champion of the 38/357 platform for a field gun and spent much time arguing with guys who belive that if it dont start with a 4 it aint worth a hoot. The 32/327's have alot to offer. First is shootability. Even the 357 with a 1400 fps load starts to get nasty...with a 32/327 its just loud....but remains very easy to shoot well. Another is the ability to get the 32/327 on the Single Six platform....just a wonder package that his plenty hard....and lots more compact than most 357's available.



I am always amazes with some one stats that a 357 "Even the 357 with a 1400 fps load starts to get nasty."

I have never thought of the 357 as Nasty with any load

The "Boolit Bub"

[2 dogs]

OK, thats a good point. So let me modify it to say that the 327 is less rude!

[leftiye]

Dark Helmet
I just did mine with a .339" chucking reamer. (It even straightened S&W's chambers out a little) It has about a 45 degree front cutting angle. This is a little steep, and if the shoulder produced were more than .012" - case neck thickness - high (and the edge should be rounded by the sandpaper/dowell or other method), or you were gonna shoot .32 shorts or anything like that in it, it could deform boolits when they hit it. It's not too high in mine, and I'm not going to shoot anything but .327s in it. My 311316 dummy load drops in just fine. A note of interest, My theory is that boolits with a throat (chamber mouth) diameter boolit driving band already resting in the throat is the beter way to go.

Especially if one made a pilot on the chucking reamer as described earlier, it would be easy to put a longer angle, say 10 degrees, on the cutting edge.

As for the D reamer issue, I think that it might work fine, Though it might have to be resharpened. This isn't mild steel in these chambers, and there are six of them.

JWP, Though I basically haven't seen the 357 to have a lot of recoil either, there are some that will try to tell you that the .475 - .500 revolters aren't "Nasty" too.

[leftiye]

BTW, anybody got any data fer this caliber yet? Specifically 115 grain cast?

[jwp475]

JWP, Though I basically haven't seen the 357 to have a lot of recoil either, there are some that will try to tell you that the .475 - .500 revolters aren't "Nasty" too.

That's news to me. I've owned a 475 since 88 the first in that caliber that was built by Bowen and I have never heard anyone that didn't think that the 475's and 500's had plenty of recoil or wanted more

The "Boolit Bub"

[Dark Helmet]

Some here- http://www.gunblast.com/Freedom-Harton327.htm
Start with the 32 H&R data found on Castpics and elsewhere. http://www.castpics.net/

[Dark Helmet]

Leftiye, got any 110, 296 or Lil'gun?
What's the overall length of your 115 gr. bullet and of your cartridge with one seated?

[Blammer]

dark helmet, you a big fan of "spaceballs" :)

[Dark Helmet]

"Prepare for Ludicrous Speed":mrgreen:
I guess I mean yes!

[Dark Helmet]

Some here- http://www.gunblast.com/Freedom-Harton327.htm
Start with the 32 H&R data found on Castpics and elsewhere. http://www.castpics.net/

Gunblast data looks kinda warm my version of Quickload says stop at 14 gr 110/296 MAX for a 115 gr lead boolit that has a .320 nose to crimp dimension and a .600 boolit length. 1600 FPS. Let us know what you find with your revolver.

PS some more data here http://proguns.proboards92.com/?board=semiautos&action=display&thread=962&page=1

[Blammer]

:)

Me too.

(It's Mega Maid! She's gone from suck to blow!)

[mike in co]

I'll stick with my 38/357.

how big is this 38/357 ?

how long is the bbl ??

how much does it weigh ??

how much do you carry it ?

what is your load ??

go read what was said at the begining.....there are some that do not like the full house or mid loads in a 357, short bbl lite gun.....they end up shooting 38 specials in thier 357.....
this is the market that the 327 shines......if you are comfortable with your gun fine, but there is a market for the gun and a niche for it....between 38 special and 357.....
in a few years you can tell me i'm wrong..or not....but not today.
mike in co

[jack19512]

go read what was said at the begining.....there are some that do not like the full house or mid loads in a 357, short bbl lite gun.....they end up shooting 38 specials in thier 357.....
this is the market that the 327 shines......if you are comfortable with your gun fine, but there is a market for the gun and a niche for it....between 38 special and 357.....
in a few years you can tell me i'm wrong..or not....but not today.
mike in co







I don't have to go back and read anything. No where have I insinuated or implied no one should buy a .327 if they want. There just isn't any need for me to buy one.

I reload for my .38's and .357's and can make anything from mild to wild. I don't see any situation where I would have any problem filling my needs whatever they are be it home defense, hunting, or plinking/target.

I'm not sure why you are getting your panties in such a wad over the couple words I posted after all there has been some posts much longer and more negative than mine. Which I didn't think my comment was even negative, just stating my opinion.

If you wish to PM me we can discuss this further, no need to do it here. I have a better idea, you can tell me in a few years if the .327 is still around and going strong like the .38/.357 is and if you can buy ammo for it just about anywhere, you just can't do it today!

P.S. If you go back and re-read the original post you will see the words "Thoughts on it?" I just give my thoughts on it, never even said anything negative about the .327. I just don't understand your need to vent on me.

[AzShooter]

What I'm waiting for is a 327 10 shot built on an X from or even an N frame. Would be great for ICORE revolver competitions.

[leftiye]

Gunblast data looks kinda warm my version of Quickload says stop at 14 gr 110/296 MAX for a 115 gr lead boolit that has a .320 nose to crimp dimension and a .600 boolit length. 1600 FPS. Let us know what you find with your revolver.

