38 -vs- 32

Status
Not open for further replies.
The problem is that you can load a .38 or especially a .357 down, but you can only load a .32 up so far.
I'll take the one that gives me the most flexibility (I reload) and the most choices in ammunition.
 
The problem is that you can load a .38 or especially a .357 down, but you can only load a .32 up so far.
I'll take the one that gives me the most flexibility (I reload) and the most choices in ammunition.

Perhaps you should check out the ballistics for the 327 Federal, compared to the 38 and 357......and then the low-power loads of the rest.........
 
Exactly.
My .357 isn't just a CCW gun - it also gets carried in the woods a lot. Granted, a .357 isn't ideal for defending myself against a bear. But the bears here usually don't get that big and I know they have been killed with full power 158 grain .357 loads. A hard cast or SP load that penetrates deep enough will do.
I don't care what the paper ballistics are of it, no way I'd trust a .32 to put down a bear (under stress with one coming at you). It might work, but do you want to trust a .32 caliber bullet to penetrate far enough into an angry bear to stop it quickly? Not me. Even a .357 could be criticized as just adequate for that.


For pure CCW, the paper ballistics of the .327 look promising. For me, sitting on my .357 components and ten years of experience reloading it, and on a reliable revolver that works great for most of my handgun purposes, I'll stick with what I know.
 
I'd love a pencil barreled 2 inch model 10 snubby, in .32-20 please. Heck a Ruger Sp101 would do in a pinch, but the old school look of the Smith would be better. There is no practical use for this, I just want one.

I don't need no .327.
 
CraigC said:
Thanks for proving my point, .357 fans instantly get defensive at even the implication that the .327 'may' steal its thunder. Gimme a break.

There is no gap between the .22Mag and .357???

Last I checked, the .357 doesn't fit in the Single Six, while one in .32H&R is easily converted to .327 with the addition of only a new cylinder. This is the platform is should've been introduced in.

Defensive? No. I don't identify with an inanimate object. As someone else pointed out- I can load down a 38 caliber to whatever I want and upload it to max if I choose. The "gap" you mention is neatly filled with 38 Special.

Sure the 38 cals won't fit a Single Six. But they fit a Blackhawk just fine. And Federal knows the truth- if they introduce a new caliber as a boutique offering for owners of single-action guns- a caliber that IS NOT a Cowboy Action caliber- they have no chance of acceptance on a large scale. Their only hope of getting momentum going for it was to market it as a CCW/Self Defense caliber FIRST and get the buzz started that way, get 327 Federal on the tongues of all the gun-magazine writers as the "New, Hot CCW offering: 327 Federal Magnum!!!1!one!!"

Let's face it, as a revolver retro-update hotrod cartridge there's only so many potential sales without the blooming CCW market. Trying to market a brand-new caliber towards "Guys who might want to rechamber their Ruger Single-Sixes" would be a marketing plan fraught with FAIL. Those of us who like to tinker with oddball cartridges are not a large and profitable market. If they could get police interest like what happened with 40 S&W they might have a chance but cops are not going back to revolvers, that ship has sailed.

And in all fairness, the 327 Federal really isn't much different from the 30 M1 Carbine.

And then we're right up against the 9mm vs 45 problem- what's better, a .357" hole or a .312" hole?

To get the smaller one to match the output of the bigger one you have to run it at the max. To get the bigger one to make 'enough' power puts it comfortably in its midrange performance. It's just like cars- do you want the turbocharged 4-cylinder or the big V-6?

People like to talk about "The bruising recoil and muzzle flash of a 357 Magnum" but really, properly loaded defensive ammo is designed to work at a certain velocity and doesn't need to be loaded up to bear-stopping, thumpenboomer levels. A moderate .357 load will get the job done and leave lots of room for going higher. 327 Federal will need to run fast to keep up.

Look, I'm not trying to be an Internet bunghole here. But there comes a time when gun industry types can say "This cartridge duplicates Popular Cartridge X's power" and we can say "Why bother? I already have Cartridge X and there's not enough benefit to make it worth changing over."
 
Last edited:
I'm adding another reply to not muddy this into the above discussion:

I think there IS a gap. But it needs to be addressed by a caliber truly between 32 and 38. I'd like to see a version of the 38 Special that is shortened to about .380 ACP and rimmed. Something designed to maximize performance in short barrels and stay small OAL wise so that the OAL of the gun it is fired in is reduced.

Imagine a "J"-frame with a 3" barrel that is the same overall length as a snubbie, because the cylinder is short enough to only chamber a rimmed 9mm. Make it with the cylinder back further from the grip almost sort of 'bullpup' style. It would be kinda fugly I guess. Kind of a Micro Desert Eagle crossed with a Ruger SP-101.

Load it with a fast powder and keep velocity over 1000 fps with a 120-grain truncated cone projectile, or a short & fat hollow point like a Gold Dot.

You couldn't introduce a cartridge like that in 38 caliber because it might get put into a potmetal 38 Special and blow it up. The same for 32 caliber. Make it in say, .325 caliber and OAL of 1" on a loaded round. That would be about the same size as a .380 Auto, but rimmed. Great for CCW in revolvers.
 
