277 fury

[Gcan]

Regularly shooting in the .1s @600?
You have a rifle that rivals the best ever built, and you are amongst the very best shots that have ever lived.
I'll go ahead and make the leap that this is all done with a creedmoor?

No. If u actually read the thread you would see its a 260 rem Panda. The load data is there also. And shooting off a bench does not make anyone the best shot.
Fun thing bout being 65 and having had a life that allowed things most folks dream about is having been there and done that. 1" at 600 on right day is not incredible by any stretch. Perhaps you should find a better gunsmith and maybe work on your loading practices/QC.
Now the Attached image Is not mine but one would think 1" at 1000 might cause you to do some more research.
Not sure where you shoot but 1" @600 is not uncommon in my circles. Its just under .2 moa.

 

[Gcan]

Because you're never gonna hump that monster up a mountain whereas the SIG Cross rifle with a folding stock, 16" barrel and 6.8 pound weight can easily do that. Sheep hunters might like it with a tip of the hat to old O'Connor and his love affair with the .270...

Your right.

I'm Possibly Mistaken, but Im thinking most of the people here chasing 6.5 velocity are not shooting mountain rifles. A fair number of the discussions appear to center on Long Range shooting. I'm a 6.5 1000 yard fan but not a 6.5 1000 yard hunting anything fan AT ALL! The comment was solely in response to ppl who are chasing FPS. As It seems reasonable most are likely shooting custom guns, I have found one solution to 6.5 fps can be found in barrel length and powder. Now I will admit the 6.5 SAUM -6.5PRC can get there with a shorter barrel, they will also go faster in a longer tube using a slower powder at lower pressures. After playing with 6.5 barrel length and a few powders, in my experience the magic number for fps and balancing "bullet in barrel time" for the 260 was 28-29" before I found diminishing returns. I originally planned on loading h1000 in a 32" tube but never got there. Set up and form became too sensitive w/o extending fore ends or the front rest point forward.

Just saying if someone is thinking of building a new custom gun to get 2900-3000 out of their 6.5, perhaps they might just try a longer tube before spending $$$$ on a new build, all the dies and Development time/effort only to find they have a 3200fps .264 that shoots 1 moa, not .1 moa.

 

[the gman]

Your right.

I'm Possibly Mistaken, but Im thinking most of the people here chasing 6.5 velocity are not shooting mountain rifles. A fair number of the discussions appear to center on Long Range shooting. I'm a 6.5 1000 yard fan but not a 6.5 1000 yard hunting anything fan AT ALL! The comment was solely in response to ppl who are chasing FPS. As It seems reasonable most are likely shooting custom guns, I have found one solution to 6.5 fps can be found in barrel length and powder. Now I will admit the 6.5 SAUM -6.5PRC can get there with a shorter barrel, they will also go faster in a longer tube using a slower powder at lower pressures. After playing with 6.5 barrel length and a few powders, in my experience the magic number for fps and balancing "bullet in barrel time" for the 260 was 28-29" before I found diminishing returns. I originally planned on loading h1000 in a 32" tube but never got there. Set up and form became too sensitive w/o extending fore ends or the front rest point forward.

Just saying if someone is thinking of building a new custom gun to get 2900-3000 out of their 6.5, perhaps they might just try a longer tube before spending $$$$ on a new build, all the dies and Development time/effort only to find they have a 3200fps .264 that shoots 1 moa, not .1 moa.

I think you missed the point of the thread. The way I read it, it was about the new .277 Fury round, derived from the SIG entry into the Army's desire for a more effective round for future combat. I don't believe it was anything at all to do with the best way to get to over 3000 fps. It simply marveled at the ability of the round, in it's highest pressure loading, to reach or exceed 3000 fps with a 140 grain bullet from a 16" barrel. Coupled with the new SIG Cross lightweight rifle, it was worthy of inclusion in the long range HUNTING part of this site. Nothing more, nothing less. Then this thread devolved into a "my penis is larger than your penis" and we went both sideways and downhill from there.

Fact of the matter is there will always be a round that fires a given projectile faster than another. Frankly, 3000 fps is somewhat slow to me when I used to have a job working on real guns that fired projectiles weighing in excess of 40 pounds at over 5,000 fps LOL.

 

[25WSM]

Are you talking about a 120mm sabot?
Shep

 

[the gman]

Are you talking about a 120mm sabot?
Shep

Yep. Can't believe it was 28 years ago I was fixing the L11 120mm Challenger tank gun in Desert Storm as part of the British Army. 20 years since I left the service.

