The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Handguns: The Revolver Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old June 23, 2012, 01:26 PM   #26
Colorado Redneck
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 6, 2008
Location: Northeast Colorado
Posts: 1,132
327 Ruger SP101

Here is one rendition of the 327 Fed Mag. Should make a nice carry gun after retirement lets us take a firearm with us if we want to. Grips by a TFL member: 1chig

6 rounds with less recoil than a 357, lower decibles, and more umph than a 9mm+p. No slide or safety to jack with, just pick it up, point, and it go bang!




http://thefiringline.com/forums/atta...9&d=1339645929

Last edited by Colorado Redneck; June 23, 2012 at 01:33 PM. Reason: Picture won't attach
Colorado Redneck is offline  
Old June 25, 2012, 09:51 AM   #27
Rampant_Colt
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 17, 2006
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 1,478
Quote:
Originally Posted by gak View Post
Another +1 - sure has seemed like a natural pairing to me--perfect actually! At least one of my Vaquerito .32s has been "planned" for a Bowen (Clements, Harton etc) conversion for quite some time.
I would love to have any Bowen revolver. Just can't afford 'em! There's no reason Ruger can't chamber their Single-Six (Vaquerito LoL) in .327 Mag. I bet they would sell. A 4" or 5½" stainless S-S would perfectly suit my needs as a camping/traipsing sidearm


http://www.gunblast.com/Bowen-327s.htm
__________________
member of an elite paramilitary organization: Eagle Scouts
Rampant_Colt is offline  
Old June 25, 2012, 10:24 AM   #28
Dan-O
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 3, 2011
Location: Kansas City
Posts: 388
Starline finally has it on their website. Downside, is that they are backordered till August.

https://www.starlinebrass.com/produc...Federal%2DMag/
Dan-O is offline  
Old June 25, 2012, 11:36 AM   #29
Sevens
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 28, 2007
Location: Central Ohio
Posts: 9,163
Quote:
There's no reason Ruger can't chamber their Single-Six (Vaquerito LoL) in .327 Mag.
I believe that the raw length of the cylinder is the reason that Ruger actually can't simply start sending them out the door.

Otherwise, Hamilton Bowen (who is a big proponent of the round) would be shipping them like mad.
__________________
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.
Sevens is offline  
Old June 25, 2012, 03:01 PM   #30
gak
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 28, 2005
Location: Aridzona
Posts: 2,767
Rampant_Colt said:
"There's no reason Ruger can't chamber their Single-Six (Vaquerito LoL) in .327 Mag."

Sevens said:
"I believe that the raw length of the cylinder is the reason that Ruger actually can't simply start sending them out the door.Otherwise, Hamilton Bowen (who is a big proponent of the round) would be shipping them like mad."

Actually both are right...but Rampant in a sense more--in that "all" Bowen (Clements, Harton and others) are doing is installing a brand new cylinder of correct length and then "adjusting" the B/C gap accordingly. That's the beauty of the conversion, no cylinder frame window modifications needed. So, no, they (and we) can't just rechammber the existing too-short H&R cylinders, but being the originating manufacturer, Ruger wouldn't have to consider that anyway. Presumably they would just do what Bowen (etc) is doing and build a new cylinder. It's been long enough since regular production of the .32 H&R Single Six that they wouldn't/shouldnt be bound by the limits of then-existing tooling, patterns and parts for everything in a "new .32_." But to the extent that it's ideal that most of the parts are already there--and they are--yes, I do believe there's no significant reason they couldn't even with almost just a moment's notice "simply start sending them out the door."

Last edited by gak; June 25, 2012 at 03:38 PM.
gak is offline  
Old June 26, 2012, 02:05 AM   #31
newfrontier45
Junior member
 
Join Date: February 23, 2012
Posts: 921
I'd love to see Ruger start offering a factory .327 Single Six. When funds allow, I'm gonna have a Bisley .32 converted.
newfrontier45 is offline  
Old June 26, 2012, 09:23 AM   #32
baccusboy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 30, 2011
Posts: 147
I have read that what the .327 actually is, and what it is supposed to be, are two different things. I have read that most factory loads are under-powered. I have read that the pressures have caused forcing cones to have questionable durability on some makes. This has also led to certain smaller revolvers that people dream of happening are simply not capable of happening.

I have read that it's pretty much a dead round.

I thought it sounded neat, but given what seems to be the future of the round, I chose to avoid it.
baccusboy is offline  
Old June 26, 2012, 11:12 AM   #33
CarbineCaleb
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 27, 2004
Posts: 2,745
Quote:
@baccusboy: I have read that what the .327 actually is, and what it is supposed to be, are two different things. I have read that most factory loads are under-powered. I have read that the pressures have caused forcing cones to have questionable durability on some makes.
In Jeff Quinn's review of the .327, he did a ballistic test using a pork shoulder as his medium, which is a pretty good test. Using a factory Federal American Eagle 100gr softpoint that he chrono'd @1375 fps** out of an SP101, the bullet completely penetrated a 16-inch pork shoulder - that's pretty serious penetration, pretty much like you'd expect with a .357 softpoint, and certainly enough for self defense.
http://www.gunblast.com/Ruger-SP101-327.htm

** This load has since been bumped up from a factory spec of 1400fps to a factory spec of 1500fps.


To me these look loaded similarly to other magnum loads, like the .357. What I look at is - are the bullets of similar sectional density being pushed at similar velocities (that's true of .357, .41 and .44 Magnums)? Here is some factory load data, and the answer is yes.

LIGHT BULLET:
  • .327 MAG: Sectional density of 0.147 with a bullet weight of 100gr and diameter of 0.312", factory rated @ 1500fps from Federal
  • .357 MAG: Sectional density of 0.140 with a bullet weight of 125gr and diameter of 0.357", factory rated @ 1450fps from Speer

HEAVY BULLET:
  • .327 MAG: Sectional density of 0.169 with a bullet weight of 115gr and diameter of 0.312", factory rated @ 1335fps from Speer
  • .357 MAG: Sectional density of 0.177 with a bullet weight of 158gr and diameter of 0.357", factory rated @ 1235fps from Speer
__________________
“Never express yourself more clearly than you are able to think.”
Niels Bohr

Last edited by CarbineCaleb; June 26, 2012 at 11:41 AM.
CarbineCaleb is offline  
Old June 28, 2012, 10:02 AM   #34
tjh
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 25, 2009
Location: North Central Ohio
Posts: 160
Heavy 327 fed.

Any one loading and shooting heavy cast bullets 115-135gr. in the 327 fed mag. What kind of performace are you getting ?
tjh is offline  
Old June 28, 2012, 12:40 PM   #35
Sevens
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 28, 2007
Location: Central Ohio
Posts: 9,163
I have recently ordered a box of Penn Bullets 115gr lead RN-FP and loaded them over two different kinds of powder. On Sunday, I hope to first check them for safety... then for accuracy... then for velocity... and then for leading.

We have a thread in the handloading & reloading area of this site specifically dedicated to the .327 Federal, and I'll report back there with my findings.
__________________
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.
Sevens is offline  
Old June 29, 2012, 09:59 PM   #36
Colorado Redneck
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 6, 2008
Location: Northeast Colorado
Posts: 1,132
baccusboy--I dare say that you read wrong. I have an SP101 and posted chrony results on factory and hand loads herein a few months back. Velocity was about as close as any factory spec's are. The round has been declared dead by a few. That is their opinion. But they are wrong. That is my opinion.

Colorado Redneck is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:45 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.10344 seconds with 9 queries