.327 Fed vs .30 Carbine revolver

[TTv2]

All very interesting, you assume too much, have a very narrow mind and paint with a very wide brush. As I already said, where are all the .327's? If you want an 1866, 1873, 1892 or Marlin 1894 based .32 levergun, there are ZERO .327's. But there are .32-20's. You 'might' have an argument if all the same guns were available in both cartridges but they are not. It's a good thing we do not require your approval to buy the firearms that interest us. You're awfully opinionated for someone with such a narrow frame of reference.


As I said, I can drive to DGW and buy an 1866, 1873 or SAA in .32-20. All new guns. Leverguns in .327 are great, as long as the Henry is what you want. If you have an aversion to used guns (awfully sensitive) maybe you need to get out more. I guess you hate single actions, fixed sights and the WCF's

I do in fact hate single action cartridge revolvers with fixed sights unless they're the NAA minis or percussion.

Sure, there are more .32-20's in lever actions, but when the flimsy brass case has a shorter lifespan than .327 and even .32 H&R Magnum and the brass will be more difficult, more costly to replace I don't see the point, I don't see the advantage. I don't see .32-20 increasing in popularity in the future to improve that situation either, I do however see .32 & .327 Magnums becoming much more common and thus popular and that will translate into more firearm and ammunition choices.

Hey, if someone wants to buy a .32-20 and have difficulty obtaining ammunition and brass and paying through the nose for it all they have every right to do it and I have every right to call them fools for it.

Well, 32's have never been big sellers, period. They don't even have a .327 single action in the catalog so why would they have a .32ACP convertible?

They have the Single Sevens and a Single Six in .32 Mag Lipseys exclusives which have been around for 5 or 6 years now. Probably should be a standard catalog item by now and offered with a .32 ACP conversion cylinder.

 

[dickydalton]

I have 5 327s the last one a Henry and I love them all.

 

[CraigC]

I do in fact hate single action cartridge revolvers with fixed sights unless they're the NAA minis or percussion.

At least that's settled, sad indeed.

Sure, there are more .32-20's in lever actions, but when the flimsy brass case has a shorter lifespan than .327 and even .32 H&R Magnum and the brass will be more difficult, more costly to replace I don't see the point, I don't see the advantage. I don't see .32-20 increasing in popularity in the future to improve that situation either, I do however see .32 & .327 Magnums becoming much more common and thus popular and that will translate into more firearm and ammunition choices.

Did you just find out that .32-20 brass is more fragile than straightwall brass? You act as if this is some sort of revelation. I've been handloading it and the .38-40 for years. You're totally blowing this whole thing out of proportion. The advantage is available guns that have only been made for what, 150yrs??? There are plain few .327's. I wish it weren't so but it's a fact. There's all sorts of wonderful .32-20 leverguns out there, waiting to be enjoyed. Only .327 is the Henry. Same for revolvers. My first exposure is Dad's old Colt Army Special. Lots of Colt SAA's and DA's out there, along with K-frames and all sorts of replicas.

Hey, if someone wants to buy a .32-20 and have difficulty obtaining ammunition and brass and paying through the nose for it all they have every right to do it and I have every right to call them fools for it.

If I encountered a .32-20 tomorrow that I wanted, I would buy it without hesitation. Sorry they don't have ammo at Walmart, I guess you'll have to leave it for the real shooters. No, you do not have the right to call someone a fool for liking something you don't. This is still America. IMHO, foolish is not a strong enough word for some of your rhetoric in this thread. You do realize that people buy and shoot guns that are a lot harder to feed than a .32-20, right?

They have the Single Sevens and a Single Six in .32 Mag Lipseys exclusives which have been around for 5 or 6 years now. Probably should be a standard catalog item by now and offered with a .32 ACP conversion cylinder.

Been around but in what quantity? If they were selling enough to warrant it, Ruger would've already put them in the catalog. Ammo for the .32ACP ain't exactly cheap so I'm not sure how much demand there is for a convertible.

