Sell me on the 327 Federal Magnum

[jdgabbard]

Like the title says, sell me on the 327 Federal Magnum.

I've been doing some reading, and it sounds like an impressive cartridge. The length of the 38spl, falls ballistically between 38spl and 357mag - but closer to 38spl, 6-shot capacity in j-frame size revolvers, light recoiling from what I understand....

But that is what the hype says. Who has one? What are your thoughts and experiences with it? Is it the current best pocket revolver caliber? Seems like if so, the revolver and semi-auto calibers of the future are the 327 Magnum and the 30 Super Carry. If companies would just start making more guns chambered in them that is...

[Bass Ackward]

The fun comes from learning something new. Why should I ruin your fun? Have good ear plugs.

[jdgabbard]

The fun comes from learning something new. Why should I ruin your fun? Have good ear plugs.

I mean, before I go spend $350 on a Taurus, $750 on a Ruger, or $1100 on a S&W, could you at least give me your impressions of it? :?

[Wheelguns 1961]

Here is my impression. If you have a legitimate use for it, it is not bad. I played with the .314” cartridges for a couple years, and still own them. I don’t have any legitimate use for them. I can’t squirrel hunt with them. You can only use a 22lr or a shotgun in my state. In my state it is illegal to hunt deer with. That is why there isn’t a legitimate use in my state.

The 327 packs a wallop with the right bullet. It also has a very loud crack. I couldn’t get the accuracy out of it, compared to 32 H&R magnum. That is why I prefer it to the 327. They are a lot of fun to play with, but I prefer the 32 H&R.

[dverna]

If it hits just as hard or harder than caliber .XXX at one end, it will hit as hard or harder at the other end. There is no free lunch.

If a smaller caliber allows more rounds in a cylinder or magazine there is an advantage. If the smaller cartridge size is utilized to make a pistol smaller and lighter, then recoil goes up.

Seems to me, with a smaller bore in short length pistol barrels, getting as good or better ballistics will result in more muzzle blast.

Like I said, no free lunches.

The .327 Mag comes in at about 80% of the .357 Mag and 60% better than a .38+P. I have a few .357 Mag weapons and did not see what a .327 mag would do better. Investing in brass, a mold, and dies for a "new and improved" caliber made no sense for my needs. I might feel different if I wanted to conceal carry a revolver, but I use semi-autos in 9mm for that.

[Barry54]

Loud! Fun. Versatile when you consider all the shorter cartridges that work too. No regrets other than I wish I got a larger frame/longer barrel and seven shot model. It’s whitetail capable in my opinion.

[jdgabbard]

Don, I agree. But they say it is still about half the recoil of the 357 magnum. +1 round when you consider j-frames. But I'm curious what it does to cylinder throats... And it is going to be intended for carry. I'm comfortable with 38spl defensively, but if I can get a little more energy, an extra round, and light recoil, I'm open to the idea...

Barry, that's one of the things I was thinking of. I have kinda been shopping for something to shoot 32 Long with lately as a low recoiling plinker. Having the versatility to shoot the H&R and Long is definitely a plus in my opinion. Although, I really don't see any situation where I would chose to shoot the H&R. Not impressed with it's ballistics, and it's cheaper to plink with the 32 Long. Just my .02... But this would kill two birds with one stone...

[376Steyr]

Think of the .327 as a 32-20, except you can get ammo and brass for a .327

[dverna]

JD,
No way it has 80% of the energy of a .357 and half the recoil. The laws of physics are tough to break.

Here is something for you to play with. Works with handguns and rifles.

https://www.omnicalculator.com/physics/recoil-energy

[racepres]

They are a lot of fun to play with, but I prefer the 32 H&R.


Think of the .327 as a 32-20, except you can get ammo and brass for a .327

my Thoughts summed up

[jdgabbard]

JD,
No way it has 80% of the energy of a .357 and half the recoil. The laws of physics are tough to break.

Here is something for you to play with. Works with handguns and rifles.

https://www.omnicalculator.com/physics/recoil-energy

I didn't claim it was breaking physics. But pretty much everyone seems to agree it has significantly less felt recoil. Been told it is loud as heck tho...

[Green Frog]

OK, I just noticed this thread. I probably qualify as one of the pioneers in the 327 movement, having bought a Ruger 8 shot Blackhawk when they came out, and since S&W wouldn’t build a suitable K frame revolver having had Project 616 custom built by converting Model 66 to 327 FM. To me, the availability of loads from cat sneeze level up to ground shaking fire breathing loads was the big attraction. My favorite heavy hand load utilizes a cast LSWC over a stout load of a non canister equivalent to Accurate #9. The most impressive factory round I’ve found is Federal’s HST, a JHP with a lead teat sticking up in the middle of the HP. I could describe some results I’ve gotten, but you probably wouldn’t believe me. For casual shooting I can load down my 327 brass or more likely use 32 H&R (magnum wannabe) or 32 S&W Long.
I’ve said this before, quoting John Sebastian, “It’s like tryin’ to tell a stranger about Rock’n’Roll.” If you know, you know, but I can’t really explain it if you don’t.
Froggie

[Bass Ackward]

It is a highly personal thing that only your logic can sort out. Would I own one? No. But I’m old fashioned when it comes to new calibers created by the industry. I ask, what does this cartridge do better than other calibers? Or is it just something to spur gun sales? Only YOU can answer those for yourself.

This “ IS “ a “new” gun / challenge. (Should be excitement). If your mind is questioning the money, is it trying to tell you something?

[MT Gianni]

I had one and traded it. Mine was a 4" Charter Arms Target, CEO of Charter says they will make no more 327's. It is a high pressure cartridge, I see throat erosion in the future if they eat heavy loads after 7,000-20,000 heavily loaded rounds. Just my opinion from working with other cartridges. If you want a small to medium game hunting revolver I would be all over one with an L frame or Ruger Blackhawk and a 4 5/8-7 1/2" barrel. I am not sure that you could find a better small game/varmit revolver. It would feature lighter cartridges than 38's and smaller holes in pelts if the fur market ever gets profitable.

Disadvantages are noise, and it's debatable whether or not the power gain over 32 Mag is needed for 90 % of the situations you're shooting it in. No one currently makes the revolver I described, to the best of my knowledge. Brass may not always be around. See the current situation with 480/475 brass. There is currently no companion rifles in the caliber. Resale in 20 years may not be easy.

As a defensive weapon, I think only us old guys fool ourselves into thinking a revolver is better. If you want one go for it, if you don't that's OK too.

[jdgabbard]

OK, I just noticed this thread. I probably qualify as one of the pioneers in the 327 movement, having bought a Ruger 8 shot Blackhawk when they came out, and since S&W wouldn’t build a suitable K frame revolver having had Project 616 custom built by converting Model 66 to 3227 FM. To me, the availability of loads from cat sneeze level up to ground shaking fire breathing loads was the big attraction. My favorite heavy hand load utilizes a cast LSWC over a stout load of a non canister equivalent to accurat #9. The most impressive factory round I’ve found is Federal’s HST, a JHP with a lead teat sticking up in the middle of the HP. I could describe some results I’ve gotten, but you probably wouldn’t believe me. For casual shooting I can load down my 327 brass or more likely use 32 H&R (magnum wannabe) or 32 S&W Long.
I’ve said this before, quoting John Sebastian, “It’s like tryin’ to tell a stranger about Rock’n’Roll.” If you know, you know, but I can’t really explain it if you don’t.
Froggie

Very interesting. I bet that Model 66 shoots real good with that cartridge! I think Ruger does offer a GP-100 in this round now tho, so that is about the equivalent of what you had built. Thanks for sharing! Btw, drop a photo of the 66 if you get a chance! I'd love to see it.


It is a highly personal thing that only your logic can sort out. Would I own one? No. But I’m old fashioned when it comes to new calibers created by the industry. I ask, what does this cartridge do better than other calibers? Or is it just something to spur gun sales? Only YOU can answer those for yourself.

This “ IS “ a “new” gun / challenge. (Should be excitement). If your mind is questioning the money, is it trying to tell you something?

This is a cop out answer... I asked for opinions and impressions of first hand accounts to determine if I might want to buy one and play with it. You responded with this comment offering no information of any value at all other than to use hearing protection:

"The fun comes from learning something new. Why should I ruin your fun? Have good ear plugs."

I ask you again for your impression of the cartridge - assuming at this point you actual own a firearm chambered in it and have shot it. And you respond that the fact that I'm asking about a particular cartridge before I buy it should tell me all I need to know, and that I should answer my own questions. But at least confirming that you don't own one, and where not the target audience of the question to begin with.

Thanks.

[Barry54]

If you wind up in Tennessee you’re welcome to try out mine. I’d be really tempted by a lever action 327 as well!

[ohen cepel]

I have a Henry in 327 and their site still shows them in their line, so, rifles were/are out there in it.

I like the 32's a lot, versatile more than the 38/357 as you can go really mild with 32 long up to hot in 327. Do you need one? Likely not.

The new Taurus is a great buy in my mind at that price. Can't loose much there if you don't care for it. Looks like $600 for an LCR if you prefer that one. Not sure where Ruger is on Single 7's or SP101's.

S&W also has their Lipsey 32mag Ultra Carry coming out, but that isn't a 327.

[Outpost75]

I see no need for the .327. I have two Ruger Blackhawks in .30 Carbine. One with 7-1/2" barrel and the other professionally shortened to 5-1/4". The .30 Carbine with full charge factory loads beats the .327 and with handloads you can tone it down to pleasant levels. The Rugers can also use .32-20 ammo and digest heavy Winchester 92 loads if that is the object of your desire. The Ruger .30 Carbine revolvers are the most accurate handguns I own. I sold my Inland M1 carbine because the Rugers were more accurate. Five-shot 3-4" iron-sight groups at 100 yards off sandbag with good ammunition are normal.

If you want watermelon sized muzzle flash suitable for night flash photography and a report so loud it is painful without both muffs and plugs try shooting LC44 military ammo at 1700 fps from a 7-1/2" or 1600 from a 5-1/4". I prefer the .309" Hornady XTP with 7.5 grains of Autocomp or 15 grains of H110 for 1500 fps. More accurate and milder report like an M96 Mauser Broomhandle, Cz52 or a Tokarev.

[rintinglen]

I have 4, and owned a fifth, 3 Single7's and a 4 inch Sp101 currently. I had a Blackhawk 8 shooter, but that was much too much iron for such a small caliber. I cannot agree with Outpost on this one. My 30. Carbine Blackhawk was not at all in the same class as my 7 1/2 inch Single Seven. Not even close. My 327 Single 7 7 1/2" is the only revolver that I have managed to shoot a 1" group with in this century (more my fault than the gun's, I fear). I never managed that with the carbine Blackhawk and my eyes were younger back then.

