Okay, Now I’m Excited

Kim du Toit
February 21, 2008
8:37 AM CDT

My antipathy towards new cartridges and calibers has been extremely well-documented, so when Reader Ed K. wrote to me to ask whether I’d heard about the new cartridge offering, the .327 Federal Magnum, I wasn’t that enthused, at first. I’d heard about it, but never followed up with some research (because when it was announced in November 2007 I was deep in “I’m Going To Vienna!” mode and couldn’t think about anything other than strudel and Milch Kafee.

So, from Shooting Times, here’s (part of) the skinny:

The new .327 Federal Magnum offers muzzle energy twice that of .38 Special +P loads, and velocities comparable to a 125-grain .357 Magnum, with 20 percent less recoil in its hottest version. Designed specifically for use in lightweight small-frame revolvers, the .327 Federal Magnum allows a six-round cylinder compared to five-round capacity for similar-sized .38 Special and .357 Magnum guns, with the added benefit of chambering .32 S&W, .32 Special, and .32 H&R Magnum loads as well.
...
From a 3 1/16-inch revolver, the 100-grain Soft Point .327 Magnum load develops 100 fps more velocity than a 125-grain .357 Magnum from a four-inch revolver, and delivers only 35 ft/lbs less energy. The recoil of the .327 Magnum 85-grain Personal Defense load is less than half the recoil of a 125-grain .357 Magnum.

Oh, be still my beating heart.

Now all they need is a fine revolver to shoot it with… something like, oh wait, they already have one of the best:

Yessiree… the wondrous Ruger SP101 looks like the bee’s knees for this cartridge.

Okay, here are my thoughts. I’ve always thought there was a gap between the super-wussy (.32 ACP), the still-wussy (.32 H&R Mag) and the not-quite-so-wussy (.38 Spec +P).

Say what you like, but the bigger bullet of the .38 makes for increased recoil over the .32 bullet—but the .32 bullet was too little, and not driven too hard, if you get my drift.

With a no-nonsense charge behind a 100-gr bullet, that .327 Fed Mag is going to leave a serious mark if one is going to reduce the goblin population on the Lawdog premise of ”Blood Out; Air In” (as fine a motto as was ever penned, by the way).

And what’s even more timely is that The Mrs. was rethinking her choice of carry piece (long story, but the Browning High Power prints just a little too easily). I think I’ll get one of these—and if she still doesn’t like it, then I’ll keep it for myself, thankee very much.

Chuck Hawks opines:

To me, a far more interesting application for the new cartridge will be in hunting rifles and revolvers. Marlin, for example, should offer the .327 in the Model 1894 lever action carbine. This would seem to be a natural, as the Model 1894CL is already available in .32-20. Along the same lines, how hard would it be for Henry to chamber their excellent Big Boy lever action carbine in .327 Mag.? These would make excellent, fun to shoot centerfire rifles for hunting javelina, jackrabbit and coyote.

All good points—but I still think it’s going to make a potent self-defense cartridge. Yeah, it’s not a .357 Mag, but then again, The Mrs. can’t shoot the .357 Mag—most ladies have a problem with its recoil—and to have something which hits harder and yet recoils with less force than a .38… what was the question again?

Yup: this is one new cartridge I think I can get behind. It being made by Federal (duh), it is of course available in my favorite self-defense boolet, the Hydra-Shok. Now all we have to do is get the cost of the practice ammo down…

Comments

Bottom of Comments | Comment Form | Original Post

IF the .327 Magmum cartridge becomes as popular (souper sekrit code for “available") as say..... the .40 S&w;, I would spring for one. If, on the other hand, it is, despite the best efforts of various marketing depts., as popular as the WSMs (souper sekrit code for “scarce"), I will not. A gun is a tool. Without ammo I can afford, it is useless (souper sekrit code for 7.62x45). It may be aestheticly pleasing, or interesting from a design standpoint. It may even be BETTER the competition it is meant to replace, but without affordable ammo, it won’t last beyond the marketing hype.