 

[TTv2]

Did you just find out that .32-20 brass is more fragile than straightwall brass? You act as if this is some sort of revelation. I've been handloading it and the .38-40 for years. You're totally blowing this whole thing out of proportion. The advantage is available guns that have only been made for what, 150yrs??? There are plain few .327's. I wish it weren't so but it's a fact. There's all sorts of wonderful .32-20 leverguns out there, waiting to be enjoyed. Only .327 is the Henry. Same for revolvers. My first exposure is Dad's old Colt Army Special. Lots of Colt SAA's and DA's out there, along with K-frames and all sorts of replicas.

I don't see a cartridge that uses a flimsy, expensive, hard to find case that isn't even as powerful as .32 Magnum, let alone .327, as an "advantage", in fact they're flat out disadvantages and one of several reasons the .32 Mag and .327 were innovated. I mean, who wants to buy into an obscure caliber with all those issues and it be basically as powerful as a .380? Perhaps those are the reasons there are so many .32-20's available is because nobody wants them? They do seem to want .32 and .327 Mag revolvers tho, they're practically Unobtanium right now.

BTW, what does the 150 years of manufacture have to do with .32-20? Do you base your purchases on how long things have been around? You must love .22 Short then!

If I encountered a .32-20 tomorrow that I wanted, I would buy it without hesitation. Sorry they don't have ammo at Walmart, I guess you'll have to leave it for the real shooters. No, you do not have the right to call someone a fool for liking something you don't. This is still America. IMHO, foolish is not a strong enough word for some of your rhetoric in this thread. You do realize that people buy and shoot guns that are a lot harder to feed than a .32-20, right?

Even if they had it at Walmart most people wouldn't be able to afford to shoot it at the prices it sells for. This is most certainly the reason people are scooping up the .32/.327 Mags over all the .32-20's you keep seeing collecting dust.

Been around but in what quantity? If they were selling enough to warrant it, Ruger would've already put them in the catalog. Ammo for the .32ACP ain't exactly cheap so I'm not sure how much demand there is for a convertible.

Well, compared to .32 S&W Long all the other rimmed .32's a .327 can shoot, .32 ACP is the cheapest online and at local stores more available. Something .32-20 can't claim and even tho I think .32-20 is obsolete if Ruger brought it back in the Blackhawk for a convertible at the very least the adjustable sights would make it the best .32-20 revolver ever made.

 

[LOLBELL]

It doesn’t cost a nickel more to shoot .32-20 than it does .327, are you saying that if you shoot .32-20 instead of 327 you’re a fool? That’s interesting

 

[CraigC]

I don't see a cartridge that uses a flimsy, expensive, hard to find case that isn't even as powerful as .32 Magnum, let alone .327, as an "advantage", in fact they're flat out disadvantages and one of several reasons the .32 Mag and .327 were innovated. I mean, who wants to buy into an obscure caliber with all those issues and it be basically as powerful as a .380? Perhaps those are the reasons there are so many .32-20's available is because nobody wants them? They do seem to want .32 and .327 Mag revolvers tho, they're practically Unobtanium right now.

The more you post, the more your ignorance shows. Folks have been handloading the .32-20 to match what the .327 does for 100yrs. To be as opinionated as you are, you should know this. You're blinded by your unfounded bias. And it is unfounded. I've never heard anyone hate on a cartridge they know so little about as you are doing here. As I said, the advantage is availability. If you can't be bothered with handloading the .32-20, I guess that leaves more for the rest of us. The cartridge has been in production since the 1870's with readily available ammo, not what I'd call "obscure" but everyone's scale is not in the same place.

Both the .32H&R and .327 were designed to fit into much more compact packages. The .32-20 was originally a rifle cartridge and its length precludes its use in anything but a full sized revolver. The question I have is this, why would you take a cartridge like the .327 that was designed to fit into guns more like the Single Six and put it in a platform even bigger than .32-20's? You're taking one of its greatest advantages and leaving it on the table. This advantage is why I have two .32H&R Single Sixes. Because a relatively potent centerfire cartridge in a Single Six is a wonderful thing but here you are giving it away. Did I call you a "fool" for doing so? No.

