I love the 270 cartridge. Flat shooting while carrying a lot of energy. I believe this is a lot like what happened with 30-06 conversation to 308. Get it to a short action, reduce weight, and fit it into more manageably sized firearms.
i see what your saying, but the 30-06 is usually a bit faster with the same barrel, if toe to toe the 308 is almost as good as the 30-06, same bullet and everything else identical, the 30-06 always comes out on top, not by much , but i cant think of a situation where the 308 out does the 30-06. no bias either, as i only have a 308 right now.
@@brian770 By pure performance standards of the cartridge, yes indeed the 30-06 is better in almost any situation. Now let us consider that 30-06 is massively overkill for two-legged mammals and we can shave off some of that power to fit more .308 into a rifleman's loadout and build their weapon lighter and nimbler.
@@brian770the original 3006 load matched todays 308 loads so not exactly accurate. In its day (1950s) the 308 did meet the industry standard of what a 3006 did.
@brian770 it didn't used to be the case that .30-06 was faster than .308 in factory loadings, in fact, it was common for over a decade that the performance for the same weight bullets was darn near identical. You have to remember .308 was designed 50 years later than .30-06 which originally was .30-03 with a slightly lighter spitzer type bullet instead of bottlenose.
Yes, but it’s really more akin to the .270 vs 270 wsm. The .277 fury in the high pressure loading is the next step because now you can have a shorter, much louder .270 or 270 wsm. For hunting, however, I’ll stick with the .270 Winchester because country store you stop at on the way to your hunting grounds will sell you not only a cheap breakfast sandwich and barely passable coffee, they will probably also sell you a box of .270 Winchester.
One thing to note about all of this: the Cross is at its cheapest a $1500+ rifle with a limited variety of ammo choices. A .270 can be had for 1/4 the price and there are at least 20 different loads for it. make of that what you will.
The hottest loads of 277 still don't top the hottest 270 he used, and as you said, there are a lot more loads to choose from. They're not the same, either in design or use.
Also there are some much lighter weight rifles than the chassis style .270. That is probably the heaviest .270 that you can buy. Many out there sub 6-7 lbs.
The Fury is 4 years old, and has a unique.....proprietary....... revolutionary new cartridge design Whereas 270 Winchester will be 100 years old next year...................................aka give SIG some time and also give the industry time, Bear Creek arsenal has teased a 277 Fury option possibly coming
I took my widest buck to date this month with my Rem model 700 in 270 Win. 130gr federal fusion, dropped him like a lightening bolt. The new stuff is fascinating but I love my old classic cartridges. Great video.
Nevermind...this round was really idealized in the 50's. It was to be the new round for the M-14...but they prayed on the altar of .30 cal and the 7.62x51/.308 was born.
Not even, this would be outdated even in the 50's due to 7.62x39 being adopted by the warsaw pact. 280 british was MUCH closer to ideal, as was 276 pederson, the original m1 garand cartridge
Good video, but are we not going to mention .270 WSM? I feel like that is a better comparison to .277 Fury as it is chambered in short actions and slightly outperforms .270 Win in most regards. You can also get a modern Model 70 with a polymer stock that weighs about 6 or 7 pounds.
The M1 Garand was originally supposed to be 270 Win, but MacArthur had millions of .30-06 rounds in storage from The Great War. The military decided to stick with that cartridge for logistical purposes. The .270 Win is hard hitting and has a flatter trajectory than .308 and .30-06. The Sig Fury is something old that is new again. The problem with the 6.8x51 is that troops will be carrying less ammo than the current 5.56 NATO.
You are misremembering the history of the Garand. 276 pederson the round originally intended and it was not because they had a bunch laying around that they went with 30-06.
There is such thing as Garands in .270 Win. In France, it used to be that it is very difficult to get guns in a military calibers, so French competition and sports shooters converted their surplus Garand rifles into .270 since they just need a new barrel and everything else can stay the same (same bolt, same clips, etc.).
the .270 doesnt hit harder than a.308. They are about the same actually not to mention most .308 are actually heavier in grains and they achieve the same velocity. I cant speak for flight ballistics though.
I think this technology would be great for the 6.5 Grendel but like FN has already done just make the case out of steel unless they are going to let us reload the cases
Are they really the same? Of course not. The 277 fury has a maximum operating pressure 15,000 psi higher than 270 Winchester, specifically developed for a shorter action that allows for higher than standard velocity out of shorter barrels
@Ripper13F1V I haven't looked in any manuals but according to Wikipedia (for what it's worth) 270 Winchester has max pressure of 65k psi and the 277 fury is 80k psi
@@Ripper13F1V Sig (that St John guy) has claimed they could push it to 100k psi or even 120k psi I think. There is a Garand Thumb vid with a 9" barrel Spear running like 2750fps. Subgun size, battle rifle performance. One TH-cam channel pushed a 308 to 100k psi with a specific brand of brass case.
The oniy significant downside to the higher pressure cartridges is the wear and tear it puts on parts and the reduced barrel life. Less of an issue if you shooting game once or twice a year....but in other applications or if you wanted to shoot it on matches and such you'd burn up a barrel and parts quite a bit faster then something like m193 would.....
This exactly, very similar to m855a1 is burning up m4's pretty bad in the field. A lot of folks think its the next best thing, but the drawbacks that people often don't consider are what end up destroying firearms, effectively through misuse. Small arms solutions did a really good video on the subject, and I'd be willing to wager that this hotter 277 fury situation will prove no different in the current firearms.
