327 federal magnum - Page 4

327 federal magnum

This is a discussion on 327 federal magnum within the Defensive Ammunition & Ballistics forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; "An answer to an unasked question." This reply is really getting old! Think of it like this, nay-sayers. There is .045" difference between the .327 ...

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 67
Like Tree14Likes

Thread: 327 federal magnum

  1. #46
    New Member Array JTTNC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    8
    "An answer to an unasked question."

    This reply is really getting old! Think of it like this, nay-sayers. There is .045" difference between the .327 and the .38/.357. There is close to that difference between the .270Win. and the .30-06/.30-30. If what you are spouting applies to one should it apply to the other? I mean seriously, the 06 had been out for 40 some years before the .270 came along. We didn't need a .270 did we? Now it sells as much or more than the grand ol' 06 every year. I'm not saying I think the .327 is going to equal, surpass or God forbid, replace the .38/.357. All I'm saying is there is always room for another good cartridge in the shooting world. If not all we'd have to choose from would be a 12ga shotgun, a .22 rifle, a .30-06 rifle, a .22 handgun and a .44 Mag handgun. If you have no use for something, DON'T BUY IT & DON'T RUN IT DOWN!!! Just shut up and let the folks that are interested in it decide if there really is a practical use for it.

    JTTNC
    Alarm Guy likes this.


  2. #47
    Member Array kmagnuss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    SW Florida
    Posts
    481
    I bought one because the numbers were good, I like new stuff, and it was CHEAP from Bud's.
    Ended up with a Taurus (where's my puke icon... I hate Taurus more than you can possibly imagine)
    Gotta say though, I like shooting it a lot more than I do my S&W 642. More of a push like a .45 compared to the snappy recoil of a .40. Plus the added round in the cylinder is nice.

    It'll probably die a quiet death in the future... but I think if more people shot it they'd like it.

  3. #48
    Moderator
    Array bmcgilvray's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    10,098
    " I mean seriously, the 06 had been out for 40 some years before the .270 came along."

    19 years.

    1906 for the .30-06. 1925 for the .270.
    Charter Member of the DC .41 LC Society

    “No possible rapidity of fire can atone for habitual carelessness of aim with the first shot.”

    Theodore Roosevelt, The Wilderness Hunter, 1893

  4. #49
    New Member Array JTTNC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    8
    Quote Originally Posted by bmcgilvray View Post
    " I mean seriously, the 06 had been out for 40 some years before the .270 came along."

    19 years.

    1906 for the .30-06. 1925 for the .270.
    My bad, I was thinking it was introduced later than that. I'll change it. But, you get my point don't you?

    It appears you can't edit a post after so long. So how about we change the ".270" to 7mmMag and the "40 some years" to 56 years. All else remains the same.



    C.S.

  5. #50
    Moderator
    Array bmcgilvray's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    10,098
    Sure works for me. I do get your point. I even like the .32 caliber revolvers and there are five of them around here.

    I also like the fact that one can "wrap a good deal of weight around that ".045" difference, like all the way to 200 grains with the .38 Special or .357 Magnum revolver handling such weight effectively.

    Someone above mentioned that the .327 Magnum makes a good round for the non-handloader. I see it as a dandy round for a handloader to tinker with. That would be its strongest suit in my view; the flexibility of handloading possibilities across the whole gamut of .32 revolver cartridge performance, with "nuclear" capabilities for top end loads.
    Charter Member of the DC .41 LC Society

    “No possible rapidity of fire can atone for habitual carelessness of aim with the first shot.”

    Theodore Roosevelt, The Wilderness Hunter, 1893

  6. #51
    Member Array GunByte's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    95
    Quote Originally Posted by ksholder View Post
    The .327 is a fine gun/caliber, but I just have to wonder what the question was that they were answering with its development. The .357 is more potent and can be had in concealable small formats. The only benefit of the .327 over the .357 seems to be an extra round in the cylinder, which is an advantage. When I was purchasing a cc revolver, I looked at the .327, but went with the .357.
    I guess the same question that was asked when the .40 was developed and took over most law enforcement agencies. Another question answered would be how to get six rounds into the same sized gun as a .38 spl J-Frame. One more question that comes to mind is how do we give the shooter more power than a 9mm or even a .40 cal in a pocketable a pocketable revolver. It also answers the question of how do we meet and exceed all the FBI standards better than most 9mm's do.