There was a round called the 9mm Federal (I think) that was a rimmed 9x19mm that might have done exactly what Evan Price mentions pretty well. IIRC, it was for use in 9mm revolvers much the same way that .45 Auto-Rim was designed for use in .45 ACP revolvers.
Still, I think the idea of a really small J-frame using moon clips and 9mm would maybe worthwhile... maybe.

It's not that I don't think the .327 is cool. I can see a lot of use in it - and now that it exists, I see no reason to ever chamber any gun that can handle it in .32 H&R Mag ever again. I think a Marlin 1894 in .327 might be a neat little reloadable small game rifle and a J-Frame with a 3" thin barrel and adjustable sights would make a great kit gun.
But you can still only load a .327 up so much. Those of us who have something that works aren't going to be selling it to get something new that will require a whole new investment.
 
So, what's a good 158gr. load for the .327? How about 200gr.?
The .327 is not intended to replace the .357, so you .357 fans can throttle back on the defensiveness.

The .327 is a wonderful cartridge. It is what the .32H&R, should have been, which was hampered by the contraints of the cheap little H&R pistols originally chambered in it. It fits neatly into the gap between the .22Mag and .357. It shoots laser flat, fits into smaller packages, it is a viable self defense option but IMHO, is best as a sporting round. It hits harder than a .357 with comparable weights, is lighter recoiling with comparable sectional densities, shoots flatter than either and fits into the Single Six with only a longer cylinder.

Yes, you can shoot .38's in a .357 if you want to hunt small game. It will also have a rainbow trajectory. The .327, in various loadings, makes for a better small game and varmint cartridge, hands down.

Yes, you can tote a Blackhawk. Anybody ever compare a Single Six to a Blackhawk? Huge difference. If you don't see it, well then you won't "get it" anyway.

I am grateful that I am not one of those shooters who thinks one cartridge, one bore size, one platform is all they need. It's simply another option and believe it or not, it DOES do something no current cartridge does. You don't have to sell everything you own and you don't have to buy one. :rolleyes:

Worthy of note is the blistering performance possible with the .327 and in the svelte Single Six package. A 100gr XTP at 1700fps and 120gr cast bullet well over 1600fps is nothing to sneeze at. As a varmint cartridge, the .357 has some catching up to do. Open your minds guys.

http://www.gunblast.com/Freedom-Harton327.htm
 
Look, I'm not trying to be an Internet bunghole here. But there comes a time when gun industry types can say "This cartridge duplicates Popular Cartridge X's power" and we can say "Why bother? I already have Cartridge X and there's not enough benefit to make it worth changing over."
I was being somewhat serious about my earlier comment re: S&W and Taurus. They do need to make a 9 or10 shot in .327 Mag.

The .327 may be virtually identical in performance to a .38 hot load, BUT...it does give the same frame/cylinder dia 1 additional shot without the snappy recoil. When moved into large frame territory there is the possibility of 2 to 3 additional shots. If S&W and Taurus can fit 8 shots into the Mdl 327 and Mdl 608, respectively, I'm certain they can fit 9 or 10 chambered for for a .327 Mag. No, this doesn't mean anything in the CC market, BUT (again) for the HD market it makes A LOT of sense. Simplicity of a revolver with the higher capacity of a semi.

And in all fairness, the 327 Federal really isn't much different from the 30 M1 Carbine.
I can't see myself CC'ing a carbine. :D

do you want the turbocharged 4-cylinder or the big V-6?
I would rather have a turbocharged 4 cylinder because it gets better gas mileage. This may be the same rationale for someone wanting a 6 shot .327 mag instead of a 5 shot 38/357 or a 7+1 shot .32 -vs- a 6+1 shot .380.
 
All that being said, I wish S&W would do a run of Model 16s in .32 S&W Long. 3Ts, purely for the target market. They could probably sell the entire run in advance.
 
I don't wade into these caliber wars over the .327 Vs. .357 anymore as it's simply silly and the naysayers are completely closed minded. I happen to love the .357 and the .327 and own examples of each, reload for each and shoot both quite often. Both are worthwhile and quite enjoyable.
 
Dies don't cost much for the use you get from them... and in the long run, neither does good brass.

I HOPE the new 32s die or get dropped - then I can buy them on Gun Broker for a song.

I scored a 110+ year old 32 rimfire, in +90% condition (NRA Antique grade 'excellent') for $75. I shoot it with reloadable adapters.

Scored a Nice Colt Police Positive in 32 Long for $160 for no other reason that it had been professionally re-blued, and it was a 32 caliber... WIN for me!
 
Revolvers chambered in .327 Federal are manufactured by:

Ruger
S&W
Charter Arms
Taurus

and readily available on the Internet.
 
Personally, I think the H&R mag is an awesome round. S&W made a J-frame that I loved, the 431PD and the 432PD, both great guns, but overpriced and were hard to find. They're on my wishlist and eventually I'll find one at the local gunshop and snatch it right up.
 
