.327 Federal Club thread

Here's what they should have done.

A .30 carbine snub that uses full moon clips.

Corbon even makes a .30 carbine dpx load.
Click to expand...
I'll respectfully disagree with you here.

The .30 Carbine round is a fairly good performer if you give it an 18" barrel.
Then it produces 1900 fps and gets you 882 ft-lbs at the muzzle. As a rifle, it's puny. As a handgun cartridge it wastes energy in muzzle flash (and a deafening report). As a carbine, it does okay. I happen to think the M1 Carbine is a good choice for home defense because it's small, light, nimble, powerful enough and can be used one-handed.

However, the .327 simply outperforms the .30 Carbine.
Out of a 3-inch barrel the 100-115 grain loads spec out to 1400 (435 ft-lbs) and 1330 (452 ft-lbs)fps respectively. That's equivalent to a hot 9mm or lower end .357 load. But if we put the .327 Magnum into an 18" barrel, the 100 & 115 grain loads produce much more horsepower. The 100gr load hits 2150 fps (1026 ft-lbs) and 1880 fps (903 ft-lbs).

In an 8" barrel, the .327 hits 1900 fps using American Eagle 100gr loads. No doubt with a little time, we'll see handloaders pushing 2000 fps from an 7.5-8" barrel as experience is gained.

Yes, I'm sure you can beat that with handloads in a Blackhawk. But allow the .327 community to work up similar loads for the BH or GP-100 and the gap will be narrow.

In a short barrel, the .327 is much more efficient than the .30 carbine because it uses faster powder. There is a lot of interest in the .327 in longer barrels -- 5½ to 7½" cowboy guns to 16" and 18" lever rifles. I think we'll eventually see "high-speed" or "rifle" bullets made for hunting with the .327 in a rifle where the JHP/JSP opens slower than the self-defense handgun bullet.
 
Keep in mind that the .30 Carbine was adopted by the military for use by troops who would otherwise be carrying a handgun -- transportation units, artillery units, etc. They wanted something more accurate at short to intermediate distances -- 100 to 150 yards. For various reasons, it ended up seeing quite a bit of front line action as well.

So, you are talking about a pistol cartridge duplicating the performance of a carbine/rifle cartridge that was designed to replace a pistol cartridge. All rather circular.
 
A .30 carbine snub that uses full moon clips.
Click to expand...

A fine tool if the goal is to deafen both parties and set the attacker's clothing afire...... as bill pointed out, the .327 is a better round from a 3" barrel than the .30 Carbine.
 
We all know the .30 Carbine's reputation as a LOUD round, especially from a handgun. That likely comes from it's 40,000 PSI max.

Thing is... the .327 Federal runs a case that's damn near as long as the Carbine... non tapered... with a hair-slight larger diameter... similar weight bullet of damn near same diameter... and runs handloads using the SAME powders effectively... but with a SAAMI established maximum pressure that is 5,000 PSI higher than is the .30 Carbine.

We have the great BBTI website to show us inch-by-inch chrono data from 18 inches down to 1 inch for .327 Federal Mag... but we don't have that same data for .30 Carbine unless someone here has that data table and they aren't sharing.

If nearly every dimension of the round is so much the same... but the .30 Carb runs a lower max pressure... how is it that the .327 isn't going to be LOUDER, with MORE of a fireball?! And how is the .327 going to blister past the performance of the .30 Carb in a 3-inch barrel simply because the .30 Carb was designed for a rifle?

In the end, it's crazy to re-introduce all the problems inherent to running a tapered, rimless case in a revolver when we've got a great new straight wall rimmed revolver case to do it...

But I think it's pure discussion folly to try and paint any picture that calls the performance of these two (at least in muzzle velocity, bullet weight and kinetic energy) different.

I just don't see them being much different. 5,000 more PSI gives a slight nod to .327 Federal... maybe .30 Carb makes that up with a smidge more case length.

What the .327 Federal has going for it in a head-to-head comparo is that it's using purpose-built pistol bullets while the .30 Carb is forever stuck with like two or three styles of tiny rifle slugs, all of which have no bullet technology newer than the 1960s behind them. It has that and a case rim that makes it work properly in a revolver with none of the hassles that .30 Carb introduces to a revolver.