@@Ratkill9000maybe with a slower fire rate? Not sure, but id imagine soldiers using rapid indirect fire will be heating up the barrel a lot faster....maybe
Hell, I'm pretty sure the 130 gr Accubond would take an Elk. I've literally never recovered one from whitetail and they hit like a hammer at the same time. Obviously the 150 gr would be a better choice though
I don’t really have a dog in this fight as I don’t own anything in either caliber, but still a very interesting video! You made ACAS compliance scanning slightly more entertaining for a short bit this morning 😂
There are some handloaders doing cool things with these bimetal cases. They're necking them up to .308 and getting .300wm velocities and necking them down to 6.5cm and getting 6.5prc velocities.
If you think a 308 win can be reloaded to a 300 WM you are on the extreme for ignorance. I have used all powders and weights of powder for the 308 win and in NO way can the 308 win be loaded to match the 300 WM
@Lure-Benson Orly? th-cam.com/video/uXkmcpk7Brc/w-d-xo.htmlsi=5iu1i7_jMQxcsYt6 And this isn't even using the bimetal cases I was talking about that'll take 80k psi.
@@Bieling3 I have been an advanced reloader and custom rifle builder and having to developed wildcat cartridges for my rifles and I build and sell AR 10 uppers in all of the WSM magnums or old deer camp favorite cartridges. I know all of the powder pressures with all weights of bullets, and you want to try to tell me just because you seen some nonsense on TH-cam from a channel that did a video telling the viewers if a 5.56x45 is fired in a 223 chamber it would blow up like a massive bomb and kill everyone! The top Parrot mouth lie, and totally stupid and ignorant fools believe it is a 5.56x45 blows up guns with a 223 chamber when the cartridges are the same and reloading data is the same for both cartridges, even the finish chamber reamer are the same. I have seen more lying bull shit on that Ultimate reloader channel!
Oh wow. The staff at MAC are amazing to be doing comparison videos like these for us. The .277 Sig fury is something really interesting and still getting up there. Maybe some improvements little by little over nearly 100 years like the .270Win (great cartridge filling freezers for generations). I don't know much about the .270Win but do know it has been adequate and plentiful on shelves.
The difference is what is your use/mission. Military use, it is going to be weight/ quantity for ammo load bearing. Hunting/target is going to weight/accuracy. The 277Fury in the hi pressure cartridge meets or exceeds 270 Win but at the expense of extra wear on the of the action and accelerated barrel wear. The rate of fire will play a big factor in wear. 270 Win is a long action, standard pressure where the 277 Fury is a short action and is essentially a +P+ or better load to reach its numbers. Use/mission is the big factor between choosing which way to go.
I’ll stick to my auld 270 Win. For deer here in Ireland, where shots are not long, it’s perfect. I use Hornady Super performance ammo. I’m 69 and have no problem with the extra half kilo weight in my Steyr rifle. Great video.
I have been saying this for a long time now incorporating the hybrid case technology with the 5.56 nato or even the 6.8SPC or any cartridge even the 9mm Luger of course the guns will need to be beefed up or stronger metals used but I think this is the next step for higher pressured rounds that brass case alone can’t handle.
30 super carry was the attempt to make a high pressure pistol cartridge, and that never really took off. intermediate cartridge weapons are a smaller market, don't think we'll see that without a major western government's patronage.
most likely. Plus as he kinda mentioned, there are hotter loads to 270, and they won't have the same barrel and bolt shredding effects that the hotter 277's will.
Sig claims that barrel and bolt life of the high pressure is good for at least 10,000 rounds. That could be the time when there's too much erosion to be considered safe or something else.
@@Ratkill9000 Actual optimal bbl life without noticeable loss of precision, if initial user reports of the M7 are anything to go by. (Apparently not an amazingly accurate system to begin with, though.)
@@texpatriot8462 Not necessarily. It's neither a direct gas system like the AR nor a simple recoil/blowback. The gas flow is adjustable at the block, and the short-stroke piston should limit transfer of force. Along with the flow-through suppressor this should all do a reasonable job of keeping the aggression down. Only the containment surfaces -- trunnion, bolt head and locking lugs, and chamber and barrel walls -- should be directly subject to the extra pressure, and these have been reinforced accordingly. Btw everybody, .277 Fury refers to the all-brass, standard-pressure commercial cartridge; the extra-hot military round is currently just the 6.8x51. (Unless that's changed recently.)
Military / sniper use 308 Win / 7,62 Nato has an estimated accuracy life of 8 to 10 K shots, .270 Win estimated at 5 K and Fury ??? About 3 - 4 K rounds ???
Man I wish you had the 13” barrel version. I want to see those numbers compared but guessing about 100-150fps slower than the 16” barrel. Awesome video
I dont know what to say other than thank you for posting the information i was curious what the full pressure Furry would do and now i know. Good job done.
Tim, good testing and actually shows the capability of the new 6.8 x 51mm and bi metal cartridge. I think is a good choice for the military maybe not for every single Trooper but a good portion. You may not see this rolled out to the Marines or the Air Force but, the US Army has definitely bought all in on it. Thanks for your content Tim.
