327 or 5.7 x28 what is you choice
- Thread starter waltfraz
- Start date
CarbineCaleb
New member
Unlike the .38+P, the .327 is a magnum round, just like the .357, but it's just skinnier.
My opinion only, but...
I'd include larger "varmints" like coyotes, bobcats, and such. Moutain lions are thin skinned, so they might be a possibility.
Javalina would be a definite "yes", being larger than rabbits and such that I consider to be "small game", and quite a bit smaller than any mature deer.
In addition, I'd include the smaller varieties of whitetail. Florida deer are small; so are the little coues whitetails found here in SE Arizona, topping out around 100 lbs or so field dressed.
I wouldn't include black bears from my area. I've seen some that would top 400 lbs, and that light .32 caliber bullet isn't enough. For the record, I'd not hunt these with other common "manstoppers", either. a 9mm, .40 S&W (which I carry daily), or .45 ACP wouldn't even make my list to consider. When hunting bears here in Arizona, I carry a heavy loaded SA Ruger in .45 Colt as a sidearm. I usually call them in with a mouth blown predator call, btw.
Daryl
Last edited:
LOL.
I hate to point this out, but the .32 H&R MAGNUM is also a magnum round, as is the .22 WMR (Winchester MAGNUM Rimfire).
The .45 Colt can be loaded to make any of these look like a white mouse in comparison, but it doesn't have the "magnum" label attached to it.
I wouldn't put too much credit in the "magnum" label.
Daryl
CarbineCaleb
New member
Hi Daryl, I am not analyzing the label, but it is labeled correctly (unlike the .32 H&R magnum).
What I mean is, the .327 Magnum is in the same series as the .357, .41 and .44 Magnum. The difference is the diameter of the round. All of them will shoot a bullet of the same sectional density at similar velocity, and those bullets will therefore penetrate to similar depth (believe it or not). Most people look at bullet weight or energy, that's the wrong way to compare handgun rounds. Look at velocity and sectional density together, that tells you the penetration, and then it's just the diameter of the hole.
azredhawk44
Moderator
I'd like to point out that the term "Magnum" in regards to handgun cartridges was originally a marketing term intending to imply refinement. Distinction of taste. Not raw power.
The source of the term comes from the container for wine and champagne - a "magnum."
dictionary.com said:
Note that the second "definition" uses the word it is defining in its own definition. Very Clinton-is-esque.
Prior to the adoption of the term "magnum" by the handgun industry, the previous favored term to project increased power was "special." The .38 special was more powerful than the .38 S&W, or the .38 Long Colt. The .44 special was more powerful than the .44-40.
The .327 can be a "magnum" if its designers want it to be. IMO, the term "magnum" still doesn't qualify it for anything more than use by recoil shy cowboy dress-up types and the niche use by trappers and pelt hunters... though I question the judgment of anyone who thinks the .32 H&R is "too little" but the .38 special is "too much" and considers the .327 to be "just right."
carguychris
New member
My point exactly. The main advantage of .327Mag vs. .38Spl from a SD standpoint is that it offers more kinetic energy and typically an additional round in a snub revolver. It is not milder and easier to shoot.
To paraphrase what I said in another thread just today, people should not assume that it's a .32ACP/.32 Long/.38S&W pussycat simply because it shoots small bullets.
TylerD45ACP
New member
Exactly, you fire say hot 357's out of a 2inch mod 60 it feels like a wrist snapper because it so little. Then you fire a 357, same load in a 6 inch revolver and it feels like butter. (Is it me or am I the only one who thinks the 45ACP's recoil is minute and very managable, 40 cal is worse in the same size pistol) I still think the 5.7 is a glorified 22mag, Only the 5.7 can defeat some vests. I would never trust my life to either given the choice.
5.7x28mm23 gr (1.5 g) SS90 AP FMJ 850 m/s (2,800 ft/s) 540 J (400 ft·lbf)
31 gr (2.0 g) SS190 AP FMJ 716 m/s (2,350 ft/s) 534 J (394 ft·lbf)
28 gr (1.8 g) SS195LF JHP 716 m/s (2,350 ft/s) 467 J (344 ft·lbf)
Test barrel length: 263 mm (10.35 in)
.22 Magnum Bullet weight/type Velocity Energy
30 gr (1.9 g) HP 2,200 ft/s (670 m/s) 322 ft·lbf (437 J)
40 gr (2.6 g) JHP 1,910 ft/s (580 m/s) 324 ft·lbf (439 J)
50 gr (3.2 g) JHP 1,650 ft/s (500 m/s) 300 ft·lbf (410 J)
(Don't know barrel length for this test)
I don't see anything that special about the 5.7- At least not what it is cracked up to be. I rather have a 9mm over the 5.7/.327 anyday.
