Good news in case there are any .327 Fed Mag fans out there!

[Guest mechanically]

http://www.guns.com/2015/03/30/ruger-brings-back-the-sp101-in-327-mag/

 

I've watched SP101s chambered in .327 go for nearly $900 on the used marked for a while, so I'm excited they're bringing it back. Now, just need to find someone to build an 1892 lever carbine to go with it... yowza!

 

They only mention bringing it back in a 4" barrel. I hope they also release the 2"-ish model too. (Well, actually, I think 3 would be about perfect.)

 

I think there are probably some investors out there gnashing their teeth at Ruger right now...

[cajunpredfan]

Thanks for the update. I have been keeping my eyes open for this.

[TrickyNicky]

I want to be a .327 fed fan, I really do. Hopefully the availability on the ammo will come up for at least one of the, what 1/2 dozen or so loads it will chamber and shoot. I remember being really stoked for the Blackhawk a few years ago but I'm not sure I've ever actually seen anything in .327 in person.

[79troublehead]

The pistol applications don't light my fuse, but a rifle chambered in .327 fed. mag.,  able to shoot anything from .32 short thru .327 fed. mag.,  would be a humdinger. 

[TNWNGR]

I like the 32 S&W Long and as another here has already said want to like the 327 FC but it and the 32 H&R Mag for all of their ballistic goodness fail to interest me. All I see is an attempt to put 32/20 performance in a straight walled cartridge which is rendered moot with properly loaded or reloaded 38/357 loadings in rifles & handguns.

[Patton]

I have stumped across a few stashes of .327 Fed Mag before, and once was during the 2013 ammo crisis. You can fire 32acp of top of the other well known acceptable catridges but you risk light primer strikes. To me the advantage is a perfect compromise between the hottes 38spl and the 357mag all while gaining an extra round.

I really wished that they would have done it in the LCR instead. Edited April 1, 2015 by Patton

[LCPfraTN]

I actually own a .327 Fed Mag SP101 3" that I got for a steal after the fever died down from the initial introduction and they sort of went out of favor...it wasn't too long after that when Ruger quit making them. The selfish side of me hopes they don't make a 3" again, so the value of mine will stay up. [emoji4]


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Clod Stomper]

I've wanted a revolver in .327 ever since I heard of it. I actually considered buying a Single-Six and having it converted by Hamilton Bowen as an heirloom for my little boy when he's old enough. But Ruger introduced the Single-Seven last year (I think)!

So I'll be getting one of those when I can save up enough. Now if Marlin chambers the '94 in it, I may pee my pants.

I'd like a small 6 round revolver for carrying, but that's a small priority.

[enfield]

I was interested a few years ago, but thanks to the unavailability of revolvers chambered in .327, I'm over it now.

[enfield]

I have stumped across a few stashes of .327 Fed Mag before, and once was during the 2013 ammo crisis. You can fire 32acp of top of the other well known acceptable catridges but you risk light primer strikes. To me the advantage is a perfect compromise between the hottes 38spl and the 357mag all while gaining an extra round.

I really wished that they would have done it in the LCR instead.

 

Yep, it's the wrong frame, wrong barrel length.  Looks like they were aiming for target shooters, not concealed carry.

[Clod Stomper]

I realize that I'm in the minority here, but I think a lot of energy is wasted with short barrels with rounds like this. Same with .357 Mag. Add to that the extra muzzle blast and I prefer a longer barrel, even for carry. I think a 4-inch barrel isn't that hard to conceal. For farm and field carry, I like an even longer barrel for the velocity and sight radius.

That's just me though.

[nightrunner]

I don't see why the S&W j frame in .327 didn't catch on. The 632 I think.

[enfield]

I don't see why the S&W j frame in .327 didn't catch on. The 632 I think.

 

I think it was the perpetual 'out of stock' label at the wholesalers.  They never made enough of them to sell.

[Patton]

I realize that I'm in the minority here, but I think a lot of energy is wasted with short barrels with rounds like this. Same with .357 Mag. Add to that the extra muzzle blast and I prefer a longer barrel, even for carry. I think a 4-inch barrel isn't that hard to conceal. For farm and field carry, I like an even longer barrel for the velocity and sight radius.

That's just me though.

My thought is yes, but no. The Gold Dot and American Eagle 327 loads have more energy out of just a 3" barrel revolver than a 38spl has in a rifle length barrel. The 327mag has twice the energy out of a 2-3" barrel revolver than its .32H&R counterpart.

http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/megraphs/38special.html

http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/megraphs/32hr.html

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

In these test for a revolver you will actual add an inch for the cylinder because these test were all done on a single shot barrel where which measure muzzle to the breech face. Edited April 4, 2015 by Patton