.327 Federal Club thread

[FrankenMauser]

No crimp needed.
But don't push it very hard.
That bullet was never intended for use in a revolver, and shouldn't be used at more than about 1,000 fps.

[Sevens]

The 60gr XTP is a dual-threat to the well being of a .327 Federal revolver. As-is, it is not constructed to handle the pressure but it has the added characteristic of being nearly half-weight so it will reach speeds far beyond it's ability without hardly trying.

The bullet has the potential to deform in the jump from cylinder to forcing cone, ruining the barrel. You can certainly use this bullet (I have successfully used 71gr FMJ and 71gr Plated-RN) but keep the speed near it's original design.

[ligonierbill]

Speer publishes a load for .32 S&W Long with a 60 gr bullet meant for the .32 Auto. They set the length to allow crimping just over the ogive. I tried it, and it worked fine, yielding similar velocity to the auto round. I have not loaded any more; seems like a novelty to me.

[JayCee]

I've developed some plinking loads for the 327 using the 71 grain Berry's plated bullet. I use a taper crimp instead of a roll crimp, and keep the velocity below 1200 fps.

[FrankenMauser]

The 60 gr XTP is a fun bullet to use "outside the box" ... but I won't touch it for my .32 revolver loads - not even with the short .32s. The jump in the chamber is too long for my liking, especially with the short bearing surface of the 60 gr XTP.

Now... if I had a .327 Federal rifle, it would be a different story. And, it's a very fun bullet to use in .30 WCF specialty loads.

[Low Friction]

How do AE100 SP's or 100gr XTP's fair in 327 long guns pushing rounds well above 2000 fps? Might be relegated to gas checked hard cast for the 20" Henry lever action.

[FrankenMauser]

I don't think we have a member active here that owns a .327 Federal rifle - even a stubbed and rechambered Handi-Rifle.

...And I haven't really looked into it. (I just want!)
Your best bet for real-world test results, I believe, would be the NEF/H&R sub-forums at MarlinOwners or GBO.

But I suspect the bullets would hold up fine in the barrel and be rather explosive upon impact.

[jason hammac]

I had my Marlin 1894 in 32 magnum converted to 327 magnum in 2011. I love it, and also added ghost sights so I could see the sights better.
Here are a couple of links to what I have posted about the conversion.

http://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-han...lin-range.html

http://www.marlinowners.com/forum/18...al-magnum.html

https://goo.gl/images/uAG4n6

[P Flados]

I am new to the 327 game (4.2" SP101 aquired last November).

I am a cast only shooter and my primary intended use is highish volume offhand target practice with lowest achievable cost. For this gun I made my own 55 gr mold (see attached images).

They shoot pretty good, but I am still working on some issues (low volume charges that give big velocity swings between barrel down prior to firing and barrel up prior to firing). I will post more on this later.

However, as I was going over this short thread (he said sarcastically), I noted the absence of a discussion that I expected. The 327 is a great platform for polymer coated cast bullets. The guys at Castboolits who figured out what we call ASBB PC coating have enabled me to fire my 12 BHN cast bullets at full power (or close to full power for a few such as the bottle neckers) for all the handguns I load for (30H, 30-30, 327 fed mag, 357 mag, 357 max, 44 mag). With potential use that involves terminal ballistics (4 or 2 legged), a hardness in the 12-15 BHN is probably about where you want be.

For those that do not make their own projectiles, I had no trouble finding multiple vendors. These below seemed pretty good:

http://missouribullet.com/details.ph...y=20&keywords=

https://www.badmanbullets.com/Online...Polymer+Coated

[P Flados]

CAUTION: The following post includes loading data beyond or not covered by currently published maximums for this cartridge. USE AT YOUR OWN RISK. Neither the writer, The Firing Line, nor the staff of TFL assume any liability for any damage or injury resulting from use of this information.

JayCee (and others that assemble light loads).

My gun shoots my 55 gr bullets OK regardless, but it would probably shoot better if I find a way to reduce velocity variations.

