327 fed levergun????

LOLBELL said:
The 32-20 is a pain for reloaders.
Click to expand...
That needs explanation -- preferably from experience.
In fact, the 32-20 is an absolute breeze to reload.
Nothing strange/special/difficult about it at all.

Ditto said:
I don't think anyone makes a production lever in 32-20 today.
Click to expand...
That, we've already disproven in any number of previous posts.
 
mehavey said:
I gotta tell 'ya...
mkkkyv.jpg

I'm truly hard-pressed to se the need for the cartridge in the middle when
the two on either end already exist/have existed for a combined 200 years.

Talk about reinventing the wheel....:rolleyes:

But y`all have fun now, 'heah? :D
Click to expand...
I have a few 32-20's and I like em other wise I would not have them.
BUT.. Its not reinventing the wheel.
The one thing I dont like about the 32-20 is the fact that there are soo many different fire arms that have different loading characteristics.
I.E. My smith and Wesson hand eject from the 1800's cant be loaded with the same loads I load for my Savage model 23 in 32-20
Even though both use the exact same caliber shooting my rifle loads from the Smith can result in a over pressure condition that can damage the gun or ME.
So I have to be very very careful to segregate the rounds so that a mistake can not be made.

No issue with that at all with the 327. Any load for my Rifle can be shot out of any of my 327 hand guns.

The 30 carbine is a fine caliber but it does not offer anywhere near the loading options the 327 magnum has. The 30 carbine has one maybe two bullet options were as the 327 magnum you can shoot literally 100's of different combinations. You can load it light and soft to heavy and hard hitting and every were in between. Just way more versatile.
So the correct comparison is. Why would you not want the one in the middle. When it can do every thing the one on the left does and everything the one on the right does and everything in the middle that ether one can not do.

But owning a 327 magnum does not preclude any one from owning a 30 carbine or a 32-20.
I will have them all. He who dies with the most calibers wins!!
And if your a 32 guy like me. Ya got to have them all anyway, so might as well get after it.
Also in my view the 7.62 Tokerev is a semi auto version of the 327 magnum.
So you have to have that one too.:D

Seriously though arguing with a 32 guy is a waste of time. We are gona buy them any way.
last week I just sold my Rossi Lever action in 38/357 magnum. Paid that money directly on the Henry lever action in 327 magnum I have on lay A Way.
$90 more and she is MINE!!!
( I have to use lay A Way for a while. I blame Ruger and releasing all of those 327's. Landed me right smack dab in Mama's mine field. You know what they say. When your wife aint happy you aint happy.)

Whats that old adage?? Oh yea 44's and 45 are for shooters. 32's are for Shootist.:cool:
 
Last edited:
A pause for the COZ said:
I have a few 32-20's and I like em other wise I would not have them.
BUT.. Its not reinventing the wheel.
The one thing I dont like about the 32-20 is the fact that there are soo many different fire arms that have different loading characteristics.
I.E. My smith and Wesson hand eject from the 1800's cant be loaded with the same loads I load for my Savage model 23 in 32-20
Even though both use the exact same caliber shooting my rifle loads from the Smith can result in a over pressure condition that can damage the gun or ME.
So I have to be very very careful to segregate the rounds so that a mistake can not be made.

No issue with that at all with the 327. Any load for my Rifle can be shot out of any of my 327 hand guns.

The 30 carbine is a fine caliber but it does not offer anywhere near the loading options the 327 magnum has. The 30 carbine has one maybe two bullet options were as the 327 magnum you can shoot literally 100's of different combinations. You can load it light and soft to heavy and hard hitting and every were in between. Just way more versatile.
So the correct comparison is. Why would you not want the one in the middle. When it can do every thing the one on the left does and everything the one on the right does and everything in the middle that ether one can not do.

But owning a 327 magnum does not preclude any one from owning a 30 carbine or a 32-20.
I will have them all. He who dies with the most calibers wins!!
And if your a 32 guy like me. Ya got to have them all anyway, so might as well get after it.
Also in my view the 7.62 Tokerev is a semi auto version of the 327 magnum.
So you have to have that one too.:D
Click to expand...
The .30 Carbine was built for military use by secondary servicemen who weren't strictly combat soldiers. The M1 Carbine also had the lightweight rifle thing going at the time so maybe some light infantry would have found it preferable to the Garand. To civilians in 2018... the M1 Carbine is obsolete and the .30 Carbine is too. Some may still find it useful, but there are better options available.

The argument meheavy is making is that there's nothing the .327 can do that the .30 Carbine and .32-30 can't and there is some truth in there are limitations to the .327. It's not a cartridge built for semi auto shooting and it's a cartridge that doesn't have a lot of old, vintage firearms that it's chambered for like .32-20 does.

