-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
-
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
New caliber - .327 Federal Magnum
- Thread starter EddieCoyle
- Start date
Looks like I'm going to have to throw my 357's in the trash and get one.
Ruger is trying hard to boost sales. It sounds like a they spent a lot of time and money on this.
I wonder if S&W will jump on the band wagon?
Ruger is trying hard to boost sales. It sounds like a they spent a lot of time and money on this.
I wonder if S&W will jump on the band wagon?
Last edited:
It looks like they have a lot of .32 H&R's parts that did not sell so they make something "NEW". .32 Mag is a nice target/small game cartridge but will never match the 357 for anything. They would still sell a lot of them if they put a longer barrel on them.
This one has a long climb out of the cellar to general acceptance.
With the current costs of ammo and components, it could be a long time before it achieves popularity. Will the companies support it for a decade or more?
My guess is no.
Jack
With the current costs of ammo and components, it could be a long time before it achieves popularity. Will the companies support it for a decade or more?
My guess is no.
Jack
It seems like it is ballistically similar to both the 7.62x25 and .30 Carbine.
I can't figure this one out. The .32 H&R Mag went over like a fart in church even though several manufacturers chambered revolvers for it.
I wonder what makes them think that this one won't fail even more miserably?
Ruger already makes this gun - it's called the .30 Carbine Blackhawk.
I can't figure this one out. The .32 H&R Mag went over like a fart in church even though several manufacturers chambered revolvers for it.
I wonder what makes them think that this one won't fail even more miserably?
Ruger already makes this gun - it's called the .30 Carbine Blackhawk.
Last edited:
I think if they made another revolver in 9mm Luger/Para that it
would probably sell a lot better than that contraption.
Moon clip it, 2"-3" bbl, hammerless, ding fries are done.... they'd
probably sell way more of those than anything else in oddball
subcalibers. Probably sell like hotcakes given that 9mm auto is
still well below the $12+ a box pricing one gets on .38 spl (at least for commercial ammo)
Unless I'm missing something, of course, which is probably true... I
know S+W had the (940?) but I think that was sans moon clips
and had some expensive-to-produce extraction system. Maybe
it didn't sell well, or something. One would think a moon clip
version would be cheaper to produce.
-Mike
would probably sell a lot better than that contraption.
Moon clip it, 2"-3" bbl, hammerless, ding fries are done.... they'd
probably sell way more of those than anything else in oddball
subcalibers. Probably sell like hotcakes given that 9mm auto is
still well below the $12+ a box pricing one gets on .38 spl (at least for commercial ammo)
Unless I'm missing something, of course, which is probably true... I
know S+W had the (940?) but I think that was sans moon clips
and had some expensive-to-produce extraction system. Maybe
it didn't sell well, or something. One would think a moon clip
version would be cheaper to produce.
-Mike
The 940 was a J-frame 5-shot 9mm revolver that used moon clips. It looked like an all stainless 642. I used to have one (Fred has it now - I know, big surprise).
The 547 was a blued, K-frame, 6-shot 9mm revolver with a 4" bull barrel. The 547 used a patented system that did not require moon clips. I have one of these (it looks just like a Model 10), it's a great gun.
.327 Magnum announced by Ruger and Federal
Ruger has added a new SP101 in caliber .327 Magnum, weighing 26 ounces.
The gun will fire .32 S&W, .32 S&W Long, .32 HR Magnum, AND the new .327 Magnum.
The top loading of the new pistol will be a Gold Dot 115 grain round, producing 400 fps faster muzzle velocity than a 125 grain .357, with only 46 less ft pounds of energy.
I'm psyched. I love .32's. Having one that will shoot all .32 caliber ammo will be great. Smith and Wesson Model 16's are going for up-wards of $800+ nowadays. A little steep for a plinker, to me.
But if Smith and Ruger come out with some lightweight, smaller framed models, like a 6 shot Chiefs Special with adjustable sights and 6 rounds in the cylinder, that could be a perfect carry gun for my use.
A 4" or 6" model built on the Model 19 frame, or the Model 10, would be a winner too. May people compare the .32 Magnum favorably with the .38 Special. The .327 Magnum would more closely approximate .357 Magnum performance.
What could be better?? Maybe a rimless version of the cartridge, adapted to real small frame quality automatics for self defense.
The .327 Magnum will be a great cartridge for re-loaders. You can't touch the versatility of this cartridge, at the economy of its smaller components and smaller powder charge.
I'm really looking forward to getting my hands on one of these.