When I was looking for my first carry gun, I looked at the Ruger SP101, in .357 Magnum. I liked it, but only 5 shots?  6 shot revolvers seemed way to “fat” in the middle to carry inside my belt. This has 6 shots, no? And power to spare. But if it fizzles, practice ammo will be scarce, and scarce = expensive. (And, YES, I already handload. Do I REALLY need yet another caliber cluttering up the bench? I already have 8 or 10......)

jimbob86 | 2/21/2008 09:30 AM CDT | #113885


With actual energies near 9mm, according to the Hawks article, I’m surprised by your excitement for 327 FedMag.  Like 45 vs 9, I very much expected fewer/bigger/heaver to win out against more/smaller/faster.

For myself, the SP in 357 mag is still the winner.  The only reason I don’t have one yet is the EBRs taking priority right now and Marlin’s failure to produce a 357mag 1894 in stainless.

aczarnowski | 2/21/2008 09:55 AM CDT | #113890


The Shooting Times article shifts rapidly and confusingly between .327 bullet weights, and also between .38/.357 loads.  But the upshot is: In a similar revolver, equal muzzle energy means equal recoil.  Unless my high-school physics teacher was lying about that whole equal-and-opposite-reaction thing, of course.  (Perceived recoil is another matter, and semiautos are a different deal because of the springs and things sucking up the recoil.)

The beauty of the .327 magnum is that it is less than a .357 (great news for women and girly-men), but because of the lighter bullet you have a wider range of options in the .38+P class.  If the .38/.38+P/.357 options are all too hot or too cold, you might find just the right medicine in .327.  And from a lever-gun...boy, I’d sure love to see a direct comparison to the .32-20!

Mike_MN | 2/21/2008 10:24 AM CDT | #113902


I wonder how the ballistics compare to the .30 carbine.  Too bad the only revolver chambered in that round (that I know of) is the Ruger Blackhawk.  I have one and like it, but it’s not exactly a self-defense piece.

Preston11 | 2/21/2008 10:37 AM CDT | #113903


Charter Arms is making one as well.  You’ll have to scroll down for the pic, but it looks, well, like a Charter revolver.

I like it because it’s going to be affordable - people on a budget have just as much right to pack as I do.

NRAhab | 2/21/2008 10:53 AM CDT | #113909


Seems that the biggest advantage of the 327 is allowing a smaller gun with, perhaps, one more shot, while retaining some degree of usable bullet energy. This logic, however, might lead someone to create an 11-shot J-frame .17 revolver..........

A rimless version of the 327 magnum, case length notwithstanding, might be more useful in a PPK-size semi-auto.

Homer | 2/21/2008 10:58 AM CDT | #113913


Taurus makes an 8 shot .17 HMR snubbie.

NRAhab | 2/21/2008 11:09 AM CDT | #113916


I already have a .32 H&R;Magnum revolver (S&W;Model 16); I read years ago that the factory loads and the “specs” had been restricted due to the limited strength of the H&R;revolvers first chambered for it.  The later Ruger and S&W;models being considerably stronger, higher pressure loads were developed for it that were safe and noticeably warmer than what was available from the factory.

It also became very popular as the ‘light’ end chambering for CAS; you can get SAA revolvers and leverguns in .32H&R;, the latter being on my short want list.

I’m mixed on this new beastie.  I have an investment in the magnum load’s components and tools.  If a levergun comes out that can handle both .327 and .32H&R;that would be worth considering, but I’ve not had the best of luck shooting shorter .32 S&W;Long loads in my S&W;.  The carbon rings that build up after only a box or two and prevent chambering the longer H&R;rounds, are a bear to get out, even with specialty cleaners and tools.  Nor do I see any accuracy improvements even shooting premium target loads in the shorter calibers (and if Lapua S&W;Long wadcutters won’t group anywhere near as well as my .32H&R;wadcutter loads, built with nowhere near the skill or care using generic bullets), thats pretty bad).  I assume the same problems might occur shooting H&Rs;in a .327.

Like Jimbob86, I think I’ll hold off and see how it goes.  I already own a number of firearms in ‘expensive and not popular’ chamberings and don’t really want to add another without darn good reason.  Plus maybe if a .327 levergun does come out, the H&R;leverguns will see some price reductions or clearances.