5.7x28mm23 gr (1.5 g) SS90 AP FMJ 850 m/s (2,800 ft/s) 540 J (400 ft·lbf)
31 gr (2.0 g) SS190 AP FMJ 716 m/s (2,350 ft/s) 534 J (394 ft·lbf)
28 gr (1.8 g) SS195LF JHP 716 m/s (2,350 ft/s) 467 J (344 ft·lbf)
Test barrel length: 263 mm (10.35 in)
.22 Magnum Bullet weight/type Velocity Energy
30 gr (1.9 g) HP 2,200 ft/s (670 m/s) 322 ft·lbf (437 J)
40 gr (2.6 g) JHP 1,910 ft/s (580 m/s) 324 ft·lbf (439 J)
50 gr (3.2 g) JHP 1,650 ft/s (500 m/s) 300 ft·lbf (410 J)
(Don't know barrel length for this test)
I don't see anything that special about the 5.7- At least not what it is cracked up to be. I rather have a 9mm over the 5.7/.327 anyday.
Azredhawk,
Thanks, and believe me that I agree with you 100%.
My use for the .327 federal mag, if I ever buy/build one, is in hunting. I'm not at all interested in it's kinetic energy, or level of recoil, or even the fact that small framed revolvers so chambered can hold an extra cartridge.
My interest in it lies in it's higher velocity, and resulting flatter trajectory, both of which mean little or nothing at self-defense ranges.
The closest Ruger has come to my desires for the cartridge is a full sized, 8 shot Blackhawk. That's better, but instead of using the smaller diameter of the cartridge to chamber it in a smaller revolver, they once again focused on capacity and went with the large framed Blackhawk.
It's very seldom that I shoot more than a one or two shots at any particular animal. I hit it, and it dies, or I've missed it, and it's running full tilt, and likely out of range in short order. I don't need 8 shots in a hunting revolver, and I don't want to carry the extra weight on a long hike if I don't have to.
The Blackhawk isn't a likely candidate for SD, so capacity becomes somewhat irrelevant.
The .327 mag can be chambered in a Single Six sized gun, simply by installing a slightly longer cylinder into a Single Six frame. They wouldn't even have to lengthen the window, since there's plenty of room for it. Several custom revolvers have been made by reputable gunsmiths in just such a manner.
I've no use for it as a SD cartridge. Obviously, a lot of other shooters feel the same way, since they still seem to prefer other, better known chamberings. The .327 mag just isn't catching on all that well with the SD group of consumbers.
The Arizona mountains where I hunt coues deer are steep, rugged, and have a lot of loose rock to make things "interesting". A lightweight revolver in a competent cartridge like the .327 mag has a lot of appeal for such a purpose for me. If it's chambered in an 8 shot, full sized Blackhawk though, I'd rather just carry a .45 Colt.
I do have a Single Six chambered for .32 H&R mag, and with my handloads I trust it completely on everything I'd hunt with a .327 mag, except for coues deer. My bases are pretty well covered these days, so when I buy something new, it's usually something for a pretty specific purpose.
But I'm not the only one that would want one of these chambered in a Single Six from what I've read on various websites.
Daryl
Thanks, and believe me that I agree with you 100%.
My use for the .327 federal mag, if I ever buy/build one, is in hunting. I'm not at all interested in it's kinetic energy, or level of recoil, or even the fact that small framed revolvers so chambered can hold an extra cartridge.
My interest in it lies in it's higher velocity, and resulting flatter trajectory, both of which mean little or nothing at self-defense ranges.
The closest Ruger has come to my desires for the cartridge is a full sized, 8 shot Blackhawk. That's better, but instead of using the smaller diameter of the cartridge to chamber it in a smaller revolver, they once again focused on capacity and went with the large framed Blackhawk.
It's very seldom that I shoot more than a one or two shots at any particular animal. I hit it, and it dies, or I've missed it, and it's running full tilt, and likely out of range in short order. I don't need 8 shots in a hunting revolver, and I don't want to carry the extra weight on a long hike if I don't have to.
The Blackhawk isn't a likely candidate for SD, so capacity becomes somewhat irrelevant.
The .327 mag can be chambered in a Single Six sized gun, simply by installing a slightly longer cylinder into a Single Six frame. They wouldn't even have to lengthen the window, since there's plenty of room for it. Several custom revolvers have been made by reputable gunsmiths in just such a manner.
I've no use for it as a SD cartridge. Obviously, a lot of other shooters feel the same way, since they still seem to prefer other, better known chamberings. The .327 mag just isn't catching on all that well with the SD group of consumbers.
The Arizona mountains where I hunt coues deer are steep, rugged, and have a lot of loose rock to make things "interesting". A lightweight revolver in a competent cartridge like the .327 mag has a lot of appeal for such a purpose for me. If it's chambered in an 8 shot, full sized Blackhawk though, I'd rather just carry a .45 Colt.