BTW, what does the 150 years of manufacture have to do with .32-20? Do you base your purchases on how long things have been around? You must love .22 Short then!

Guns! Lots of them! The .32-20 was one of the most popular cartridges chambered in both the Winchester 1873 rifle and Colt SAA. Far greater availability than the .327. Which, as I said, is sad because I wanted it to be plentiful. I'm not hating on the .327, I lauded its appearance. It's just the cold hard fact is that there are plain few guns available for it.

Even if they had it at Walmart most people wouldn't be able to afford to shoot it at the prices it sells for. This is most certainly the reason people are scooping up the .32/.327 Mags over all the .32-20's you keep seeing collecting dust.

Ammo has always been expensive. That's why we handload. Wouldn't be much of a shooter if I didn't. I wouldn't be shooting any .32's if I didn't handload.

Is that why the .327 is so ubiquitous? Because people are just scooping them up wherever they find them? Or is it too struggling for relevance in the marketplace?

Well, compared to .32 S&W Long all the other rimmed .32's a .327 can shoot, .32 ACP is the cheapest online and at local stores more available. Something .32-20 can't claim and even tho I think .32-20 is obsolete if Ruger brought it back in the Blackhawk for a convertible at the very least the adjustable sights would make it the best .32-20 revolver ever made.

Ruger doesn't make what doesn't sell. For some odd reason and this has been noted many times in print (for those who still read), the .32's have never been overly popular in the US. The .327 is not exactly setting sales records so I wouldn't brag too much. Ruger did make a .32-20 Blackhawk. One run for Buckeye Sports, 30yrs ago. Way too much gun for the cartridge and popular only with collectors. If they offered it in the mid-frame, they might have something but it'll still be a brick.

 

[LOLBELL]

I don’t know where we are getting information on cost of ammunition for 327 vs 32-20 but this fool did a comparison using Hodgdon data and invoices from Starline when I bought brass. I paid $109 for 500 pieces of 327 and $119 for 500 pieces of 32-20 so that’s plus $.02 per round for the 32-20. Using all of the fool’s math loading W231 at a modest velocity with prices from Powder Valley it cost $.015 for 327 per round and $.011 per round for the 32-20 so 32-20 gained a little back. This is using this same lead bullet that I cast from free lead so projectile costs are the same. Same primer too. After doing all of the adding, subtracting, and goesintas ( that’s a fools way of saying dividing) it cost approximately $1.60 more per HUNDRED rounds to shoot the 32-20. Either one is easily accessible so no difference there. The 327 is a little easier to load due to it head spacing on a rim verses bottle necked, but my time is free so no added cost there.

A dollar and sixty cents per hundred.........I could have already retired if I hadn’t been foolishly shooting the Buckeye all these years. What was I thinking. Foolish thoughts I guess.

 

[Sistema1927]

Hey guys, it's getting old. Just decide to agree to disagree.

 

[TTv2]

Hey guys, it's getting old. Just decide to agree to disagree.

The .32-20 fanboys won't allow that, at some point everyone gets stuck in their ways.

 

[CraigC]

The .32-20 fanboys won't allow that, at some point everyone gets stuck in their ways.

That tactic ain't gonna work. Like I said, I was touting the superiority of the .327 long before you came along. Because it IS a better cartridge. I was going to have one built off my Bisley .32H&R and also bought 500rds of brass from Freedom Arms before the Single Seven was introduced. I just never bought one. I have an aversion to stainless steel, so I didn't get too excited about the first batch. Don't have much need for what one does over the .32H&R's I already have so by the time the blued Bisley was available, I wasn't in much of a hurry to get one. The problem, as I've said numerous times, is that there are too few guns available. I'm not going to replace my Browning 53 with a Henry.

 

[GarrettJ]

In an attempt to keep this from devolving into a full-blown purse fight, I'll post my findings and try to steer back to the original topic.