Rich Jordan | 2/21/2008 11:59 AM CDT | #113925


My main experience with serious calibers is 9x21 (yeah, I know...). I was pretty comfortable with .38 Spec, but .357 Mag was too much - not that I couldn’t shoot it, but controlling the gun was too difficult. The .327 Mag sounds like a good compromise. But here guns and all things related are expensive like hell.

Mike_MN, recoil is more about conservation of momentum than conservation of energy. Also, the actual acceleration of the bullet down the barrel makes a differenc in how recoil is perceived.

FabioC. | 2/21/2008 12:36 PM CDT | #113932


Hmmmm....Seems I have something much like that already… .32 WCF or .32-20 when chambered in modern handguns and rifles.  Lesseee...in the safe there are 3 older S&Ws;...moderate loads only, 2 more modern ones...hotrod away and a converted N frame...El Cannon. switching to long arms there are 3 lever actions (1 marlin, one rossi and a winnie), 2 bolt guns...a Savage Sporter and a converted Mauser all of which can be hotrodded to the limitations of the brass.

So i need this for what?  yes its cool...and its more spanky than the .32 H&R;...which also has a solid representation in the safe in both long and short forms.

Hmmmm...yes I like the SP101...just dont have one.  I’m still back at the .357 Service Six.

woodswalker | 2/21/2008 01:15 PM CDT | #113941


Designed specifically for use in lightweight small-frame revolvers, the .327 Federal Magnum allows a six-round cylinder compared to five-round capacity for similar-sized .38 Special and .357 Magnum guns, with the added benefit of chambering .32 S&W;, .32 Special, and .32 H&R;Magnum loads as well.

WHAT???....I can see .32 S&W;, .32 S&W;Long, and .32 H&R;.  the .32 SPECIAL I know of is a rifle cartridge, usually found in a Winchester Model 94.

woodswalker | 2/21/2008 01:20 PM CDT | #113944


Taurus makes an 8 shot .17 HMR snubbie.

Yeah, sure, but it’s not an 11-shot. Or a 14-shot. Or a ....oh, never mind.

I’d express curiosity about why Taurus (or anyone, for that matter) makes the 8-shot version - or any revolver in .17 HMR, much less a snub nose model - but I don’t think I really want to know.

Homer | 2/21/2008 01:24 PM CDT | #113945


AFAIK, right now, only the Ruger SP101s are chambered in it. That’s a recipe for a quick and ignoble end. The market for these guns isn’t self defense, no matter what they’d have you believe. It’s plinking, small game hunting, and CAS. If Ruger had the sense God gave turnips, they’d bring it back, either in the Single Six(in every configuration they can think of) or if that’s too small, the .357 sized blackhawk. Get Marlin to make 1892s in 327 magnum.. Get Charles Daly to put it in their new 80% Sharps..

HTRN | 2/21/2008 02:09 PM CDT | #113955


jimbob86 said:
“It may even be BETTER the competition it is meant to replace, but without affordable ammo, it won’t last beyond the marketing hype.”

Witness the 10MM......

He says as he ducks.....

1894C | 2/21/2008 02:49 PM CDT | #113962


SP101s consistently rank at the top of self-defense pieces for the ladies and this new offering certainly sounds like a real improvement on the .357 for that demographic.  That said, I’ll reserve judgment until I can do some comparison in recoil and energy on target between .327 mag and .40 S&W;.  My wife, though very petite, is not intimidated by the .40’s recoil (or anything else for that matter, but that’s another issue) and I’m just guessin’ that the .40 winds up packing a bigger punch.  Still, any excuse to look at and maybe buy another one of these beautiful, smooth stainless babies is good enough for me.

Now on the “not all that new cartridge” scene, Kim, don’t the WSM rifle cartridges give you at least a little thrill?  Gotta say, if I wasn’t already invested in .308 and way short of extra cash, I’d probably be shopping for a .300WSM.  Anyone else tried these?

Ay Uaxe | 2/21/2008 03:23 PM CDT | #113968


Hi.  I’m new here, commenting-wise, but I’ve been lurking and reading a lot, off and on.  So, I registered.  ThanX! for letting me in, Kim, I appreciate it.  I’ve a question, specifically for this post.  Could you use that thing (.327 magnum) in a Nagant?  I mean the Nagant will chamber other .32 variants, tho you don’t get the “seal”, like with the weird 7.62x38mm recessed round.  What say, all.

