• If you are being asked to change your password, and unsure how to do it, follow these instructions. Click here

277 sig fury

Seawolf69 said:
Yes it has a 20" barrel and weighs 7.1 lbs. The short barrel is on their semiautomatic rifle ($4100+) rifle. No idea why the 20" vs. the 16".
Click to expand...
When they launched the cross was advertised a 277 fury having a 16in barrel. And a 7 twist.

Instead they made a black 270win. Huh.

I was going to buy one of these when they got around to cambering for it, but I don't even have 277 bullets that will stabilize in a barrel they pulled out of a 1950's junk pile. I mean you'd at least think they'd follow the saami chambering and twist. Since they made the thing up. I just saved $1800.
 
Last edited:
akmtnhnt said:
When they launched the cross was advertised a 277 fury having a 16in barrel. And a 7 twist.

Instead they made a black 270win. Huh.

I was going to buy one of these when they got around to cambering for it, but I don't even have 277 bullets that will stabilize in a barrel they pulled out of a 1950's junk pile. I mean you'd at least think they'd follow the saami chambering and twist. Since they made the thing up.
Click to expand...
I've been waiting for this rifle for quite a while, so I am very happy to have it in my hands.
 
My guess is the 16" barrel is how the military wanted it in the new battle weapon. 16" barrel, and, enough punch to go thru a standard military bullet resistant vest, body armor?, at 600 yards. Sig answered with 277 fury set up. I bet for civilian use 20" barrel is better. The civilian ammo might have a different load?
I think the military round is suppose to have a muzzle velocity of 3000 fps out of the 16" set up. 140 grain projectiles.?
 
Lee Goodwin said:
My guess is the 16" barrel is how the military wanted it in the new battle weapon. 16" barrel, and, enough punch to go thru a standard military bullet resistant vest, body armor?, at 600 yards. Sig answered with 277 fury set up. I bet for civilian use 20" barrel is better. The civilian ammo might have a different load?
I think the military round is suppose to have a muzzle velocity of 3000 fps out of the 16" set up. 140 grain projectiles.?
Click to expand...
Sig has 4 different rounds available. The 1st being the hybrid poly tipped 150gr. $80/box, another hybrid 155gr match round $65/box; a 135gr fmj $33/box and a 130gr soft point hunting round at $40/box.

I picked up a few of the FMJ rounds. I figured I need the brass to reload
 
chindits said:
There will be no reduction in rounds down range for suppressive fire when your maneuver element is assaulting the objective up to its LOA. It's not precision shooting out there.
Click to expand...
The study that they did for Nam was that for every NVA or Black Pajamas killed it took 56K rounds. Now this was for all Services Combined (Army/USMC/Air Force/Navy). That is why the OD changed the M-16A2 to selective fire of Safe, semi & 3 shot burst. When Newbees got onto their first fire fights (and maybe last) would duck and empty a whole clip into nowhere.
Seasoned/Trained units would use selective fire(safe, semi, auto).
I would think that the NEW US Fighters from any Service are TRAINED in Combat before being sent into action. This new .277 could be a good difference from the 5.56???
 
Coyote Shadow Tracker said:
The study that they did for Nam was that for every NVA or Black Pajamas killed it took 56K rounds. Now this was for all Services Combined (Army/USMC/Air Force/Navy). That is why the OD changed the M-16A2 to selective fire of Safe, semi & 3 shot burst. When Newbees got onto their first fire fights (and maybe last) would duck and empty a whole clip into nowhere.
Seasoned/Trained units would use selective fire(safe, semi, auto).
I would think that the NEW US Fighters from any Service are TRAINED in Combat before being sent into action. This new .277 could be a good difference from the 5.56???
Click to expand...
My own thoughts on rifle/cartridge combos.
Seems like when a new theatre of operations is foreseen in the future new combos come out. To your example Nam was spray&pray
from the news I see its optics and aimed rounds down range with distance between 300-500 yards. Seems DOD is attempting to use the Kalishnakov (sp) weakness, distance accuracy, against it. Just my 2c
 
lyle2231 said:
My own thoughts on rifle/cartridge combos.
Seems like when a new theatre of operations is foreseen in the future new combos come out. To your example Nam was spray&pray
from the news I see its optics and aimed rounds down range with distance between 300-500 yards. Seems DOD is attempting to use the Kalishnakov (sp) weakness, distance accuracy, against it. Just my 2c
Click to expand...
If you see the Military weapons of today, they have Optics like nothing even what we can get today.
I had a M-14 with Iron, then a M-16 with Iron, or a M-14 with Starlight Scope and then a Rem model 700 with a 10X fixed power Scope.
Today's US Fighting Men/Women are trained to shoot through very good optics. No longer "SPRAY".
If I was still in, I would still carry double the max load of ammo. some water and a med kit.
 