    Lastly it answers the question about how the same old tire lines get repeated over and over again instead of original and experienced based posts. There are a lot of calibers out there and the same old tired non original question was asked about almost every one of them at some time. I know because I have been shooting since they were asking the same question about the 9mm, .223 and many other calibers people regularly use. :)

  7. #52
    Member Array GunByte's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    95
    I have the S&W 632 2 1/8" barrel. The Federal 85 gr. load works the best for me as far as controlability and accuracy. Check out the ballistics by the inch website and you will see that this bullet has more energy than the 115 gr. Gold Dot load. Penetration meets or exceeds all FBI standards through all medium tested. The bullet will expand to twice its size. How about that, a small bullet that gets wider than a .50 caliber bullet very quickly due to its size and speed. As such, in some respects it is better than the .357. For those who state the tremendous size difference I say get real. We are talking about tenths of an inch here and after expansion the .327 is pretty wide. :) Does anyone else think it strange that people will provide opinions based on beliefs or limited knowledge or understanding of the subject? I have been shooting long enough to have lived through the .380, 9mm and .40 cal and many other calibers, are all junk and will die off opinions of the past. :) I was around when Glocks were plastic guns that would never be accepted. There were enough armchair experts who never even saw one in person that presented convincing proof about how the plastic guns will fall apart after a few thousand rounds and were basically cheap junk. The last great caliber war was with the .40 caliber, a solution with no problem and here we are today with so many civilians and LEO using it daily. Some things never change. :)

  8. #53
    Member Array GunByte's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    95
    Quote Originally Posted by bmcgilvray View Post
    Nope, it really doesn't outperform even the lowly .38 Special. Not unless one is selectively using quoted ballistics. Paper ballistics aside, I'll take the .38 Special's bullet diameter and weight over the .32, especially for the serious business of self-defense. The .38 Special is still hanging in there. Here's some links to some .38 Special chronograph testing. Sure some are heavy handloads but there are also some equally effective factory loadings found in the first link that far exceed the 129 grain performance figures quoted in the cartridge listing above.

    Some .38 Special Velocity Tests

    Three .38 Special Handloads

    Four High-Performance .38 Special Handloads

    I really like the .32 bore (have several different revolvers chambering various .32s) and it has it's place, which could include effective self-defense, but a sense of proportion must be maintained.
    I read your test and they are just energy figures. You are basing all of your strong opinions on energy figures. What you provided to prove your point is nothing the FBI or any other agency would use to determine the effectiveness of the bullet on human targets. When you do some tests with calibrated ballistic gel then you have a basis to make your claims. Until then all you have shown us is the energy of a .38 using hot loads that produce a lot of recoil and are uncomfortable to shoot.

    I am a .38 fan for over 40 years but always knew that it was pretty low on the effective caliber for defense scale out of snub nose. Expansion is a problem for one. Inadequate penetration is the other problem. I have .38 +P ammo that has more energy than the 125 gr. Golden Saber rounds I carry but do not go around saying that the .38 +P is better than a .357. I have seen handloads for the .327 that have better numbers than a .40. So what? Few will ever carry that ammo and it will have a lot of recoil. Show me what your bullets do in ballistic gel compared to what I have seen a .327 do and then you are providing the information that is used to determine a bullets effectiveness. Hot loading .38s to produce high energy numbers is an exercise is producing high numbers and nothing more.

  9. #54
    Moderator
    Array bmcgilvray's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    10,098
    "Show me what your bullets do in ballistic gel..."

    I'll show you what my bullets do in ballistic gel right after you show me instances of folks being assailed by rampant calibrated ballistic gel run amok.


    "I read your test and they are just energy figures."

    Yep, they are just energy figures...until one of those bullets hits home.


    "Expansion is a problem for one. Inadequate penetration is the other problem."

    Are you really claiming that the .38 Special, even fired from a snub, can neither expand or penetrate? Other than being a "fan," have you actually used the cartridge over the past 40 years? Expansion is nice. Expansion is gravy to proper bullet placement. Expansion is not the end in itself. Far too much is made of expansion and it has long since acquired a luster all out of proportion to its importance. It looms very large in many minds rather than bullet placement which actually lends itself to true effectiveness. Expansion absolutely cannot be counted on to mitigate bad hits.


    "What you provided to prove your point is nothing the FBI or any other agency would use to determine the effectiveness of the bullet on human targets."

    I'm uninterested in what the FBI is publishing this year or the next about terminal ballistics. The FBI isn't the gold standard or the last word on relative terminal ballistics of various handgun calibers and loads.

    FBI specifications: Terminal ballistics data esteemed as gospel truth by trusting souls who relish poring over "jello tests" and who accept anything a government agency declares at face value. Such folks derive so much comfort out of FBI proclamations that they consider anything falling outside of the FBI's blessing as being hopelessly outmoded and ineffective for self-defense purposes.

    I never implied that I was the final authority on handgun stopping power either but it's easy to play the numbers game for fun and frolic. I never implied that the .38 Special +P load was better than a .357 Magnum. Strangely enough though, there are some .38 Special +P loads that equal or exceed some factory .357 Magnum ammunition currently marketed and it's only because some .357 Magnum ammunition is watered down.