I new that the long skinny case would result in very low powder density for my target loads. When I got around to the long drive out to where I could use my Chrony, I went looking for the dreaded "excessive velocity variations" associated with powder forward vs. powder to the rear. I found just what I was looking for . Back when I worried about this issue in 38 Sp, I had switched over to TightGroup as it is marketed with claims to be better. From the Hodgdon web site:

• Unlike pistol powders of the past, powder position in large cases (45 Colt, 357 Magnum and others) has virtually no effect on velocity and performance

My actual results are

Charge.......Avg Vel
3.1............636............Barrel Tipped Down
3.1............926............Barrel Tipped Up
3.7............745............Barrel Tipped Down
3.7............1164...........Barrel Tipped Up
5.0............1040...........Barrel Tipped Down
5.0............1406...........Barrel Tipped Up
5.5............1345...........Barrel Tipped Down
5.5............1543...........Barrel Tipped Up

Note that the 3.7 gr charge is clearly subsonic one way and supersonic the other.

Caution, both the 5.0 & 5.5 gr tipped up were hard to extract.

[jimbob86]

Very interesting, Mr. Flados ......

I've always avoided low density loads, mostly because they allow a double charge to go undetected ....... but also have read much about positional variations in burn rate ...... and have read about potential detonation danger with very fast powder at low densities......

[P Flados]

Jimbob86,

Your "potential detonation danger" phrase makes me think of powders in or close to the Blue Dot to H110/WW296 range. These powders have very well described concerns when the powder densities get too low.

Down in the very fast end of the burn rate spectrum, lots of evidence would say that charge rates can be dropped to barely get the bullet out of the barrel with no "detonation" danger. One of the more detailed independent assessments of low charges can be found at the link below. I am not completely convinced in all of the conclusions at this site, but I did agree with most of what was said. There is also huge amount of real data presented.

http://www.gmdr.com/lever/lowveldata.htm

[jimbob86]

Down in the very fast end of the burn rate spectrum, lots of evidence would say that charge rates can be dropped to barely get the bullet out of the barrel with no "detonation" danger.

I'm not a scientist of the internal ballistics type, but nearly all the KB'ed pistols I have seen in person or on the 'net involved low density loads of very dense, fast powder ...... usually titegroup in a .40S&W.

Your wild velocity swings tend to make me think that there is wide swing in pressure ....... and powder is progressive, with regard to burn rate- the higher the pressure, the faster it burns ....... what you are seeing can't be good.

While you may save a few cents on powder, you are making poor ammo, and risk being penny wise and pound foolish if you damage your gun.

[smee78]

I just wanted to let everyone know I had sent Ruger an e-mail asking if they had planned to put out the LCRX platform in the 327mag round. They responded today saying they do not plan on putting out the LCRX in ANY other caliber... Needless to say I was a little disappointed. I would of preferred to have the gun in 327 with a hammer, they already make barrels and cylinders in the regular LCR's so????

[NINEX19]

WARNING: YOUR USE OF ANY LOAD DATA WRITTEN IN MY POST IS DONE AT YOUR OWN RISK. I ASSUME NO LIABILITY FOR ANY DAMAGE OR INJURY RESULTING FROM USING THIS INFORMATION. USE AT YOUR OWN RISK.

If you want a really fun (and cheap) load for your .327 Federal, try using the 71g FMJ with 8.0g of Bluedot (standard primer) in a .32 H&R case. I found it to be very accurate at 15 yards from my Ruger SP101 in 327 Fed. I was averaging 1162 fps. Increasing to 8.5g of Bluedot (in my .327 Federal Single Seven) gave me 1368 fps with excellent accuracy also. They ring the gong pretty strong. I had zero signs of over-pressure with both loads and burned clean. The 8.5g load feels like it could be a hotter .327 Federal load.

This load is found elsewhere online from people who have "tested" the load, but not published by any manufacturer. This is not my creation, but it sure is a fun little round. If you give it a try, I would work up, of course. I am not sure if I would go anymore than the 8.5 grain of bluedot, though I have seen online load data for higher with this case/weight combo.