They are noisy. A full on 327 is LOUD. But then, so was the 30 carbine Blackhawk. What I like is that you get bottom end 357 ballistics in a smaller lighter gun. The 4 inch sp101 is a pretty nifty package, though only after you perform a serious action job. Stock SP's come with gritty heavy triggers and the 327's are no exception. I tried for years to get a 3 inch when I was still back in California, but it never happened. I think that would be a great CCW revolver, but I finally decided you can't own 'em all, so I gave up on that particular unicorn.

Bottom line is that I am a fan. I keep toying with the idea of getting an H&R and making a single shot 327 carbine, but I am getting older and find it increasingly hard to justify new toys when I don't play with the ones I have. But a 327 640 S&W??? Hmm, that might follow me home..
326177326178326179326180

[david s]

https://i.postimg.cc/5yB5XnrG/IMG-1300-2.jpg (https://postimages.org/) You seem to be leaning more to the self-defense side of the 327 than a woods gun but here is my opinion. I looked at the original 3-inch J framed S&W first offered with the muzzle brake and shied away because I worried about the 327's bark. Make no mistake it does make noise about like the 30 Carbine round. I purchased one of the full sized 8 shoot Blackhawk 327's and like it enough but should have waited for the Single Six version. The 327 belongs in a smaller framed pistol. I had one of the 4-inch K framed 32 H&R and didn't care for it because of the full lugged barrel traded it off for the J framed Kit Gun 32 H&R. The 32's in any flavor are fun pistols and with the 327 the time between the bang and clang is surprisingly short. Mine are mostly woods guns though.

[Jeff Michel]

As everyone else has warned you about the muzzle blast, I'll be honest, there isn't much to the .327 to endear it to me. I own every example of .327 the Ruger has ever made and it really doesn't come close to a .357 when you compare a 85 grain soft point in the .327 to a 158 grain in a .357. If your looking for a self defense application, I'd take a .38 special with 148 grain wadcutters over a .327 as to recoil, accuracy and muzzle blast. As for hunting applications...... Can't say I've used a 327 on anything other than a couple of horses. I really like .32 calibers but all of my .327 Magnums are fed a steady diet .32 H&R's and that is an excellent small game round.

[contender1]

Long ago,, when Ruger introduced the Single-Six in .32 H&R mag,, I figured it to be a big bust. It wasn't, and I found out why when I got my first one. Wow was it fun, accurate, easy to reload for, & a fine caliber for smaller to medium game.

I was GLAD I was wrong.

Then along came the .327 Mag, and I could not wait to get a few. I snagged &and still have) a Blackhawk in .327 and a Single-Seven in it as well.

You can load .32 shorts, .32 Longs, .32 H&R mags, and .327 in them. Very versatile. I have used them for groundhogs, ground squirrels, a few coyotes, a crow, and dispatched a few coons as well. As a hunting round,, it is excellent for smaller to medium sized game. Very mild recoil.

If self defense is your desires,, I can't offer any real world experience. I've never carried one with that in mind. I'm of the mindset; "A .45 is just a .9mm for grown-ups!"
I carry & prefer a larger caliber handgun for protecting my life or the lives of family.

[Dan Cash]

I find the .327 recoil to be insignificant in my Tarus snub. The bullet makes a wound like a .32-20 or a .30 Mauser with a blunt lead bullet. Fie on al the snivel concerning throat erosion, muzzle blast etc. The cartridge and revolver is easier to handle than .38 SP or .357, makes a heck of a wound in flesh and if you use your .327 in a moment of great need, you will likely not hear the gun go off. It is a fine cartridge and if I did not have lots of .32-20 brass, I would be packing my .327 as a field pistol.

[jdgabbard]

If you wind up in Tennessee you’re welcome to try out mine. I’d be really tempted by a lever action 327 as well!

Yeah, probably won't end up that way before I make a decision. But a lever in 327 does sound interesting.


I have a Henry in 327 and their site still shows them in their line, so, rifles were/are out there in it.

I like the 32's a lot, versatile more than the 38/357 as you can go really mild with 32 long up to hot in 327. Do you need one? Likely not.

The new Taurus is a great buy in my mind at that price. Can't loose much there if you don't care for it. Looks like $600 for an LCR if you prefer that one. Not sure where Ruger is on Single 7's or SP101's.

S&W also has their Lipsey 32mag Ultra Carry coming out, but that isn't a 327.

Actually, the Lipsey 32 Ultra Carry is sort of what prompted me to look into the 327. Like I said before, I've kind of been looking off and on at 32 S&W Longs, notably the 30-1. And when I saw Lipsey's upcoming release with the 32 H&R I said to myself "Why the heck wouldn't they just have it chambered in 327 Federal." Then I started looking at the various options out there for 327 Federal. As for needing one, I mean, technically I'll never NEED another gun in my lifetime. But that doesn't mean there might not be something out there that better suits my particular needs at any given moment. But, that's also why I'm weighing the options.

Out of curiosity, does that Henry feed 32 H&R or 32 Long from the tube? Or does it jam up?


I see no need for the .327. I have two Ruger Blackhawks in .30 Carbine. One with 7-1/2" barrel and the other professionally shortened to 5-1/4". The .30 Carbine with full charge factory loads beats the .327 and with handloads you can tone it down to pleasant levels. The Rugers can also use .32-20 ammo and digest heavy Winchester 92 loads if that is the object of your desire. The Ruger .30 Carbine revolvers are the most accurate handguns I own. I sold my Inland M1 carbine because the Rugers were more accurate. Five-shot 3-4" iron-sight groups at 100 yards off sandbag with good ammunition are normal.

If you want watermelon sized muzzle flash suitable for night flash photography and a report so loud it is painful without both muffs and plugs try shooting LC44 military ammo at 1700 fps from a 7-1/2" or 1600 from a 5-1/4". I prefer the .309" Hornady XTP with 7.5 grains of Autocomp or 15 grains of H110 for 1500 fps. More accurate and milder report like an M96 Mauser Broomhandle, Cz52 or a Tokarev.

Yeah, I'm looking at the defensive side of things. I have a new GP100 for woods duty. As for fireballs in the night, I've got a CZ52 and a few SBRs. So not lacking in that regard.

[jdgabbard]

I have 4, and owned a fifth, 3 Single7's and a 4 inch Sp101 currently. I had a Blackhawk 8 shooter, but that was much too much iron for such a small caliber. I cannot agree with Outpost on this one. My 30. Carbine Blackhawk was not at all in the same class as my 7 1/2 inch Single Seven. Not even close. My 327 Single 7 7 1/2" is the only revolver that I have managed to shoot a 1" group with in this century (more my fault than the gun's, I fear). I never managed that with the carbine Blackhawk and my eyes were younger back then.

They are noisy. A full on 327 is LOUD. But then, so was the 30 carbine Blackhawk. What I like is that you get bottom end 357 ballistics in a smaller lighter gun. The 4 inch sp101 is a pretty nifty package, though only after you perform a serious action job. Stock SP's come with gritty heavy triggers and the 327's are no exception. I tried for years to get a 3 inch when I was still back in California, but it never happened. I think that would be a great CCW revolver, but I finally decided you can't own 'em all, so I gave up on that particular unicorn.

Bottom line is that I am a fan. I keep toying with the idea of getting an H&R and making a single shot 327 carbine, but I am getting older and find it increasingly hard to justify new toys when I don't play with the ones I have. But a 327 640 S&W??? Hmm, that might follow me home..
326177326178326179326180

I own an SP101, and yeah, their triggers are pretty heavy. But I've never found that to be too much of a problem, as they tend to have a good stage on them to still get decent groups double action. I'd prefer a 2-3" though, as the 4" is just a bit long for concealed carry. Would make a nice target gun though, I'm sure. As mentioned in a previous post, apparently Henry is making some 327 rifles. So that might be easier if you have the cash to spend.


I find the .327 recoil to be insignificant in my Tarus snub. The bullet makes a wound like a .32-20 or a .30 Mauser with a blunt lead bullet. Fie on al the snivel concerning throat erosion, muzzle blast etc. The cartridge and revolver is easier to handle than .38 SP or .357, makes a heck of a wound in flesh and if you use your .327 in a moment of great need, you will likely not hear the gun go off. It is a fine cartridge and if I did not have lots of .32-20 brass, I would be packing my .327 as a field pistol.

Dan, thanks for sharing. This is what I was mostly looking to find out. Probably ought to head down to one of the local ranges and see if they have one for rent. Wouldn't mind laying my hands on one before pulling the trigger. Even something as cheap as $350 I couldn't lose much money on, but I'd like to try before I buy.

[Green Frog]

Well, Outpost75, my friend, I never thought I’d find myself disagreeing with you, but I submit that in a properly sized revolver, the 327 FM is a fine, flexible cartridge.and more, the basis of a very viable system. When added to a rifle such as the Henry mentioned above, it can be even more effective. As I mentioned, I don’t need to feel the Earth move every time I shoot it, and frequently don’t want to, so I can shoot H&R, S&W L and even 32 acp and “shorts” if I want, something that can’t be done with a revolver chambered in 32-20 or 30 carbine.

That’s what I’ve concluded, rightly or wrongly. I’m committed to the degree that I’m planning for my next project to be the conversion of a Ruger #3 Carbine to 327 Fed Mag. I don’t think Bill Ruger would object too much if he were here, do you?

Your Phriend the Phrog

[dverna]

I didn't claim it was breaking physics. But pretty much everyone seems to agree it has significantly less felt recoil. Been told it is loud as heck tho...

You can believe the numbers or what people say. I am a numbers guy and old enough not to trust what people say.

[P Flados]

I have a 4.2" SP-101 in 327. It was my first "32". I now have a number of other choices to shoot 32 caliber projectiles.

I shot thousands of rounds of ammo through it but very few full power loads. The choice to more or less give up the full power stuff seems to be pretty common for reloaders of the 327. This is easy to understand with the combination of blast, noise, and recoil in guns similar to or smaller than mine.

I am not shooting it much much currently. Reasons are mostly gun specific, not because it is a 327.

[gc45]

Had one when first came out, a smith revolver. After 100 rds or so, traded it to a friend and went back to my J-frame 38 spec for my carry gun. Still not sure why I bought the 327 but was not for me.

