.327 Federal Club thread

[nelsonal]

Aha, I was unclear, I meant turning the rim down on the .327 fed to a rebated rim that was equivalent to the rim on a 5.7x28 (.307), then rebarrel a FiveSeven and work out the changes to the magazine. The .327's oal is shorter than the 5.7 and the diameter other than the rim is surprisingly close. I imagine it'd take considerably more work but the two rounds are awfully similar in size. The concept isn't all that different from the old Magnum Research calibers that were turned down from older revolver brass.

Your correct on the other point. I meant to imply that it was the biggest of the other reasons. The remaining market is folks who care a lot about a fairly narrow improvement in performance (by which I mean the .327 doesn't really outperform the .357 mag at 150 gr and up because they're largely unavailable) which is great for those of us who are interested, but really doesn't appeal to many gun buyers (hense the claims of a solution in search of a problem).

 

[tjh]

Don't care what the anti-327 bunch says ...I like the 327fed.mag and my sp101 !!

 

[Layne]

Handgun hunting

I believe in Ohio that you cannot handgun hunt with any caliber smaller than a .357. So that probably turns some people off that are looking for a multi purpose firearm.

 

[gak]

Tjh said,
Don't care what the anti-327 bunch says ...I like the 327fed.mag and my sp101 !!
To me the .327 is the ultimate expression of that gun (probably in 3"). Like the Single Six in the .32 H&R, never was there a better marriage of frame and cartridge. Nicely weighted--vs similar Smiths--to tame the .327s recoil.

And Layne said,
I believe in Ohio that you cannot handgun hunt with any caliber smaller than a .357. So that probably turns some people off that are looking for a multi purpose firearm.

Sounds like they need to do an update review!

 

[jason hammac]

I am bringing this thread forward. I am a FAN of all things .32, I recently purchased a MARLIN COWBOY 1894 in .32 magnum and sent it off to be converted to .327 federal. I will keep you updated on the process.
Now, getting to revolvers, S&W is absoluting goofing up by not offering a K or L frame in this caliber. I own a bunch of single sixes but the conversion cost is crazy. With the Rugers, the redhawk, blackhawk, or GP100 is to large to carry. As said before, with those sizes and weights you might as well have a .357 or larger.

 

[Sevens]

I believe in Ohio that you cannot handgun hunt with any caliber smaller than a .357. So that probably turns some people off that are looking for a multi purpose firearm.

Full disclosure: I'm not a hunter and know very little about it. (but I support it and if I'd had a mentor, I'd probably be a hunter today...) In any case, I believe the restriction you are referencing is for deer hunting only. Small game doesn't have the same restrictions.

I could be absolutely wrong, but that's what I think. I know guys in southern Ohio are hunting coyotes and varmints of all kinds with .223 and .204 which are also prohibited calibers for deer in Ohio. (not legal to hunt deer with a rifle in Ohio... slugs, muzzle loader or bow... yes, it's lame... yes, it should be updated...)

 

[Sevens]

I am bringing this thread forward. I am a FAN of all things .32, I recently purchased a MARLIN COWBOY 1894 in .32 magnum and sent it off to be converted to .327 federal. I will keep you updated on the process.

Very cool, Jason. Please do keep us up to date on the process. Matter of fact, it might be a good idea to start a new thread on your idea & new rifle in the rifle forum, then link to that thread with a post here. Very cool. Many folks have asked for a .327 lever gun.

Now, getting to revolvers, S&W is absoluting goofing up by not offering a K or L frame in this caliber. I own a bunch of single sixes but the conversion cost is crazy. With the Rugers, the redhawk, blackhawk, or GP100 is to large to carry. As said before, with those sizes and weights you might as well have a .357 or larger.
Not sure if you scanned the whole thread or not but we all agree that S&W is nutbar... they've been that way on MANY decisions, if you ask me. Poster Hammer It has found the best solution, modifying the hard-to-find Model 16-4 which was made for the .32 H&R and has enough cylinder length to pull it off. Sadly, the Ruger Single Six guns also chambered in .32 H&R do not have the cylinder length... so a conversion would be more than expensive, it would be more like re-designing the revolver rather than converting it.

 

[Hammer It]

Quote:
I am bringing this thread forward. I am a FAN of all things .32, I recently purchased a MARLIN COWBOY 1894 in .32 magnum and sent it off to be converted to .327 federal. I will keep you updated on the process.

Very cool, Jason. Please do keep us up to date on the process. Matter of fact, it might be a good idea to start a new thread on your idea & new rifle in the rifle forum, then link to that thread with a post here. Very cool. Many folks have asked for a .327 lever gun

Hello Sevens & Jason
I have Heard in the past that converting a Marlin Lever action rifle of .32 H&R Magnum to the New Federal .327 will Not work out. The reason I am told, is that the Much higher pressure involved with the .327 Magnum surpasses the safety factor of that rifle handling it. This means it may be Lengthened in the chamber portion to fire the Federal .327 Magnum, but from what I have Heard Is Not safe to fire the Cartridge. Before you Molest a perfct .32 H&R Magnum caliber Marlin rifle, you may want to look into this a bit deeper... Hammer It

 

[gak]

Sevens said:
Hammer It has found the best solution, modifying the hard-to-find Model 16-4 which was made for the .32 H&R and has enough cylinder length to pull it off. Sadly, the Ruger Single Six guns also chambered in .32 H&R do not have the cylinder length... so a conversion would be more than expensive, it would be more like re-designing the revolver rather than converting it.