I keep remembering the test you did of 556 77gr standard pressure VS 556 extreme pressure. Velocity with the same projectile weight wasn't worth measuring. But the high pressure stuff was wasting barrels at an extreme rate. I always keep that in mind when I hear about 'high pressure' military rounds
First, nice objective look at the rounds. As usual, well done. Naturally they are different. The higher operating pressures of the fury put it into another performance class. My question is “Do I need it?”. Answer”NO”. My .270s do the job I need them to do perfectly. I’ll stick with them. Nothing negative on the Fury. Just something I don’t need to invest in.
@@patroit5192 Didn't offer any real advantages in combat over 5.56 while having drawbacks including bolt breakage due to the larger diameter case head. It would probably have been OK-ish if it'd been introduced as part of a whole system, and not shoe-horned into the AR15.
@@immikeurnot Where ever did you come up with the nonsense that 223 breaks bolts? I have owned AR 15s before Bill Clinton was president and not once has an AR 15 I own broken a bolt. I also own one AR 15 in 7.62x39 and a new AR 15 I did in the Nazi German cartridge of 7.92x33 Kurz and no broken bolts here.
Many of us would love to see a 10MM 16"-barrel Carbine using 60 grain Liberty Civil Defense VS a 556 16"-barrel rifle using 60 grain ammo as well, shooting out to 100 then 200 yards. Who wins in muzzle energy and accuracy????? You might be extremely surprised.
I’m a big time .270win fan and also a short action cartridge fan. I would be very curious to build a .277Fury and make my own load for it. I’ve also kicked around the idea of take a 6.5Creed case and blowing out the neck to .277 to essentially make a 6.8Creed. I’m mainly looking at brass availability in comparison with Fury versus the Creed.
You know they had a .270wsm back in the day. The .270 WSM can have a muzzle velocity of 3,700 ft/s with a 90 grain bullet, 3,295 ft/s with a 130 grain bullet, 3,250 ft/s with a 140 grain bullet, and 3,136 ft/s with a 150 grain bullet.
The Brands of WSM cartridge are back in stores here in the Pacific NW. I build and sell AR 10 uppers in all of the WSM magnums, and I have an AR 10 upper in 300 WSM for sale now ready for a new owner for $1700 Next upcoming builds is in 6.5-300 WSM and 7 mm WSM AR 10 uppers
It’s crazy to me how many people are choosing to ignore the advantages with the new cartridge setup. Having a 270 in a 16” semi auto is pretty devastating. But no, “muh 270!” prevails.
You hear Radio signals through cardboard and pape., and more. Radar uses high frequency radio waves, so it won't travel through as much, but it will travel through thin materials like that.
The only thing holding the 270 win back if you prefer to shoot bullets over 150 grains is it's barrel twist rate . The 6.8 western rifles have a faster twist rate , 1 : 8 vs 1 : 10 of 270 win production barrels .
Obviously not the same, the SIG cartridge is designed to achieve 270 Win velocity out of a 16" barrel, where 270 would normally get there with a 24" barrel.
I picked up a used Savage cheapo scope combo gun in .270 Winchester for $150 back in 2001. It has been a great deer gun for twenty years. I would love something new, cool looking or maybe even threaded for a can, but I just can't justify the expense.
Good testing but, still not impressed for military use or economy on 277 Fury. The bimetal case isn't standard issue, the full brass case is. The Bi-metal is being used like AP ammo was issued in 7.62 or 30-06. Not sure you can reload bi-metal, can you? The 270 you can reload to all sorts of bullet sizes and comparatively cheap. Not sure on Fury. Still thinking US Army is reinventing the wheel
Typically you’re only bumping the shoulder and resizing the neck which are both still brass on the bi metal case so it shouldn’t really be different in regards to being able to be resized but at 80k PSI who knows what will hold up.
.270 winchester doesn't fit in a short action autoloading (AR10 or equivalent) modern military pattern receiver. And if you are going to build a XL action auto loading military pattern rifle... (and the only reason you'd need to do that is for wet work or paper work beyond 1200 yards) there are FAR more effective rounds to chamber it in. Ever wonder why you seldom (if ever) see someone belly up to the line at an ELR match shooting .270 winchester? The round has some limitations... 277 fury gives you energy levels similar to .270 winchester, but with a twist rate allows for longer, high BC bullets you can't use in an off the shelf. 270 winchester hunting rifle. They didn't "reinvent the wheel" they improved the wheel for military use.
@@stinkyfungus the 6.8 Creedmore is far better in long range shooting, not that Pvt Snuffy is going to be able to hit beyond 200 meters anyways. They are inventing a round and rifle that would have been nice in high mountains of Afghanistan (where they shot at us with 100 year old Mosins) but worthless everywhere else.
*_6.8 Western._* _Thee_ best modern 'do-all' cartridge, IMHO. (Until we finally get a successor to the .300 WSM.) Of course, that is assuming we are now bringing hunting rounds into the otherwise stale mix of ubiquitous calibers. You know the standard lot, folks. Nevertheless, it seems like the .277" projectiles are _finally_ getting some much needed recognition. Although, I have my doubts regarding when/if _We The People_ will ever see the .277 Fury available to the public in a normal capacity. Which leads us back, once again, to the 6.8 Western for the win. _"The West is the best."_ *~Jim Morrison • The Doors* Stay classy my friends.
I disagree. There were problems with the cartridge as a swap-out replacement for 5.56 in existing rifles, which was the original concept. Check out the LWRC Six8 rifle, it addresses the cartridge OAL issues that haunted the 6.8 SPC in standard AR's.