[rockshooter]

I've had most every iteration that Ruger sells, but am down to a 3" and a 7.5". I use both for a plinking gun with 120 gr cast bullets- sorta like a fat .22LR. For me the blast is so nasty in the short bbls that I much prefer .38Sp with wadcutters. The real place, in my opinion, is in a Henry lever action. Even with the heavier 120gr bullet, it can be a flat-shooting, fast 32-20 substitute. The downside of the Henry is that they use the .357 feed tube, so loading it and getting the tube back down can be a chore. My Henry gets lots of use while roaming the desert around here.
Loren

[trapper9260]

The way I see it that you can not just go by what others says. It is what your use for it or plan for . I got the 327 BH when they first came out because of all the other rounds you can shoot in it. Because at the time 22lr was not easy to get and wanted something to reload then have to count on the factory . That is one of the main reason I got one. Then I had a Handi Rifle made and it shoots all I want out of the BH in the rifle also. It all works for me . I know we each have our own opinion. It is what will work for the one who looking for the use , no matter what it is . Just like use of 357 mag , you can shoot 38spl in it . It works the same for the 327 . Also the 44 mag you can shoot 44spl and 44 Russian. You have more then one gun in one for the different rounds you can shoot. Also the 32 cal cast you can also shoot in the 30 cal bolt and lever and pump rifle for light loads if you like .

[shooting on a shoestring]

I’m blessed with plenty of choices in pocket revolvers in 32 & 38.

Ruger LCR in 327 gets more time in my pocket than the rest. After dark it’s the S&W Ultimate Carry in 32 H&R bc I find that tritium front sight a good thing. Sometimes it’s an early J-Frame 32 SWL (loaded heavy bc the gun can handle it).

Why not my Models 36, 49, 60? The 32’s are 6 shooters. The 32’s penetrate as deep or deeper than 38’s (it all depends on which boolit and how heavy it’s loaded). In general, 32’s have more velocity and lighter boolits.

If you’re man enough to handle 357, you can handle 327. Like dverna points out, 327 does not have any more recoil than 357 (Ha!). Although….my LCR in 327 loaded with my Accurate 31-117E making 1300 fps out of that short barrel has wicked recoil! No concern of throat erosion. My hand won’t hold up.

Loud. That comes from muzzle pressure. 327 being sanctioned to run as high as 45,000 psi can, and in many loads will, have muzzle pressure higher than 38’s. So, louder. Big deal. I use double hearing protection when I shoot any gun. In the rare occurrence of shooting my heavy loaded 327 LCR in a defensive situation, yes I’ll loose some hearing. Probably would lose a little with a 38 too. But I’m willing to trade that for the 6th shot and a much more energetic terminal performance. Some people aren’t. And I may deteriorate in my tolerances and go back to 38’s. I’m keeping them just in case. But…then again I don’t have to load my 327’s to top end to still get good performance. The 32 H&R UC 432 is a good DA only snubby. It’s driving Accurate 31-088w through 4, 1-gallon water jugs and bumping into the 5th. Lots less blast than the heavy 327 load, which also stops at number 4, but impressively shreds the first jug and expands bigger than the 32 H&R load.

327 HP jacketed bullets, there’s plenty of Hornady XTPs in 85 and 100 grain. I prefer carrying the 100 grains in a six shot speed strip for a reload. I like having the copper jackets rubbing around in my pocket (other pocket, not the one with the gun in it) better than a lead boolit bumping into whatever else is riding there.

Longer than sunbbies, I have 3” and 4” revolvers in 32’s, 38’s and 357’s. The 32’s get shot the most because I just enjoy them. They use less lead and that matters to me. They generally shoot flatter (depends on the loading) and plinking is more fun. There’s not a night and day difference. Just a preference.

People have brand loyalty. Or in this case caliber loyalty. It’s an ingredient in why people prefer one over the other. I recognize that I’m a 32 caliber fan. That’s definitely part of why I carry them. Some people are 38 fans. Some only want calibers starting with a 4. I like my big bores too. But for snubbies, I use my 32’s. In my opinion the LCR in 327 is the best snubby.

[Jeff Michel]

My Henry does feed 32 H&R just fine. 32 Long has to seated out to feed reliably, about the same as the 1894 Marlin in 32 mag. It will not feed if it is not held vertical regardless of ammo used. Pretty nice rifle, but heavy.

[Thumbcocker]

I have an sp 101 and a single 7 in .327. I got them because of the "shoot all thec.32's " aspect. Thec101 pierces primers but only withe .327 brass. The single 7 won't chamber all the loads the 101 will (could be the other way around its been a while). I love the 101 for size but would be just as happy if it was in .32 H&R. My .30 carbine Blackhawk shoots rings around both of them and shoots flat. Plinking at 100 yards is easy. I have .32 H&R single sixes and they are great. I see no advantage in a .327 over a .357 for woods bumming, hunting, or defense.

[jdgabbard]

My Henry does feed 32 H&R just fine. 32 Long has to seated out to feed reliably, about the same as the 1894 Marlin in 32 mag. It will not feed if it is not held vertical regardless of ammo used. Pretty nice rifle, but heavy.

Jeff, sounds like the Henry would be real fun with 32 Long for Cowboy Action Shooting. It's not something I'd do, but it does sound fun!

[Abert Rim]

I had the Taurus snub for a while and was pretty impressed with it. I am playing with .30 Super Carry currently, but might well go back to it. It is a very flexible cartridge that seems to punch above its weight class with best loads.

[Bass Ackward]

This is a cop out answer... I asked for opinions and impressions of first hand accounts to determine if I might want to buy one and play with it. You responded with this comment offering no information of any value at all other than to use hearing protection:

"The fun comes from learning something new. Why should I ruin your fun? Have good ear plugs."

I ask you again for your impression of the cartridge - assuming at this point you actual own a firearm chambered in it and have shot it. And you respond that the fact that I'm asking about a particular cartridge before I buy it should tell me all I need to know, and that I should answer my own questions. But at least confirming that you don't own one, and where not the target audience of the question to begin with.

Thanks.

When this thread is exhausted, you are going to have opinions that amount to nothing of value in your case. After 50 years in the gun business, I have seen guys fixated on calibers, gun brands, action types. Frame sizes, and there is no logic.

Since you are posting here, the assumption is you are asking relative to cast. Not particularly cast friendly. Is it a more accurate cartridge than any other? No. Does it have a particular killing edge? This is again opinion, but I wouldn’t bet my life on it. Does it have superior range performance. Only if you look at a barrel length FAR greater than you are considering. So should you buy a Hyundai? Is a 1000 cc bike big enough? If it’s important to you, buy it.

[ohen cepel]

My Henry runs 32mag fine also. IIRC the barrel is marked 327 and 32mag. Never tried 32L in it, but as mentioned above I don't see why if seated out far enough. I never bothered to try myself as 32mag was real mild in it and I didn't have to do special loads for one rifle.

[mobilemail]

I own a 4" SP101 and a Henry Big Boy brass rifle. Here are my thoughts in no particular order:
1. Forget finding loaded ammo on the shelf, at least where I live in Central IL. If you buy a gun, just take five more minutes and buy some brass and bullets.
2. As far as I've been able to find, the only jacketed bullets available are XTPs in 85 and 100gr. if you can find them.
3. Personally, I think .327 is an even better rifle cartridge than a handgun cartridge. Load it soft for smaller game like raccoons or coyotes, up to full tilt for deer if legal where you live (for shot distances within reason and good placement). I used my Henry to shoot a pistol cartridge silhoutte match once, and it was pure fun! The rifle pointed and balanced well, and no recoil to speak of.
4. If I did things over I would buy a 3" revolver for CCW and a 6"GP100. The 4" is a little long for CCW, and a little light for repeated shooting full bore loads. If you wanted a general purpose gun to carry in a hip holster, it would do nicely.
All just my personal opinions, of course. :-)

[dverna]

I own a 4" SP101 and a Henry Big Boy brass rifle. Here are my thoughts in no particular order:
1. Forget finding loaded ammo on the shelf, at least where I live in Central IL. If you buy a gun, just take five more minutes and buy some brass and bullets.
2. As far as I've been able to find, the only jacketed bullets available are XTPs in 85 and 100gr. if you can find them.
3. Personally, I think .327 is an even better rifle cartridge than a handgun cartridge. Load it soft for smaller game like raccoons or coyotes, up to full tilt for deer if legal where you live (for shot distances within reason and good placement). I used my Henry to shoot a pistol cartridge silhoutte match once, and it was pure fun! The rifle pointed and balanced well, and no recoil to speak of.
4. If I did things over I would buy a 3" revolver for CCW and a 6"GP100. The 4" is a little long for CCW, and a little light for repeated shooting full bore loads. If you wanted a general purpose gun to carry in a hip holster, it would do nicely.
All just my personal opinions, of course. :-)

Good post. With my many .38/.357 weapons, I faced the issue of what would the .327 do that would justify adding it?

In my old age, I have become a minimalist. It did not fit a need.

It is a fine cartridge that you should have a lot fun with it if you decide to go that route.

[racepres]

Following what Don posted above... I do Not require more...of anything. My Bitter Half however, likes her Rugger SSM, in 32 H&R, purchased early '90's, very much. The 32H&R is all she desires...tho she likes it "Peppy". She does shoot our little H&R in 32S&W(L), infrequently. I'm saying we are Set! Tho a larger frame 32 would be welcomed...who says one must be in Need???

[Bigslug]

Would you rather commute to work every day in a common, reliable car that always starts, always runs, always gets you where you need to go, has commonly available parts and accessories, and runs on standard 87 octane gas. . .

. . .or would you rather do it in a quirky exotic with exactly the same performance but without even half the logistics tail that runs on wishes and unicorn farts?

There's nothing unusable about the .32's, but they're basically all chambered in guns that can be had in .357 magnum, which can be watered down all the way to shooting .38 Short Colt, if desired. Maybe you can get an extra round in the cylinder, but as you say, we now have flatter and higher capacity 9mm's in the same performance spectrum (with serious defensive loads available) that will fit in your front pocket and not have a fat, bulgy cylinder to contend with.

I've got a Martini Cadet single shot shooting something of an exotic, blown out .32-20. Shoots great, and I learned a lot figuring out how to make ammo for it, but if I could wave a magic wand and have it run on scrounged .357 Magnum range brass, I'd do it in a heartbeat. Like the .32 wheelguns, it's fun, but logistically more than a little insane.

[jdgabbard]

When this thread is exhausted, you are going to have opinions that amount to nothing of value in your case. After 50 years in the gun business, I have seen guys fixated on calibers, gun brands, action types. Frame sizes, and there is no logic.