I'm no stranger to off-beat calibers. In revolvers, I own .357, .41 Mag and .45LC. That said, I used to own a number of j-frames, but do not currently own any...nor do I intend to in the future.

My personal minimum is a 4" K-frame...where is my incentive to own a .32 or .38? I can load .357 cases with .38-power-level loads for new shooters.

As a reloader, I could (conceivably) load and own just about everything. But I am trying to consolidate my collection down to a few really versatile calibers. I have eliminated .44SPL and .40S&W in the last few years, and am currently weighing the pros and cons of .45LC/.41 Mag. One day, I will end up with one or the other.

Stalin once said that "quantity has a quality all it's own". The older I get, the more I come to see that versatilty and minimalism (done correctly) have a quality all their own... and I'd rather have versatility than quantity. As a result, my gun colection has been growing smaller in quantity year over year, but each piece is of higher quality and greater versatility...

YMMV.
 
Last edited:
I will stick my neck out and say that the 327 is both a better CCW and sporting caliber than the 357.

1. Over 500 lbs of kenetic energy with my .327 Sp101. I bet 90% of those carrying concealed 357s are not getting that much power with their carry load/gun/barrel length combination. Ah, but you say KE doesn't = stopping power. That is true to the extent the engergy is not transferred to the target. But there is no reason to believe that a 115 grain slug at 1450 fps out of a 327 would not perform similarly to a 125g slug from a 357 at a similar velocity, the 357 being the undefeated "manstopper champion." It comes in a package that I can, and many would be able to shoot better than a 357 snub. Oh yeah, 6 shots too, but I would pick it even if it were just 5.


2. It's other forte would be for small game/varmint handgun hunting. It's too light for deer in most cases, but so is a .357. But for varmint hunting from a handgun, it is marvelously fast, accurate, and flat shooting - in this role better for the purpose than a 357.

Yes, you do have that "but I'm walking around in the bear woods" going for the 357. Yeah, and if a bear attacked me I'd rather have a 357 with a max charge behind a 180g slug than a 327. But that would not be my CCW load in a 357, and although we have mountain lions and black bears in Arkansas I feel just fine in the woods with the 327, since the chances that I get attacked by either is probably lower than the chance of me being hit with debris from a falling Russian satellite. If I was in an area with dangerous bears, I'd have my Ruger Alaskan in 454, but would still be using the 327 for varmint hunting.
 
Last edited:
I guess I fall into that "circular availability" camp, which others have alluded to, that keeps the .327 from achieving its full market potential.

I don't buy a firearm for a cartridge that hasn't demonstrated robust market appeal for at least, say, 10 years. I don't want to be stuck with an orphan, I don't reload, and I want a caliber that I can readily pick up at my local Wally World on the way home from work.

I'm guessing there are quite a few firearm owners with my general outlook, which is keeping sales of .327's down...

.
 
The .32 Long is still one of my favorite cartridges for plinking and
target shooting. It is still popular over in Europe and in my opinion,
I wish it was more widely accepted here. It is also a good cartridge
for novice shooters to cut their teeth on and for the fairer sex. My
wife carries my S&W Model 30-1 on her daily walks (after trying
out my other handguns in various calibers she liked it the best).
I haven't had the pleasure to shoot the .327 Magnum yet, but I'm
eager to try it out. If S&W or Taurus came out with a nine shot
.327 Magnum, I'd be in line to buy one. I love the .38 Special/.357
Magnum but the .32 Long/.327 Magnum has its place too.
 
Yes, I think JFrame kind of summarizes how difficult it is for a new cartridge to get a foot-hold these days. I'm in the early adopter camp, trying to be a part of its success.

I'd like to see a Ruger LCR in 327 at the shot show this year. One with a 3" barrel would be awesome.
 
I looked hard at .327 Mag. when I first heard about it. I like the idea of having 6 rounds in a J frame sized gun. I also like the idea of a gun I can load .32 Long into and let my wife shoot until I can work her up through .32 Mag. to .327 Mag. But I still can't go to Midway and get .327 Mag. brass. My solution ended up being to buy an old Model 31 and load .32 Long for my wife. And when she's ready to step up it will most likely end up being to .38 Special.

In my mind the gap that .327 Mag. fills is between .22 and .38. For years and years revolvers came in .22, .32, .38, or .44. .22 rimfire will never go away since it is so cheap to shoot. And .22LR is plenty powerful for certain small game animals. In .38 caliber land the .38 S&W gave way to .38 Spl. and .357 Mag. which have the power to get the job done for a wide range of jobs. .44 Spl and .44 Mag. satisfy the power needs for big bore territory. But .32 caliber didn't see a power upgrade until the 80s. By then it had pretty much faded from the consciousness of the "a gun is a tool not a hobby" crowd that constitutes such a big part of the gun owning public. So I suspect that .32 caliber has been passed by and will never make a resurgence. I don't think there's enough of a power gap between high-end .22 and light .38's to draw in very many people. Only the hobbyist will appreciate it - much like .41 Mag. or dozens of other good ideas that just never caught on.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top