How about a new Ruger?

[Rusty]

Ruger has been introducing quite a few new handguns in .327 Federal. The Single Seven, the SP101 with different barrel lengths, well I'm ready for a long gun.

How about a 77/327? The platform is already pretty much in place. A .327 would offer something in a long gun that would be pretty close to a .32/20 but with all the shorter cases that could be fired in it there would be a lot of versatility and with reloading it would offer economy just about equal to the .22 LRs that we can't seem to find any more.

[gamekeeper]

That would be really neat, I'd also like Ruger to make the 96 Carbine in .22 Hornet....
Then I would have the problem of which one to buy?...

[bdhold]

that round needs to be in a levergun

[Rusty]

I agree Bulldog, a 96/327 would be nice but I don't see them ever bringing that back. I would think the 77 bolt action would require a lot less to get into production.

[AJMD429]

It wouldn't take much at all for them to make 77's in 327 Fed and 45 Colt, since they already make them in 357 Mag and 44 Mag. The 'Hornet' family might be nice, in regular '22' version, or the 'K' version, or the 17 Hornet (I have one in a Contender Carbine, and am getting to really like that cartridge).

As far as the 96's, my 96/44 is still one of my favorite leverguns, even though everyone who sees it tells me how it doesn't look like a levergun should (but probably drools when they see a Marlin model 62, or a Winchester model 88 ). I also have 96's in 22 LR, 17 HMR, and 22 WMR, but would love to see them make 96's in 45 Colt or 357 Mag for sure, but 480 Ruger would have been a natural for them too.

I don't have any 327 Fed guns (yet?) and other than the fragile brass, I really like the 32-20, so I'd "settle" for pretty much any new gun any maker turns out in 32-20 (maybe a Desert Eagle... ). Seriously though a 96 or 77 or SP-101 in 32-20 would be really cool. Same for 327 for those who have that in their stable.

[DPris]

Your best bet for something like the 77 would be to lobby Lipsey's HARD.

Ruger no longer dips a toe like they used to with variations that would have a relatively limited market.
Lipsey's is willing to push the envelope in smaller numbers & when Ruger gets paid by the distributor up front, with a guaranteed bulk sale that takes Ruger off the hook in piling up inventory that goes nowhere, Ruger's willing to produce a couple thousand on order.

As far as the leverguns go, those never sold as Ruger had anticipated & they're just not worth further development.
Denis

[Grizz]

how about an AR.327? get some serious smokepole action . . .

[mikld]

Jes thinkin'. What niche would a 77/327 fill? Kinda small for hunting deer size game (?). Good "plinker" of course. Varmint (?) Howz the ballistics at "varmint" range? Not being critical of the idea, just enquiring minds wanna know...

A .327 in a levergun? Now that's a necessity...

[DPris]

I had one of the Marlins in .32 Mag.
Eventually let it go, couldn't find a use for it.

.22 does rabbits, .357 does deer, .44 Mag does bear.

Denis

[Old Ironsights]

The only Ruger I want these days is a CCO variant of their SR1911 and to restart the pistol caliber 96 series...

[Streetstar]

Ruger already catalogs too many variations of everything --- if they would slow down and up production on a few things they have slipped on, i'd be happier

for instance --- 7.5" .45 Colt stainless Blackhawk has been cataloged for years ---- but i've never seen one new

There are probably other examples

[Old Ironsights]

Ruger already catalogs too many variations of everything --- if they would slow down and up production on a few things they have slipped on, i'd be happier

for instance --- 7.5" .45 Colt stainless Blackhawk has been cataloged for years ---- but i've never seen one new

There are probably other examples

True, but then, no one makes a 4.25" Officer's frame 1911 since Colt dropped the ball at the advent of thick 9mm Plastiguns.

Now that people are remembering why thin is a good idea, I'd like to see Massad Ayoob's favorite 1911 variant made in Stainless OTC rather than $2000 custom...

[Rusty]

Jes thinkin'. What niche would a 77/327 fill? Kinda small for hunting deer size game (?). Good "plinker" of course. Varmint (?) Howz the ballistics at "varmint" range? Not being critical of the idea, just enquiring minds wanna know...

A .327 in a levergun? Now that's a necessity...

I was thinking a .327 in a rifle would be about equal to a .32/20. That would make it suitable for yotes, varmints and a short range deer rifle.

with .22 LRs being in such short supply they would also make an economical plinker.

[DPris]

We already gots two Marlin .32-20s, the .32 Mag didn't offer much over what I can do with Bubbles' little Marlins.

Lead or JHPs, either way, I can load those up for whatever niche might fall between .22 & .357 Mag.