Since you are posting here, the assumption is you are asking relative to cast. Not particularly cast friendly. Is it a more accurate cartridge than any other? No. Does it have a particular killing edge? This is again opinion, but I wouldn’t bet my life on it. Does it have superior range performance. Only if you look at a barrel length FAR greater than you are considering. So should you buy a Hyundai? Is a 1000 cc bike big enough? If it’s important to you, buy it.

Actually, that couldn't be further from the truth. I've found the opinions here to be very valuable. And mostly positive by about 2:1 of the cartridge. There are some disagreements as to it's practical application, and whether or not it is subjectively better than this cartridge or that cartridge. But there is a lot of valuable information here.

No offense intended, but that is how people figure out when something works and when it doesn't - they share their opinions and experiences. And the people who ask the questions gather up those experiences and opinions to form their own conclusion of the costs/benefits based upon the answers they received. You're practically the only person involved in this thread that offered neither. I'll agree there are fanboys of every genre out there. But that doesn't mean that valuable insights cannot be conveyed through opinion and experience. Sure, if we're talking Colt vs S&W what does it matter. But that's not what we're discussing here.

[jdgabbard]

Would you rather commute to work every day in a common, reliable car that always starts, always runs, always gets you where you need to go, has commonly available parts and accessories, and runs on standard 87 octane gas. . .

. . .or would you rather do it in a quirky exotic with exactly the same performance but without even half the logistics tail that runs on wishes and unicorn farts?

There's nothing unusable about the .32's, but they're basically all chambered in guns that can be had in .357 magnum, which can be watered down all the way to shooting .38 Short Colt, if desired. Maybe you can get an extra round in the cylinder, but as you say, we now have flatter and higher capacity 9mm's in the same performance spectrum (with serious defensive loads available) that will fit in your front pocket and not have a fat, bulgy cylinder to contend with.

I've got a Martini Cadet single shot shooting something of an exotic, blown out .32-20. Shoots great, and I learned a lot figuring out how to make ammo for it, but if I could wave a magic wand and have it run on scrounged .357 Magnum range brass, I'd do it in a heartbeat. Like the .32 wheelguns, it's fun, but logistically more than a little insane.

Great analogy. I am fond of the idea of the cartridge. And it does sound like a great cartridge. But the only real advantage I'm seeing over the .357 is the +1 capacity and slightly less recoil in identical frames. I'll probably end up buying one if for no other reason than to shoot 32 Long in it as a plinker - but as I've said, I've been looking for something to shoot that cartridge regardless.

I think the overall answer here is that it is a great cartridge, and does do what it says it does. But it's practical application is probably niche centric, with a lot of cartridge overlap.

[jrayborn]

I'm another one that has all the offerings Ruger offered in .327. For ME, the 327 is just fun. I would say that although factory ammo is generally available, this cartridge shines for a handloader. I like heavy bullets and handloading allows me to load them inexpensively.

The 327 doesn't really do anything another caliber can't do, but you can say that about nearly any cartridge. I have the Henry Carbine and that's a lot of fun too.

I really like the cartridge in Rugers LCR. A JFrame sized six shooter with plenty of power if that's your thing, or download it to be comfortable for anyone recoil adverse. That's the strength of the round over the 38's and 357's in my opinion, as a carry gun.

Oh ya, last thing. It's no secret that many Rugers generally need a little work on the forcing cone, throats and possibly a constricted barrel. Once these potential deficiencies are addressed my experience is they shoot like a freaking laser. If you want a flat shooting revolver round, this is it for me.

Mostly, its just fun.

[smkummer]

Would you rather commute to work every day in a common, reliable car that always starts, always runs, always gets you where you need to go, has commonly available parts and accessories, and runs on standard 87 octane gas. . .

. . .or would you rather do it in a quirky exotic with exactly the same performance but without even half the logistics tail that runs on wishes and unicorn farts?

There's nothing unusable about the .32's, but they're basically all chambered in guns that can be had in .357 magnum, which can be watered down all the way to shooting .38 Short Colt, if desired. Maybe you can get an extra round in the cylinder, but as you say, we now have flatter and higher capacity 9mm's in the same performance spectrum (with serious defensive loads available) that will fit in your front pocket and not have a fat, bulgy cylinder to contend with.

I've got a Martini Cadet single shot shooting something of an exotic, blown out .32-20. Shoots great, and I learned a lot figuring out how to make ammo for it, but if I could wave a magic wand and have it run on scrounged .357 Magnum range brass, I'd do it in a heartbeat. Like the .32 wheelguns, it's fun, but logistically more than a little insane.

He kinda hits the nail on the head. But I own both 32 S&W long and 32-20 revolvers. Maybe shoot the 32-20 more just because I shoot cowboy action and have a Win. 92 in that caliber. With that said, I’m shooting 38/357 revolvers and rifle way more. My lightest is a 32 short colt loaded with 1.9 grains trail boss that sounds like a big 22 short in my Marlin rifle. I could go as low as a 95 grain bullet for 38/357. Never any problem finding 38 special brass. So would I own a 327 if I didn’t own the other 32 revolvers? Probably like outpost 75 says, I would own a 30 carbine Blackhawk as I’ve loaded ammo for a couple others with those guns and they work wonderful with reduced loads. And it’s kinda neat that Ruger just had to make a minor change to the new model blackhawks to accept 32-20 ammo. And I shoot cast in my military M1 carbine as well. Oh, I also own a few colt 22 single actions with 22 mag. cylinders so the gap between 22 to 38 is more than covered. Oops, forgot I also own a colt 1903 32 acp.

[kenton]

You can believe the numbers or what people say. I am a numbers guy and old enough not to trust what people say.

As I under stand it, recoil is based off momentum, mass x velocity of the bullet and gasses and the static momentum of the firearm. (With some voodoo for speed of recoil, grip shape, and personal preference) Kinetic energy is 1/2 x mass x (velocity squared) So generally faster, lighter bullets will have less momentum for the same energy. Whether kinetic energy is the best metric for a firearm is a different question.

Also it has been a while since Physics class so forgive me if I am confused.

[35remington]

I note the depressingly large velocity variations obtained with powder position variation of lighter charges of fast powder intended to simulate 32 Long and 32 H and R and my enthusiasm for light loading the longer cartridge is considerably diminished. Since 32 Long is my preference for such use, and 357 is my preference for higher power use, i see no niche for it for myself.

I’ve already got those revolvers that cover “lighter” and “heavier” on hand. The full sized cartridge doesn’t do modest loading well and another cartridge beats it on the high end. So meh.

[Jeff Michel]

Just found out today that Ruger makes a 3" SP 101, fixed sight in 327..... Also found out it fits surprising well in the center console of my Ford. :cool:

[Bigslug]

I think the overall answer here is that it is a great cartridge, and does do what it says it does. But it's practical application is probably niche centric, with a lot of cartridge overlap.

This is where I've arrived on many things - ESPECIALLY since I got into bullet casting. Between manipulating alloy, nose shape, and adding hollowpoints, you can often pick one cartridge and tweak the penetration to be suitable for mice or mastodon. When you start looking at ammo in that light, there becomes less practical performance difference from one round to the next. At that point it becomes a matter of suitability for the job at hand, how many jobs it can do suitably well, and the logistics of keeping it going - not only in terms of basic components, but in the hassle of converting the press from making ammo for your five .357/.38's so you can make ammo for the quirky niche gun.

Hey, we all have the wild flights. I cast and load for Webleys not because they're practical, but because they're historically cool. But it's worth considering what side of the line that wild flight is on.

Something else to consider in a carry gun is the weight. Typically, a manufacturer will leave the external dimensions alone, and bore out the inside for the desired cartridge. Smaller bore, often = heavier gun.

[jdgabbard]

At that point it becomes a matter of suitability for the job at hand, how many jobs it can do suitably well, and the logistics of keeping it going - not only in terms of basic components, but in the hassle of converting the press from making ammo for your five .357/.38's so you can make ammo for the quirky niche gun.

I’ve got a turret press, so it’s just a matter of changing plates, shell holder, and possibly primer seating equipment. So no hassle there. And honestly finding brass would probably be the biggest issue. But again, I’d probably shoot 32 Long in it more than anything.

[shooting on a shoestring]

Finding 327 brass is easy. You find it on the front porch a couple days after you order it. Currently in stock at Graf’s and Powder Valley and probably lots more internet ordering houses. Even Cabela’s has it in stock. Star Line just made a batch and had it green dotted for the last couple of months. It’s yellow dotted now, so taking back orders. In 2008 when it came out, find brass was tougher. Not now days.

327 brass is made for the high pressure and I’ve not had any longevity problems with my brass. I don’t remover losing a case. I’ve loosened plenty of primer pockets on 32 H&R. Thanks SSM! But not in 327.

[barnabus]

Here is my impression. If you have a legitimate use for it, it is not bad. I played with the .314” cartridges for a couple years, and still own them. I don’t have any legitimate use for them. I can’t squirrel hunt with them. You can only use a 22lr or a shotgun in my state. In my state it is illegal to hunt deer with. That is why there isn’t a legitimate use in my state.

The 327 packs a wallop with the right bullet. It also has a very loud crack. I couldn’t get the accuracy out of it, compared to 32 H&R magnum. That is why I prefer it to the 327. They are a lot of fun to play with, but I prefer the 32 H&R.

yep

[Geraldo]

Don, I agree. But they say it is still about half the recoil of the 357 magnum. +1 round when you consider j-frames. But I'm curious what it does to cylinder throats... And it is going to be intended for carry. I'm comfortable with 38spl defensively, but if I can get a little more energy, an extra round, and light recoil, I'm open to the idea...

Barry, that's one of the things I was thinking of. I have kinda been shopping for something to shoot 32 Long with lately as a low recoiling plinker. Having the versatility to shoot the H&R and Long is definitely a plus in my opinion. Although, I really don't see any situation where I would chose to shoot the H&R. Not impressed with it's ballistics, and it's cheaper to plink with the 32 Long. Just my .02... But this would kill two birds with one stone...

I looked, but I don't see a S&W j-frame .327 being produced currently. If they did make one, I would avoid it. My Single-Seven is small enough. I haven't fired a factory round in it. .327 rounds are incredibly noisy/blasty. It's a lot like my .454 SRH, only smaller. .45 cowboy loads/.32 S&W=fun. Ruger only .45 Colt/.32 H&R=still fun and get the job done. .454/.327=stuff just got real. That's the point, that I can do anything I want with three different cases and one revolver.

In addition to good earpro, buy more than one set of dies.

