Thought about a .327 design

[19-3Ben]

Aside from anything else, keep in mind that just like many people take their S&W 340 and load it with .38spl, the carrier would have the option to load .32mag and other .32 loadings in this hypothetical gun if recoil was really a problem for them.
Just because the option for more power is there doesn't mean it's the only option.

 

[JFrame]

Aside from anything else, keep in mind that just like many people take their S&W 340 and load it with .38spl, the carrier would have the option to load .32mag and other .32 loadings in this hypothetical gun if recoil was really a problem for them.
Just because the option for more power is there doesn't mean it's the only option.

That is a good point. Again, my issue is with the uncertainty of the .327 magnum as a long-term market presence, which makes me think manufacturers would be hesitant to go for a radically new approach requiring major factory retooling.

But I am a revolver fan, and I would love to see the market expanded with new and novel ideas that stretch the limits of what we consider a viable revolver option. I hope some manufacturer either proves me wrong, or the .327 demonstrates sufficient market longevity and presence to encourage said manufacturers.


.

 

[Guillermo]

I would love to see the market expanded with new and novel ideas that stretch the limits of what we consider a viable revolver option

as would I.

but I am a "watch and see" guy. There are a lot of ideas that end up being no better than what we have already got.

And I am pretty happy with what I have already got. (9mm, 38spl, .357, 45ACP, 44 magnum)

But I am watching...

 

[JFrame]

as would I.

but I am a "watch and see" guy. There are a lot of ideas that end up being no better than what we have already got.

And I am pretty happy with what I have already got. (9mm, 38spl, .357, 45ACP, 44 magnum)

But I am watching...

Yup -- that's basically my approach also. I ascribe to the quote, "Those who ride the leading edge of technology are prone to be cut."

However -- I'm more than willing to encourage other people to do it...


.

 

[Guillermo]

that's basically my approach also

hopefully it is understood that I am not anti .327.

I am trying to understand why it is a better mousetrap, if it in fact is.

They have some smart guys on THR and I look forward to learning.

 

[19-3Ben]

I really don't know that it's any more effective than a .38+p, which has been around for a bazillion years.
The reason, in THIS case, why it would be a "better mousetrap" is simply a matter of capacity. Where you would normally fit 5 rounds of .38/.357, you get get 6 of .327. Or, in this case, you can stuff 5 rounds of .327 into a cylinder smaller than would never work with .38.

 

[JFrame]

hopefully it is understood that I am not anti .327.

I am trying to understand why it is a better mousetrap, if it in fact is.

They have some smart guys on THR and I look forward to learning.

Oh, I totally agree...I try to keep an open mind -- and even in instances where a solution may not necessarily work for me, I will not discount the possibility that it could be the absolutely perfect solution for someone else.


.