The .327 Mag wouldn't offer much to us either, for all practical purposes.
That's just for us, others may differ.
Denis

[1894cfan]

For those of you that have a 30/30, why not try DOWNLOADING it? 5.5gr of 231 on up to about 8gr of Trail Boss with cast bullets ranging from 100gr on up to about 125gr on up to 30 carbine bullets ought to suit ya! Heck, even an unsized case with a .310 ball and .3cc Lee scoop of some fast burning powder out to about 25yds would get almost anyone chuckling.

[Griff]

As far as the leverguns go, ...just not worth further development.
Denis

I lobbied hard with Winchester for a re-introduction of the mdl 1892 in the mid '80s... A quality piece that would beat the socks off the Brazilian maker... but they said those same words... "not worth further development." I still don't understand... the development was done more'n a century ago...

[Old Savage]

Doris, the 327 operates at 45,000 lbs.

[DPris]

Griff,
I was referring to Ruger leverguns.

They didn't sell well enough to keep in production.

Theories about why not include their non-traditional approach.

Given that, there's no sound financial reason for Ruger to develop THEIR leverguns any further, as in bringing any back or adapting them to calibers that would not sell in large numbers.

The Winchesters, with traditional lines & designs that WERE developed over a hundred years ago, continue to sell.
Very little demand for Ruger's more modern levergun designs.

Incidentally, I also lobbied hard with USRAC to bring back a domestic 92 at an affordable price.
Zero interest.

Glad somebody's picked up the ball on 92s via Miroku, even if they are pricey & have the unwanted lockwork.
Denis

[BenT]

In northern WI the 96/44 sold well. A lot of gun shops owners were confused why Ruger discontinued them, because they sold so many of them.

[DPris]

May have sold regionally, but a Ruger rep told me they simply had not met Ruger's sales expectations & that's why they were dropped.
Denis

[Streetstar]

May have sold regionally, but a Ruger rep told me they simply had not met Ruger's sales expectations & that's why they were dropped.
Denis

Sounds like similar reasons the 44 mag semi auto carbines didnt survive

[MrMurphy]

Kind of funny that they've got that "nontraditional" design that's 115 years old....which sold well for a century.


I have no use for the .327, and for everyone with their pet new caliber of the minute, you have to remember, if it's not going to sell (well) you won't see a major manufacturer take the chance.

It's one thing for a company that only makes repro Sharps to a known market to try out a new caliber in what is a single shot weapon, a bit different to design a brand new weapon (or alter that design) which is definitely not cheap.


The manufacturer I used to work for, with rifles costing in the multiple car payment range, discussed changing to other (similar) calibers at one point.
Which, for the rifle in question, meant changing the barrel, and not much else. Others have done it.

Five years have passed. Still hasn't happened. The demand just isn't there.

[DPris]

We may be using different meanings for "non-traditional design".

When I use it, I refer not to the levergun as a class, but specifically to Ruger's approach, with no hammer & a plastic rotary magazine.

Aside from the old Savage 99 long out of print (and another non-traditional design), that configuration had not been around as a mainstream handgun-caliber rifle for 115 years, nor had their internals, which were adapted largely from Ruger's semi-auto 10/22 design, and not based on anything from either Savage or Browning designs.

The Savage died out many years ago, and it's too expensive to resurrect today.
It also was never chambered in handgun rounds.

Today's NEW levergun market is no longer PRIMARILY driven by generations of tradition, as an affordable hunting rifle.
The boltgun is now so cheap as a hunter, and newer generations so familiar with them, that they've largely replaced the once-entry-level (and relatively cheap) levergun for those uses.

Where I live, in the West where the levergun was King, you still see them, but come deer hunt the vast majority of the guns in the field are not leverguns like my Grandpa's 1951 Model 94 in .30-30, they're scoped boltguns, even in the brush.

Older guys, like me, still appreciate the old 92 & 94, but the market's changed to where a good levergun's more expensive, and nostalgia drives the market almost as much as practical use, particularly with the current Winchesters.

For those who do still buy leverguns, the situation with the Rugers indicated they simply prefer more traditional patterns, with hammers.
It was the market that didn't support the guns, not Ruger.

The Ruger 96 variants were not traditional in looks or function, and were non-traditional both cosmetically & internally.
And they just didn't sell enough for Ruger to keep 'em going.

When I say there's no point in Ruger doing further development in THAT levergun program, that's why.
And most particularly- if they couldn't sell in .22LR & .44 Mag, there's NO way they could make a profit in developing for fringe calibers.
Denis

[piller]

Does T/C make a rifle barrel in .327? If they or NEF would make one, I would have to buy a single shot. I am aware that it is not a really popular caliber, but I would buy a rifle in that caliber to go with the .327 SP101 that we have. At the distance I have seen coyotes lately, it would be an excellent choice. The 32-20 is long out of production, and the .327 duplicates it. So what if it is not the equal of a .357.

Now, I wonder if it could be made to work in some sort of small semi-auto carbine? It is slim enough in diameter to have plenty of metal around it without making too much weight. As far as the Ruger leverguns go, I got into buying guns too late to get one. They were already discontinued before I heard about them.