Even still, this is a fun conversation. :D
 
I don't own a .327 handgun...But I used to own a H&R Model R37 in 32 H&R Mag....Like the one pictured.....I know that the 327 is much more powerful...but the Little H&R was simply a hoot !! I loved that revolver..shot alot of 32 longs.. and a few boxes of 32 H&R out of it ..a buddy and loaded me a box or so of 32 H&R Mag. with LSWC ..I think the weight was 110gr. ???

I landed a job while in school as a security guard at a large construction site..the Boss told me to show up" heeled" ..My first choice of carry was my dads Model 10 S&W 3inch barrel (he pruned it) but he said heck no ..so I loaded the Model R37 up with some of those LSWC hand loads and off I went..I carried that gun on that Job the entire time ..felt perfectly armed.....for over a year...till a fellow on the site swapped me a Japanese copy of a Colt Detective in 38 Spl. all I had to do was throw in 20.00 ( a days pay) ...

If I can scrounge a little money aside I'd like to get a revolver in the 327 ..

I think it would make a superior SD gun..

7262010%20052.jpg_thumbnail1.jpg
 
Sevens said:
If nearly every dimension of the round is so much the same... but the .30 Carb runs a lower max pressure... how is it that the .327 isn't going to be LOUDER, with MORE of a fireball?! And how is the .327 going to blister past the performance of the .30 Carb in a 3-inch barrel simply because the .30 Carb was designed for a rifle?
Click to expand...

The .327 round is somewhat less noisy that the .357 Magnum but not as loud and sharp as the .30 Carbine. It's certainly not going to classed as a "stealth" round, even with a suppressor. :p

Flash When Ruger and Federal developed the .327 Mag, the factory blended a special powder mix that included flash suppressants because the 3-inch barrel was part of the initial design parameters. A look at reloading data for the M1 Carbine shows powders like IMR-4227, Alliant 2400, Win-296/H-110/VV N-110, AA-9 and AA-1680, all slower burning powders (index 56-68).

For the .327 Magnum, reloading data shows canister powder using the "slow" powders as Alliant 2400, Ramshot Enforcer and Hodgon's Longshot. The other loads use powders like Clay's, Bullseye, Unique, Win-231 and Power Pistol which are all much faster burning powders.

In short, the .30 carbine commercial loads are geared towards an 18" barrel to burn up the powder. At 3" to 7" there is still a lot of unburned powder being consumed outside the muzzle that leads to flash and a concussion wave from both the powder and supersonic bullet. And the M1 Carbine doesn't call for flash suppressants in the powder either.

The .327 uses faster burning pistol powders, the majority of which get consumed inside the barrel. Add flash suppressants and you get reduced flash, which reduces the muzzle blast noise by vaporizing less air (less vacuum to cause concussion). You get less muzzle blast but still have the crack of the supersonic bullet.

The short barrel performance is simply a matter of the speed of the powder. In the M1 Carbine, not all of the powder is used to accelerate the projectile whereas almost all of the .327's powder turns to energy to get the bullet moving.

Think of a pair of drag racers with similar engines -- say a Chevy 327 vs. a Ford 302. Suppose both cars are close in weight (10% difference) and both are using the same high-octane fuel. But the heavier car is configured to consume 20% less fuel per second than the lighter car. Which one will accelerate faster and be ahead at mid track? The one that turns energy into work the fastest.
 
WHY NOT the Dardick or Gyrojet pistols, .327 or the .41AE? Or .307 Winchester, .401 Powermag or the S&W .22 JET? Or a 9 MM Revolver? Why don't these products catch on? Why didn't another Manufacturer buy the design rights and create an updated version, if the original had cash flow issues, or entered the market at the wrong time? No matter how bad the economy is, or tight the budget is, most of us, if we want a gun bad enough, find a way to get it, via trade, saving or credit. Why don't certain new calibers and weapons catch on? We could ask that question pertaining to a number of products...