[mobilemail]

yep

Can't argue with performance. In my case, I chose to buy .327 guns anyway because the caliber can easily be handloaded to fire at .32H&R velocities. I have the higher power capability if I want it - ever - and the guns are built and tested for the higher pressures. So I just buy and stock one size of brass. And it's of little concern to me, but .32H&R ammo is nearly as hard to find in my neck of the woods as .327.

If you want to nitpick, I think a bullet caster can get more of the common weight bullets (98-115gr.) from a pound of lead than .357 (130-180gr), but I really doubt if anyone here cares about that slight difference.

[rintinglen]

Just found out today that Ruger makes a 3" SP 101, fixed sight in 327..... Also found out it fits surprising well in the center console of my Ford. :cool:

IME, they are made out of unicorn horns. I have never seen one.

[ohen cepel]

Ruger just did another batch of SP101's in 327. Lots of 3 and 4in versions on GB now, not cheap, but better prices than there has been in a long time on them. Buds also has them in stock under $700.

[jdgabbard]

I looked, but I don't see a S&W j-frame .327 being produced currently. If they did make one, I would avoid it. My Single-Seven is small enough. I haven't fired a factory round in it. .327 rounds are incredibly noisy/blasty. It's a lot like my .454 SRH, only smaller. .45 cowboy loads/.32 S&W=fun. Ruger only .45 Colt/.32 H&R=still fun and get the job done. .454/.327=stuff just got real. That's the point, that I can do anything I want with three different cases and one revolver.

In addition to good earpro, buy more than one set of dies.

Yeah, it looks like S&W dropped the caliber. It used to be offered in the performance center 632, but doesn’t look like they’re doing that one anymore.

[Jeff Michel]

Ruger just did another batch of SP101's in 327. Lots of 3 and 4in versions on GB now, not cheap, but better prices than there has been in a long time on them. Buds also has them in stock under $700.

Not too bad me thinks......675.00 OTD.

[Green Frog]

There is a philosophical saying about “a solution looking for a problem”. In a way, this is how some folks regard the 327 FM, but for me it seems like a fine chambering looking for an appropriate platform (ie gun). With the release of more Rugers this situation may be improved, but I still wish S&W would get on board with an appropriate K frame. The Single Seven may be their final answer in a SA, but if Ruger would give their Blackhawk another chance, it might sell well. I envision a dual cylinder 32 (a la the Buckeye Special) in 327 FM and 32-20 for the ultimate handgun in this caliber family. If they made it a triple cylinder version with a 30 Carbine cylinder as well, maybe my friend Outpost75 would want to come on board as well. That would be my Ultimate Single Action!
Froggie

[racepres]

There is a philosophical saying about “a solution looking for a problem”. In a way, this is how some folks regard the 327 FM, but for me it seems like a fine chambering looking for an appropriate platform (ie gun). With the release of more Rugers this situation may be improved, but I still wish S&W would get on board with an appropriate K frame. The Single Seven may be their final answer in a SA, but if Ruger would give their Blackhawk another chance, it might sell well. I envision a dual cylinder 32 (a la the Buckeye Special) in 327 FM and 32-20 for the ultimate handgun in this caliber family. If they made it a triple cylinder version with a 30 Carbine cylinder as well, maybe my friend Outpost75 would want to come on board as well. That would be my Ultimate Single Action!
Froggie

Darn We Need a Like Button!!! Well Said Froggie

[rintinglen]

Thanks for the heads up, ohen. I ordered a 327 SP101 and it should be in my hands by next Tuesday! With tax and my dealers fee, It'll run me a shade less than $750.00 OTD Those of you with no sales tax, will make out, as there is free shipping from Bud's. I am ordering a spring kit from Mcarbo and shims from Shively in Michigan. I know my Ruger will need them.

[jdgabbard]

Thanks for the heads up, ohen. I ordered a 327 SP101 and it should be in my hands by next Tuesday! With tax and my dealers fee, It'll run me a shade less than $750.00 OTD Those of you with no sales tax, will make out, as there is free shipping from Bud's. I am ordering a spring kit from Mcarbo and shims from Shively in Michigan. I know my Ruger will need them.

Checked with my buddy the other night. He can get the SP101 for me out the door right at $700, but this is him giving it to me at cost... Still thinking about the Taurus though, as I think it'll serve my purpose a little better. That S&W in 32 H&R needs to be offered in 327 instead, that would be exactly what I am interested in.

[gwpercle]

Darn We Need a Like Button!!! Well Said Froggie

:goodpost:
LIKE LIKE LIKE !!!

We have a like button ... sorta , post : then goodpost then : and LIKE ...
Tah - Dah... I has Liked Your Post !
Gary

[Harter66]

For about 6 years I've been trying to get a 25 ACP to fly in an SA and a repeating rifle. It's never going to happen.
I've decided to go to a 32 something . I really just wanted a direct reloadable replacement for 22 LR.

I'm big on cross utility and safety margins. My thoughts are this if it's a straight case there's a bigh probability that if you go with the longest mag chamber you can shoot all of the shorter straight wall cases that share case and bullet OD . After skimming the thread I don't see any mention of this context . 327 F ,32 H&R , 32 long ,32 short ,32 ACP . Maybe it won't work but a 9×25 rimmed worked well in in a Sec 6, BH and 38/357 1894C . So I figured I have a platform to stub or adapt that will handle the 327 and a rust ruined 20 ga barrel. Seems to me a 303 take off while more appropriate than the loooooong throated short side of 1-10" 06' take offs should be fine donors for a single shot .
Finding a pistol then is just a matter of the timing , money , and price lining up .

[RJM52]

100% agree with Froggie on S&W needing a good K-frame revolver.... They wouldn't make it so I had Jack Huntington convert a 6" Model 53 to .327 using by reboring the barrrel and rechambering the .22 rimfire cylinder... To me it makes the perfect DA .327 for target shooting and hunting...

https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/gallery/80/full/71553.jpg

As to SAs, at least for me the SAA size guns are just too big... The FA 97 or Ruger S-7 are all as big as I want... Had one of the original stainless BHs in .32/.32-20 and just didn't balance...

Bob

[jdgabbard]

For about 6 years I've been trying to get a 25 ACP to fly in an SA and a repeating rifle. It's never going to happen.
I've decided to go to a 32 something . I really just wanted a direct reloadable replacement for 22 LR.

I'm big on cross utility and safety margins. My thoughts are this if it's a straight case there's a bigh probability that if you go with the longest mag chamber you can shoot all of the shorter straight wall cases that share case and bullet OD . After skimming the thread I don't see any mention of this context . 327 F ,32 H&R , 32 long ,32 short ,32 ACP . Maybe it won't work but a 9×25 rimmed worked well in in a Sec 6, BH and 38/357 1894C . So I figured I have a platform to stub or adapt that will handle the 327 and a rust ruined 20 ga barrel. Seems to me a 303 take off while more appropriate than the loooooong throated short side of 1-10" 06' take offs should be fine donors for a single shot .
Finding a pistol then is just a matter of the timing , money , and price lining up .

It was mentioned before I think, if not, it should have been - and I was well aware of it. Mixed reviews of shooting 32 ACP in these guns though, I've heard it has a tendency to rupture primers, and is very inaccurate. I imagine 32 Short wouldn't fair much better.


100% agree with Froggie on S&W needing a good K-frame revolver.... They wouldn't make it so I had Jack Huntington convert a 6" Model 53 to .327 using by reboring the barrrel and rechambering the .22 rimfire cylinder... To me it makes the perfect DA .327 for target shooting and hunting...

https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/gallery/80/full/71553.jpg

As to SAs, at least for me the SAA size guns are just too big... The FA 97 or Ruger S-7 are all as big as I want... Had one of the original stainless BHs in .32/.32-20 and just didn't balance...

Bob

That is a nice looking revolver you got there. I'd be happy to have something like that for sure!

[Soundguy]

Like the title says, sell me on the 327 Federal Magnum.

I've been doing some reading, and it sounds like an impressive cartridge. The length of the 38spl, falls ballistically between 38spl and 357mag - but closer to 38spl, 6-shot capacity in j-frame size revolvers, light recoiling from what I understand....

But that is what the hype says. Who has one? What are your thoughts and experiences with it? Is it the current best pocket revolver caliber? Seems like if so, the revolver and semi-auto calibers of the future are the 327 Magnum and the 30 Super Carry. If companies would just start making more guns chambered in them that is...

You can load them right up to 357mag specs..discounting heavy for load weighted projectiles. I love my 3" ruger Sp101 in 327. Can shoot 327 32 mag..32 long/short and usually acp depending on the extractor... gotta love that.. Small..easier to carry than a larger 357... I love mine.. PS..easy to reload for too..

[Green Frog]

Herter66, you must not have read much of my stuff. I’ve repeatedly observed that the ability to handle multiple lengths of the 32 family was a selling point of the 327. In fact, I’ve fired all five out of a single cylinder both with the Smith and Ruger. I don’t know whether this would work in a repeater, but it certainly is a possibility in a single shot rifle.

RJM52, that is precisely the type of revolver Smith should build, both in blued steel and stainless. I had to graft parts from different guns for Project 616, while you were able to just alter what was already there. I like the idea of using a Model 53 length cylinder so longer bullets can be used. My rebored 617 cylinder is shorter so it limits the COAL that I can use in 327.

Froggie

[ohen cepel]

I had mixed luck with 32acp out of my 32 revolvers. Neat option but of limited use to me.

If you do get the Taurus look into this front sight when they come back in stock;
https://shoptaurus.com/shop-by-model/revolvers/small-frame-revolvers/ameriglo-front-orange-night-sight-small-frame-revolvers
Great deal for a quality night sight.

[Green Frog]

If you are buying something to shoot, 32 acp is a marginal choice for any of the revolvers (at least any I've encountered) but it will work if need be. I've heard some folks have erratic (or no) ignition from (especially older) revolvers with loose chambers, but none of the 32s of my experience have had that problem. Actually now that I think of it, I haven't tried them that much in my older revolvers, just the newer tighter ones.
Froggie

[mobilemail]

.327 has been long touted as being able to shoot .32ACP, but.....why????? Are the other cartridge options somehow lacking??

[shooting on a shoestring]

Mobilemail, shooting 32 acp in a 32 cal revolver is an option but not a good idea. It’s like going to the grocery store driving your car in reverse. You can do it. It’s an option. But it’s not a good idea.

Why would someone shoot 32 acp in their 32 revolver? If for some really odd reason you only had 32 acp ammo and a 32 cal revolver and needed to shoot, that combination will fire and shoot a boolit out of the barrel.

