277 Sig Fury

[nw_hunter]

Impressive!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ajzR1bgUOjA&list=PLf6QHPn6ZVf6d8_X9GvkNFxq2vQkTDQyG

[Lloyd Smale]

i wonder with that washer and steel head if its reloadable. I sure have no interest in any rifle round that isnt. My guess would be because of the extreem pressures they are running they intentionaly made in non reloadable.

[DDZ]

New military round. it has impressive velocity out of a 13 inch barrel, but at 80,000 psi chamber pressure. Below is another link where a guy talks about the cartridge.

No reloading dies yet for it. Sig makes a round that is ball ammo, that has an all brass case. Then a round that is for hunting that has the steel band at the bottom of the case. I see Midway has the FMJ for a box of 20 at $33.00
Its noted that at 80,000 psi barrel life wouldn't be very long which makes sense. Also brass wouldn't last very long.

In the video he mentions that the 277 has more than double the recoil of the .223, but the suppressor reduces that by 40%. Which makes it manageable for rapid fire.   

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALvd7k1Bbpw&t=324s

[Lloyd Smale]

but its in an ar10 sized gun. They would have been better off for practicality with the 6.8 rem or my favorite ar round the 6.5 grendel. they could have made that in an ar15 and made it to replace all the 556s and 308s.  Might make a decent gun for a quad sniper who carries a 308 ar10 but they have done just fine with the 308s since korea. We need ships and jets and tanks not a new infantry rifle.

[DDZ]

but its in an ar10 sized gun. They would have been better off for practicality with the 6.8 rem or my favorite ar round the 6.5 grendel. they could have made that in an ar15 and made it to replace all the 556s and 308s.  Might make a decent gun for a quad sniper who carries a 308 ar10 but they have done just fine with the 308s since korea. We need ships and jets and tanks not a new infantry rifle.

Yeah I agree, the 308 has been a very fitting caliber for the military. Don't need a 277 Fury. Wonder what that endeavor cost?  Although when it comes to the government spending tax payers money it don't matter how much the cost is.

[Ranger99]

I guess I'm thinking on a basis
that's too practical as a gun user
and taxpayer.
If I were asked to get some individual
firearms with a bigger payload, I'd be
buying about 50,000 AK's to be distributed
on a trial basis
We sure don't need to be buying a large
supply of some new and different something.
Maybe a quantity of uppers to retrofit
what we have to where all the current
receivers and magazines can be used
without having to buy a bunch of new
something.
My buddy's youngest son used a 6.8
AR and has made a bunch of one shot
kills on deer and hogs.
Ought to be able to send a few pinheads
to paradise with it

[Lloyd Smale]

300bo and 300 hmr work in standard ar15 mags. There better with dedicated 300 mags but the p mags 556 mags will work with all of them. But that said if your going to trust your life to a battle rifle your going to want dedicated mags so switching calibers will require making new mags to go along with it. 6.8 and 6.5 grendel wont work(at least with any kind of reliability)  with an 556 mag and DO need dedicated mags. Good thing with the 300s is that dedicated 300 mags do work perfectly well with the 556. Any one of those rounds will work with an ar15 receiver and even bolt carrier. They just require a barrel and the actual bolt. All that said theres sure better ways to spend our military budget today then on a new rifle. The ar15 and the 556 have done just fine and MILLIONS have been wasted since the viet nam war by polititians pissing it away on power lunches and martinis to change something that doenst need changing. What really needs changing is that kind of waste.