When ever I see a new caliber or product, I ask myself, does it fill an existing void, or are they creating a void to fill? Is the design and or quality sound? Does it offer that much of an imporovement over an existing product, that I feel compelled to upgrade? As an old Yankee who was brought up to believe [B]"IF IT AIN'T BROKE, DON"T FIX IT". [/B],
since I already have .22 Mags, .38's, .357's, .44's and a .41 Mag revolver, amoung others, WHY would I even consider a .327? I wouldn't. Nor a .32 H&R mag. Or the "new .347x56.2 MM TallywackerHolyBeJesume round" that will be featured in "Next months" gun magazine or reviewed by some Internet wizard who is a self proclaimed self defense expert. They often show a photo of the new round and weapon posed next to a dead goat (shot at a feeder) at the J/O Ranch, or a block of that magical, yellow jello stuff that looks so cool when the bullet strikes.

Those guns/calibers that I already have cover any use I might want them for. It seems these days as if too many ignore shot placement and get hung up on marketing, numbers and yellow jello. And I am not alone, hence the failure of many new calibers and guns over the past few decades. Most of us don't buy into all the hype. :rolleyes:

Then again, it's your money. To each their own. My buddy thinks I'm cracked because I bought a .41 Magnum Ruger a few years back, instead of another .44. To me, as a hunter, the .41 Mag fills a void, unlike the .327, and a few others, as pertaining to self defense calibers in a revolver, either a snub .38 or .357 works just fine.
 
Last edited:
Your buddy is either dead wrong, or absolutely correct.

If we go by your extended diatribe, your buddy has you pegged brilliantly. You got suckered in to .41 Magnum and forever pigeon-holed yourself as "trying to be different" by using the oddball .41 Magnum when we all know that the .44 Magnum would not only have worked perfectly well for everything you use the .41 Magnum for, but it would be cheaper, more available, more mainstream, so many more platform and factory ammunition choices, so many more component bullet choices, so much easier to find brass for, so much easier to find other enthusiasts for to exchange load data and ideas with, ad nauseum.

It's comical that you feel completely secure and happy with .41 Magnum (as well you should) but that the .327 Magnum is just another gimmick with no real tangible reason for anyone to want to add it to their lineup other than... hype or marketing?!

Just... wow. :rolleyes:
 
not an expert but still a proud owner

I am a part of the proud but small group that loves to shoot my GP in this caliber.

Shurshot and many others have a legitemite view. No matter how you care to phrase it, 'If it ain't broke...", 'an anwer to a question..." or "a void filled..." it surely is wedged between alot of already established and fallen calibers.

I too have become jaded over the years. New products, marketing schemes mostly BS. It comes with gaining experience and spending money over time and later realizing you were dupped.

But once in awhile, something comes along that is good as advertised. In fact, it may be better. As others have stated, there is still much to learn about this caliber that will take time to see just where this goes.

So for those of you who are happy with your current flavor of calibers, enjoy.

But allow us to enjoy our unexpected and pleasant find. It is only in part that these are fun to shoot, it is also, for me, something truly new and interesting (and that doesn't happen often with this hobby) and I want to watch where this goes.

This is somewhat like we are watching a movie and someone opens the back door to announce that this is crap movie with a bad ending. (Forgive us if we get a little crabby as we like the movie, know it is a premier showing and no one yet knows the ending).

Now back to my popcorn.:D
 
This is a 41 magnum. A reasonably powerful handgun - do you feel luckier than if it was a 44 magnum - do you - punk?

This is a 327 magum - it may be as powerful as 357 but maybe not? Do you feel that you are lucky. I'll wait till you use your I-phone and read 628 posts on TFL, punk!

Who knew the 40 would take off - it is reasonable that it wasn't needed between the 9 and 45, certainly no data suggests it has an advantage. It was a panic response to the 10 mm flop which was a panic response to the Miami shootout? And polymer guns?

Market will tell.
 
You know what else is worth mentioning... (of course, we may have said it on page 14?!) is that the .32 H&R Mag was/is, IMO anyway, kind of a roadblock to the .327 Federal.

It was a wonderfully conceived idea that was POORLY executed. It wasn't nearly as hot, high pressured or performance oriented as it should have been. It's more like a .32 Special over the .32 S&W Long that it superceded.