I'm not going for the Ruger. If it weighs 26 Ounces, I might as well carry my S&W 640 and the option of .357 Mag. Let this revolver or pistol be produced in an Airweight frame, or a 4" pencil barrel Model 10, or even (especially) in a Model 34 or 63 Kit Gun, and I think I'd have to own several versions. I HOPE one of them will be a nice blue and wood, small frame revolver, and I hope it's soon.
Ruger has added a new SP101 in caliber .327 Magnum, weighing 26 ounces.
The gun will fire .32 S&W, .32 S&W Long, .32 HR Magnum, AND the new .327 Magnum.
The top loading of the new pistol will be a Gold Dot 115 grain round, producing 400 fps faster muzzle velocity than a 125 grain .357, with only 46 less ft pounds of energy.
I'm psyched. I love .32's. Having one that will shoot all .32 caliber ammo will be great. Smith and Wesson Model 16's are going for up-wards of $800+ nowadays. A little steep for a plinker, to me.
But if Smith and Ruger come out with some lightweight, smaller framed models, like a 6 shot Chiefs Special with adjustable sights and 6 rounds in the cylinder, that could be a perfect carry gun for my use.
A 4" or 6" model built on the Model 19 frame, or the Model 10, would be a winner too. May people compare the .32 Magnum favorably with the .38 Special. The .327 Magnum would more closely approximate .357 Magnum performance.
What could be better?? Maybe a rimless version of the cartridge, adapted to real small frame quality automatics for self defense.
The .327 Magnum will be a great cartridge for re-loaders. You can't touch the versatility of this cartridge, at the economy of its smaller components and smaller powder charge.
I'm really looking forward to getting my hands on one of these.
I'm not going for the Ruger. If it weighs 26 Ounces, I might as well carry my S&W 640 and the option of .357 Mag. Let this revolver or pistol be produced in an Airweight frame, or a 4" pencil barrel Model 10, or even (especially) in a Model 34 or 63 Kit Gun, and I think I'd have to own several versions. I HOPE one of them will be a nice blue and wood, small frame revolver, and I hope it's soon.
On steroids.
This is another small caliber handgun cartridge that touts muzzle energy as the "be-all to end-all". There's more to it than that. Cross sectional density, bullet weight, and bullet profile have an impact too. This is not a great SD round. If recoil is the issue, try a .44 Special.
Compare these ballistics to the .30 Carbine and there's little difference.
EDIT: Actually there's a big difference - the .30 Carbine kicks the .327's ass.
Last edited:
J
Jose
Watch for this great invention to join the 223 WSSM in the Cartridge Hall of Fame.
Be patient.![[laugh]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/012.gif "Laugh [laugh]")
Be patient.
Knob Creek
NES Member
Well, that and the fact that there's already lots of surplus ammo, brass, bullets and load data for the .30 Carbine.
Oh - and that Ruger already made a revolver in that caliber.......![[rolleyes]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/042.gif "Roll Eyes [rolleyes]")
Ever been standing next to anyone shooting that .30 carbine Blackhawk? Yowwww!
I have one. It was my loudest handgun until I got an X-frame. It's the powder that makes it loud - the .30 Carbine is loaded with the equivalent of H110. I have some loads for my .460 that use about 3-1/2 times the charge of a .30 Carbine round. Those are the loudest handgun rounds I've ever used.
strangenh
NES Member
Agreed 100%. I have some hunting .357mag that pushes a 160gr flatpoint to 1400fps out of a 6" (yeah, it's overpressure). The only issue I see with .357mag and 115gr bullets in short barrel revolvers is whether you want to set your assailant on fire in addition to putting a round into him. Not an issue I worry much about.
Chris
NES Member
- Joined
- May 24, 2005
- Messages
- 13,395
- Likes
- 8,239
The only way I see this being viable is if somehow it enables one to
have a 6 shot j-frame. Even then it is very hard to justify its
existence when one can get a myriad of loads in .38 SPL, .38 +P,
and .357 Mag which is loaded from "mild, medium, to HOT".
Yeah, some people might reload for it, but most of those people
are probably already set up for .357/.38.
The real proof is in the loadings around- if this speer GDHP load
tests well, then the gun might actually sell well. If it does what
I think it mightl do (underpenetrate and/or not expand properly.)
thenit will, as Jose says, certainly join the WSSM hall of shame.