Tim, you're forgetting couple things. Barrel life and cost overall. Federal and Hornady has or had light magnum .270 Win ammo. XM7 will have a barrel length of 13-14.5"
I've been following the 277 fury/ 6.8x51mm for a while now and I have actually been surprised by not only the lack of interest but the animosity and hatred surrounding it It's to the point where it's surprising we get anything new at all in the gun industry period hell if social media is to be believed there's no good reason why any advancement should ever happen, this 100 year old cartridge does everything it perfect and we don't need anything new.........just glad the people from a century ago actually pushed for advancement if they had this mentality revolvers and bolt actions would be the only options SMFH maybe even smokeless powder would have been scuffed at lol
People aren't against advancement at all; they are against defense-spending boondoggles which waste hard-earned taxpayer money on unnecessary projects and/or proposals which could be filled using off-the-shelf components and existing systems. This whole project, 6.8 Fury as well as the rifle system which fires it - is a solution in search of a problem, which will cost the taxpayers tens, perhaps hundreds of millions of dollars which could be put to better and more-productive use. While it is true that the 6.8 Fury offers performance gains over existing cartridges, if it performs as promised (which is by no means a sure thing), those gains are not impressive-enough to justify its price tag and the adoption of unproven new tech. The other problem is that the Sig Spear 6.8x51mm is a battle rifle, and the more-urgent need is for a more-potent assault rifle and intermediate cartridge, neither of which need is answered by this system.
The 270 is still uses a 30-06 case length of 64.5 while the 6.8 uses a case length of 51mm . So other than being over pressured , more expensive and more damaging to the firearm why not go with the 7mm-08 . But then again follow the money and see which Generals end up on Sigs payroll upon retirement . So the US Army will not only have a cartridge that no one else uses including NATO or the Navy or Marines but will push it anyway reminds me when they adopted the UCP camo pattern that did not blend into any environment BUT they forced it anyways .
7mm-08 master race! Lol jk but the fury seem to be a short action 270 which ain't bad at all. We'll see how it goes but new calibers rarely do well in the marketplace. There's something to be said for existing infrastructure
That's interesting Tim. It's a cool new round and I've been anxious to see the numbers. As a side note, and speaking of newer technology, how do you like that Garmin Zero chronograph? I need to upgrade again and I think it's time to go Doppler.
Tim, i've commented before about your smock (coat), i have a question (or two)... does it have the Union Flag (Jack) on the arm? I keep looking but can't see it if it's there, and do you ever get mistaken (by those who don't know you) for being former/current R.A.F?
Why didnt they just use the bi-metal tech on the 6.5 creed. Slightly shorter case that means less bullet intrusion into the case along with room for higher BC bullets. Its what gives the 6.5 creed its advantages over 308 based cartridges in a short action rifle. .277 cal. isnt magical. We spend so much money reinventing the wheel. The standard brass cased fury is just a 50 year old 270 redding😊
Re: "We spend so much money reinventing the wheel." Yep, that's exactly right. But when you realize that the Pentagon exists not to get the best weapons and equipment for our soldiers at the best prices, but to pad the bottom line of defense contractors, lobbyists and pols, and help that project officer get his next bump in salary and rank, everything starts to fall into place. Our country spends an order of magnitude more money on defense and the military than anyone else, yet our weapons are falling behind those of our potential adversaries. Russia's army now ranks as the most-combat capable in the world, and they do it with a budget a lot smaller than ours. The current Pentagon-DOD system is broken and expensive and does not work as advertised. And lord knows what the PRC are up to - I won't get into that because that's enough nightmare material for one evening!
I kind of wish they have a commercial .270 in the .308 case long before this. But it's now a lot better than it could have been. Hopefully more companies will release rifles with this cartridge, since a lot of us don't want to pay the premium price tag Sig is asking.
My conclusion after watching this video: Sig Sauer is 100 percent scamming the American taxpayer and the DOD. Go watch Ultimate Reloader's video where they push the .308 Winchester to .300 Winchester Magnum performance. They were running a 200+ grain bullet past 80k psi and pretty close to or over 3,000 fps. IIRC, they were using Alpha Munitions brass with a small primer pocket. I think it would be interesting to see them redo the test with lighter bullets.
