Nagant M1895 and .327 Federal Magnum? PLEASE READ!

Discussion in 'Curio & Relic Zone' started by griff30, Mar 25, 2008.

  1. griff30

    griff30 Member

    903
    0
    I understand the .32 H&R Magnum will chamber in the Nagant M1895. After reading up on the HOT new .327 Federal Magnum, I can't help but wonder about the possibilities of a seven shot pistol in that cartridge for around $60!

    The Nagant works well with the .32 H&R Magnum." While the .32 H&R Magnum is a near equivalent to the .38 Special +P, the .327 Federal Magnum reaches the levels of the .357 Magnum, with velocities of up to 1400 fps (420 m/s) from the short-barreled Ruger SP-101. "--wikipedia ADD to that the gas seal of the Nagant and longer barbell and this round could make the Nagant M1895 surplus dry up overnight!
    The 327 is longer than the 32 hr mag but a little shorter than the 7.62x38mmR so on paper it would work.Just wondering if anyone else thought of it?
    I liked the write up on the new Ruger spo1 but $60 for a Nagant or $600 for the Ruger? You tell me if this doesn't sound fun!
    http://www.shootingtimes.com/ammunition/st327_110707/

    It has been asked but never answered here. I will search more elsewhere...
     
  2. Dave_H

    Dave_H Member

    247
    0
    .32 H&R magnum is commonly used by some folks in the Nagant M1895. It should be noted that it is hotter that the original military 7.62x38, and the bullets are something like .003 bigger around.
    The H&R magnum is already pushing the envelope for the Nagant.
     

  3. griff I asked the same question in another thread, and I wish I had an answer for you. I am afraid that the caliber is so new that the only way to know the answer is to go and try it. That just isn't my cup of tea, but I'm sure we will hear in time if it is possible.

    From what I have read about the Nagant revolver, it is a very solid firearm. Dave you are the first I have heard say the .32 H&R is pushing the envelope. May I ask why you say this and where I could read about it? If you are right then there would be no reason to test the .327mag as a blowup is all but guaranteed.
     
  4. Dave_H

    Dave_H Member

    247
    0
    Well when I first consindering getting a Nagant I heard all about the ammo substitutions, and I looked around at whatever info I could find online.
    I compared the data I could find on the original military ammo ( sketchy ) to .32 H&R magnum.
    Pushing the envelope is my own phrase, perhaps poorly worded. As far as I could tell from what I read then the .32 H&R magnum is a bit more potent than the original military ammo. So when we shoot that stuff in a Nagant, we are already going farther than what the gun was designed to shoot. That is all I meant by that.
    Lots of people shoot the stuff with no problems, so the Nagant is obviously a robust and well made gun.
    I'd hesitate to try a new more powerful round, since I have know way of knowing for certain what the upper threshold for pressure that the Nagant can handle.

    A good question for a gunsmith I suppose.
     
  5. Do you think that since any .32 ammo used is short and does not make a complete seal that the pressure is greatly reduced so it doesn't effect it?
     
  6. Dave_H

    Dave_H Member

    247
    0
    Well some gas is escaping, so that may be. I have no idea whether that reduces the pressure in the cylinder by a large amount or not.
     
  7. neothespian

    neothespian Member

    4,578
    0
    I've REALLY wanted to get the MN revolver, but I'm just worried about if firing .32 in the stock setup is actually safe. They have conversion cylinders but they cost as much as the gun does and they require "fitting", which makes me question them after the mod is done.

    My question from anyone who is truly experienced in firing the .32 round out of the MN revolver is if it is safe? I really don't care about power that much since it is a collector piece but I really would like to fire it more if I could find ammo that didn't cost me 50 cents a pop.
     
  8. This is the best article I have read on the matter. I have not personally done it but the writer of this site has and is very confident that there is no problems. I am still on the fence.

    http://www.sff.net/people/sanders/nagant.html
     
  9. neothespian

    neothespian Member

    4,578
    0
    Well, after weighing the options, I think I may have enough reason to buy one of these. Would be cool to have a compliment to the M44, and hell I'm thinking about buying ANOTHER M44 just to keep stock since they still have them for so cheap. That and I feel bad going up to J and G and only buying one set of things (need to buy 7.62x39).
     
  10. hrabiaA

    hrabiaA Member

    1
    0
    I own two natant revolvers. One manufactured in USSR in 1944, another manufactured in Imperial Russia in 1913. I shot a lot of .327 Magnum out of both. Works perfect in the older 1913 revolver. Very hard to remove the spent casings out of the newer Soviet 1944 one. No cracks. Shots are uncomfortably loud, I use ear plugs even if I shoot outside. I read that Leon Nagant the Belgian designed of this revolver had a specification to build 7.32mm caliber revolver capable of killing a horse on the distance of 50 meters (51 yards). I suspect that the original Nagant military ammo was about equal to the now days' .327 Magnum. The gas seal was to harvest even more energy to meet the task of killing a horse at 51 yard. The gas seal, by the way, does not work with .327 or any ammunition other than the weird 7.62X38R Nagant proprietary ammo.
     
  11. eldarbeast

    eldarbeast Supporting Member

    Huh...?

    ajole?

    Little help here!

    eldar
     
  12. Bull

    Bull Just a Man Supporting Member


    The bots are back!
     
  13. lklawson

    lklawson Staff Member

    I don't know if it's a bot (doesn't seem like it) but the part about the gas seal and the wonky ammo is right.

    Peace favor your sword,
    Kirk
     
  14. undeRGRound

    undeRGRound ROLL wif Da MOLE! Supporting Member

    23,326
    232
    INDY
    Two words, and this is w/o reading any responses:

    K-BooM! :eek:
     
  15. eldarbeast

    eldarbeast Supporting Member

    Thought so.

    Thanks for the confirmation.

    eldar
     
  16. moona11

    moona11 King of you Monkeys Lifetime Supporter

    13,800
    1,740
    Iraq
    Kids don't try this a home (I mean you Kirk)
     
  17. lklawson

    lklawson Staff Member

    :)

    I'd rather use the right ammo.

    Peace favor your sword (mobile)
     
  18. moona11

    moona11 King of you Monkeys Lifetime Supporter

    13,800
    1,740
    Iraq
    Ya I got 1000 rds of the old stuff and 500 PPU Nice shooter
     
  19. undeRGRound

    undeRGRound ROLL wif Da MOLE! Supporting Member

    23,326
    232
    INDY
    Well, that's coming from a Mole that knows enough to just get in trouble,
    Most Times ;) :D But I have never heard of a weapon of that vintage being able
    to handle a modern Magnum Loading. I understand they were made up until (or past)
    WW2, but even that time frame, considering advances in metallurgy Across the Board,
    it just seems to be nearly a no-brainer. The .003" larger bullet Alone tells me it's a bad idea :eek:
     
  20. MaryB

    MaryB Supporting Member

    I looked at one f these, the thousand pound trigger pull(okay more like 12...) put me off.