    "I have the S&W 632 2 1/8" barrel. The Federal 85 gr. load works the best for me as far as controlability and accuracy. Check out the ballistics by the inch website and you will see that this bullet has more energy than the 115 gr. Gold Dot load.

    So, it's ok for .32's have high energy numbers but not .38s. That's original! It's so inconvenient for those "low-on-the-effective-caliber-for-defense-scale -out-of-snub-nose" .38 Specials which produce a "lot of recoil" and are so "uncomfortable to shoot" to also produce high energy numbers, even using factory ammunition. The old outmoded .38 Special must be held back in order to give new "whiz-bang" cartridges a chance. I mean...let's be fair.

    "Hot loading .38s to produce high energy numbers is an exercise is producing high numbers and nothing more."

    Yep, but you gotta admit it is effective in achieving the numbers. Numbers just the same as the ones that you deem so important to prove your point about the .327 Magnum. A sense of proportion still must be maintained.
    OD* and WHEC724 like this.
    Charter Member of the DC .41 LC Society

    “No possible rapidity of fire can atone for habitual carelessness of aim with the first shot.”

    Theodore Roosevelt, The Wilderness Hunter, 1893

  10. #55
    Distinguished Member Array Madcap_Magician's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    MN
    Posts
    1,862
    Did it ever occur to either of you that both cartridges are perfectly acceptable for self defense, and that in the grand scheme of things, the performance is not even all that different?
    Hakkaa päälle!

  11. #56
    Member Array R.W.Dale's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    ar
    Posts
    86
    I'm considering giving the 327 a shot so to speak to compliment my EDC 60-18 smith in 357 (5"BBL). As a handloader I'm not especally concerned about long term viability provided I have brass. Three reasons this cartridge appeals to me are.

    1 I don't want a snubby but I do want something halfway between one and my 60 for times when I'm concerned about deeper concelment. The 3" 327 SP101's are cheap and easy to get ahold of fitting this bull nicely size wize.

    2. ammunition is smaller when loaded on a speed strip in a pocket

    3 I get that sixth shot that in 38 requires me to step away from "J framed" guns

    These advantages appeal to me greatly even before considering ballistics which IMO appear to be more than satisfactory.

  12. #57
    Member Array eipo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    190
    Quote Originally Posted by R.W.Dale View Post
    I'm considering giving the 327 a shot so to speak to compliment my EDC 60-18 smith in 357 (5"BBL). As a handloader I'm not especally concerned about long term viability provided I have brass. Three reasons this cartridge appeals to me are.

    1 I don't want a snubby but I do want something halfway between one and my 60 for times when I'm concerned about deeper concelment. The 3" 327 SP101's are cheap and easy to get ahold of fitting this bull nicely size wize.

    2. ammunition is smaller when loaded on a speed strip in a pocket

    3 I get that sixth shot that in 38 requires me to step away from "J framed" guns

    These advantages appeal to me greatly even before considering ballistics which IMO appear to be more than satisfactory.
    I don't think you'll be disappointed. I started reloading due to the cost and availability of .327 ammo. Hornady XTP 100gr bullet over 13 grains of Lil Gun is quite accurate, very controllable and not all that dirty. The bullet is just touching the powder.

  13. #58
    New Member Array CoyoteHunter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    14
    "An answer to an unasked question."

    No, the question has been asked many times and the .327 Federal is a good answer. A very good answer in my case.

    My situation is that I own a Walther .380, Browning 9mm Luger and Kimber .45 and have a CCW. Which one I carry depends on circumstances. Sometimes I have one in the car and another on my person. While these are suitable for me, none are acceptable for my wife due to medical and other issues.

    My wife is a leukemia survivor but the medicines that saved her life also destroyed both shoulder joints and a hip joint, all of which have been replaced. (Never mind that she may also need a knee replacement or two.) The medicines also accelerated her osteoporosis. She cannot tolerate much recoil nor can she work the slides on most auto loaders. Her hands are smallish and large factory grips, like those on the Ruger GP100, are awkward for her, to say the least. She currently keeps her Ruger Super Single Six loaded with .22WM for home defense when I am gone. She wants something that is faster to reload (i.e. swing-out cylinder) and is DA to replace the Single Six.

    After considerable review of various factors, my choice came down to two options - a 3" Ruger SP101 in .327 Federal or a 4" in .357 Mag. I already load for the .357 Mag as I have a Ruger Blackhawk, so downloading a .357 Mag was considered. My wife prefers the 4” barrel of the .357. Last night I sat down and did a number of recoil calculations using 85g and 100g bullets for the .327 and weights up to 125g for the .357. The .327 Federal was the clear winner. Moreover, it eliminates the possibility of getting loads mixed up – a serious concern because full-house Blackhawk loads in the SP101 might cause serious damage to her hands and/or wrists.