@Mk-vc4fx - Re: "My conclusion after watching this video: Sig Sauer is 100 percent scamming the American taxpayer and the DOD." Yes, absolutely true, but they didn't do it alone - they got in the door because of the ridiculous requirements of the project in the first place. There's nothing wrong with wanting a performance upgrade to enable the soldier of the 21st century to defeat ceramic body armor at combat ranges. It is the way the Army - "Big Green" and the Pentagon/DOD went about it which beggars belief. First, the DOD erred in not taking a closer look at off-the-shelf solutions to the problem. If 7.62x51mm NATO AP black-tip didn't do the job, why not and what would it take to make it work? And if .308-cal. wasn't an option, when what about working with existing cartridges in 6.5-7mm, i.e., 6.5 CM, 7mm-08, etc.? Then to compound matters, the proposed rifle had to use a ridiculously short 13-inch barrel with permanently-affixed silencer/suppressor. This in turn forced Sig to invent new and heretofore untested technology to allow the very high 80k operating pressure, a full 20-25% higher than the existing M80 7.62 round. Namely, a hybrid-case using a steel case head, lock-ring and brass for the remainder. Few troops "need" a carbine with a barrel whose length is only thirteen inches. Indeed, having a barrel that short defeats the purpose of a battle rifle in the first place, which is to serve as a longer-ranged, harder-hitting alternative to an assault rifle. Battle rifles are longer, larger and heavier than assault rifles precisely because they are designed for a different mission profile than a battle carbine or assault rifle. The DOD/Army appear to have suffered from schizophrenia here - requesting a battle rifle, but waffling and insisting that it is be as compact as an assault rifle or SMG. Sig's work on the 6.8 Fury looks promising, and if the cartridge and its host rifle system can work, the performance would be very good. But the simple fact remains that many - indeed most - of the performance targets could have been met with off-the-shelf tech and components, and not an expensive brand-new weapon system using new and combat untested tech. The ultra-high operating pressure of the cartridge, its new technology, and the unorthodox design of the rifle almost guarantee that the new system will suffering teething problems and breakdowns in the field once it is committed to action. And since spares and service support may not be army-wide, let alone across all services, the troops will probably end up using the same weapons they've been using for the last three decades or more, and the cartridges that work with them. The Pentagon/DOD can always be counted upon to choose the least-cost effective, most-complex and most-expensive "solution" to any military equipment problem, and this episode proves it yet again. But then, it has been a very long time since the five-sided puzzle palace has been in the business of providing the best weapons and gear to our fighting men for the best return on the dollar, hasn't it? It is more about getting that flag or project office that next bump in pay and promotion, and helping the folks down at Raytheon or General Dynamics make their numbers for this quarter.... or in this case, Sig make its numbers. Which brings up another issue: What does Sig-Sauer have on the folks inside the Pentagon anyway? Blackmail or something? Because all of a sudden, American firms need not apply when it comes to small arms and equipment contracts over at DOD....
@GeorgiaBoy1961 A 13" barrel was not one of the requirements. The NGSW requirements were to drive the new 6.8mm AP projectile at the required velocity and for the overall length of the weapon system to be a certain length. General Dynamics came up with a bullpup design with a 19" barrel and the polymer case to drive the same projectile at the required velocity. Sig just chose a 13" barrel and the hybrid case design of 80k psi chamber pressure to get the same velocity. I am not saying the military industrial complex is not very adept at wasting taxpayer money. I am 17 years and counting active duty. I am very well aware at the Charlie Foxtrot that is the military acquisition system.
I would assume these pressures and velocities, heat and such are increasing the wear and tear on the rifle as a whole but mainly on the throat and barrel? It certainly looks good in context of the perspective mentioned.
I have a 270 and will be keeping it. A great hunting round, consistently 2/3 the price of 277 fury for regular pressure ammo and 1/4 the price for the high pressure ammo. The moderate gains to be found do not overcome the much much higher costs of running this cartridge. I am confident that a 270 rifle in comparable weight can be easily found, especially in a bolt action, but length will always be greater for comparable barrel lengths. I can see these small improvements having value in a military application, but for civilian applications it I guess I don't agree that the benefits out way the costs. And unlike the past, cost of ammo for new cartridges no longer goes down as sales increase. Even fully adopted for military and civilian use the costs will never come down even close to 270. That's not in the marketing plan.
@ look at the rounds when they are side by side the tip of the high pressure is higher then the low pressure. Hence the round would be longer. I understand it is a hybrid casing, but the bullet tip is higher
@ look at the 7:06 mark and you will see the furthest right round is taller then the middle round. Meaning either the bullet is not seated as deep or the bullet is longer
@ it does look like it, but it can’t be. It must be the angle of the shot. If there was that big of a difference, the brass ones would blow out at the front to fit the chamber. The case dimensions have to be identical. The bullet might not be seated as deep in the HP round, adding the an overall cartridge length, but the case itself has to be identical.
@ unless the metal base has something to do with over all length, I think that once this round finds it way in to service it will dropped quick due to the extra weight. I know that carrying 300 rounds of 5.56 is heavy as shit. And i know as a m249 saw gunner 800 rounds of 5.56 os heavy as hell. Now if you add the weight of 6.8 bullets alone, you will see infantry man dropping out (even now with 5.56 it happens a lot).
Having shot the 6.8x51, do you see any issue with swapping a barrel in an ar10 and running them through it? Possibly needs heavier buffering, and an adjustable gas block? A stronger bolt material? Upgrading those would still keep the cost way below the spear and open up the market to a lot more demand for the ammo.
What he failed to state…insultingly and unsurprisingly is that .270 ammo is much easier to find at any store in America and is much cheaper for those of us that aren’t sent ammo for free.
1. That wasn't the point of the video at all 2. 270 Winchester will be 100 years old next year.......... 3. The Fury is a revolutionary new cartridge design that is barely 5 years old.....it's also proprietary.....SMFH Give SIG and the market some time, 270 has had plenty
277 is to 270 what 308 is to 30-06. Except for the higher pressure rounds that can be used in the hybrid case, which makes it a better ballistic performer
Weight of any rifle depends on how you have it configured, so it's a non-issue. For sheer performance, I see absolutely no advantage to the Fury round except in the heavy grainer, where it has a noticeable edge over the .270 if both are fired from 16 inch barrels. But, that was the whole point of that cartridge.
It's about the same as saying a .308 and 30-06 are the same. Out of a bolt action with factory ammo yeah basically. Try chambering in various actions or hand loading with 1/3 more powder per case then no, not really.
@Chester_Oliver except it didn't. Hornady followed the same marketing scam they've followed with cartridge after cartridge. They used a proprietary loading and claimed it was the cartridge.