I had loaded some ammo using Hornady XTP bullets in 90 gr/.30 and 85 gr/.32 using AA#9 powder and CCI#400 primers for both cartridges. I was shooting at 25 yards over the chronograph. I had initially tried to get over to the range's 50-yard bay to shoot groups there, but nearly got stuck in the process, so decided to stick to the shorter bays which had been plowed recently. Temps were in the mid-teens, I was getting light snow off and on, and the hands were getting pretty cold part way in. I could probalby do better under more favorable circumstances, but at least I had consistent conditions for both guns/loads.

It was getting later in the afternoon, and it got too dark for the chronograph to pick up shots reliably before I was finished, so I didn't get all the way through the .30 Carbine loads. I did get up through mid-range .30 loads, which produced a velocity around 1580 fps. Best accuracy was a 2.7" 6-shot group.

The top-end .327 load gave a velocity of 1780 fps. and 6-shot group sizes ranged from 2.2" to 1.7".

I need to get out and play with both some more. But I'm happy with both of these. Initially I was thinking of replacing the .30C with the .327, and I may still do so. But knowing how I am, I'll probably end up just keeping both.

 

[TTv2]

That tactic ain't gonna work. Like I said, I was touting the superiority of the .327 long before you came along. Because it IS a better cartridge. I was going to have one built off my Bisley .32H&R and also bought 500rds of brass from Freedom Arms before the Single Seven was introduced. I just never bought one. I have an aversion to stainless steel, so I didn't get too excited about the first batch. Don't have much need for what one does over the .32H&R's I already have so by the time the blued Bisley was available, I wasn't in much of a hurry to get one. The problem, as I've said numerous times, is that there are too few guns available. I'm not going to replace my Browning 53 with a Henry.

I'll give you that the Browning and the Marlin may be better rifles than the Henry, I assume you can't accept a lever action without a side gate and the Henry lacks that with the .327. IDK if you can put a scope on the Marlin, I don't like how a scope mounts on 92 actions, but I know the Henry can and in the proper place for a scope. I'm not saying I love the Henry, but what features it has and in .327, I think it's better and if I wanted a 1866/73, Marlin, whatever... I'd get it in something not .32-20.

Revolvers is a different story, while I appreciate the age and history of stuff like the Police Positive and the older S&W's, those guns compared to today's are obsolete. For me and others, the sights are unusable, the triggers, especially in DA, heavy and horrible, and almost all of them have long barrels. With .32Mag/.327 you have a good variety and all have better triggers and sights.

I'll leave it there, I'd just be repeating myself, but I will say maybe those specifically buying .32-20 over .327 aren't so much fools, they're dreamers.

 

[CraigC]

I'll give you that the Browning and the Marlin may be better rifles than the Henry, I assume you can't accept a lever action without a side gate and the Henry lacks that with the .327. IDK if you can put a scope on the Marlin, I don't like how a scope mounts on 92 actions, but I know the Henry can and in the proper place for a scope. I'm not saying I love the Henry, but what features it has and in .327, I think it's better and if I wanted a 1866/73, Marlin, whatever... I'd get it in something not .32-20.

You do way too much assuming. The Browning is a better rifle than anything else, Marlin included. I got it 23yrs ago, long before the .327 was a thing. I don't care about the loading gate, nor do I have anything against Henry, else I wouldn't have a Henry .357. The Browning is just a significantly nicer rifle and it came first. If given the choice again, I would still take the Browning in the cartridge you hate. Now if Rossi offered a new 1892-based rifle in .327, I'll be first in line. Until then, I'll be the happy dreamer with the .32-20.

Marlins are as easily scoped as a Henry. You should know this. I think 1866/1873 guns in .32-20 are grossly overweight, as are the .357's. My 1873 is a Deluxe Sporting Rifle .38-40, which I'm sure you also do not approve of. You might ask yourself why someone would buy one when .44 Specials and .45Colts were available, rather than throw around words like "fool". You are obviously free to buy guns chambered in whatever cartridges you like and I will do the same.

