.327 Federal Club thread

I will not shut this as it is a reference for the fans of the 327. Instead, I will remove the snark and with this warning - the posts and posters of personal comments and attack.

Get the hint.

Now back to the great round!
 
Gotta LOVE those .32's!

All the negative garbage about the cartridge (too small, ammo unobtainable, insufficient power) are all a bunch of disinformation being pumped out serving to denigrate the successor to the .32-20. (This was a LONG time coming, and exceedingly overdue!)

This cartridge should find it's way into "L" frame revolvers and 16" barreled lever-action rifles. No one should mistake it for the marvelous "woods walking" round it is!

Scott
 
I agree with the last posts. That's exactly how I found the .327 Magnum. I was searching for a "skinny", long and modern round with the following attributes:

- a replacement for .22LR and .22WMR

- good for plinking but with more kick compared to .22WMR

- acceptable for defense

- reloadable

My GP100 will arrive next Tuesday. I already received a bunch of ammo, bullets, powder, primer, dies. Can't wait and load up some max velocity rounds. Too bad Starline needs 3 month for my 1000 brass.

I wish they'd bring out a 7" GP100 and a rifle would be awesome too.
 
Yep, It's a great "trail" cartridge and hunting round as well. There's a lot more to it than meets the eye!

Engage in a bit of research, and it's virtues become increasingly apparent.

Scott
 
The interest I have in the .327 is more in the defensive mode. Something that has an effective power range with less recoil than the .357. The extra round is a bonus in most platforms too.

For a defensive gun I'd prefer fixed sights for the lower profile or low profile night sights. In a 3" barrel I'm not going to be trying too many shots beyond 25 yards - mostly between contact an ~15 yards.

A woods gun, trail walker or kit gun is another story. Longer barrels and adjustable sights, perhaps even a mount for a light/laser for dealing with nocturnal camp or cabin visitors.
 
For a defensive gun I'd prefer fixed sights for the lower profile or low profile night sights. In a 3" barrel I'm not going to be trying too many shots beyond 25 yards - mostly between contact an ~15 yards.

A woods gun, trail walker or kit gun is another story. Longer barrels and adjustable sights, perhaps even a mount for a light/laser for dealing with nocturnal camp or cabin visitors.
Click to expand...

BillCA, would a 4" SP101 have been right for the woods gun?
 
Bill:

The .327 is at it's best when shooting "98-grain +" projectiles. When it comes to smaller-bore handguns, penetration is your friend! There is no doubt in my mind that the following axiom is true:

"When it comes to defensive shooting, shot placement is king, penetration is queen. Everything else is angles dancing on the heads of pins!"

Years of studying street shooting confirms this.

Scott
 
"When it comes to defensive shooting, shot placement is king, penetration is queen. Everything else is angles dancing on the heads of pins!"
Click to expand...

Looking at it this way, remember that the queen is like a lot of ladies: complicated. We are really talking about where you dump the kinetic energy. Obviously, you need to penetrate enough to drop it somewhere useful. (The king only draws an "X" at the entry point in this metaphor.) You also want to dump as much of it as possible where it counts, preferably the full load. Anything that shoots right through the assailant is holding on to energy that would have been better spent in his body. That said, the mechanical and energetic advantages of certain bullet shapes are more than angels on a pinhead. I don't know if it's the Jack, the Ace, or the Royal Adviser; but it matters.
 
Men with time on their hands.:cool:

Had some fun shooting my Single Seven 5.5 incher yesterday with my reloads of 11.0 gr AA#9 and 100 gr LRNFP Br 12. I followed up with my 357 Match Champion and can say that the 327 Federal Magnum is a better target gun for me with its milder recoil.
 
reloaders...

FYI for anyone using the recently released Alliant BE-86, there is a little 327 mag load data available via their "Ask the Experts" section on the Alliant web site.

I emailed them and asked about load data for certain Hornady bullets and got a detailed answer within just a few hours. The responder advised that further testing on 327 mag loads was being conducted and more data would be available soon.