With the Fury’s high pressure, comes faster throat erosion and shorter barrel life. Not a problem in a bolt-action, but not feasible in a heavy-use semi or full-auto.
The 276 Pedersen ( 7x51 ) was designed in 1923 and would have been used in the M1 Garand and would have held 10 rounds rather than the 8 rounds of the 30-06 BUT the US did not want it and stayed with the 30-06 . The Brits had played around with several different types of 7mm round and then after WW2 the US adopted the 7.62x51 and forced NATO to accept the round . And now once again we are playing around in the 6.5 & 7mm rounds again , so would we have been better off adopting the 276 Pedersen in the first place or at least adopted it rather than the 7.62x51 .
You act as if the 30-06 was some sort of also-ran or mediocre cartridge, when in reality, most FA historians rank it as the finest center-fire cartridge of the 20th century. One whose record in battle, afield and in competition is above reproach. Revisionist historians have slung a lot of mud at General MacArthur's decision not to adopt the .276 Pedersen, but his judgment was sound in keeping the 30-06. It isn't simply the costs of switching to a new cartridge and rifle, but retooling existing medium MGs, BARs and rifles in 30-06 for the new cartridge, as well as refitting ammo plants to make it. And not just ground-based systems, but naval and aeronautical small arms, too. Shipboard and aircraft machine-guns would have had to be rechambered, rebarreled, etc. and new ammunition stocks built up. Existing spare parts inventories would have had to be scrapped, and so on. Costs would have gotten out of control in a hurry. In the midst of the Great Depression, the funding simply wasn't there to do such a switch, not without taking money from some other place where it was needed. From a cost-benefit analysis standpoint, the switch from 30-06 to .276 would not have made sense then, and it still does not make sense now. Army Chief of Staff General Douglas MacArthur made the correct decision.
@@GeorgiaBoy1961 Not saying the 30-06 was a bad cartridge BUT if it was so good why did the US military ditch it later for the 7.62x51 ? And yes retooling would have been expensive BUT since they had not yet started production of the M1 Garand there would not have been any additional costs . And they could have kept the BAR and 30 cal MGs while still producing the .276 and before you clammer about having to make another cartridge they had no problem in introducing a new rifle and cartidge with the 30 cal carbine . Kinda puts a hole in yours and Dugout Dougs therory . And you did not explain that the military absolutey refused a smaller cartridge than a 30 caliber hence both the 7.62x51 and the 30 caliber were both 30 caliber . Also when Britain wanted to go with a 7mm cartridge the US forced NATO to make the 7.62x51 the NATO cartridge and they did the same with the 5.56 . And if the US is foolish enough to adopt the 6.8x51 cartridge they will probably try and force NATO to accept it .
The 277 Fury at high pressure is more like a .270 WSM or 6.8 Western. 100 ft-lb more energy at 4 inches shorter barrel. Add 4 inches and it’d be at much more magnum velocities and energy.
The "FURY": No Cartridge on the Planet can compete with it for its size and application. Spurned from the 7mm "Rum Punch Colonial" design (reamer available from PT&G), which was engineered from the 7mm 30TC cartridge and converted to an 08 Case to shoot 162 ELDX bullets. With a desire for maximum performance in a short action based on the 08 case, Sig had demanded proven and documented load data, which they wanted for the Army's 135-grain armor-piercing 277 caliber bullets. The 7mm SGLC had published documented loads Layne Simpson already developed that rivaled 280 Ackley improved. So it was advised the shoulder height was raised to that of the SGLC only with the "RPC" 30 Degree shoulder for superior feeding & even more case capacity! All this was coupled with the over-engineered two-piece case design from the 9mm Shell Shock technologies case already in production, which guaranteed Magnum performance in a Safer and lighter-stronger package. Presented with this proven information, Sig made the "FURY" a reality to form a working cartridge by creating loads for the 277 Caliber with SAAMI standards. From its inception, the "FURY" was designed for pure, unadulterated power.
I believe it's also the heavy VLD bullets that will be available in the 6.8. It'd difficult to load these into the 270 and there's the twist rate problem too for heavy bullets in the 270. That said, the 270 is awesome for what it was designed for. For a LA LR gun it could totally be modernized to shoot the heavy VLD's, but that outside the original design.
The only two things this rifle has going for it is high pressure rounds and a little less weight. Weight helps with recoil. Lots of hunters and reloaders like a happy medium like me good fps good 3 shot groups with good foot pounds to maximize our factors. Key points that make other factors
Why even go to a new cartridge when 7.62 nato would be just fine as a battle rifle cartridge. Dont get the waste in money and resources. For the new 6.8
We were pushing for 6mm ARC uppers. 308 fucking sucks cause it kicks like a mule, drops fast, and goes transonic way sooner than modern skinny boolets, its also considerably heavier to carry. DMR/SPR work is at 1500-2000m now get with the times old man.
You just don't get it bro, 7.62 x 51 mm is not good enough anymore. Hence the 6.8 x 51mm. This is a more capable round and caliber and can actually penetrate body armor at 300 yd according to the military.
Why? First of all the DOD can’t help themselves when it comes to breaking NATO standardization. It’s a way the US senior military officers flex on their better educated European counterparts. Secondly, follow the money. The Pentagon hasn’t seen a wasteful military spending program it doesn’t love. Whether or not the program produces a better weapon/vehicle is irrelevant. Just inventing a new program acronym gets a bunch of officers medals to add to their stack. And finally, somewhere in this program is either (or more likely both) a senior officer preparing for a post retirement job or a Congressman/Senator looking for Federal funding for their state/district or lobbyist friends. That’s why the DOD is funding a new cartridge/rifle combo all common sense people know won’t work for general military issue.