+1 The Single Six.327 conversion cost is prohibitive (still am considering when I can save up my pennies) - but it's mostly because it requires installing a new cylinder (Bowen and others do this, or for local fixers, Bowen sells fluted blanks) and resultant gap "adjustment"... but at least does NOT require frame/window modifications...which would *really* render the process prohibitive and effectively be your "re-designing."
Sadly, 16-4s - when found - are cost prohibitive as well. Add an otherwise simple and cheap conversion and, of course, the total gun price is up there.

Ruger should really build some Single Sixes (both adjustable and "Vaquerito" style) in this great cartridge, and Smith should expand its J line up (to its regular line up, not just high-priced Pro/Performance shop) and its K series as stated.

 

[FrankenMauser]

Smith should expand its J line up (to its regular line up, not just high-priced Pro/Performance shop)

I don't think the aluminum and scandium J frames can handle the pressure of the .327 Federal. The 'standard' steel-frame versions would probably sell, though.

 

[gak]

Quote:
I don't think the aluminum and scandium J frames can handle the pressure of the .327 Federal. The 'standard' steel-frame versions would probably sell, though.

Good point, and that (steel) is what I was primarily referring to. A non-ported variant (steel/2.1") was added to the Pro Series (only) 18 or so months ago IIRC, still inordinately pricey.
http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/...57767_757751_757751_ProductDisplayErrorView_Y

 

[jason hammac]

What the caliber needs is a medium frame revolver with 4 or 6 inch barrel to make it shine. I have several 16-4's and I do not want to convert it. Hammer It's conversion looks outstanding and I might do this, but then I have to decide which length barrel is the best for this cartridge??

 

[Hammer It]

What the caliber needs is a medium frame revolver with 4 or 6 inch barrel to make it shine. I have several 16-4's and I do not want to convert it. Hammer It's conversion looks outstanding and I might do this, but then I have to decide which length barrel is the best for this cartridge??

Hello Jason
Your response is a little confusing to me here. You say that you have several model 16-4s but do not want to convert one, I am Curious as to Why you would not want one to be convertd ? I only have the one and am Very glad I converted mine, compared to the factory caliber of .32 H&R Magnum what it came from the factory in, there simply is nor was no comparison to the new Federal .327 Magnum Cartridge. Once the gun is converted no one other than the owner will ever know that it has been converted as Bowen does not mark or stamp the guns that he does this to. Allowing me the Freedom to have a Gun chambered in this now is where the Beauty of this conversion Lies. It will now fire .32 S&W, .32 S&W Long, .32 H&R Magnum and the New Federal .327 Magnum and does so with Far more accuracy in all of the mentioned caliber's than it used to fire just the Three aforementioned ones.





While doing the caliber conversion, Hamilton Bowen Matches the cylinder throats when he does it and it did improve the revolver's over all accuracy when he was finished with it, so I have No Regrets on getting mine done. The Federal .327 Magnum is everything that the .32 H&R Magnum should have Been. I originally wanted a 4' Model 16-4 but was not able to Locate one so took a 6" Example as shown instead. It all comes down to what the owner of the gun wants as far as velocity goes, or what they feel comfortable carrying. I have found that the 6" Barrel length is superb in the field so am very happy with mine, and the over all Balance of my 6" revolver feels good to me.





In Looking at what velocites we can expect out of different barrel lengths that the model 16-4 was Offered in The 4" Barrel guns would fire Factory Federal American Eagle ammo at a velocity of 1604 F.P.S. where as the 6" example would fire the same round at 1808 F.P.S. and the Longest Barrel model of the 16-4 being 8-3/8" would clock 1913 F.P.S. Totaling up the three different barrel lengths would be little more than 300 F.P.S. in velocity difference from the shortest barrel length being 4" to the Longest version of 8-3/8". If I had the chance again to convert one going into this with all three barrel Lengths offered in this S&W Model 16-4 I would have chosen a 6" as well....To me, the Longest version being the 8-3/8" Barrel example would be too Long to carry comfortable in the field. I have fired other S&Ws with an 8-3/8" Barrel in the past, and can share with you that for me that they are not the easiest guns to hold still and get accuracy from without the aid of a Pistol Rest, due to their Longer barrel length.