But…..
32 acp rims are nominally 0.045” thick.
32 SWL, 32 H&R and 327 rims are 0.055” thick.
That means if you fire 32 acp in a 32 cal revolver there is 0.010” excessive headspace. That could lead to battering of the recoil shield, recoil plate, hammer nose bushing, depending on what brand the revolver is, if done on a regular basis.

Much better idea is to stay out of really odd reasons and fire the proper ammunition in the gun.

[dverna]

Mobilemail, shooting 32 acp in a 32 cal revolver is an option but not a good idea. It’s like going to the grocery store driving your car in reverse. You can do it. It’s an option. But it’s not a good idea.

Why would someone shoot 32 acp in their 32 revolver? If for some really odd reason you only had 32 acp ammo and a 32 cal revolver and needed to shoot, that combination will fire and shoot a boolit out of the barrel.

But…..
32 acp rims are nominally 0.045” thick.
32 SWL, 32 H&R and 327 rims are 0.055” thick.
That means if you fire 32 acp in a 32 cal revolver there is 0.010” excessive headspace. That could lead to battering of the recoil shield, recoil plate, hammer nose bushing, depending on what brand the revolver is, if done on a regular basis.

Much better idea is to stay out of really odd reasons and fire the proper ammunition in the gun.

Good post. Just because something is possible does not make it a good idea.

[Harter66]

Herter66, you must not have read much of my stuff. I’ve repeatedly observed that the ability to handle multiple lengths of the 32 family was a selling point of the 327. In fact, I’ve fired all five out of a single cylinder both with the Smith and Ruger. I don’t know whether this would work in a repeater, but it certainly is a possibility in a single shot rifle.

RJM52, that is precisely the type of revolver Smith should build, both in blued steel and stainless. I had to graft parts from different guns for Project 616, while you were able to just alter what was already there. I like the idea of using a Model 53 length cylinder so longer bullets can be used. My rebored 617 cylinder is shorter so it limits the COAL that I can use in 327.

Froggie
Actually this has been a recent change in direction for me . The 25 ACP as a direct reloadable replacement for 22 LR was really where I wanted to go . Unfortunately without either a clear lottery check or setting up my own tooling to modify bolts , frame bushings, and do .251 groove cut rifling my choices were very limited and very expensive. Step up to 32 and viola' a pistol for less than having a barrel turned, relined , or rebored and a Savage take off I can cut the chamber off and thread for a stub in an otherwise toasted 20 ga NEF barrel . Of course the risk of getting to the range to find I took the 30-30 not the 32 barrel or vis versa is there , a small price though.

Probably at least initially because of my personal intentions I'd just leave it reamed for the ACP or short in the NEF rifle . Just buy the 32 Short reamer and an appropriate dia straight reamer 2nd or 4th hand and you good to go for all the straight 32s ...... :) , right ?

[P Flados]

Richard,

I went down a very similar path but with a Contender handgun instead of a rifle.

I have a 22 LR "equivalent" that is a rimmed version of a 32 ACP in a stub tube contender.

At one point during the Obama years I realized that with my cast bullets, I could reload cheaper than buy 22s. However, my lead source (wheel weights) suddenly dried up and I decided that I needed a 22 LR equivalent gun that could handle really small bullets.

My first solution was a SP-101 in 327 along with a custom NLG 55 gr bullet mold. It worked ok, but the case was "too big" to be real happy with my mouse fart loads. All of the free space made for big velocity swings depending on powder position.

My next solution was to stub tube a 7.5" 30 cal (from a scrap 30-30 pull) for my TC. I tried 32 S&W short but the cases were too small for me to reload without fumbling a lot.

I deepened the chamber to try some 32 ACP. The gun shot good, but my 32 ACP brass was not fun to load. The case size was much better than the 32 shorts, but the rims were very inconsistent in size from brand to brand and generally smaller than I liked. So I made up a batch of brass 32 ACP in length but with the same rim dimension as the 32 S&W Long. I refer to it as a 32 ACPR.

With reloaded primers, 1.7 gr TG and a 55 gr bullet I get a great 890 fps load for offhand practice shooting at 30 ft. Last time I figured my out of pocket cost for the materials, it was like $1.80 per hundred. My usage rate has been about 1000 rounds per year for this gun.

The above load is not suitable for much more than making holes in paper. I have loaded heavier bullets that seemed to shoot fine. These would be effective at longer ranges.

For a shotgun conversion, a precision insert may be worth considering. If you go this path, note that real world testing showed that anything over say 8" in a 32 ACP will not result in more velocity.
http://ballisticsbytheinch.com).

Although I was happy with the performance of the above, my desire to reload in large batches combined with my aversion of purchasing brass led me to try another stub tube effort that will either supplant or replace the 32 ACPR, see https://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?464780-Extra-Low-Cost-options-for-volume-shooting&p=5725814#post5725814

[rintinglen]

The advantage of being able to shoot 32 ACP is not like backing to the grocery store when you have a choice. It's like eating the pickled herring sandwich that is all you have to eat. The other cartridges are preferable, but not always readily available. And being able to shoot something, even if not ideal, is better than not shooting at all.

For what it's worth, all three of my Single Sevens have fired 32 ACP with no misfires, and barely acceptable accuracy. But if all I had was a Single Seven and a handful of 32 ACP, I'd at least pose a threat to a ne'r do well bent on doing me harm. My neighbor's Dad told me years ago that during WW II, his dad, a Bank Guard, had to use them in his 32 S&W revolver, because that was all he could find. I think of using 32 ACP in my 327's as being like driving on the doughnut spare: not ideal, but better than not driving at all.

[jdgabbard]

The advantage of being able to shoot 32 ACP is not like backing to the grocery store when you have a choice. It's like eating the pickled herring sandwich that is all you have to eat. The other cartridges are preferable, but not always readily available. And being able to shoot something, even if not ideal, is better than not shooting at all.

For what it's worth, all three of my Single Sevens have fired 32 ACP with no misfires, and barely acceptable accuracy. But if all I had was a Single Seven and a handful of 32 ACP, I'd at least pose a threat to a ne'r do well bent on doing me harm. My neighbor's Dad told me years ago that during WW II, his dad, a Bank Guard, had to use them in his 32 S&W revolver, because that was all he could find. I think of using 32 ACP in my 327's as being like driving on the doughnut spare: not ideal, but better than not driving at all.

A pointy stick is better than no stick at all. 32s have the flexibility to keep your options open. I would never see that as a bad idea.

[Captain Wheelgun]

Single Seven and LCR 327 here.

In addition to the advantages previously mentioned, one thing I like is that for reloaders, the pistol bullets can be used for plinking / small game loads in 30ish caliber rifles like 7.62x39 and .303 British.

[sixshot]

Yes, if you go light & fast you're going to get noise! Just no way around it but I can get some really fine accuracy out of the Blackhawk 30 Carbine, my single six, single seven, 8 shot blackhawk & my Buckeye. I've shown the antelope that I took with the 8 shot blackhawk using a 135 gr cast slug, it was fast & a bit on the loud side but every bit as effective as my 357's.
This new S&W Ultimate Carry 32 mag is going to be ok once my son works over this terrible trigger, yikes! Shoot what you like & if you don't like loud, slow it down, there's no free lunch.
Dick

[Soundguy]

Just found out today that Ruger makes a 3" SP 101, fixed sight in 327..... Also found out it fits surprising well in the center console of my Ford. :cool:

It's a great gun.. I have one. After you get this..then look at 30 super carry...

[history@mts.net]

I'm looking at the same cartridge, but in a rifle platform. Think modern Rook rifle. And before anyone says, why not build a .32-20, I already have a Westley Richards Rook Rifle Cadet-frame Martini in .298 Minex, which is a .32-20 case using a 0.300" 140 grain bullet at 1,400 fps.

I have a spare Ruger #1 action & stock that is in need of a new barrel [as I have absolutely no need for a .264 Winchester Magum] if I want to use factory ammo [although I haven't in 40 years] or I can chamber the cartridge in an older action & simply load to the action's design limitations, sort of like duplicating the old .32 Extra Long cartridge in a modern platform.

Being a student of ballistics, however, I keep running up against the fact that the cartridge will not do anything that either my Ruger #1 in .357 Magnum with its 26" barrel or the Westley Richards will not do better.

[shooting on a shoestring]

History…..
There’s no justification for your proposed Ruger #1 in 327 other than want.
Yes it’ll work and be a dandy and very fun gun. That’s all the justification you need for this hobby. Do it!

But….the 2 big selling points for 327 are best realized in revolvers. That’s the really high chamber pressure (high for a handgun) that gives super hard acceleration for the first couple of inches of boolit travel, and the smaller than 357 diameter that gets 1 more shot in the cylinder of a 357 sized revolver.

Neither of those two factors matter in a Ruger #1 with a 20-something inch barrel. Expansion ratio could easily outrun the 45k psi chamber pressure like almost any 30 caliber rifle cartridge could do. However you might have fun playing with light charges in the 327 case, stay sub-sonic and have a fairly quiet small game harvester that could be a deer getter too with a full charge 327 load. But you can do that in 357 too….

So maybe trade that heavy duty 264 for a 327 revolver and join the party?

[history@mts.net]

shooting on a shoestring:

The only fly in that ointment is that even before the total ban on handgun transfers was instituted last year here in Canada, for 20+ years before that, .32 & .25 calibre handguns were banned [under the so-called Saturday Night Special provision].

[P Flados]

shooting on a shoestring:

The only fly in that ointment is that even before the total ban on handgun transfers was instituted last year here in Canada, for 20+ years before that, .32 & .25 calibre handguns were banned [under the so-called Saturday Night Special provision].

May I offer my condolences.

For a break open handgun such as the TC, I would be tempted to make myself a 264 or 280 straight wall using 327 brass out of spite (I make 32 mediums from 9mm, so I "have the technology"). And actually, converting something like a Dan Wesson Model 15 would not be super difficult.

But then again, you said that they have now banned even going out and getting a used version of either of the above.

[Gus Youmans]

jdgabbard,

I have accumulated six .327 Federal Magnums and one .32 H&R Magnum and have enjoyed shooting them over the years. The .327 Federal is legal for deer hunting in Georgia and will probably do the job and the cartridge is also a viable self-defense cartridge. However, in my case, the .32s stay in the safe when it comes time to pull something out for deer hunting and self defense. I have handguns chambered in more powerful catridges for deer hunting and prefer small autoloaders for concealed carry. The one niche that my 4" SP101 fills better than any of my other pistols is carrying around the property and casual woods walking.