Mcgyver, out

Mcgyver | 2/21/2008 03:36 PM CDT | #113970


I for one am looking forward to this round. could be interesting to shoot.  If it is better than a .38 +P, then why not use it. Maybe Taurus will make a gun for it, which will be more affordle than others. I am wondering if the Taurus Ultralites will be able to to it.

RayH | 2/21/2008 04:01 PM CDT | #113975


My biggest complaint with the .357 has always been that it zips through the body and the next two houses. SERIOUS over-penetration. I saw my cousin shoot a .357 round through one of those small fuel drums (25 gal?) and we saw a shaft of sunlight coming in to the warehouse through the exit hole in the warehouse wall. Ooops.

I watched an autopsy (I was there to acquire the bullet, Chain of Evidence, and all that) one time from a guy who had taken a .32 round in the guts. The entry wound looked like a red period. There was no exit wound. When the ME opened him up, it looked like someone had rummaged around in his insides with a chainsaw. The bullet had zig-zagged around so much, that it was a bitch to find.

Bane | 2/21/2008 04:15 PM CDT | #113978


...oh, and I forgot to mention, the fuel drum was full of sand.

Bane | 2/21/2008 04:16 PM CDT | #113979


I loved the idea the first time I read an article about it at http://www.gunblast.com - it truly seems to fill a niche.  While I love the SP-101, especially the one I owned for a couple of years, those grips, while great for soaking up the recoil of full-house .357 magnum loads, didn’t fit my very average size hands-it was as if I needed to lop off my right middle finger to make it work.  I don’t have this problem with comparably-sized Taurus revolvers, for instance.

CC

CrunchyCon | 2/21/2008 04:42 PM CDT | #113983


Can you say .45 GAP?

Seriously, if you can’t get it done with 5 standard-pressure .38 Special hollowpoints in your snub-nose , I don’t think a six-shot .32 will help any. I use ammo designed specifically for the little 1.88 inch J-frames. and the recoil level is acceptable.

Practice, practice, practice.

Placement, placement, placement.

spectre765 | 2/21/2008 04:58 PM CDT | #113986


I’d like to see Ruger chamber the Model 99 in 327 magnum.  It could be a nice non-EBR autoloader for those of us stuck behind enemy lines.  You may even be able to fit a decent number of rounds in the rotary mag (7 or 8 maybe?)

TrappedInChicago | 2/21/2008 05:27 PM CDT | #113987


I’m definitely interested in the round and the gun, the SP 101.  I don’t care for its grips, but that’s easily fixed.  Echoing an earlier comment, I’ve wondered how the round compares to the .30 carbine.  I love my .30 Blackhawk, and have long thought it would be a fun round in a smaller pistol.

Darrell | 2/21/2008 05:38 PM CDT | #113988


Recoil is not determined by a simple mass times veloctiy squared formual.  The simplest formula for it:

formula and tables

Impulse calulations would probably be more accurate but you’d have to figure some differentials.

toad | 2/21/2008 07:25 PM CDT | #114002


In a revolver it may be okay, but you’d better use hollow points cause I’m guessing that the high V and small M equal over penetration as with the .30 caliber handgun cartridges. ammo cost also will be a big limitation. I owned a 32 H&R;mag and sold it because ammo cost too much for what it was. As for a carbine? Can’t see bothering, a .357 mag in a 16” lever gun gets an additional 400 FPS velocity over a revolver and has 0 recoiland a mild report.

Tom The Impaler | 2/22/2008 02:20 AM CDT | #114024


Mcgyver,

Using the .327 FedMag in a Nagant will probably equal mo’ money for your local ER doc. Check your favorite gross-out site for pics of folks who set off fireworks in their hands and you’ll have an idea of what the results will be.

Cybrludite | 2/22/2008 04:51 AM CDT | #114025


#26 Cybrludite ThanX!  Just curious.

Mcgyver, out

Mcgyver | 2/22/2008 07:00 PM CDT | #114142

Add a comment

Bottom of Comments | Original Post