[DPris]

Piller,
For purposes of discussion, I were discussing.
Only said there'd be no real use for me & my situation, never said the .327 Mag couldn't be useful for anybody else, or that the .357 Mag was a better choice.

There are dozens of rifle calibers that offer some overlap; in my own case I get by with .223, .30-30, .308, .30-06, and .45-70.
Have a good store of .32-20 components left over from Bubbles' CAS days, could plug that caliber in if needed.
Those cover it all for me.

Which does not mean there's no use for the 7mm-08, the .243, the .300 Win Mag, or the .416 Rigby for others.

Marlin has plans for caliber expansions in their leverguns, so there's a remote possibility there.

As far as a new semi-auto carbine goes, probably not enough demand in .327 Mag.
Denis

[3leggedturtle]

It wouldn't take much at all for them to make 77's in 327 Fed and 45 Colt, since they already make them in 357 Mag and 44 Mag. The 'Hornet' family might be nice, in regular '22' version, or the 'K' version, or the 17 Hornet (I have one in a Contender Carbine, and am getting to really like that cartridge).

As far as the 96's, my 96/44 is still one of my favorite leverguns, even though everyone who sees it tells me how it doesn't look like a levergun should (but probably drools when they see a Marlin model 62, or a Winchester model 88 ). I also have 96's in 22 LR, 17 HMR, and 22 WMR, but would love to see them make 96's in 45 Colt or 357 Mag for sure, but 480 Ruger would have been a natural for them too.

I don't have any 327 Fed guns (yet?) and other than the fragile brass, I really like the 32-20, so I'd "settle" for pretty much any new gun any maker turns out in 32-20 (maybe a Desert Eagle... ). Seriously though a 96 or 77 or SP-101 in 32-20 would be really cool. Same for 327 for those who have that in their stable.

I think about these combinations all the time. Especially a 22H or 25/20. If you could switch barrels like on the rimfires it would be all the better.

[piller]

I have a Rossi 92 in .480 Ruger, and it pairs perfectly with my Super Redhawk in the same caliber. Maybe Rossi could make the Model 92 in the .327 caliber for a special run. How many rifles and at what cost would be required to make enough money for the company to tool up for it?

I like the .327 for its ability to use a 115 grain lead bullet intended for the .32-20, especially because I haven't found a .32-20 that I can afford that is in good condition. I just was never turned on by the .357 Magnum. Your mileage may vary.

[DPris]

Don't quote me on this, but a certain maker in Ilion says the .32-20 is the most requested caliber they get for a bring-back.
And that same un-named maker in Ilion also has plans for caliber expansion in their handgun-calibered leverguns.

Can't say which company & can't give a time-frame, but....
Denis

[barbarossa]

Ruger should bring back the no 3 in 357mag,44mag,22lr,and 22mag and possibly 30/30

[Ysabel Kid]

that round needs to be in a levergun

+1

Would make an awesome companion piece to the Single Seven.

Or, how about a slide action like the Remington Model 25?

[AJMD429]

Ruger should bring back the no 3 in 357mag,44mag,22lr,and 22mag and possibly 30/30

Or sell them with rifled but unchambered barrels so you could make them whatever you wanted. Through a custom subcontractor if needed for legal/liability reasons.

[AJMD429]

One thing on the 327 Fed is that it IS a rather high pressure round, and may not be suitable for just any lever gun design. Have to ask the engineers.

Speaking of engineering, I wonder how hard it would be to make a switch-barrel Ruger No.3...?

[JerryB]

Well Doc AJ that sounds like a couple of questions for Buck. my old 92 Winchester 32wcf still fits that place just fine for me.

[Tactical Lever]

Ruger should bring back the no 3 in 357mag,44mag,22lr,and 22mag and possibly 30/30

I would like one of those, but I would like a few changes (probably a new guns worth). Reportedly it was hard to make them shoot accurately, and I believe it was because of the forend/barrel band arrangement. I would like to see no barrel band, and maybe a receiver support forend like on the BLR.

I was never a fan of just a safety in many cases. I would rather see a manually cocked rifle.

And just for a neat caliber that I would like to see come back: the .256 Winchester Magnum.

[yooper2]

In northern WI the 96/44 sold well. A lot of gun shops owners were confused why Ruger discontinued them, because they sold so many of them.

Likewise in the UP. Same with the old Deerfield. You still see a lot of those in the yearly buck photos at the general store.



Eric

[Tactical Lever]

One thing on the 327 Fed is that it IS a rather high pressure round, and may not be suitable for just any lever gun design. Have to ask the engineers.

Speaking of engineering, I wonder how hard it would be to make a switch-barrel Ruger No.3...?

The pressure should be no problem. It would have very little back thrust against the bolt face being a straight walled case. The hoop, that is the chamber surrounding the shell would be of greater concern. But it would not take too much metal to contain it.