.327 Federal Magnum

[Longbow14]

I was sauntering around on gun blogs and ran across a few articles about the .327 Federal. Seems like a cool little round, not realy somthing i'd swear by for CC or hunting but i thought it'd be a cool gun for my wife to shoot. I like the fact it will eat any .32 cartridge made (practically) but my searches have lead to a wasteland for these guns. I know ruger, S&W, charter arms and taurus all made guns chambered in it but they are no where to be found. Does anyone have one? and If so do they like it?

 

[SAWMAN]

My wife has owned a Ruger Blackhawk chambered in 32H&R Mag for some 15 years or so. It is a great little gun and when loaded with some 115gr WFNGC's(hardcast) it hits pretty hard. I feel that it would make an excellent carry gun with enough energy to solve the "problem".

The 327FM is somewhat even more gun than that. It produces even more velocity and has more energy dump. I have heard tales of it's proximity to a 38Special +P+. As you stated there were several weapons manufacturers that chambered for it. Now.......I'm not so sure. I looked at buying the S&W version but my wife loves her Blackhawk too darned much.

I would absolutely love to see someone come out with a 16" lever gun chambered in the Fed round. It would be a great little varmint and slightly bigger gun. The recoil in even a "hot" loaded 32H&R Mag is super easy to control. The Fed would be also. One problem is the list of bullets available with the <95gr(IMO) being too light. I have loaded some 100gr Hornady XTP's to great success also. --- SAWMAN

 

[flyandscuba]

Unless you are going to shoot 327 Federal in a firearm with at least a 4" barrel, it is a waste. Check out the test results from Ballistics By The Inch for the cartridge here:

http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/327mag.html

This is why you see CDNN selling all those 2" revolvers chambered in .327 Federal at dirt cheap prices -- an 85gr bullet coming out of the 2" barrel is only going to produce 179 ft/lbs of energy... Pitiful, especially given the higher cost of ammo and limited availability for the cartridge. It was a neat idea that simply didn't catch on - and most firearms manufacturers aren't chambering firearms for .327 Federal anymore.

If you really want a "hot" cartridge from a handgun in the .32 caliber range -- you should consider a milsurp pistol chambered in 7.62x25mm. You can get a near brand new Yugo M57 with two 9-rd magazines for just over $200. The 7.62x25mm -- even with milsurp ammo -- pushes the same 85 gr weight bullet at 1650 fps or more -- producing greater than 500 ft/lbs of energy! Suitable self-defense ammunition is basically non-existant (except for Wolf's JHP -- if you can find it in stock). However, the hand loader can use a variety of .308 an .309 projectiles in the 85 to 100 gr weight range to make some very formidable self defense loads.

 

[SAWMAN]

f&s,man o man did you pick the absolute worse bullet that you could find to make an "example" of.

Using the ballistics by the inch thing that YOU USED this is what I came up with. -->
327Fed --100gr @ 1604 =571.2FPE from a 4" bbl
327Fed -- 100gr @1808 =725.8FPE form a 6" bbl and -->
460 Rowland 230gr @ 1208 = 745.2FPE from a(your)5" bbl.

Are these figures correct ?? That 5" Rowland will only put out 19.4FPE more than a 6" 327FED ??? JEEEEEZE !! AND...remember what I stated Re. a short bbl'ed carbine. --- SAWMAN

 

[flyandscuba]

Sawman -- did you read my post completely? I stated that you needed at least a 4 inch barrel in .327 Federal to make it worth your while.... Most women would go with the snubbie -- in a 2" barrel, the cartridge is inefficient.

As to the .460, they chose to use Corbon's downloaded 460 Rowland ammo for their tests. Johnny Rowland himself states that the Cor-bon loading isn't worthy of the cartridge.

My own 5" XD in .460 Rowland using Underwood's 230 gr Gold Dot produced 1354 fps and 936 ftlbs of energy on average (witnessed by oneshot)...

Out of a 16" barrel with a polygonal bore from my "converted" HK USC/UMP carbine, the same Underwood load produced 1692fps & 1461 ftlbs.

Still want to compare?

 

[wildrider666]

:fencing:

Spectator only!

 

[SAWMAN]

Then.....give me(us) the stats of a 460Rowland with a 2" bbl if you want to talk efficiency. Or maybe a 7.62X25mm with a 2" bbl shooting a super light(for caliber) bullet. And.....weed out everything except "apples to apples". Cartridge efficiency goes hand in hand with bbl legnth,case capacity,burning rate of the powder used,and bullet weights. Also type action of the firearm. The thing that I find completely amazing is that the writers of some of these stats take none of this into consideration. It's great to simply lop off an inch or two of bbl but then to list it(OR have someone believe it)as a completely inefficient cartridge is unfounded,IMO.

BTW...you still got any of that 357Sig ammo hanging around ?? I can show you a CWP and a FDL to show I can(kinda)be trusted in it's use. --- SAWMAN

 

[flyandscuba]

Yep, all the 357 Sig on the thread listed as available -- is still available. You're a "known" buyer to me -- so no "extra" documentation would be required... :wink:

460 Rowland would be less efficient in a 2" barrel. No one has been foolish enough to waste the toolingand production costs to manufacture such an inefficient example -- unlike the case in the .327 Federal. However, in the shorter barrel of my G30 the same 230gr Underwood load produced a high of 1320 fps and a low of 1308 fps -- producing 889 and 873 ftlbs of energy respectively.

My little XDS with it's 3.3 inch barrel gets 1216 to 1249 fps in 45 Super with Underwood's 185gr Gold Dot - producing 607 to 640 ftlbs. Winchester's Ranger 230gr 45 ACP +P only produced 850 fps and 368 ftlbs. Now, that is a significant difference!

To my knowledge, the 7.62x25 chambered firearms were only made with 5" barrels...again, because it woud be foolish to produce them in a length as short as 2 inches. The Russian engineers wanted as much velocity as they culd get in a combat sidearm in order for te projectile to pierce multiple layers of heavy winter lothing. Sadly, the .327 Federal engineers weren't smart enough not to make the same wise decision, and wased efforts and finaces on inefficient snubbies!

Again -- my point is that the .327 Federal is a completely inefficient cartridge in firearms with barrels less than 4 inches...

 

[Longbow14]

SO. Understood the main problem with any round is going to be a piss poor preformance from a 2" barrel, perhaps i was a little vague, this wasn't a gun i plan or carrying simply another gun i plan on shooting, perhaps packing in as a slightly beefier "kit" gun. I wasn't looking for a snubby i was realy looking for a 4+ inch barrel like a blackhawk or gp100.