.327 Federal Club thread
- Thread starter farmboy
- Start date
A pause for the COZ
New member
Thats about the going rate right now.
I paid a bit more for mine. But thats because I was impatient and wanted mine right now.
I was not going to let this one get away like I did the Black Hawk version or The Charter Arms Bulldog 4 inch target version.
Still kicking my self for that one.
Could have got the Target Bulldog for $350 at one time.
Now good luck...
I paid a bit more for mine. But thats because I was impatient and wanted mine right now.
I was not going to let this one get away like I did the Black Hawk version or The Charter Arms Bulldog 4 inch target version.
Still kicking my self for that one.
Could have got the Target Bulldog for $350 at one time.
Now good luck...
Magnum Wheel Man
New member
I think those thinking lever carbines may have issues with the 327 cartridge length, if trying to shoehorn them into traditional pistol caliber carbines I'd think we may need to be looking at 30-30 / 32 Winchester rifles as the base for a custom...
a quick check shows plenty of 32 Winchester rifles for sale on Gun Broker, & 32 caliber handgun bullets at .312 & rifle bullets at .312, so the barrel would likely work without changing or re-lining... bolt face would need work, & likely the lifter... but don't see either as a deal breaker on building a 327 on a 32 Winchester???
ooops sorry... I was looking at the 32-20 rifle bullets... the 32 Winchester uses .322 - .323" bullets... so only levers in 32-20 would not require barrel work of some kind
a quick check shows plenty of 32 Winchester rifles for sale on Gun Broker, & 32 caliber handgun bullets at .312 & rifle bullets at .312, so the barrel would likely work without changing or re-lining... bolt face would need work, & likely the lifter... but don't see either as a deal breaker on building a 327 on a 32 Winchester???
ooops sorry... I was looking at the 32-20 rifle bullets... the 32 Winchester uses .322 - .323" bullets... so only levers in 32-20 would not require barrel work of some kind
Last edited:
A pause for the COZ
New member
Getting them to fit into a lever action is not an issue.
All it would take for Rossi to chamber a M92 for 327 is the desire.
My M92 in 357 mag feeds them well enough. 327's would be just as simple.
All it would take for Rossi to chamber a M92 for 327 is the desire.
My M92 in 357 mag feeds them well enough. 327's would be just as simple.
Magnum Wheel Man
New member
OK... I'm not ( yet ) a 327 guy... I assumed it was longer like a 357 max length, or at least longer than the standard cartridge length...
your picture helps out... so it's more like the comparison between 45 Colt & 454 Casull... most difference is just the pressure
your picture helps out... so it's more like the comparison between 45 Colt & 454 Casull... most difference is just the pressure
A pause for the COZ
New member
Yea pretty much.
The only issue that the 327 has is perception.
You can tell the manufactures really have no idea what they have and what its best use is.
Our numbers are not big enough to push the issue.
I really hope Lipsey is selling the crap out of the Single 7.
Because thats were the future of the 327 mag lies.
Small runs as an exclusive gun for a particular distributor.
A Lipsey exclusive Marlin 1894 in 327 Mag would be in my safe post haste.
The only issue that the 327 has is perception.
You can tell the manufactures really have no idea what they have and what its best use is.
Our numbers are not big enough to push the issue.
I really hope Lipsey is selling the crap out of the Single 7.
Because thats were the future of the 327 mag lies.
Small runs as an exclusive gun for a particular distributor.
A Lipsey exclusive Marlin 1894 in 327 Mag would be in my safe post haste.
Cosmodragoon
New member
Is the rifling in guns for .32 H&R Magnum or 32-20 optimal for .327?
Cosmodragoon
New member
Given the fabulous 686+, I'd imagine they could give you 8 shots of .327 in that platform. Does anyone know a reason they couldn't? That said, could they squeeze 9 on an N-frame?
*sigh* This thread continues to make me angry because all of these great ideas will probably never be explored. The .327 is just plain wonderful and the failure in marketing and support that sank it sank some powerful potential. I suppose I can keep hoping that the execs read our threads. In the meantime, there are things we can do. First, buy factory ammo! I know it costs more than reloading but it's the best way to show suppliers that demand exists. Then, when a company does offer a new gun in .327, buy it! When something sells like hotcakes, manufacturers pay attention. Of course, take your .327 out and shoot it with friends. The more fans it has, the better.
Joshua 2415
New member
I agree with the above, absolutely.
One of the main reasons I regularly check this thread is that I hope someone will announce that S&W is making a 9 shot 327 magnum revolver in 3" or 4" for concealed carry. it just seems like an obvious thing to do.
Maybe they're thinking the round doesn't have a market. But to the extent that's so, I think it's because they aren't making the guns to support it. And they aren't promoting/advertising the most obvious benefits: Higher capacity and more power than 38 specials, with less recoil than 357 mag. Should sell like hotcakes, if they would promote it.
One of the main reasons I regularly check this thread is that I hope someone will announce that S&W is making a 9 shot 327 magnum revolver in 3" or 4" for concealed carry. it just seems like an obvious thing to do.
Maybe they're thinking the round doesn't have a market. But to the extent that's so, I think it's because they aren't making the guns to support it. And they aren't promoting/advertising the most obvious benefits: Higher capacity and more power than 38 specials, with less recoil than 357 mag. Should sell like hotcakes, if they would promote it.
I just sent an email to S&W investor relations.. lets see how far I can get up the chain. I'll point them to this thread. 1,153 posts and 108,025 views should speak for itself.