 

[25WSM]

My dad started in m 48s all the way to the m1a1. I was in the USCG when desert Storm started so I stayed at airstation cape cod. I got to play around in so many tanks growing up. My dad retired the same year I enlisted. Both sides of my parents and my wife's side are all military. Best days of my life.
Shep

 

[25WSM]

Anybody know why the military is stuck on the 277 or 6.8 whichever. I would think the 6.5 in 140 grain bullets would fit the bill. How much pressure is this fury going to make to get 3000 fps in that short of a barrel? And would modern bolt actions be able to take that kind of pressure repeatably.
Shep

 

[25WSM]

Just found this. Pretty much sums it up. But still don't know why the 6.8. The bc of the 2 new bullets are not that good compared to a 6.5.
https://www.tactical-life.com/gear/ammo/277-sig-fury-hybrid-case-design/

 

[del2les]

Anybody know why the military is stuck on the 277 or 6.8 whichever. I would think the 6.5 in 140 grain bullets would fit the bill. How much pressure is this fury going to make to get 3000 fps in that short of a barrel? And would modern bolt actions be able to take that kind of pressure repeatably.
Shep

That was one of the issues with the 1985 "Everlasting" steelhead cases and somewhat discussed in the article I posted earlier in this thread. 80kpsi has more effect on things then just the case head, and while a few rounds "may" not hurt anything, many hunting rifles cannot sustain this level of pressure without things becoming stressed over time.

Sure, rifles can be built to routinely handle these pressures, but that is a separate matter. The "advertised" velocity in a 16" is one thing, but until we have outside chrono'd data, we do not know if these claims will hold true.

 

[the gman]

Anybody know why the military is stuck on the 277 or 6.8 whichever. I would think the 6.5 in 140 grain bullets would fit the bill. How much pressure is this fury going to make to get 3000 fps in that short of a barrel? And would modern bolt actions be able to take that kind of pressure repeatably.
Shep

I was the VP of Operations at LWRC (one of the early champions of the 6.8 SPC round) and spent a lot of time talking with the designers and originators of the 6.8SPC, especially MSgt. Steve Holland from 5th Group Special Forces. The original design spec for the round that became the 6.8 SPC was that had to offer a significant lethality upgrade over the 5.56, had to fit in the mag well of an existing 5.56 AR and be a drop on conversion for the M4/MK18 carbines that were already in service.

Steve and the team at AMU (who made the first cases, uppers and loaded rounds) looked at everything out there, including the 6mm, 6.5, .277 and 7mm but after they had loaded and tested everything, the 6.8 diameter bullet came out on top. Remember, this round isn't intended to shoot at 1,000 yards; its intended to reach out to a max of 600 with most engagements taking place at under 300. With that set of parameters, the 6.8 diameter makes good sense because of the different natures of ammo that the military wants to put in a weapon system from tracer to AP to OTM to regular ball. There is just a bit more room in the 6.8 over the 6.5 for that purpose.

All this mental masturbation by gun nuts about BC, drop charts and the rest doesn't rate with the .mil. They specified a caliber and the 3 manufacturers down selected for the future competition have gone about things the way they each think offers the best solution to fulfill those parameters. SIG is hedging its bets in making their option available to the public in parallel with the military so they can generate interest and perhaps legitimize the round in the mind of the public ahead of the decision. I think they are trying to make this the new 5.56 or 7.62x51 military cross over round before any of their competitors get out of the gate.

I own several 6.8 SPC carbines and have a couple more builds scheduled for my wife and daughter for deer hunting in locations like WY, NM and AR where the distances aren't too far. I shot the first cow elk in North America to be taken with a 6.8 SPC and it is a hell of a killing round. I've used it on antelope and deer and it just flat out works. I have no reason to suspect the .277 Fury with the same diameter projectile won't perform as well on 2 legged critters...

My buddy is 6 foot 1". That was a big elk!

Entry /exit in the upper chest:

Entry/exit in the neck shot I added for good luck:

 

[the gman]

In terms of hunting rifles being able to handle the pressures, well, those of us who have studied history and as was already mentioned in this thread, the Arisaka actions tested by P.O Ackley were just about indestructible. It is inconceivable to me that with the massive advances in metallurgy and machining since 1897 when the Arisaka was adopted, that rifles cannot be designed to handle pressures in excess of 100K PSI.