I thought the goal behind the .277 Fury was to get sufficient velocity to penetrate Level 4 armor at up to 600M, and the only way to do that with a 16" barrel was to boost the chamber pressure to 80K psi... and then the only way to prevent case head separation and blown-out primers was the bi-metal case with the brass portion of the case well into the chamber. Basically Remington's 3 rings of steel idea but with no seam at the bolt/barrel face for brass to fail. Given that the weak link in modern cartridges is the brass case, I wonder if ammo companies will start using bi-metal cartridge cases to factory load 70K loads that will safely 'magnum-ize' old favorites like the '06, .270, etc?

For us civilian hunters, a 6.8 Western with a 24" barrel will outperform the .277 Fury in a 16" barrel and be roughly equivalent 20" Fury barrel, without running 80K psi pressures... there are published 140 gr handloads getting 3100 ft/sec. Maybe Winchester should do a run of their 1885 High Wall hunting rifle in 6.8 Western with a 26" factory barrel. I'm going to get a 0.535" bolt head and extractor for my new-to-me Mausingfield action and a 26" CF barrel in that caliber for a long range game rifle.
 
ObiJohn said:
I thought the goal behind the .277 Fury was to get sufficient velocity to penetrate Level 4 armor at up to 600M, and the only way to do that with a 16" barrel was to boost the chamber pressure to 80K psi... and then the only way to prevent case head separation and blown-out primers was the bi-metal case with the brass portion of the case well into the chamber. Basically Remington's 3 rings of steel idea but with no seam at the bolt/barrel face for brass to fail. Given that the weak link in modern cartridges is the brass case, I wonder if ammo companies will start using bi-metal cartridge cases to factory load 70K loads that will safely 'magnum-ize' old favorites like the '06, .270, etc?

For us civilian hunters, a 6.8 Western with a 24" barrel will outperform the .277 Fury in a 16" barrel and be roughly equivalent 20" Fury barrel, without running 80K psi pressures... there are published 140 gr handloads getting 3100 ft/sec. Maybe Winchester should do a run of their 1885 High Wall hunting rifle in 6.8 Western with a 26" factory barrel. I'm going to get a 0.535" bolt head and extractor for my new-to-me Mausingfield action and a 26" CF barrel in that caliber for a long range game rifle.
Click to expand...
The fury will also have 15% or so less recoil that the 6.8 western given the same velocities and bullet weights.
 
akmtnhnt said:
The fury will also have 15% or so less recoil that the 6.8 western given the same velocities and bullet weights.
Click to expand...
Is this accurate? We're talking 1/30th of an ounce less powder but likely 10K psi more pressure being expelled from the muzzle... in equivalent weight rifles I have to believe the .277 will recoil more. Maybe a brake will reduce the difference, but 8" to 10" of more barrel will also reduce recoil and muzzle blast.
 
ObiJohn said:
Is this accurate? We're talking 1/30th of an ounce less powder but likely 10K psi more pressure being expelled from the muzzle... in equivalent weight rifles I have to believe the .277 will recoil more. Maybe a brake will reduce the difference, but 8" to 10" of more barrel will also reduce recoil and muzzle blast.
Click to expand...
Pressure is irrelevant to recoil, at least directly. Powder weight does matter since it's also mass you are accelerating. Even in the same cartridge, say a 6.8w vs a 6.8w, if one powder gets a 150gr bullet to 3000fps with 63gr of powder and another gets it there with 60gr of powder, the latter will recoil less.
 
Well, I made it to the range this morning. No idea what I was expecting as for as recoil goes, but it wasn't bad at all. I could shoot that rifle all day….if I could afford the ammo..lol.

Very happy with the rifle and the 277 fury round.
 

Similar threads

bamban
277 SIG Fury
2 3 4
Replies
46
Views
7K
44-40
4
D
Sig wins contract with the 277 fury
14 15 16
Replies
210
Views
63K
ButterBean
ButterBean
Seabeeken
277 Fury
Replies
0
Views
601
Seabeeken
Seabeeken
Andrew Massi
277 fury
8 9 10
Replies
135
Views
80K
lyle2231
lyle2231
Zen Archery
.6mm-277 Fury
Replies
13
Views
3K
bamban
bamban

Recent Posts

Top