What the .327 does have is a strong case that will last many reloads and the big one is it's available in guns that are less than 15 years old. Can't say the same about .32-20, the guns in that cartridge are already old and getting older. I think as more people gravitate to the 6 shot snub revolvers in .327 for the extra round and lighter recoil, they're going to look more at rifles in .327, demand will increase, and that will cause interest in .32-20 to disappear from newer/younger shooters who see no reason to buy into old guns that don't have any significant history like Milsurps do and would have to be sent to sit on a gunsmith's desk for 6 months if it need something fixed.

As you say though, you don't have to choose only one of the .30 caliber pistol/rifle cartridges to shoot. I just think it's better to leave the .32-20 and .30 Carbine in the past for any serious work.
 
mehavey said:
Does anyone -- other than Henry -- produce a repeating rifle in 327 ?
Click to expand...
I could ask the same question about revolvers and Ruger. What difference does it make if someone other than Henry and Ruger make .327 chambered guns? I don't care how many manufacturers are producing .327 guns, I care that there are companies making them today. Not the past 150 years or 100 years or 20 years... today.

Why take the chance on a .32-20 rifle that's as old as my grandfather, that doesn't have an easy way to mount a scope, that no longer can be serviced by a factory if issues come up, and costs more than the Henry or the Ruger's?

Years from now when people are looking at a gun in .32-20 next to .327, they're going to ask the same questions as me then they're going to see that the .327 guns can also shoot .32 S&W Long for $16 per 50 rounds while the .32-20 is double the price. Then if they want to use the .327 for serious work, the price of the ammo will still be lower than factory .32-20.

If the .32-20 was as popular and great as you think it is, the .327 would be in the dustbin of history by now and Henry and Ruger would be pumping out .32-20 guns. They're not.
 
To each his own, Truth.
But I'd still suggest getting that 32-20 if/when you run across a Marlin, and loading it to full potential.

It's a cartridge still going strong after 135 years... and like the 45-70... coming into its own with modern firearms.
Brass no problem in either buying new, or in reloaded case life.

(Oh, ...and partner/shoot it in a your 30 Carbine Ruger too) ;)
 
It's a cartridge still going strong after 135 years... and like the 45-70... coming into its own with modern firearms.
Click to expand...
What modern firearms? The .45-70 is going strong today because there are few other rifles that reach that big bore caliber and hurl a 500 grain bullet. A 115 grain bullet... you can get that in a hot 9mm.
 
"The 32-20 is a pain for reloaders."


Hum... I've reloaded several thousand .32-20s over the past 15 or so years.

I've lost 0 cases to neck wrinkling because I'm careful in aligning the bullet on seating.

You do need to lubricate the cases during sizing because it's bottle necked, which is something of an annoyance, but it's certainly not a pain.

The .32-20 in reality isn't much more difficult to reload than any other small rifle cartridge.
 
"My smith and Wesson hand eject from the 1800's cant be loaded with the same loads I load for my Savage model 23 in 32-20"

If you have a Model of 1899 Hand Ejector in .32-20 that was actually made in 1899, hang onto it.

I've seen some estimates that say that fewer than 100 were manufactured in .32-20 in 1899.


Regarding not being able to use the same loads, that wasn't the case when S&W and Colt first brought .32-20 revolvers to market. Later rifle manufacturers (including Winchester) created that situation.

I want to get either a lever action or pump (Remington or Marlin) in .32-20 to accompany my Colt & S&W revolvers in that cartridge. I'm not really interested in uploading the round, so that doesn't much bother me.
 
The Henry in 327 is a versatile rifle as it can handle 32 S&W Longs down to 1.16" OAL and up to full power 327 loads with an OAL up through 1.53". If you want to load it down to 32-20 levels you can and you still have the capacity of 45K SAAMI MAP if you need more performance. We are very happy with our Henry and it is a joy to shoot.
 
FrankenMauser said:
If one is offered, I may buy it.

But....
I'm not a fan of Henry rifles. To me, they're clunky, chunky, unrefined, and look like ungainly hybrids of multiple classic designs.
And, of course, they're had some quality issues lately.

And Marlin?
Not a chance. Remington can't build a lever gun, outside of dumb luck, that will survive 100 rounds, now that they are no longer heat-treating internal parts or doing spot-checks/dimensional-checks on parts. They assume that since everything is being CNC milled now, that every part is the same, and they no longer use check-gauges or QC inspections during production.

That basically leaves Rossi, Winchester, and the Italians.
Rossi would be a no-go.
Winchester would be out of my budget.
And I don't want an Italian import.