I have some BE-86 test loads made up but am waiting for better weather to get to the range.

I've been using some nice loads using Hodgon Lil'Gun and Win 231/HP38 with Hornady 85g and 100g XTP's and Missouri 100g Rnfp's. Data available from Hodgdon.
 
"my reloads of 11.0 gr AA#9 and 100 gr LRNFP Br 12"

What's the estimated velocity of that load?
Click to expand...

1143 fps from the Lyman Cast Bullet Handbook. The 11.0 gr is the starting load. I got no barrel leading with it.
 
"We are really talking about where you dump the kinetic energy. Obviously, you need to penetrate enough to drop it somewhere useful. (The king only draws an "X" at the entry point in this metaphor.) You also want to dump as much of it as possible where it counts, preferably the full load. Anything that shoots right through the assailant is holding on to energy that would have been better spent in his body."

This is all well and good, however, the accuracy should (obviously) come first. Penetration is of primary import. Expansion is nice, but only if the cartridge provides sufficient penetration (through velocity) to permit expansion to dump energy. The .327 Federal Magnum DOES provide sufficient velocity to use expanding bullets to good effect. (Velocity and bullet weight remaining the "keys" to this equation).

Scott
 
Well after the initial answer from Elizabeth Sharp, Vice President Investor Relations at S&W for a new revolver chambered in .327 I never heard back from her. A reminder email was also ignored.

Meanwhile I received my .327 Ruger GP100 and I literally love this gun. 32 long is extremely accurate out of this firearm.

My conclusion: I removed that .357 686+ from my purchase list and stay clear of S&W guns. Arrogant or ignorant customer service does not pay off. I will support Ruger for keeping this great caliber alive.
 
Sound level?

I am a huge fan of the .32 S&W Long. However, when I see the .327 Federal being touted as the "ideal woods, walking around gun...", I envision someone who may be tempted to shoot at a target of opportunity (squirrel, rabbit partridge, etc.), in the woods without hearing protection (who actually carries hearing protection in the woods, after all?). Having never fired or having heard the report of a .327 Federal, I ask: How hard is it on the ears.
 
Having never fired or having heard the report of a .327 Federal, I ask: How hard is it on the ears.
Click to expand...
With full power loads, you're right up there with .357 Mag. ...Maybe even .30 Carbine.

It has some bark.



But, as I've said many times before in this thread....
I, personally, don't find it anywhere near as offensive as .357 Mag.
Firing it without protection will make you regret that decision, but I'd rather run a cylinder full of .327 Federal through my GP100 without hearing protection than run a cylinder of .357 Mag through my brother's GP100 under the same circumstances. (The two revolvers being identical, other than finish and chambering.)


And to sort of, almost contradict myself....
If I was carrying my GP100 with full power .327 Federal loads, in an area and season when and where it was legal to take an upland game species with the revolver, I would pass unless I had one of my .32 S&W Long or .32 H&R loads available.
I value my hearing.

(You can replace "GP100" with "Blackhawk" in all of the places it is used above, and the situation wouldn't change. At least not for me.)
 
With full power loads, you're right up there with .357 Mag. ...Maybe even .30 Carbine.

It has some bark.



But, as I've said many times before in this thread....
I, personally, don't find it anywhere near as offensive as .357 Mag.
Firing it without protection will make you regret that decision, but I'd rather run a cylinder full of .327 Federal through my GP100 without hearing protection than run a cylinder of .357 Mag through my brother's GP100 under the same circumstances. (The two revolvers being identical, other than finish and chambering.)


And to sort of, almost contradict myself....
If I was carrying my GP100 with full power .327 Federal loads, in an area and season when and where it was legal to take an upland game species with the revolver, I would pass unless I had one of my .32 S&W Long or .32 H&R loads available.
I value my hearing.
Click to expand...

So then, considering the noise level it produces, you for one would not consider it as an "ideal woods gun"?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top