I do have a Single Six chambered for .32 H&R mag, and with my handloads I trust it completely on everything I'd hunt with a .327 mag, except for coues deer. My bases are pretty well covered these days, so when I buy something new, it's usually something for a pretty specific purpose.
But I'm not the only one that would want one of these chambered in a Single Six from what I've read on various websites.
Daryl
TylerD45ACP
New member
O ,Ok. Well when I saw 5.7x28 I was immediatley thinking SD. You have a very specialized purpose in mind and out of those two catridges I would go with the .327- sounds to me like you already got your mind made up. Go for the 327 why not eh.
ice monkey
New member
Well as for the original posters question as to which caliber to get … the .327 is only available in revolvers, and the 5.7 is made for pistols so …
You state that the handgun will be used for home defense or cc, so the question becomes,
1. What do you like better, a revolver or pistol?
You state that the handgun will be used for home defense or cc, so the question becomes,
2. Can you find a 5.7 that’ll be easy to conceal (I can’t)?
In this case, I would say that the .327 is WAY more versatile than the 5.7. I like them both but only know of one (rather large) pistol for the 5.7 whereas the .327 comes in all kinds of sizes, from all kinds of makers.
As for the whole ammo thing … well I have seen both in abundance here in Kansas. The fact is, for home defense - just make sure you have enough to get to your shotgun and you’re all good.
That is really a complicated question.
The thing is, the only pistol (AR57 "pistol" doesn't count) in 5.7x28 is the FN Five-Seven, and the only pistols chambered in .327 mag are revolvers. Furthermore, home defense and CC are completely different purposes.
For CC, I'd have to give the nod to a compact revolver in .327 mag more for ease of carry. The Five-Seven is going to be much more difficult to conceal, and the unfortunate association with the Fort Hood shooting and undeserved reputation as a cop-killer might also be an issue in some areas.
For home defense, the Five-Seven makes a little more sense. Although the cartridge isn't exactly proven, the rather high capacity helps to make up for it. Personally, I'd still go with a .327 mag revolver, but that's more personal preference than anything.
Also, I'm not really convinced the .327 mag is really worthy of a "Magnum" suffix since it's directly comparable to a 7.62 Tok or ordinary 9mm.
Cheapshooter
New member
So stick with a 45 ACP!!!!!!!!!!
Seriously, 327 over the 5.7, but neither would be my first choice.
5.7 is anemic. It's good for one thing, punching through armor when stoked with the right bullet. I couldn't ever imagine buying one. I already have plenty of 22 plinking guns and they aren't expensive to feed.
327? Not my choice either. But out of the two, its the only one suitable as a CC gun.
I'm unclear why one put these two calibers in the same breath anyway. They don't fill the same rule. 5.7 is available in giant bulky guns and the .327 is in small frame revolvers.
Neither would be in my top 20 choices. Defensive rounds begin with .38 or .380 in my opinion, though I greatly prefer stepping up to .357 or 9mm. I've taught even small frail people to shoot these rounds. I can't think of much of a an excuse to carry lesser rouinds.
327? Not my choice either. But out of the two, its the only one suitable as a CC gun.
I'm unclear why one put these two calibers in the same breath anyway. They don't fill the same rule. 5.7 is available in giant bulky guns and the .327 is in small frame revolvers.
Neither would be in my top 20 choices. Defensive rounds begin with .38 or .380 in my opinion, though I greatly prefer stepping up to .357 or 9mm. I've taught even small frail people to shoot these rounds. I can't think of much of a an excuse to carry lesser rouinds.
TylerD45ACP
New member
I know Imagine using a 5.7 in a SD scenario, I would be so nervous and confidence in ones equipment is a very important thing. I would feel like Im protecting my family with a .22mag!!! Thats a no no, I like the 11.43x23mm (European Dimensions 
)
I wouldn't even think about getting the .327 either, too scarce.
(European Dimensions ) I wouldn't even think about getting the .327 either, too scarce.
Last edited:
It isn't of course.Blue Monster
New member
Magnum is not a term to describe refinement, it is Latin for "great".
In wines, specifically Champagne it is used to describe a bottle size.
A Magnum (1.5 Liters) equals two standard (750ml) bottles, I suspect it's use in firearms is to describe "double" power.
In wine it never implies refinement any more than a "six pack" means better beer, it's just a measurement.
I want a .44 Nebuchadnezzar
(sorry, wine guy had to chime in...)
Um, it is anemic vs other rounds. balistic testing and real world results prove that. The Ft. hood shooter was going for head-shots, tanking advantage of the 5.7's low recoil. He could have done the same with a 22 rimfire pistol. 13 were killed, but 30 were wounded as well so it's not like it was some death ray. Virginia Tech had 32 dead and only 17 wounded using a 9mm and a 22 rimfire.