Sorry for this being slightly off topic, but it is relevant since you should only try this load in a .327 Federal chambered gun. I have not tested this in a 32 H&R gun. I suggest you not do that testing either.

Again, USE AT YOUR OWN RISK.

[Triggernosis]

What's the quietest, softest shooting handload that is reasonable (i.e. consistent ignition) to shoot in a .327 gun? Load up some .32 ACP?

[saleen322]

32 S&W Long with 98 grain WC shot from my 327. These were shot from 25 yards with less than 2 grains of powder.

[Triggernosis]

Should one use a "fluffy" powder when using light charges?

[saleen322]

The two best loads in the 32 are 1.8 of #2 and 1.5 of WST. Neither are all that fluffy IMHO.

[Radny97]

Smee, I have thought for a while that we would not see additional calibers in the LCRx model. I felt like looking at the gun it likely did not have the strength to handle pressures higher than 38 special + P. You'll notice on the LCR that there is a pin at the top of the polymer portion of the gun near the rear site which provides additional strength for the recoil of a larger higher pressure caliber. The LCRx does not have this strengthening pin. I think in order to get a higher pressure caliber into the LCRx it would require an almost complete redesign.

[TruthTellers]

I just wanted to let everyone know I had sent Ruger an e-mail asking if they had planned to put out the LCRX platform in the 327mag round. They responded today saying they do not plan on putting out the LCRX in ANY other caliber... Needless to say I was a little disappointed. I would of preferred to have the gun in 327 with a hammer, they already make barrels and cylinders in the regular LCR's so????

This is getting into a non .327 related topic, but I will respond.

It's likely because Ruger does not want to have the LCRx line compete with the SP101 line. The .38 LCRx works for the LCR because it's a low power cartridge and its a waste of steel in the SP101's. Making the LCR in .22, .357, or .327, directly competes with the SP101.

With this response by Ruger, it all but confirms what I've long believed.

Welp, guess that basically means the .327 is not going to be chambered in any other Ruger guns beyond what's now available. I don't see Ruger putting it in the GP100 again, nor the Blackhawk.

Maybe the Vaquero for Cowboy Action Shooting.

[TruthTellers]

Smee, I have thought for a while that we would not see additional calibers in the LCRx model. I felt like looking at the gun it likely did not have the strength to handle pressures higher than 38 special + P. You'll notice on the LCR that there is a pin at the top of the polymer portion of the gun near the rear site which provides additional strength for the recoil of a larger higher pressure caliber. The LCRx does not have this strengthening pin. I think in order to get a higher pressure caliber into the LCRx it would require an almost complete redesign.

Fair enough, I can see what you're getting at, but why then wouldn't Ruger also make a .22 LR version of the LCRx? It would directly compete against the S&W 317 and be a better gun in the process.

I'll also mention that not all pins have to go through in order work. By this I mean the LCR has one through pin, but the LCRx could possibly work by have two pins, one on each side of the exposed hammer.

[dgludwig]

It's likely because Ruger does not want to have the LCRx line compete with the SP101 line.

Interesting point of view but I'm not sure I agree: I think the LCR and the SP101 revolvers are enough different from each other that they appeal to different buyers; sort of like the different rationale for buying that is posed between Smith&Wesson J-frames and K-frames or between K-frames and L-frames. Significant enough differences in size, weight and general configuration to attract diverse buyers in my view.

[NINEX19]

Not that my opinion really matters, but I would love an .327 LCRX to supplement my SP101 in 327 Fed. I have little interest in the LCR in .327 Fed Mag, especially at the $600 prices I see. If they come down to half that price, I might consider it, but I really do not like short barrels, and for sure not that short (1.87" ??).

I see an X version, with a slightly longer barrel (@ 3"), no competition to the SP101. I feel that both designs serve very different purposes and interest.

They would have a sale with me if they came out with the .327 in the 3" LCRx, perhaps even at the $600 price range.

[Cosmodragoon]

The LCR 38 is built on a lighter frame than the LCR 327 or 357. Just a guess but is the LCR-X built up from that lighter frame? It might be less about competing with the SP101 and more about investing in yet another frame type.