Model 16-4 Questions

[0le]

Here are three pictures of my 16-4, with it's 8 3/8 inch barrel. Should I modernize it and have the cylinder reamed out for the .327 Federal cartridge, or should I leave it alone in it's current .32 magnum configuration? Is there a significant ballistic improvement to the .327 to warrant the expense? Is there any collector value to the original configuration? What would be the pros and cons of either? Thank you in advance for your input in my decision.

 

[bgrafsr]

I recently had my 6" re-chambered for the .327 Federal Mag after reading about its performance, and it looks like there is some improvement over the .32 Magnum. Whether the modification will alter the collectibility of the firearm does not matter to me. I do though, have a 4" 16-4 also, which I will keep as is.

A fellow forum member, Hammerdown, definitely thinks the .327 Federal Magnum is a lot better, and it was because of him that I made the decision to have mine done as well.

 

[S&WIowegan]

First, these 16-4s do have collector value in that they sell for around $1k depending on condition vs the $325. I paid for my NIB 6" in 1990. The 16-4s didn't sell well initially but have really taken off in the last 10 yrs. Yours appears to have been fired but in excellent condition(what about box and papers, tools?). If you have it converted it will affect value for some collectors.

The gun is very easily reamed to fit .327 Fed. Mag. I bought a reamer from Dave Manson and had mine done locally. Hamilton Bowen is very active in building and converting to .327. The cartridge is dramatically more powerful than the .32 H&R and these 20 yr. old K-frame 16-4s are one of the few factory guns available that do the round justice.

Try it, you'll like it!

 

[cgt4570]

Bowen has new replacement cylinders that he can chamber in .327. If you are concerned with keeping your gun original, you can have a new cylinder fitted to it. Then, if you ever want to sell it, you can simply swap the original cylinder back in to make it an original gun.

 

[civil1977]

....these 20 yr. old L-frame 16-4s are one of the few factory guns available that do the round justice.

I think you mean K-frame.

Anyway I'm fan of the 16-4 and .32 caliber also but I would not modify my original cylinder. I would instead pay the extra cost of having a new cylinder made. The 16-4s are collectable guns and any modification will hurt collector value. Granted, we're only talking about a small change in the length of the chambers but its still a change. Also, of the 8,800 or so 16-4s made the 6" barrels where the most common, with the 4" and 8 3/8" barrels less common. So you have an uncommon version of an low production gun and I would consider that.

Here's my 16-4 in the middle with its 17-6 and 14-5 classmates.

 

[PMRet]

The 16-4's aren't as scarce as the K-32's, but they're still highly sought after, so I wouldn't convert one of mine. I think the idea of an extra cylinder in .327 is the way to go, the best of both worlds.

 

[kennyb]

i wouldn't alter mine either...they are collectable and scarce...if i need a 327mag.i'll simply buy one

 

[peyton]

I just converted two of mine, but they are with a 4 inch barrel. I got tired of waiting for S&W to make a K frame .327 revolver!!!!!!!!

 

[S&WIowegan]

I just converted two of mine, but they are with a 4 inch barrel. I got tired of waiting for S&W to make a K frame .327 revolver!!!!!!!!

Exactly!!! Both Ruger and S&W treated the cartridge as if it was only of use in little pop guns. Ruger at least now chambers both the GP100 and the Blackhawk in .327. I converted my 16-4 and a Ruger Blackhawk to .327 2 yrs. ago.