Gus Youmans

[jdgabbard]

jdgabbard,

I have accumulated six .327 Federal Magnums and one .32 H&R Magnum and have enjoyed shooting them over the years. The .327 Federal is legal for deer hunting in Georgia and will probably do the job and the cartridge is also a viable self-defense cartridge. However, in my case, the .32s stay in the safe when it comes time to pull something out for deer hunting and self defense. I have handguns chambered in more powerful catridges for deer hunting and prefer small autoloaders for concealed carry. The one niche that my 4" SP101 fills better than any of my other pistols is carrying around the property and casual woods walking.

Gus Youmans

Thanks for the reply, Gus.

I actually do carry a small wheel gun more than anything else, defensive wise. Though I do own small semi-autos. The small wheel gun just serves my needs better.

[Kosh75287]

Nah, I don't see much potential. It's a rimmed .30 Carbine, with all the limitations that shorter and vented barrels inflict. It is ballistically a 9mmP/.38 Super, without the bore area (wound-channel creation potential). In revolvers originally meant for .38 Special or .357, it holds one more round. IF you believe that one more round of a smaller-bore round will save your life, then this round's for you.
Stuffed into a lever-action rifle, it is the .30 U.S. Carbine, re-invented. Marginal for defense, inferior for game weighing in excess of 100 pounds. Yee-haw.

[Abert Rim]

Ask the Germans what they thought about getting stitched by a GI with an M-1 Carbine.

[Soundguy]

Marginal for defense, inferior for game weighing in excess of 100 pounds. Yee-haw.

Would you say a 357 mag is marginal for defense? You can load 327 into 357 ranges.. meaning you think 357 is marginal for defense. Same with game.. If you don't think 357 can take a small to medium deer.. then I think you are just heavily biased and not really looking at the facts... IMHO...

[Green Frog]

Five pages later, it’s still “like tryin’ to tell a stranger ‘bout Rock-n- Roll”!
Froggie over and out.

[jdgabbard]

Would you say a 357 mag is marginal for defense? You can load 327 into 357 ranges.. meaning you think 357 is marginal for defense. Same with game.. If you don't think 357 can take a small to medium deer.. then I think you are just heavily biased and not really looking at the facts... IMHO...

I agree with you. After having researched this quite a bit, it does seem to do what it claims to do. And I think those in opposition to it based on it's capability are extremely biased. But whether or not it makes sense to switch from the 357 is another story that is much more depending on your specific needs / wants.


Five pages later, it’s still “like tryin’ to tell a stranger ‘bout Rock-n- Roll”!
Froggie over and out.

You're never going to convince everyone. But, it's like wildcat rounds. There are a whole lot of them out there that don't do anything special compared to commercially available alternatives....

[billmc2]

The first time I ever got to shoot anything was when I was in the Boy Scouts at summer camp; 22 rifles. I liked it. I was hooked. My parents, not so much. No guns allowed. I was away from shooting for about 40 years and now I'm back at it (not very skilled, but...).

I read about the 327 when it first came out and I was intrigued but not enough to pursue it; besides it was a revolver. Never had one, didn't know much about them.

A couple of years back I was trying to help a friend find a gun she could shoot. She doesn't do well with recoil. Thinking 32 would be her caliber I picked up a Charter Undercoverette for her to try. It was a 32 and relatively cheap (I've got no way of trying without buying) so I gave it a shot. She was Ok with the 32 Long but 32 Mag was to much for her, so she really wasn't interested (I hadn't realized that the Undercoverette was a very light gun at the time). I thought the SP101 would be ideal but Ruger wasn't making them at that time. I looked at the LCR but that is only slightly heavier than the CA gun.

Taurus announced they were bringing back a 327 in both 2 and 3 inch versions and I got excited but decided I'd get the 3 inch when it appeared. It never appeared. This year Taurus finally brought out the 3 inch gun. As I started shopping I learned that Ruger also started making the SP101 again, so that's what I bought. I ordered it through Bass Pro for $700 back in January.

I'm 65 now and I've got my health issues (new pacemaker installed last week) and I've discovered I can't clear my automatics when they jam, so I've decided to start carrying a revolver. Any guesses as to which one? I think I now have 3 or 4 different 32 cal molds of various weights from 72 grain up to 115 grain. I'm still working through the loads.

After shooting the Federal American Eagle 100 gr out of the SP101, I don't think I'd want to shoot that out of a lighter gun. I'm considering picking up another one for myself giving me a total of two SP101s (she still hasn't found an opportunity to try it yet, but when she does, considering all the ammo choices, I'm pretty sure she'll like it).

If you're looking between the Ruger and the Taurus, I'd recommend you get your hands on both. I also picked up the Taurus 856 Defender. That's the 3 inch 38 Special +P version, same as the 327. With the Taurus, I'm on my third set of grips and I'm still not real happy. This latest set (the wood ones you'll find on their Executive) are workable for me but not ideal. The factory grips on the Ruger are just right (for me anyway). The two guns appear to be the same size with the Ruger 2 ounces heavier. Looking at the overlay of the two guns on Handgun Hero I see that the distance from the grip to the trigger on the Ruger is every so slightly longer than the Taurus. I think that is what is making the difference for me.

As for the caliber doing the same as or less than the others, because I didn't have any of the others yet, it wasn't an issue for me.

A slight thread drift. Anyone have any experience with the XS Big Dot on the Ruger SP101? The black factory ramp, even painted isn't doing it for me.

[Lance Boyle]

I wish there were more .32 H&Rs around. I’d settle on a .327 as you pay collector prices on the .32s I desire,...a 4” model 16 Smith and a Marlin lever gun.

my options as runners up ar the 4” Sp101 as I prefer adjustable sights and a Henry. Hearing the mag tube is an overly large .357 mag tube is disappointing.


If Lipsey’s got Smith to make a Classic K frame model 16 I’d be overjoyed. I have a j frame 31-1 in .32 S&W long which I like but a k frame with an adjustable rear sight would be 10x more cool to me.

[Green Frog]

I wish there were more .32 H&Rs around. I’d settle on a .327 as you pay collector prices on the .32s I desire,...a 4” model 16 Smith and a Marlin lever gun.

my options as runners up ar the 4” Sp101 as I prefer adjustable sights and a Henry. Hearing the mag tube is an overly large .357 mag tube is disappointing.


If Lipsey’s got Smith to make a Classic K frame model 16 I’d be overjoyed. I have a j frame 31-1 in .32 S&W long which I like but a k frame with an adjustable rear sight would be 10x more cool to me.

You’re singing my song. I felt so strongly about it I had Project 616 built… a Model 66 fitted with rebored Model 617 barrel and cylinder. It works!
Froggie

[rintinglen]

Having held the Froggy One's "616," I'd love to have one, but after looking around, it would run me 2 grand or more to have one like that made by the time I got the gun, the parts, and a talented gunsmith to put it all together. Plus, anybody good enough to make one of those is booked up to the middle of the next decade, and I might not live that long.

[jdgabbard]

Having held the Froggy One's "616," I'd love to have one, but after looking around, it would run me 2 grand or more to have one like that made by the time I got the gun, the parts, and a talented gunsmith to put it all together. Plus, anybody good enough to make one of those is booked up to the middle of the next decade, and I might not live that long.

I feel that in my bones. Gunsmithing prices have almost priced out the gun owner...

Edit: That said, firearms have almost priced themselves out of reach for the average owner as well...

[rintinglen]

But I did get my 3" SP101 out of hock and hope to shoot it Wednesday. I have plenty of 32 S&WL, about 100 32 H&R (that I can find--there's another 150 odd floating around somewhere) and a bunch of 327." But the trigger was every bit as nasty as I expected, when the Mcarbo set gets here, I'll pull it apart and smooth things up. Until then, I'm just going to make do with the stock setup. Why a 750 dollar gun should have such a cruddy trigger when the S&W J frames are cheaper and have generally decent triggers out of the box dumbfounds me. I have the Shively Shim set I ordered and will install it when I put the spring set in, along with some polishing and a general clean up.

I have an Askins Avenger style holster for a kimber K6s that fits just fine, and the 32-J HKS speedloaders seem to work ok, so I should be all set.

[Jellyroll]

I have the GP100 in .327. Its my current favorite!

[billmc2]

But I did get my 3" SP101 out of hock and hope to shoot it Wednesday. I have plenty of 32 S&WL, about 100 32 H&R (that I can find--there's another 150 odd floating around somewhere) and a bunch of 327." But the trigger was every bit as nasty as I expected, when the Mcarbo set gets here, I'll pull it apart and smooth things up. Until then, I'm just going to make do with the stock setup. Why a 750 dollar gun should have such a cruddy trigger when the S&W J frames are cheaper and have generally decent triggers out of the box dumbfounds me. I have the Shively Shim set I ordered and will install it when I put the spring set in, along with some polishing and a general clean up.

I have an Askins Avenger style holster for a kimber K6s that fits just fine, and the 32-J HKS speedloaders seem to work ok, so I should be all set.

The SP101 triggers must be a hit or miss thing. Yesterday I brought home a second one (availability is getting less). This trigger is fairly smooth but heavy. My first one was very gritty and heavy. Following MCARBO's video and some Wolf Springs, the first one cleaned up nicely. I've ordered a set of springs from Wolf for the second one and am waiting for them to arrive.

[Thundarstick]

For ones who still may not know. The 327FM calls for a small rifle primer that takes more of a wack to ignite. This is the reason for the heavy hammer springs in 327 revolvers. I have 2 9mm semi auto pistols, and a collection of 327 revolvers, plus the Henry rifle. I shot factory ammo, and roll my own.

[trapper9260]

For ones who still may not know. The 327FM calls for a small rifle primer that takes more of a wack to ignite. This is the reason for the heavy hammer springs in 327 revolvers. I have 2 9mm semi auto pistols, and a collection of 327 revolvers, plus the Henry rifle. I shot factory ammo, and roll my own.

I know the data calls for SRP for loading the 327 . I still use the SPP . I do not see any need to just buy primers that at this time will not use it in anything else. Besides I have my loads shoot the same ammo in my BH as in my Hadi Rifle in 327 . I am working on to have it shoot the same in the 4" SP 101 . That way I have one type of ammo in all.

[Green Frog]

While Federal may use SRPs in their factory leadings, all of my hand loads (including a batch where I got somewhat exuberant with the powder) have had standard SPPs. My Model 66 cum 616 had previously been tuned for PPC and has a very light DA and SA trigger pull. With my hottest hand loads I see some primer flattening, but no sign of dangerous pressure damage. This is my personal experience. Your mileage may vary.