    Color me as one who likes velocity. When I had a .38 special I did some tin can shooting and later picked up a lead bullet that was in perfect condition except for the grooves from the rifling. One thing I like about my wife’s .22WM defensive loads is they have enough velocity I am convinced they will expand reliably. I want relatively fast, light recoil loads for her and the .327 Federal is the best fit I can find.

    Not everyone has the limitations my wife has, but there are many who have similar issues. For myself, the 4” GP101 in .327 Federal would be a better home defense choice than the 3” SP101, but this handgun isn’t for me.

    The mild recoil of the .327 Federal means getting back on target quicker – something that might be important in actual defensive use. Fast bullets like the 85g Gold Dot or Hydra-Shok generate mild recoil in the SP101, levels my wife can handle, yet energy levels are very good. Again, the .327 Federal is a very good solution for our needs and one that should work very well for many others for the same reasons. Not everyone is a 235 pound alpha male that eats recoil with his Wheaties.

  14. #59
    Moderator
    Array bmcgilvray's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    10,098
    "When I had a .38 special I did some tin can shooting and later picked up a lead bullet that was in perfect condition except for the grooves from the rifling."

    And, that is actually ok...if bullet placement is accurate. If a bullet is not accurately placed then the expansion that is almost universally worshiped cannot be depended on to save the day. Expansion does not make up for bad hits nearly as effectively as folks think. Expansion is not the do-all and end-all of self-defense bullet performance. While a small bore handgun is far better than none at all it's pretty extreme to be convinced that the reliable expansion of a .22 slug as lending more effectiveness than a bullet that features a larger diameter in the first place.
    Charter Member of the DC .41 LC Society

    “No possible rapidity of fire can atone for habitual carelessness of aim with the first shot.”

    Theodore Roosevelt, The Wilderness Hunter, 1893

  15. #60
    New Member Array CoyoteHunter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by bmcgilvray View Post
    And, that is actually ok...if bullet placement is accurate. If a bullet is not accurately placed then the expansion that is almost universally worshiped cannot be depended on to save the day. Expansion does not make up for bad hits nearly as effectively as folks think. Expansion is not the do-all and end-all of self-defense bullet performance. While a small bore handgun is far better than none at all it's pretty extreme to be convinced that the reliable expansion of a .22 slug as lending more effectiveness than a bullet that features a larger diameter in the first place.
    100% agreed that bullet placement comes first.

    That said, I loaded my wife’s .22 with WM rather than LR because of velocity. Given identical bullets, my first choice in a defensive situation would be the velocity of my .357 Mag, second choice my 9mm velocity and last choice, by a significant margin, that of my .380. This based on observed results on targets of various types.

    The mechanics of wounding are complicated but there are some general truths. Other factors being equal, expanding bullets present more frontal area and generally cause more damage than non-expanding bullets. Higher impact velocity helps ensure reliable expansion. Higher impact velocity also helps accelerate flesh beyond its limits of elasticity, a desirable result in my world. (If I could do so in an acceptable package with acceptable recoil, my carry weapon would shoot heavy and highly frangible bullets at 10,000fps and BGs would blow up like prairie dogs do with my .22-250. ) You can’t beat physics and the “equal and opposite” rule comes into play – energy spent deforming a bullet is equaled by the energy spent resisting its passage – and the more the better in my book. A slightly fatter (.357 vs .327), slower bullet that doesn’t deform may easily pass through flesh and do less damage than a faster, lighter bullet that expands.

    I think you missed my point, however – this gun is not for me but rather for my wife, who simply cannot handle high recoil and needs a DA revolver because she can’t work the slides on my semi-autos. A 3” SP101 in .327 Federal will deliver an 85g Gold Dot or Hydra-Shok a little over 1300fps (1314fps IIRC). That puts it right behind my 1252fps 115g 9mm Luger loads in terms of energy and beats them in terms of velocity. Assuming identical weights for the two guns, my 9mm loads run a calculated 42% more recoil (5.4fp vs 3.8fp). A similar 110g/1252fps .357 load in the SP101 would generate 46% more recoil. That is recoil my wife can live without.

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

.327 federal magnum

,

.327 federal magnum review

,
327 federal mag
,

327 federal magnum

,
327 federal magnum ballistics
,
327 federal magnum review
,
327 federal magnum reviews
,
327 magnum
,

327 magnum review

,
taurus 327 magnum revolver
,

taurus 327 magnum revolver review

,
taurus 327 review
Click on a term to search for related topics.

» Log in

User Name:

Password:

Not a member yet?
Register Now!

» DefensiveCarry Sponsors