Even good ballistic performance, however, is not enough to
guarantee market viability. For instance, 10mm Auto is
probably one of the best autoloader cartridges ever created,
but it is still relegated to "third fiddle" status commercially, due
to a bunch of factors which aren't purely technical. Although, it
is safe to say that 10mm Auto will be around a hell of a lot longer
than "solutions in search of a problem that doesn't exist" type
cartridges like .45 GAP.
-Mike
J
Jose
Fit in a revolver.
S&W made the 627 in .38 Super:
http://www.gunsamerica.com/97698533...-Center/627_4_38_Super_8_shot_PC_2002_gun.htm
In fact, S&W went so far as to have it certified for compliance for sale in MA:
http://www.mass.gov/Eeops/docs/chsb/firearms/approved_firearms_roster_12_2006.doc
J
Jose
I'm sure those are pretty common.
I guess the interchangeability of .32 S&W, .32 Long and .32 HR Mag doesn't mean all that much to most of you?
I like the .32 for fun. Everything I own doesn't have to be the ultimate man-stopper. While I think a .327 Magnum might suit some recoil shy people, it's not the main selling point to me.
Boston Patriot was on the classifieds here for a long time looking for a Smith Model 16 for reasonable money. I don't know if he ever found it, they are hard to find an lots of money.
If the .327 became popular, there might be some variety in the handguns that shoot it. It's a nice intermediate round. I picture it for bunny shooting and animals as big as woodchucks. It's an accurate caliber, time tested. The .327 is just a little MORE.
I'm a big fan of the .357, and don't see myself replacing my Rugers and K frame Smiths over a .327 Mag, but I still say I'd grab one as soon as a version I liked came out. There are a lot of .32 Short and .32 long sitting in my cabinet. I find it cheap all the time at gun shows and in the classifieds. It's a fun round to shoot. Add the ability to step up to a .32 HR Mag, or the .327, and you've added enough versatility for me to want one.
I own many .22s also, and don't expect them to take down a bear.... they're for fun and precision practice. That's what I see the .327 as, something fun. Right now the .32 is only available in a few not-so-varied guns. You have the Ruger Single Six and Bisley, the Ruger SP101, the S&W Mod. 30, and then you get into old 32 HE's. I'd still like something like a J Frame 6 shot .327 Mag, or even a 5 shot I Frame with 3 to 4 inch barrel and target sights. Maybe even a 6 inch that doesn't cost a grand like the Smith 16.
I like the .32 for fun. Everything I own doesn't have to be the ultimate man-stopper. While I think a .327 Magnum might suit some recoil shy people, it's not the main selling point to me.
Boston Patriot was on the classifieds here for a long time looking for a Smith Model 16 for reasonable money. I don't know if he ever found it, they are hard to find an lots of money.
If the .327 became popular, there might be some variety in the handguns that shoot it. It's a nice intermediate round. I picture it for bunny shooting and animals as big as woodchucks. It's an accurate caliber, time tested. The .327 is just a little MORE.
I'm a big fan of the .357, and don't see myself replacing my Rugers and K frame Smiths over a .327 Mag, but I still say I'd grab one as soon as a version I liked came out. There are a lot of .32 Short and .32 long sitting in my cabinet. I find it cheap all the time at gun shows and in the classifieds. It's a fun round to shoot. Add the ability to step up to a .32 HR Mag, or the .327, and you've added enough versatility for me to want one.
I own many .22s also, and don't expect them to take down a bear.... they're for fun and precision practice. That's what I see the .327 as, something fun. Right now the .32 is only available in a few not-so-varied guns. You have the Ruger Single Six and Bisley, the Ruger SP101, the S&W Mod. 30, and then you get into old 32 HE's. I'd still like something like a J Frame 6 shot .327 Mag, or even a 5 shot I Frame with 3 to 4 inch barrel and target sights. Maybe even a 6 inch that doesn't cost a grand like the Smith 16.
Doesn't mean a thing for me. The last thing I need is another caliber. Already got .22lr, .32 ACP, .380, .38, .357, 9mm, .40, 10mm, .45 ACP, .45 Colt, .44 Mag. And that's just the pistols.
J
Jose
+1
I like my life simple. I own firearms in the minimum number of cartridges that get the job done. I am not a collector or accumulator. I have some very definite purposes when I shoot, namely organized sport and self defense. And those purposes can be achieved with a very few common calibers.
Obscure/obsolete calibers do not even enter into consideration.
I reload for 38 Special, 223, 260 Rem, 6.5X55, 30-06, 308, and 12 gauge. 9x19 is to cheap to even bother.
Last edited by a moderator:
![[wink]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/002.gif "Wink [wink]")
