That's where all the magnums came from and is this cartridge called a magnum or not? I think it is a good thing to avoid using that word in the name.
I think the use of the word is fine... they NEVER should have used it for the .32 H&R round. Neither the pressure nor performance of that round deserved the term "magnum." I don't think there is anything wrong with the use of the term "magnum", but for the good of everyone, it should be used with discretion. If anything, I'd argue instead of ".327 Federal Mag" it should be the ".32 Federal Magnum" but obviously... that would have been easier to do had the .32 H&R been called what it really was-- the .32 H&R Special.
However, I also imagine more .38 specials are fired from .357 magnums than magnum rounds are and the .38 Special itself is the longer, lower, wider development of an older cartridge.
I used to think this and practice it myself, too, until I re-discovered the absolute joys of shooting .357 Magnum from a large, solid revolver. I put thousands of .38's through my 686 to hundreds of magnums over the years, but in the past couple seasons, I've done all my .38 from a model 10 and I've shot nothing but .357 from my 686. Not all of it ball-to-the-wall, some were merely medium magnum loads, but so much more enjoyable then little .38 poppers.
Tell me, how does the .327 Federal (any relation to the 9mm Federal?) compare to a .32-20? Probably that has been covered already but I skipped to the end of the book.
It's not a pseudo-bottle neck round, it's not a 120-year old round, it's much more stout in brass strength and it runs at a higher pressure. Like my earlier comparison to the .30 Carb, it's similar. But different.
But I will say one thing. To me, were I interested, only performance counts. Not cost, not ease of reloading and not availability. If you want performance, you aren't talking paper punching and you probably aren't going to do a great deal of shooting. But that's just the way I see things anymore.
All well and good, but the entire buying public may not see it the same way. For me, I don't see me getting one of the .327 Blackhawks or GP-100s, but only because I'm frugal and I'm already married to the .30 Carbine in a Blackhawk. But if someone stole my Blackhawk, I'd replace it with a .327 Federal GP-100. I probably won't own both, because they are so similar.
And when you absolutely dig handloading, like myself and at least a couple of other folks in this thread do, it does matter a lot that it's much more load bench friendly.
Say, is anyone trying out anything new with the .38 S&W these days. Really a neglected and overlooked cartridge.
It may be, but it's pretty easy to see why... not the same diameter as .38/.357. It's different enough that you need different tools and components to work with it.
I think .41 Magnum would have a lot more popularity right now if it were .400" (or even if .40 S&W and 10mm were .410", either way) But they aren't, so they are different, and require a whole separate run of bullets and loading dies. Pain in the butt, doesn't help the popularity.
Attention Brass rats and other reloaders: I really need .327 Federal Magnum brass, no lot size too small. Tell me what caliber you need and I'll see what I have to swap. PM me and we'll discuss.