Froggie

[Thundarstick]

Load how you want, just saying if you drop that hammer spring to where it just does trip off standard spp, you're likely to have misfires when you filler up with factory fodder! I learned this vary early on with 327 double actions. I went back to the heavier hammer springs and practiced more double action shooting. YMMV

[P Flados]

Load how you want, just saying if you drop that hammer spring to where it just does trip off standard spp, you're likely to have misfires when you filler up with factory fodder! I learned this vary early on with 327 double actions. I went back to the heavier hammer springs and practiced more double action shooting. YMMV

I replaced the springs on my SP-101 with a Wolff spring kit. I later changed back to the factory hammer spring due to FTFs.

The Wolff trigger return spring probably made a bigger difference in the feel of the gun and is still installed.

[Thundarstick]

I replaced the springs on my SP-101 with a Wolff spring kit. I later changed back to the factory hammer spring due to FTFs.

The Wolff trigger return spring probably made a bigger difference in the feel of the gun and is still installed.

Looks like we traveled the same road!

[ohen cepel]

For ones who still may not know. The 327FM calls for a small rifle primer that takes more of a wack to ignite. This is the reason for the heavy hammer springs in 327 revolvers. I have 2 9mm semi auto pistols, and a collection of 327 revolvers, plus the Henry rifle. I shot factory ammo, and roll my own.

I just checked Speer, Hodgdon, Hornady, and Lyman manuals. Only one, Speer (IIRC) called for SRP's, the others depending on load called for SPM or SPP. Does throw another variable in the mix now for me.........Speer called for Fed 205's, and Fed has a reputation for being softer than most. If loading a harder SR primer I can see light hammer strikes increasing.

I have several 327's which have had lighter springs put in them and have not had light primer strikes with any of them aside from a Taurus, but I think I have that issue addressed and it was not a spring one.

Not saying that is a huge sample size, just stating my experience with the round.

[Green Frog]

Project 616 was built on a highly modified Model 66. Most people who pull the trigger on it (SA or DA) are amazed at how smooth and light it feels... this was done when it was tuned for PPC work. Could I do it again? No, but but it sure came out sweet that time! And before you ask, it pops the prime first time every time, regardless of type or brand. back in the day, we always used Federal SPPs when we could get them, but I find that to be unnecessary.
Froggie

[jdgabbard]

Project 616 was built on a highly modified Model 66. Most people who pull the trigger on it (SA or DA) are amazed at how smooth and light it feels... this was done when it was tuned for PPC work. Could I do it again? No, but but it sure came out sweet that time! And before you ask, it pops the prime first time every time, regardless of type or brand. back in the day, we always used Federal SPPs when we could get them, but I find that to be unnecessary.
Froggie

Really? You pop primers every time? Have you considered having the firing pin gently stoned down a little?

[Green Frog]

Really? You pop primers every time? Have you considered having the firing pin gently stoned down a little?

I said I “pop” the primer every time, meaning it goes off. I didn’t say “pierce” which would indicate improper ignition with the primer being unduly damaged. As I stated earlier, on some of my hottest factory or hand loads, I occasionally get some flattening, but no structure failures nor failures to fire. I’m quite happy with my firing pin just the way it is and don’t plan on altering it.
Froggie

[jdgabbard]

I said I “pop” the primer every time, meaning it goes off. I didn’t say “pierce” which would indicate improper ignition with the primer being unduly damaged. As I stated earlier, on some of my hottest factory or hand loads, I occasionally get some flattening, but no structure failures nor failures to fire. I’m quite happy with my firing pin just the way it is and don’t plan on altering it.
Froggie

I misunderstood what you were getting at. I thought you meant it pierced primers.... No worries, if it doesn't do that I wouldn't mess with it either!

[RJM52]

My full load .327s use a SR primer. The other day I was out shooting a SP101 that has a VERY nice action job...and brought the wrong bag of ammo with me that had SR primers. Only 1-2 in a cylinder full would go off DA and only 3-4 SA... Yet with SP primers will run 100% regardless of the make of the primer.

Yesterday had the same bag of ammo out with a Single-Seven and every one went off...

Bob

[Green Frog]

With all of my 32s I sorta work to the lowest common denominator. I size my bullets to .313” and use standard SPPs… both in S&W DA revolvers and Ruger SAs. My tuned DAs and my box stock SAs should set off whatever they’re likely to be fed.

I had my faux Model 16-3 built on a 14-3 receiver (apparently “stock”) and the ‘smith gave me tight chambers with .313” throats and my Project 616, as stated, was built on a highly tuned Model 66 ND, so both should fire the same 32 S&W Long ammo reliably.
Of course the stock Ruger SAs don’t care. They’ll eat anything!

Froggie

[rintinglen]

I am underwhelmed with my most recent .327, a Ruger SP101 3 inch. It has a miserable trigger.

Even after a thorough cleaning to remove metal chips and the addition of a spring kit, it is still gritty enough to remind one of a barefoot walk on gravel. I am hoping it will smooth out with use, but I am dismayed at how far QC has fallen at Ruger. I have several--actually three currently and one previously-Security Six series revolvers and all of them have decent triggers. Maybe not Pre-war S&W smooth, but decent to pretty good would describe them all. I have yet to run into an SP101 that has a good off the shelf trigger. (I know the fan boys will be jumping off their chairs to defend their personal guns, but I have only examined 6 or 8, and only have two, none of which had very good actions--though my 4 inch now after about two hours of work and 30 dollars in replacement springs and shims is acceptable.) I could have bought a Taurus for 200 dollars less and had a better trigger. Rant done.

[Green Frog]

S&W makes DA revolvers, Colt makes auto pistols and Ruger makes SA revolvers. The more times I try to forget this, the worse my experiences seem to get... with only a few exceptions.
Yes, I love me a 327 S&W and a 327 Super Blackhawk, but for a 45 ACP, give me an old Colt 1911!
Froggie

[Noah Zark]

I jumped on the 327 bandwagon because of experience with the 32 H&R Magnum, the 32-20, and the 7.62 Nagant Revolver. Specifically I had an interest in the .32 a a true caliber (not using the word as a synonym for cartridge, as so many do) and tons of boolits. I never intended to shoot full-house 327s regularly, but to tweak loads for specific firearms for POA and accuracy. So I ended up with loads that are in between H&R Magnum and 327 Fed Mag factory loads, but reasonably accurate.

The firearms I currently have in 327 are:

3.1" SP101 Stainless
2.2" Charter Arms Patriot Stainless
3.75" Ruger Single Seven Birdshead Stainless
6" Ruger GP100 Blued
Henry Big Boy blued steel lever gun (no hideous brass, thank you).

My favorites to shoot with reasonable 327 loads or "factory" 32 H&R loads are the Charter and the Ruger Birdshead with the 3.1" SP101 tied for second. Stepping up to hotter loads, to and including factory 327, the 6" GP100 is the ticket. I've not fired a S&W in 327 because I have an irrational aversion to the handcuff key lock. I once owned a short LCR but it was unsuccessfully challenging to get any kind of accuracy at POA, so it went down the road. YMMV.

The steel Henry is the second such levergun because the first one didn't feed / eject consistently because the company uses the 357 Magnum extractor instead of a new part number specifically for the 327. I even installed a Rulon plastic magazine tube insert to shrink the ID of the 357 mag tube Henry uses so that 327 cartridges fed straighter and more consistently. I used a mag tube insert for the 32-20 ID intended to fit into a 357 levergun mag tube. It worked better, but not perfect and I got disgusted and sold it with full disclosure. A couple years ago I had the coincidental chance to meet Anthony Imperiato of Henry at a big Henry dealer in PA and we had a great discussion. He said the newer 327s that Henry was shipping had improved feeding, so I took a chance some months later on a current production 327 steel lever I found in a store. It does feed and extract better, but the extractor is still a 357 extractor and it fits the 327 case groove like a cheap 1911 extractor does - making contact partway up the front taper of the extractor groove. Still, it's more reliable than the first one.

HTH,

Noah

[Chubbs]

I started enjoying .32s with a .32 H&R Single Six. I followed it pretty quickly with a Marlin 1894. The Single Six is way more accurate than me. So far the Marlin shoots .75" at 50 yards. I still have grand plans for more load development and I think I can slim the groups down a little. Both are a hoot to shoot, but the Marlin is too heavy for what it is. I have a weakness for Marlin lever guns, so there you go.

I love my 3 screw .357 Blackhawk and .44 SPL flattop because the smaller frame really does make a difference compared to the larger frame Blackhawks. Sizing down to a Single Six/Seven sized frame makes even more of difference if you are OK with the smaller caliber.

I recently bought a couple of .327 Magnums: a 4" SP101 and a 10" Contender barrel. The SP101 is a really great little woods bumming size.

The Single Six and SP101 have a lot of versatility for me in pretty small packages. I am currently working up some full bore .327 loads for the SP101, but I expect 99% of the time I will shoot loads at a firm .32HR level. I think of the .32s as reloadable .22 Magnums. The .327 gives you way more performance, but that is not the niche I am looking for right now.

The Contender is what it is. The barrel came as a package deal with a .41 Mag ported barrel. I put a 2x Leupold on it, but I'm not really sure what I am going to do with it. My initial plan is to work up stout loads and work on shooting it at way longer ranges than I have business shooting a handgun. With cast .32s I can do that really cheaply.

[Green Frog]

The Contender is what it is. The barrel came as a package deal with a .41 Mag ported barrel. I put a 2x Leupold on it, but I'm but really sure what I am going to do with it. My initial plan is to work up stout loads and work on shooting it at way longer ranges than I have business shooting a handgun. With cast .32s I can do that really cheaply.

Is the Contender barrel a factory made or after market? If the former, it may have a 308 bore diameter. That kept me from wanting the 32-20 barrel TC made for them. I could get really cranked up about one of those. 327 FM has a a lot of potential in a solid gun with no barrel to cylinder gap so they don’t lose any power and put it all into velocity.
Froggie

[Chubbs]

Is the Contender barrel a factory made or after market? If the former, it may have a 308 bore diameter. That kept me from wanting the 32-20 barrel TC made for them. I could get really cranked up about one of those. 327 FM has a a lot of potential in a solid gun with no barrel to cylinder gap so they don’t lose any power and put it all into velocity.
Froggie

It is an MGM barrel with a .311 diameter. All I've shot through it so far are 100 gr SWCs and 100 gr WCs. All loaded as .32 HR and all sized .313. Pretty informal so far, but it seemed to prefer the SWCs. I was really surprised that the WCs shoot about 2" higher at 35 yrds.