Marlin 327 Federal

[canon6]

Anyone heard any poop on whether or not Marlin will chamber the 1894 in 327 Federal. I have a Ruger SP101 and a NEF in the 327 and flat love it, but a lever gun would be a hoot.    Doug

[Swampman]

Loaded down it might be good for CAS.  I'm guessing it's the equal to the .32-20.

What would it do that the .357 1894C doesn't do better?  I guess I'm asking why did they bring this cartridge to market?  Did we need/want another novelty cartridge?

[victorcharlie]

I haven't heard of this round.....but now that I've read about it........it looks interesting....

It was designed for small frame pistols.....

http://www.federalcartridge.com/default.asp?menu=1&s1=4&s2=6&id=171&brand=5&year=2007

[canon6]

Swampman, you do bring up the essential question  WHY. it is not a 357, but it is better than a 38+P in the top loading.The revolver it was brought out in is a great one , Ruger SP101, and I like 32's.Do we NEED another cartridge is the on going question, " 1893=WHY DO WE NEED THIS NEW FANGLED 30-30 WINCHESTER, WHAT WILL IT DO A 45-70 WILL NOT"  .
maybe a simplistic approach but I have nothing against new, as long as it is in a single shot, lever gun or revolver.    Doug

[Swampman]

I had an SP101, but like all Ruger double actions it was way too heavy for anything but the night stand drawer.  If they chambered the Single Six in this cartridge(if that's possible) it would make a handy little field gun.  I like a .32 caliber pistol, but not one that weighs as much as an L-frame S&W.

[canon6]

I do agree about the weight issue,I have been carrying a double action revolver for 50+ years , I have tried single actions and this old dog doesn't learn new tricks well.So a Ruger Single Six, albeit a great little revolver is as useless as a lead balloon to me.        Doug

[S A Webbx1]

I was on Ruger's site and the SP 101 in 327 was 28 oz vs 39 oz for a single six in 5.5"  Sp 101 aren't ultra-lite unobtanium weights but they aren't going to anchor a carrier either.  And the single six ain't exactly svelte.  The comparison would be better with the 7.62 x 25 Tokarev, which worked plenty well in subguns on the Russian front.  High intensity smaller bore cartridge with good sectional density but in a platform that is suitable for high volume handloading with no bottlenecks or weaker guns to destroy.  The 357 wouldn't do much that the 38/44 loads wouldn't do either.  Is there an overlap in performance with the 32-20?  Of course, but not without some real differences that some, though clearly not all, can appreciate.  If I can get up to 30 carbine levels with a straight wall cartridge that will function with a variety of bullet types and weights at a wide range of velocities through double action revolvers, a levergun and my progressive press, I'll be happy.  Or could be with an adjustable sight [windage AND elevation] version

[big medicine]

I guess I'm one of those people that see the glass half full. Hey it is a new cartridge and worth checking out for myself. If we had the mentality that only needed cartridges should exist then there wouldn't be much need for anything other than the 22LR, 30-06 for rifles and the 44 mag for handguns. Those three are enough to get any job done, but how boring that would be.

This same thing was said about the 308 Marlin Express last year, why..it isn't needed? Just because is as good of excuse as I need to get another gun. I like messing with new cartridges, being the first to try the limits." For not being and elk rifle" My 308 Marlin Express sure did kill an elk dead last year.

I guess I just have that stubborn jar head corpsman mentality. When I'm told you can't do that, or that rifle isn't a deer cartridge ect, ect I just have to prove it to myself that I can.

I welcome the 327 mag I hope Marlin does bring it out in the 1894, and I hope I'm one of the first people to kill a deer with it. Kinda like my 1899 Krag carbine, why kill a deer with that when I have a 300 Win mag??? Because it is fun, and I can!