Meanwhile a list of reasons why S&W should bring back the 327 Fed in SS this time would be helpful for me for any further communication with them.
Meanwhile a list of reasons why S&W should bring back the 327 Fed in SS this time would be helpful for me for any further communication with them.
Cosmodragoon
New member
Forgive me being thick but what is "SS"? If you mean "stainless steel", then I'd agree. Just in case they do look, I remember them offering one model, the 632. I think they released it in stainless steel but it must have been a limited run. I can only find it incidentally in articles like this one.
I actually liked the look of it and putting 6 on a J-Frame is a major selling point. (I still think the 432PD in .32 H&R Magnum was a nearly perfect pocket gun.) The main reason I didn't buy a 632 is because they ported it. I know ported guns are cool and I've come to appreciate the stabilization in guns like the XVR. However, there are tradeoffs. Porting increases noise, flash, and mess; all things that are already turned up with the .327 federal magnum. Here, it made the decision easy for me. It was another sale lost to Ruger, who released it in the arguably prettier and more weight-stabilized SP101.
A point I've advanced here and elsewhere is that the marketing and support failed to realize this round's potential. It doesn't just give you an extra shot in a smaller frame. It gives you what the SP101 review above rightly called "high velocity and controllability". It also lends itself nicely to longer barrels and the fact that no rifle/carbine has been offered still grinds my gears. This would have been awesome in 4" 7-shot combination, preferably on a K-frame, or in potentially higher-capacity 5-6" offerings on a larger frame.
If we are just musing here, I suppose I could wish for one without that accursed lock. Why Smith and Wesson keeps blemishing their otherwise beautiful guns with that abomination is beyond me, but there are whole threads on that topic. Even with it, I'd still be inclined to pony up the premium if S&W offered what I was looking for in .327.
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
The SS gun was on sale at Cabela's for awhile. I have one and put fiber optics on it. It's a great revolver. The J frame fits my small paws well.
The 432 is also a great pocket revolver. Got that also - they were quite cheap when SW stopped making them and dumped them on the market. Should have bought a few.
The 432 is also a great pocket revolver. Got that also - they were quite cheap when SW stopped making them and dumped them on the market. Should have bought a few.
Glenn, I agree with you that the 432PD is a nifty little package. I still have mine and it's very handy for things like answering the door or pocket carry when working in the yard. Bring out a 3-inch stainless .327 Centennial and I'd be all over that too.
S&W really needs to get with it. Carry guns with 3-inch barrels are highly favored by the public as well as collectors. Either J or K frame .327's should start with a 3-inch launch tube. A 3-inch stainless version of the Model 13/65 for a K-frame .327 would be perfect for concealed carry.
A 3rd change for the Model 16, as I see it would return with a K-Frame in 4 or 6 inch barrels with the "Magnum" partial underlug and 7 shots. It'd look like the beautiful Model 66 in profile. No need for the heavier 686 style barrel either.
S&W really needs to get with it. Carry guns with 3-inch barrels are highly favored by the public as well as collectors. Either J or K frame .327's should start with a 3-inch launch tube. A 3-inch stainless version of the Model 13/65 for a K-frame .327 would be perfect for concealed carry.
A 3rd change for the Model 16, as I see it would return with a K-Frame in 4 or 6 inch barrels with the "Magnum" partial underlug and 7 shots. It'd look like the beautiful Model 66 in profile. No need for the heavier 686 style barrel either.
Cosmodragoon
New member
For reference, here is the Model 66. If this was a 7-shot .327 Federal Magnum, I'd buy it.
It might not really "need" it but I do like the weight distribution. What about keeping the sloped underlug? Imagine this rather attractive 3" Model 60 as a 6-shooter in .327.
... or for something a little larger, something like this 5" 686 Plus Pro as a 7 or 8-shooter in .327. This here would be my dream gun.
If anyone from Smith and Wesson actually is reading this, ask yourself. Would it really be so hard to do a limited run of something like this? Do you really think it wouldn't sell? Do it without the internal lock and you'll be a hero. I know I'm only one guy but you've got my word. I'll buy two of them. I never thought I'd see myself writing this but please help me buy over a thousand dollars in product from you.
Last edited:
I like the enthusiasm but I believe it is extremely naive to believe that discussion in this thread could or would possibly have any effect... any at all, at what Smith & Wesson might ever choose to build and market.
It seems to me that if S&W were to read -ANY- online gun forum (any forum of any size, anywhere on the 'net) and actually react to the end user's whims -- the first thing they would do would be to start producing half their entire line (or more) without the internal lock.
If you could dig up a thousand online gun enthusiasts that like a .327 Federal... than I could probably find ten thousand online gun cranks that would love to ser S&W bury the internal in the annals of history.
A better group to direct your .327 fever toward? Lew Horton or Lipsey's or one of those outfitters with the clout and bankroll to get S&W to make cool, oddball stuff.
It seems to me that if S&W were to read -ANY- online gun forum (any forum of any size, anywhere on the 'net) and actually react to the end user's whims -- the first thing they would do would be to start producing half their entire line (or more) without the internal lock.
If you could dig up a thousand online gun enthusiasts that like a .327 Federal... than I could probably find ten thousand online gun cranks that would love to ser S&W bury the internal in the annals of history.
A better group to direct your .327 fever toward? Lew Horton or Lipsey's or one of those outfitters with the clout and bankroll to get S&W to make cool, oddball stuff.