.327 vs .30 carbine [Archive] - Gunboard's Forums

: .327 vs .30 carbine

10-04-2008, 02:13 PM
Anyone shot the new .327 in Ruger or Charter Arms?
Looking at www.chuckhawks.com/327_federal.htm article, it looks very close to .30 carbine performance in an 18 1/2 " bbl.. The .327 gives away only about 500fps going from an 18 1/2 " bbl to a 3 1/16 inch barrel; 435 ft-lb from a snubbie isn't shabby. I don't know how the .30carbine performs in a snubbie. I am thinking that the .30ammo will always be easier to find, but the .327 is rimmed aiding its use in revolvers. I know that Ruger and Tauras make .30 carbine larger revolvers already.

10-04-2008, 03:54 PM
When I tested the Ruger in .327 the Federal 115 gr. Gold Dot load produced velocities superior to the 9mm+P+ out of my Glock 19. If you are a round gun fan I think this new round is a winner. I'd like to see S&W bring out their new K-frame Night Guard in this caliber with a 7 round cylinder!

10-04-2008, 09:46 PM
30 Carbine, with the usual laods, will perform poorly, with enormous muzzle blast and flash and significantly reduced velocity in a snubby. Proper load development should improve that, but it is really a rifle round and not a pistol round.

I have shot 30 carbine in a Ruger Single action, with a 6.5" barrel. Awful lot of noise and commotion indicative of powder wasted on the open air past the muzzle, didn't have a chrony to determine exact velocity, though.

Considering that the 327 Federal was designed and loads developed for handgun use, I suspect it will normally be a better choice. Besides - nobody chambers a snubby in 30 carbine...

10-04-2008, 10:12 PM
Besides - nobody chambers a snubby in 30 carbine...

LOL. No, unless they want a flaregun. :D

El Bibliotecario
10-06-2008, 11:19 PM
LOL. No, unless they want a flaregun. :D


Having once owned a 7.5" Ruger .30 carbine revolver, I'd say that pretty much says it all. This was the weapon that convinced me to switch from earplugs to earmuffs. I'm not sure why anyone would want a snubnosed weapon chambered for a round designed to be fired in an eighteeen inch barrel, but it's your money and your ears and I think you should follow your heart.

11-27-2008, 02:06 AM
On the other hand, I'd as soon not follow my heart downrange...

.327 might make a neat little round in a Winchester '92 clone. A super .32-20!


11-27-2008, 04:00 AM
If your talking for a handgun with those two cartridges I would choose the 327. If your talking for a rifle I would choose the 30 carbine. Now if anyone would make a rifle, (like a Marlin 1894 or a Ruger Semi-Auto like the 44Mag Carbine) for the 327, I could see it as a more viable cartridge over the 30 carbine and it would make a better handgun, rifle combo cartridge. That has yet to be seen. Will it happen? If your a 327 fan, one can only hope.
From a 3 1/16" barrel the 115gr. 327 delivers 1300fps. The 110gr. 357 from a 4" is 1295. The 115gr. load in 327 from an 18 1/2" barrel gives a velocity of 1750fps. Rifle loads for the 158gr. 357 run 1830fps. If using the lighter faster 110gr. that should increase. I can't find any data for this as a rifle load.
Now of course, if a rifle is manufactured for the 327 it will probably have the correct twist to stabilize the 115gr. bullet. I believe rifles for the 357 have a twist to better stabilize the heavier bullets and so accuracy comes into play also if using a lighter bullet like the 110gr.. Maybe not much of a factor.
Unless you already have handguns in 32 H&R Magnum or 32 S&W long or short, why get the 327?
I still feel the 357 is the better cartridge and really see no need for the 327. And the 357 is a proven cartridge that has been around for decades. Especially if you handload. And before it's said, I know everyone doesn't handload and some want a little less recoil and blast than the 357 125 or 158gr. loads but, there is always the lighter 110gr. factory load in 357 that will fill that niche.