PS some more data here http://proguns.proboards92.com/?board=semiautos&action=display&thread=962&page=1

Dark, thanks for your help! I'd suspect that 296 with its rep for accuracy might be the ticket, though I've seen some impressive stuff with LiL gun. Any idea what the minimum load would be.

[Ricochet]

Many years ago, I shot some 32-20 "rifle only" loads from a Colt SAA 4-3/4". It had the SHARPEST crack of any cartridge/firearm combination I have ever fired -- before or since. It also had a fantastic 3 foot long muzzle flash in the dark.

I won't say it was the loudest. However, it was definitely the sharpest. I now have hearing aids and believe that at least some of the hearing loss I have is due to shooting less than a box of those cartridges in that gun (this was before ANYONE had any hearing protectors).
I'm convinced that's why Robert Johnson sang the .32-20 Blues back in 1936. Those high speed rifle-only .32-20s seemed mighty impressive fired from a revolver!

[dougader]

I'd like to get some 327 guns when they come out. I like SP101 ok, but would rather have something with target sights for my old eyes. Maybe a 4-5" single Six or even a blackhawk.

That AA #9 data looks pretty good to me. Id love to work some loads up in Blue Dot too.

[Harry O]

I'm convinced that's why Robert Johnson sang the .32-20 Blues back in 1936. Those high speed rifle-only .32-20s seemed mighty impressive fired from a revolver!

Yep, I've heard a recording of that and thought the same thing. One thing I didn't mention was that before I shot them out of the Colt SAA, I tried shooting them out of a Colt Police Positive Special. That is probably the lightest frame handgun ever chambered in 32-20.

Unfortunately, it bent the yoke or center shaft with the first half-cylinderfull. I should have known better, but I was a kid and even though the box said "use ONLY in modern rifles", the guy I bought the ammo from said that they could be used in any modern (smokeless powder) gun. A 1931 Colt PPS was well within the range of smokeless steel. 32-20 ammo was very rare and difficult to find at the time so I wanted to believe him.

What made it worse was that the gun was my father's, not mine. I got a gunsmith to fix it with a few taps of his hammer and never shot them in that gun again. I have since inherited the Colt. It still works fine, but I only use factory loads (very weak and getting weaker) in it.

[Dark Helmet]

Some data in the proguns.proboards link I posted earlier. I'd probably start at 10 grains and work up.

What are you seeing with your gun / loads so far?

http://data.hodgdon.com/cartridge_load.asp


I've ordered some plug gauges to help me measure my various cylinders more accurately, want to order a custom reamer for pistol and rifle.

[Dark Helmet]

See above post! Have you seen/fired any of the Gold Dot loads yet?

[6pt-sika]

I shot a few cylinders full of ammo yesterday for the first time in my 327 Federal !

Used the El Cheapo "American Eagle" ammo and shot 50 meter chicken silhouettes .

Took one cylinder full to get on target by the walk method [smilie=1:

Then shot 3 more full cylinders !

INMO , the guns shot pretty well , recoil is non existant and the little revolver with the Hogue grips is very comfortable . It however is very loud !

[leftiye]

Dark,
Sorry, I haven't ever fired a gold dot of any persuasion. In this 327 I'll probly only shoot the 32-20 115 grain cast boolit, maybe some xtps if they make them. The Hodgdon data is mostly for faster powders, and I suspect that the slower powders mentioned above are the ticket in this ctg. Thanks for your help.

[Dark Helmet]

I like them because you can't have a bullet jacket separation. I have had that happen with the 60 gr. XTP's in 32H&R, GD 60gr. just expand:twisted:. 'Course boolits don't separate either.:mrgreen:

[leftiye]

Oh yeah, I can make a cast boolit separate in all directions (no advantage in it though). Thanks for the info on gold dots. I've only shot xtps in 44 (445), and 45 (454) most accurate thang I have ever shot in a revolter. Got some I haven't shot yet for the .357 max.

[9.3X62AL]

I like them because you can't have a bullet jacket separation. I have had that happen with the 60 gr. XTP's in 32H&R, GD 60gr. just expand:twisted:. 'Course boolits don't separate either.:mrgreen:

That won't do, at all.

Having a S&W Model 16-4 x 6", the NEED for a 327 Federal isn't strong........but if an L-frame 8-shot were to be produced, I might be hard-put to say "no". A 4" would be nice.

[Ricochet]

Cast one of those boolits with foil in the nose and you'll get separation.

[Dark Helmet]

Yeah those 60 gr .32 bullets were designed for 32 auto velocities, but it was sooo easy to expand the jacket right off the XTP's in my Single Six.[smilie=1:

[mike in co]

well all the print hoopla has calmed down, whats the current feel on this revolver. i'm still interested and have a woman friend that is in the personal defense shoping mode.

thanks
mike in co

[Dale53]

As I have stated, on here before. I am a .32 fan for general shooting use.

However, I would NEVER pick something that new for a concealed carry revolver. I have no doubt that the .327 Magnum does everything in the way of velocity, etc that they state. However, NONE of us know whether it is going to be successful. Most here do not reload. Those that don't will be left with the "misery of chance" regarding availability of ammunition.

Concealed carry? I would definitely have to go with the Plus P .38 Special with grips that "milady" will find comfortable (I vote for Packmayr Compacts). This is a combination that will NOT hurt her, and .38 Specials are available EVERYWHERE with inexpensive practice ammo (she IS going to practice, is she not?). If you reload, you will not be waiting on Starline to produce the, for now, exotic brass but have used brass, new brass, bullet moulds galore, and tons of designs of commercial bullets available in bulk at bulk prices.

FWIW
Dale53