I also would think due to the barrel under lug adding some weight that the 8-3/8" Barrel model would be a little tougher to fire accurately when hunting with it as no rest is offered in a woods type hunting situation. If I had another spare 6" example I would be inclined to have it's barrel shortened to a 5" Barrel length for eye appeal and easier carry in the field, as S&W Made many guns with the 5" Barrel and they look and balance great. Let's see your Model 16-4s Perhaps in a Group picture in this Thread Jason, I haven't ever seen more than Two of them together in the past due to their rarity...I also would like to see a Picture of your Marlin 1894 lever action rifle chambered in .32 H&R Magnum, they too are hard to locate. Here is mine again, Long Live the Federal .327 Magnum cartridge... and those that belive in it's accuracy and High Velocity Traits Hammer It

In retrospect to the Fondness of the .32 Caliber accuracy, here is my Elusive Pre-16 K-32 Target Masterpiece, that shipped in June 1951 and is a Five screw variation. S&W Made this Gun chambered in the .32 S&W Long Cartridge from 1947-1974 with only 3,630 of them being made in a 27 Year span making them Far More Rare to find compared to the Model 16-4 Magnum revolvers.

 

[jason hammac]

Sometimes I get confused, really a lot more than I want to admit. Hammerdown answered my question, the velocities are what I was looking for. I will pardon the pun "Bite the bullet" and get the 6 inch barreled 16-4 converted. I am also finding more places offering the ammo. Sorry, I can not post pictures at the moment, the ARMY blocks photobucket for some reason!

 

[Hammer It]

Sometimes I get confused, really a lot more than I want to admit. Hammerdown answered my question, the velocities are what I was looking for. I will pardon the pun "Bite the bullet" and get the 6 inch barreled 16-4 converted. I am also finding more places offering the ammo. Sorry, I can not post pictures at the moment, the ARMY blocks photobucket for some reason!

Hello Jason
I would be happy to Place those pictures for you, Just send them to me. See Your PM Box for my Personal E-mail as we all Know that.....

 

[rodfac]

Geez, Hammer It I've lusted for a K-32 since the early 60's and have never had a chance at one when I had enough shekels coming in. That 5 screw is spectacular.

That said, I've got a 16-4 with a 4" tube on it that I'm considering having the cylinder rebored for the longer cartridge .327. My local shooting buddy had Bowen do one (a Ruger Buckeye Special in .32-20 & .32 H&R) and is very satisfied. His wife carries a Ruger SP101 in .327 so that was the reason for the conversion...

What was the turn around time with Bowen...not that the gun in question is getting a daily workout, but it would be nice to know ahead of time. I've not contacted Bowen as yet...my pal's was back in two weeks as I recall. Have you chrono'd any loads for yours? I'm wondering if the actual velocities hold up when chrono'd by someone other than the manufacturer.

TIA, Best Regards, Rodfac

 

[Hammer It]

Geez, Hammer It I've lusted for a K-32 since the early 60's and have never had a chance at one when I had enough shekels coming in. That 5 screw is spectacular. What was the turn around time with Bowen...not that the gun in question is getting a daily workout, but it would be nice to know ahead of time. I've not contacted Bowen as yet...my pal's was back in two weeks as I recall. Have you chrono'd any loads for yours? I'm wondering if the actual velocities hold up when chrono'd by someone other than the manufacturer.





Hello Rodfac
Here are some recent pictures of my S&W Five screw K-32 that I took this weekend when I had it out for some exercise. The Turn around time for my Cylinder was Just two weeks. He only needs the cylinder & Crane assembly out of your existing Model 16-4 to do this caliber conversion as well. See My Response on Post #150 for more on this caliber, but I used Accurate Arms # 7 Powder dispensed at 10.2 Grains per their suggestion along with a CCI Small magnum pistol primer and medium crimp. I took 50 rounds of it to the range and set up my Chrono meter to see the velocity. It clocked 1420 out of my 6" Barrel Fifteen feet in front of the Muzzle. Regards, Hammer It

 

[FrankenMauser]

Have you chrono'd any loads for yours? I'm wondering if the actual velocities hold up when chrono'd by someone other than the manufacturer.

Manufacturer velocity claims hold up quite well. There are many reports available, showing chronograph results within (+/-) 30 fps of the claimed velocities out of the SP101.

In my 5.5" barrel, I had the following results:
.327 Mag. 100 gr American Eagle SPs.
1,685 fps. (Factory rating: 1,500 fps, 3" bbl.)

.327 Mag. 85 gr Federal Hydrashoks ("reduced recoil").
1,560 fps. (Factory rating: 1,400 fps, 3" bbl.)

.327 Mag. 115 gr Gold Dots.
1,480 fps. (Factory rating: 1,335 fps, 3" bbl.)

 

[rodfac]

Many thanks for the pics and data, Hammer...that's one beautiful revolver. I'll give the load a try and I'm about convinced that I need (there's a good word), to get that 16-4's cylinder off to Bowen. I'll be calling him manana.

Franken....thanks for your views on factory ballistics as well. You guys have perked my interest anew for things .32...kinda rhymes eh?

Best regards, Rodfac

 

[Boberama]

It was not a bad cartridge, especially for small revolvers and recoil sensitive shooters.