Many manufacturers are moving to barrels with extensions that the bolt locks up into rather than making the receiver the stressed part. I sincerely doubt that any carbine/MG adopted by the military will use anything but this system. SIG of course has gone that route with the Cross rifle. Will it be successful? Who knows but its certainly an interesting project...

 

[Stgraves260]

Nobody is getting 2900+ fps w/ 140s from creed/260 from a short barrel, nobody. 24-26" yes it's doable. But still operating at max psi.

I have a 6.5 CM 26" Barrel and a 260 Rem 27" Barrel. You gain//loose about 25 FPS per inch on the barrel. I get 3030 FPS out of my 260 140 Grain Berger's. 2900 FPS from a 16" barrel? WoW. That would be nice. I wish. Then I could just cut a foot off my barrel and get same velocity.

 

[Wild Monkey]

Using low twist and small bearing surface, high speed 270 tech is not new. That being said IMO 6.8 is not conducive to piercing russian body armor and is just more waste by M.I.C. & Army. Fat Cats getting fatter. I'd expected near this performance from my 27-RPC which is nothing but a 6.8-6.5 Creedmoor-08. Sig was chomping at the bit for anything to get some meat off the bone of the AR market for the past two years. Captain of the Port. LOL This is a new era for sure. When I grew up there Four Branches of the Military: Marines, Army, AirForce & Navy. Everybody gets a participation ribbon I guess. How much does the Harbor Master Charge? Lots of free advertising going here. If it's 30 cents a round I'm in.

 

[Gcan]

I think you missed the point of the thread. The way I read it, it was about the new .277 Fury round, derived from the SIG entry into the Army's desire for a more effective round for future combat. I don't believe it was anything at all to do with the best way to get to over 3000 fps. It simply marveled at the ability of the round, in it's highest pressure loading, to reach or exceed 3000 fps with a 140 grain bullet from a 16" barrel. Coupled with the new SIG Cross lightweight rifle, it was worthy of inclusion in the long range HUNTING part of this site. Nothing more, nothing less. Then this thread devolved into a "my penis is larger than your penis" and we went both sideways and downhill from there.

Fact of the matter is there will always be a round that fires a given projectile faster than another. Frankly, 3000 fps is somewhat slow to me when I used to have a job working on real guns that fired projectiles weighing in excess of 40 pounds at over 5,000 fps LOL.

No, I got it. I guess my point was this entire subject is who has the bigger -/;. Its always about SPEED when it should be bout accuracy. This is long range HUNTING not shooting. I could see a new 6.5 going 4000fps that didn't burn barrels being of real interest. And that would probably require machine turned bullets. I get the 16" 3000 fps thing. But show me a target at 500. And its still a 6.5. When its a 30 or 338 going 3000 from a 16" accurately Id build one today.
But new barrels, reamers, dies, load development, etc. for another 200-300 fps from a 100k psi bi metal round, or even building a 6.5PRC when you might already have a 6.5x47 or some other 6.5 that shoots 1/2 moa or better at 1000 is indicative of what my wife calls "my gun problem."

One of the guys at the club has 4 or 5 338s. Edge, Lapua, Lapua Improved. Maybe he has 6 or 7. Some are the same with different throats. He has dies, bullets, powders and chrono data for them all. Different brass, bullets and loads. He looks like the mad scientist from back to the future when he shows up with notebooks and 8 boxes of ammo for 4 guns in the same damned caliber, while Larry shows up with one 6.5 @ 2800fps gun and rings the 6" plate at 1000 like its a carnival game. One guy spends all his time buying new guns, chasing fps and the next best new thing. The other guy spends all his time perfecting loads and quality control for one gun. Guess which one wins all the matches?

no matter what we do with a 6.5 its still a 6.5. Its not a 30PRC OR 338LM or a 375CT.
I made my 6.5 decision long ago. Now I have a single, a box fed and an AR10 all in same 260 Rem. All with same reamer, bullet and load. Like I said, im sure I could get 3000 but the gun shoots at 2950. If I want more I go to the 300 UM or PRC. If I want more I go to the 338LM. If I want more I go to the 375CT.

they won't let me have anything in the 5" class so the 50bmg is where I tap out.
I guess its about the "why" for each of us. Some guys are hunters, some shooters and some tinkerers. A 16" 6.5 going 3000 fps still only makes 1200 ftlbs at 750. Its still a 6.5. A 185 .30 @ 2800 makes 1200 at 750.

I try to build each gun as though it was the gun I would run out the door with. Thats why I gave up my edge for a LM. If it was just bout accuracy we'd all be shooting Dashers or BRs.