.32 H&R Mag at the time was also tied in the market to Harrington & Richardson that failed, and the association is hard to get away from, especially in the '80s before the information age. Certainly, there were some very good guns built for the .32 H&R Mag, but the flagship guns were not very good or strong or well received. So folks with the better guns have been hot-rodding .32 H&R Mag for years, but .32 H&R Mag as issued is pretty limp.

.327 Federal should have been a 1982 release instead of a 2008 or whatever it was.
 
You know they are discussing SOMETHING but you don't know what it is they are discussing?! That's kinda mean!! :p
 
Shurshot said:
Those guns/calibers that I already have cover any use I might want them for. It seems these days as if too many ignore shot placement and get hung up on marketing, numbers and yellow jello. And I am not alone, hence the failure of many new calibers and guns over the past few decades. Most of us don't buy into all the hype.
Click to expand...
I'm also a happy .41 Magnum owner (5 of 'em)... as well as a fan of .32 caliber revolvers - .32 Long & .32 H&R. As versatile as the .41/.44 Magnums are, they are not suitable for some applications. I've used the .41 Mag on pigs, deer and coyotes (it's what I had at the time). I've used .32 Long on rabbits, raccoon (though it's a bit light for garbage-can-fed raccoon), squirrel and skunk (only once!). The .32 H&R would be better for some of those. Reports I've heard say the .327 Mag is excellent for coyotes and will turn a raccoon inside out at 50 yards.

Just because you don't see a niche it fills, doesn't mean there isn't one or that the .327 Mag doesn't fill a need. The .327 is like the .32-20 my late uncle used in the 1920's to take down fox and coyote on his father's farm, but it's a .32-20 on steroids. Once someone makes a nice lever rifle for the .327 Magnum I expect it to become popular on a lot farms and ranches.

The little .327 is work efficient and much more economical to load than many small rifle or pistol cartridges. Owning a revolver, with a quality lever or pump rifle chambered for the .327 Magnum, I'd think most farmers and ranchers would be quite pleased. More so if they reload their brass as the .32 sips powder and 500 bullets weigh less than eight pounds to ship.

Turning this around to the beginning - self-defense - there are plenty of people out there who would like a cartridge as potent as the .357 Magnum without the severe recoil. As a bonus, in most configurations (J-frame, K-frame) you can get an extra round in the cylinder too. Let's add that tests show it averages 14" of penetration and expands to .46 caliber.

While you say you're not impressed by "yellow Jello" tests, all the information adds up that the .327 is a hot performer in guns from 3" to 18"
 
does it fill an existing void, or are they creating a void to fill?
Click to expand...

Both.

There was the void of .357-level power in a six-shot j-frame size production revolver, and they created a void for you to fill, again and again: that of the 6th hole in the cylinder! :D
 
The only way I would buy a revolver in 327 is if they made a levergun in it as well. I have a need for the rifle but the pistol would be just for kicks.
 
The only way I would buy a revolver in 327 is if they made a levergun in it as well. I have a need for the rifle but the pistol would be just for kicks.
Click to expand...

That is one of the most common statements I hear/read about .327 Federal. Why we haven't seen one yet, is beyond me...

And, I still think a Ruger 77/327 would be a fantastic carbine.
 
The reason you haven't seen a lever gun is Marlin is probably waiting to see if it succeeds as a revolver. It's chicken and egg part 2.

Speaking of which I used to have a .32-20 revolver and it was awesome. Another one they could have simply dusted off instead of reinventing the wheel.
 
Agreed, that's why my 632 SS comp'ed model is so sweet. Nice J, hammer, longer barrel, etc.
Click to expand...
__________________





Hello Glenn
The stainless Version model's of the 631 & 632's were short lived due to the caliber not getting off the ground or fully accepted. It did not help that a Magazine writter did a Test on the pair with only mediocre result6s on accuracy. He used factory ammo and I feel he did not hand load the round for supreme accuracy. Now that you have the 632, you need a 631 Snub to sit next to it... Here's one for Ya... Hammer It



DSCF6166.jpg


15004DSCF6168.JPG



DSCF6163.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top