New Ruger LCR in 327 Federal Magnum Announced
- Thread starter weblance
- Start date
Cheapshooter
New member
Wasn't the 327 Federal's SAAMI listed pressure being 10,000 psi higher than 357 Magnum considered the roadblock to a 327 LCR. Also, with the same width, and other measurements, and one additional chamber in the cylinder, are they sitting on the edge of chamber failure? Or did Ruger design the original with the 327 in mind for a future chambering.
Oh please don't misunderstand me, I don't think the .327 GP and Blackhawk are bad ideas, just poorly timed. The lion's share of the revolver market these days is in small, CC-oriented guns or bigbore magnums for big game hunting. If you want a new revolver cartridge to take off, you need to establish its usefulness in one of those two categories and I think it's pretty obvious that the .327 Federal was always intended to be primarily a self-defense cartridge (that's certainly how Ruger originally marketed it). It seems to me that the market for a .327 LCR is probably a lot larger than the market for a so-chambered GP-100 or Blackhawk. As such, I'd have thought it would make more sense to introduce the LCR in that chambering first to help establish the market for the cartridge and bring out the GP-100 and Blackhawk later to fill the market out.
.327 mag suffers in a short barrel. Looking at Ballistics by the Inch, it's nearly identical to a 9mm with similar bullet weights, although the 9mm +P loads do a bit better.
I'm not convinced that carrying one extra round is worth putting up with .327 scarcity, but your mileage may vary.
EDIT: I forgot that revolver barrel lengths don't include the cylinder, so I compared it to a 2" barrel instead of a 3" barrel. I'll check it for a 3" barrel later.
I'm not convinced that carrying one extra round is worth putting up with .327 scarcity, but your mileage may vary.
EDIT: I forgot that revolver barrel lengths don't include the cylinder, so I compared it to a 2" barrel instead of a 3" barrel. I'll check it for a 3" barrel later.
Last edited:
The best variant of the LCR, in my opinion, is the 9mm five-shooter with moon clips.
This one is the same weight class as the 357 17oz variant, not the 12oz ultralight class from the aluminum 38. I suspect the 327 is also going to be based on the 357 steel frame.
The 9mm round has a lot of state-of-the-art projectile development thrown at it because it's still in common police use and is actually starting to gain back market from the 40. The Federal HST rounds in particular are just monsters in 9mm.
In a long-cylinder revolver like this, something very interesting happens ballistically in 9mm. The cylinder has a long tight "smoothbore" area with more or less no blow-by past the round, so in the first 1/2" or so of travel you get a very decent velocity boost to the slug equal to another 1" or more of barrel. The cylinder doesn't have a typical "constricted point" at the end of the chamber (throat) rather a "long throat". A 2" barrel S&W snubby in 9mm will often clock bullet velocity similar to a 4" barrel Glock, for this reason. The Ruger is likely built the same way - pretty much has to be to have the rims headspace correctly.
Yes, you're down one round versus the 327 but your reload speeds make up the difference in an extended fight and in the more common close-range sudden situation, five shots versus six isn't a big issue - again, in my opinion.
Then again, my 9mm wheelgun is a seven-shooter out of the holster with a six-shot cylinder and 9rd reloads so...yeah
.
This one is the same weight class as the 357 17oz variant, not the 12oz ultralight class from the aluminum 38. I suspect the 327 is also going to be based on the 357 steel frame.
The 9mm round has a lot of state-of-the-art projectile development thrown at it because it's still in common police use and is actually starting to gain back market from the 40. The Federal HST rounds in particular are just monsters in 9mm.
In a long-cylinder revolver like this, something very interesting happens ballistically in 9mm. The cylinder has a long tight "smoothbore" area with more or less no blow-by past the round, so in the first 1/2" or so of travel you get a very decent velocity boost to the slug equal to another 1" or more of barrel. The cylinder doesn't have a typical "constricted point" at the end of the chamber (throat) rather a "long throat". A 2" barrel S&W snubby in 9mm will often clock bullet velocity similar to a 4" barrel Glock, for this reason. The Ruger is likely built the same way - pretty much has to be to have the rims headspace correctly.
Yes, you're down one round versus the 327 but your reload speeds make up the difference in an extended fight and in the more common close-range sudden situation, five shots versus six isn't a big issue - again, in my opinion.
Then again, my 9mm wheelgun is a seven-shooter out of the holster with a six-shot cylinder and 9rd reloads so...yeah
.WhitSpurzon
New member
From the Ballistics by the inch website:
Given that the 327 OAL is in the 1.470" range that leaves a mere .530" of barrel length for their testing protocol.
It will be interesting to see what the 327 LCR is actually capable of.
I'm holding out for the 3" LCRx in 327.
Given that the 327 OAL is in the 1.470" range that leaves a mere .530" of barrel length for their testing protocol.
It will be interesting to see what the 327 LCR is actually capable of.
I'm holding out for the 3" LCRx in 327.
A pause for the COZ
New member
Dont forget factory loads get their best out of the longer barrels.
I hand load mine so I can Taylor my loads for the gun they will be used in.
I get right about 1375 fps out of my wife's two inch Taurus. With the 85 gr XTP's ahead of 2400, need a good crimp.
Cant remember the numbers for the 100gr but they were not chopped liver ether.
The 327 mag is no different than any thing else. Shorter barrel = faster powder.
But I dont know. Its the same every time we talk about it.
I quit trying to justify the caliber when I found it did exactly what I wanted it to do.
If you want to use a 38 use a 38. If you want to use a .380 use a .380.
If you want a 45 use a 45.
For some strange reason though, when ever we get a 32 cal thing going.
The choice gets brow beat by quite a few who have never tried it.
Its not perfect just like all the rest. But with the addition of the 327 mag.
That rounded out the 32's
It has a absolutely huge window of usable options.
If you never use 32's I get it. " Why I have a 357 magnum?"
But you have to understand how we see it.
We dont see the 327 as the BEST SD option. We see it as the perfect caliber that now has a good SD option. It rounds out the Mix.
Including my 327's I have 30 different 32 cal guns. I must like em.
What we hope is that people will get the 327 as a SD option, but then get curious about what else can it do.
Last edited:
9x18_Walther
New member
Will the LCR be able to take the Heavy 327 Federal from Buffalo Bore?
Meet Maurice:
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2014/03/03/maurice-frankenruger-magazine-fed-revolver/
Too weird to live, too tough to die. (Or was that Hunter S. Thompson?)
Then it can be said that the new LCR chambering mitigates the noise factor, but wastes a lot of energy because of the short barrel. Maybe it will become known as another reloader's gun, shooting softer loads in 327 cases. The parallel is my SP101 and SW 60-10 shooting "short barrel" loads in 357, the recoil otherwise brutal.
Cosmodragoon
New member
Generally speaking, .38 special and .32 H&R Magnum have comparable power levels while .327 catches the heels of .357 magnum. A very short barrel works to mitigate magnum advantages but not entirely. Looking at the energy graphs over at Ballistics by the Inch, here are some rough comparisons for a two-inch barrel that might come as a surprise:
110-170 ft-lbs for .38 special (appears to include +p)
135 ft-lbs for .32 H&R Magnum (only one ammo type tested)
180-280 ft-lbs for .327 Federal Magnum
200-320 ft-lbs for .357 magnum