What are the 270 and 277's ft/lbs of energy at different distances though? Comparable muzzle energy is a great start but does the 277 fall off faster than the 270?
270 win is a great cartridge. But it’s old. We shouldn’t be surprised that a much newer cartridge is marginally better. The 270 wsm and 6.8 western kinda did the same thing the furry is doing now.
I'm glad someone finally did this comparison.
Nice looking range. BTW
Thanks Brian, and thank you for watching.
I love the 270 cartridge. Flat shooting while carrying a lot of energy. I believe this is a lot like what happened with 30-06 conversation to 308. Get it to a short action, reduce weight, and fit it into more manageably sized firearms.
i see what your saying, but the 30-06 is usually a bit faster with the same barrel, if toe to toe the 308 is almost as good as the 30-06, same bullet and everything else identical, the 30-06 always comes out on top, not by much , but i cant think of a situation where the 308 out does the 30-06. no bias either, as i only have a 308 right now.
@@brian770 By pure performance standards of the cartridge, yes indeed the 30-06 is better in almost any situation. Now let us consider that 30-06 is massively overkill for two-legged mammals and we can shave off some of that power to fit more .308 into a rifleman's loadout and build their weapon lighter and nimbler.
@@brian770the original 3006 load matched todays 308 loads so not exactly accurate. In its day (1950s) the 308 did meet the industry standard of what a 3006 did.
@brian770 it didn't used to be the case that .30-06 was faster than .308 in factory loadings, in fact, it was common for over a decade that the performance for the same weight bullets was darn near identical. You have to remember .308 was designed 50 years later than .30-06 which originally was .30-03 with a slightly lighter spitzer type bullet instead of bottlenose.
Yes, but it’s really more akin to the .270 vs 270 wsm. The .277 fury in the high pressure loading is the next step because now you can have a shorter, much louder .270 or 270 wsm. For hunting, however, I’ll stick with the .270 Winchester because country store you stop at on the way to your hunting grounds will sell you not only a cheap breakfast sandwich and barely passable coffee, they will probably also sell you a box of .270 Winchester.
"A horrendous muzzle brake" the cardboard: "Can confirm..."
One thing to note about all of this: the Cross is at its cheapest a $1500+ rifle with a limited variety of ammo choices. A .270 can be had for 1/4 the price and there are at least 20 different loads for it. make of that what you will.
The hottest loads of 277 still don't top the hottest 270 he used, and as you said, there are a lot more loads to choose from. They're not the same, either in design or use.
Also there are some much lighter weight rifles than the chassis style .270. That is probably the heaviest .270 that you can buy. Many out there sub 6-7 lbs.
The Fury is 4 years old, and has a unique.....proprietary....... revolutionary new cartridge design
Whereas 270 Winchester will be 100 years old next year...................................aka give SIG some time and also give the industry time, Bear Creek arsenal has teased a 277 Fury option possibly coming
@@thalo215 I'mma need that .270 Winchester AR.
The military does not pay what we pay for gear and ammo.
To be honest, the .277 Fury chamber is much, much closer to 7mm-08 than .270 Winchester, but with MUUUUCH higher chamber pressure than either.
OMG! It's almost exactly like 30-06 vs .308. Who would have thought...
I took my widest buck to date this month with my Rem model 700 in 270 Win. 130gr federal fusion, dropped him like a lightening bolt. The new stuff is fascinating but I love my old classic cartridges. Great video.
Nevermind...this round was really idealized in the 50's. It was to be the new round for the M-14...but they prayed on the altar of .30 cal and the 7.62x51/.308 was born.
300 Savage on steroids is all the .308 is.
Not even, this would be outdated even in the 50's due to 7.62x39 being adopted by the warsaw pact. 280 british was MUCH closer to ideal, as was 276 pederson, the original m1 garand cartridge
Good video, but are we not going to mention .270 WSM? I feel like that is a better comparison to .277 Fury as it is chambered in short actions and slightly outperforms .270 Win in most regards. You can also get a modern Model 70 with a polymer stock that weighs about 6 or 7 pounds.
We need an accuracy test of the high pressure solid copper military ammo in the SIG cross, for science! Would be neat to compare it to the match ammo
The M1 Garand was originally supposed to be 270 Win, but MacArthur had millions of .30-06 rounds in storage from
The Great War. The military decided to stick with that cartridge for logistical purposes. The .270 Win is hard hitting and has a flatter trajectory than .308 and .30-06. The Sig Fury is something old that is new again. The problem with the 6.8x51 is that troops will be carrying less ammo than the current 5.56 NATO.
You are misremembering the history of the Garand. 276 pederson the round originally intended and it was not because they had a bunch laying around that they went with 30-06.
@ you are right, sir! 276 Pendersen.
There is such thing as Garands in .270 Win. In France, it used to be that it is very difficult to get guns in a military calibers, so French competition and sports shooters converted their surplus Garand rifles into .270 since they just need a new barrel and everything else can stay the same (same bolt, same clips, etc.).
the .270 doesnt hit harder than a.308. They are about the same actually not to mention most .308 are actually heavier in grains and they achieve the same velocity. I cant speak for flight ballistics though.