Revolvers is a different story, while I appreciate the age and history of stuff like the Police Positive and the older S&W's, those guns compared to today's are obsolete. For me and others, the sights are unusable, the triggers, especially in DA, heavy and horrible, and almost all of them have long barrels. With .32Mag/.327 you have a good variety and all have better triggers and sights.

I don't even know what you're talking about. Don't think you do either and seem to have a lot of stuff backwards. A 100yr old S&W or Colt DA is going to be infinitely smoother than anything produced today. You're again at a disadvantage because the first .32-20 I was ever exposed to was Dad's old Army Special, which is slicker than butter on glass. My Police Positive is about the same. Not sure what advantage you think "modern" sights have either.

.....I will say maybe those specifically buying .32-20 over .327 aren't so much fools, they're dreamers.

Or maybe they know something you clearly do not. You could try asking, rather than slinging names and judgments? You can start by not acting like I'm here dumping on your favorite cartridge, like you're doing one of mine. Just a thought.....

 

[GarrettJ]

So back in my original post I wrote:

I see in general they show the .30 Carbine has the advantage in velocity. Although all tested that cartridge with a longer barrel than used for the .327. And some will use a solid test barrel vs. a revolver with its inherent cylinder gap. I'm thinking it will be close enough for my needs.

Now that the daylight is lasting a little longer, I was finally able to get out and finish some of my loadup work. In trying to compare as closely as possible between the two cartridges, I settled on the 85 gr. XTP in the .327 and the 90 gr. XTP in the .30C. As noted above, I expect the .30 to shoot a bit faster than the .327.

I loaded both cartridges using AA#9. When I got to the top of the published load range with both, I was surprised to find the .327 beat the .30 by a fair margin.

The 90 gr. .30C topped out at 1640 fps from the 7.5” barrel. In comparison, the 85 gr. .327 got up to 1780 fps from the shorter 5.5” barrel.

I’m still pretty happy with both. The shorter bays at the shooting range were all filled up today, so I set up at the 100 yd. bay. Shooting from a sandbag, I was able to get a 5-shot group of 6-1/2” at that distance, using iron sights. I’m pretty happy with that outcome.

 

[LOLBELL]

The .32-20 fanboys won't allow that, at some point everyone gets stuck in their ways.

32-20 fanboys and stuck in our ways, now that’s funny. Looking in a mirror ever cross our mind?

 

[swg1]

Already got the S7, 327. Would love to pick up a 32-20. But I'll probably get a 44-40 first. Any 30 carbine I have will be fired in my,... carbine. I'll pass on that in a revolver. Now an AMT that worked or an Enforcer pistol, those have some possibility. I'm pretty flexible here.

 

[JustsayMo]

The AE 100 JSP clocks just under 1500 fps in my 5.5" Single Seven. They expand in water and in meat at ranges I would shoot either. Haven't tried them in gel.





About 0:40 into the video shows me shooting the AE 100gr JSP into water jugs.

 

[LOLBELL]

That 100 AE load is brutal in the Sevens. I have got over 1700 FPS out of the Blackhawk but tend to not use the heavy stuff in the SS especially the Birdhead.

 

[Dunross]

Got lucky weekend before last and found three boxes of the 100 AE at a small-town show for 2019 retail. I jumped on those straight away. The weekend before that at a different show a dealer had three boxes of the same stuff that he wanted $55 a box for. That was the one and only time I walked away from it. I'm still saving those for my carbine. They are unpleasant out of a short pistol barrel.

Nice video. I would not have thought those 100 AE jsp's would have expanded from a pistol length barrel.

 

[hdbiker]

My 9mm cyl. doesn't shoot nearly as accurate in my Blackhawlk as the .357 cyl. does . hdbiker

 

[Offhand McFlan]

The 327 also gets my vote. More practical and a huge ammo selection (youre not relegated to just 327 Fed). It will shoot most other 32 pistol cartridges too.

 

[TTv2]

My 9mm cyl. doesn't shoot nearly as accurate in my Blackhawlk as the .357 cyl. does . hdbiker

use different ammo