So, I guess that means, for me, that there's no chance unless Henry really steps up their game; or Remington sells Marlin to a company that believes in quality and Marlin decides to make one for us.
Click to expand...
Not intending to be mean at all but I have owned many Marlins through the years and currently own four examples, two JM and two REP. The REP have better metal fit and finish, shoot and cycle just fine and and are as accurate or more so than the JMs and are more reliable cycling and feeding. I do agree that while the REPs have better metal work the wood fit is not quite where it used to be but getting better. And my 45-70 SBL has devoured BB and HMS Bear Loads and is at a round count around 500. My 336SS loves the Hornady and is just passing though 100 rounds. Neither are falling apart in any way. The internet urban legend anti-Remington rant from the MO forum is not supported by facts especially concerning heat treat. What heat treat did JM Marlin do with their SS rifles?

Well, at least we agree on one thing, a Henry looks like the box my new Marlin 336SS came in. And it is the best shooting Marlin I have ever owned going back to the 60s. But the Henry (looks) dislike of mine is opinion granted, my Marlin 336SS shooting qualities are fact. First day at the range with a new scope:




Might want to take a look at the lever there in the photo above and the locking bolt.

I would be interested in a .327 Federal in the Ruger Single Six and in a matching lever gun. Not much into the tube loading but I suppose I could live with it.

3C
 
Last edited:
3Crows, the post you're quoting is a year and a half old. Keep that in mind.

I also own Marlins spanning almost 100 years worth of production, including REPs and a few hybrids (JMs with various REP parts and/or barrels).
Some are good. Some are crap.
For a time, nearly ALL Remlins were crap.

And the heat treating issues are not a fantasy, a myth, or born from quality rants on the MO forums. They were documented in many places, and admitted to by Marlin management over the last couple years. Notable heat-treating failures included breech bolts, locking bolts, finger levers, and pins and screws. In some cases, heat treating was missed. But, in general, it was inadequate or improper heat treating (causing brittleness, or going the other way and returning the part to an annealed state).

As for your lever and locking bolt, I have but one thought stuck in my head while looking at that photo: "Why did they put an 1895 lever in a .30-30?..."

(The answer is: to save a few bucks while making operation only 'slightly' rougher. [The .45-70 rim cut allows smaller cartridges to rattle around more, and can cause a bit of a "hitchy" or "janky" feeling to cycling the action, as the smaller cartridge catches on lips and burrs in the action that it would normally be guided around. ...But it does get the job done.])
 
I finally got to shoot my Henry .327 for the first time. I used some 95 grain and 115 grain handloads using Trail Boss. With the buckhorn sights at 25 yards accuracy was okay for the 95 grain and great for the 115 grain. My guess is that the Henry prefers a heavier bullet 100 grains or more. IDK how fast they were going, but I would guess they were around 950 to 1000 fps as I didn't hear a subsonic crack.

I tried them on steel at 125 yards and they were stupid boring repeatably hitting the torso sized plate. I wonder how well full power .327 Magnum would fair in that regards as the few reports I've read factory .327 Magnum isn't too accurate in the Henry.

One thing I tried and found out didn't work at all is single loading .32 ACP. The firing pin didn't even touch the primers.

After today, I am very happy with my purchase and because of the variety of handloads that can be made for the .32, I think I'm going to buy my first chrony to see how fast the Trail Boss loads and how fast near max .327 loads will go.
 
Last edited:
I'm glad to hear you're satisfied.
Drive it like you stole it.

I finally got to shoot my Henry .327 for the first time. I used some 95 grain and 115 grain handloads using Trail Boss. With the buckhorn sights at 25 yards accuracy was okay for the 95 grain and great for the 115 grain.
Click to expand...
Try a different powder.
Trail Boss goes bang and pushes the bullet out of the barrel with nearly any reasonable load. ...But that's about the limit of its prowess; and it's a pretty finicky and temperamental powder in .327 Federal, in my experience.

Try a different powder. Work up to full power with something like Accurate 2400, Alliant 300 MP, Hodgdon Lil Gun, etc., and you may be surprised at the change in performance.


...And go to at least 50 yards, instead of 25. It gives you a better feel for the rifle vs your own issues. (Speaking from experience - not trying to insinuate anything.)
 
I'm going to put a scope on it, but I have to buy a mount and rings first. Then I'll give 50 yards and beyond a try. I'm generally not a good shot beyond 25 yards with a rifles iron sights.

As for powder, I used Trail Boss specifically to keep the velocities low for small game and I was planning to try .32 S&W Long and H&R Magnum loads with Trail Boss as they use less powder and lower velocities even more. .327 Trail Boss loads are a bit faster than my liking.

For full power .327, I can only find one bullet with a gas check and it's a 125 grain projectile and there is no loading data out there for that bullet in .327, so I'll have to work up a load.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top