I will keep my 270 Winchester !
Get them deers! 277 fury is… not designed for deers……..
For hunting, it does it all except for Alaskan browns.
@@juanoncello86You really think 6.8×51 would have an issue taking a deer?
I think this technology would be great for the 6.5 Grendel but like FN has already done just make the case out of steel unless they are going to let us reload the cases
Are they really the same? Of course not. The 277 fury has a maximum operating pressure 15,000 psi higher than 270 Winchester, specifically developed for a shorter action that allows for higher than standard velocity out of shorter barrels
I think it's higher than just 15K psi, but this is the correct answer.
@Ripper13F1V I haven't looked in any manuals but according to Wikipedia (for what it's worth) 270 Winchester has max pressure of 65k psi and the 277 fury is 80k psi
@randyhavard6084 I thought it was closer to 90k psi. Maybe i read a test report from the .mil of ammo they were wanting to look at but didn't adopt.
@@Ripper13F1V Sig (that St John guy) has claimed they could push it to 100k psi or even 120k psi I think. There is a Garand Thumb vid with a 9" barrel Spear running like 2750fps. Subgun size, battle rifle performance. One TH-cam channel pushed a 308 to 100k psi with a specific brand of brass case.
@Ripper13F1V I just looked on Wikipedia, maybe it needs to be updated. Either way, it's quite a bit more pressure out of the new round
The oniy significant downside to the higher pressure cartridges is the wear and tear it puts on parts and the reduced barrel life. Less of an issue if you shooting game once or twice a year....but in other applications or if you wanted to shoot it on matches and such you'd burn up a barrel and parts quite a bit faster then something like m193 would.....
This exactly, very similar to m855a1 is burning up m4's pretty bad in the field. A lot of folks think its the next best thing, but the drawbacks that people often don't consider are what end up destroying firearms, effectively through misuse. Small arms solutions did a really good video on the subject, and I'd be willing to wager that this hotter 277 fury situation will prove no different in the current firearms.
Sig claims 10,000 rounds for barrel life and bolt life with the high pressure.
@@Ratkill9000maybe with a slower fire rate? Not sure, but id imagine soldiers using rapid indirect fire will be heating up the barrel a lot faster....maybe
The 150 grain accubond load will also take down an elk and is printing at .5 moa in my 18 inch setup
Hell, I'm pretty sure the 130 gr Accubond would take an Elk. I've literally never recovered one from whitetail and they hit like a hammer at the same time. Obviously the 150 gr would be a better choice though
Great video and great comparison at the end
Thanks! 👍
I don’t really have a dog in this fight as I don’t own anything in either caliber, but still a very interesting video!
You made ACAS compliance scanning slightly more entertaining for a short bit this morning 😂
Thank you, and I hope you have a “boss key” to hide the screen if necessary.
There are some handloaders doing cool things with these bimetal cases. They're necking them up to .308 and getting .300wm velocities and necking them down to 6.5cm and getting 6.5prc velocities.
If you think a 308 win can be reloaded to a 300 WM you are on the extreme for ignorance.
I have used all powders and weights of powder for the 308 win and in NO way can the 308 win be loaded to match the 300 WM
@Lure-Benson Orly? th-cam.com/video/uXkmcpk7Brc/w-d-xo.htmlsi=5iu1i7_jMQxcsYt6
And this isn't even using the bimetal cases I was talking about that'll take 80k psi.
🤣🤣🤣@@Lure-Benson
@@Lure-Bensondidn't they just do a video on that at Ultimate reloader?
@@Bieling3 I have been an advanced reloader and custom rifle builder and having to developed wildcat cartridges for my rifles and I build and sell AR 10 uppers in all of the WSM magnums or old deer camp favorite cartridges.
I know all of the powder pressures with all weights of bullets, and you want to try to tell me just because you seen some nonsense on TH-cam from a channel that did a video telling the viewers if a 5.56x45 is fired in a 223 chamber it would blow up like a massive bomb and kill everyone!
The top Parrot mouth lie, and totally stupid and ignorant fools believe it is a 5.56x45 blows up guns with a 223 chamber when the cartridges are the same and reloading data is the same for both cartridges, even the finish chamber reamer are the same.
I have seen more lying bull shit on that Ultimate reloader channel!
I'm surprised they didn't just stick with the 6.5 an make a bi-metal case for that..
Especially when socom is going with 6.5cm in the MRGG
if they can spend more of our money developing something unnecessary they will lol
Oh wow. The staff at MAC are amazing to be doing comparison videos like these for us. The .277 Sig fury is something really interesting and still getting up there. Maybe some improvements little by little over nearly 100 years like the .270Win (great cartridge filling freezers for generations). I don't know much about the .270Win but do know it has been adequate and plentiful on shelves.
The difference is what is your use/mission. Military use, it is going to be weight/ quantity for ammo load bearing. Hunting/target is going to weight/accuracy.
The 277Fury in the hi pressure cartridge meets or exceeds 270 Win but at the expense of extra wear on the of the action and accelerated barrel wear.
The rate of fire will play a big factor in wear.
270 Win is a long action, standard pressure where the 277 Fury is a short action and is essentially a +P+ or better load to reach its numbers.
Use/mission is the big factor between choosing which way to go.
Can you do more .270/6.8 family vs the fury? 270 wsm and 6.8 western and other short actions i don't know about would be fun comparisons
You guys are awesome ✌️👍
My question is how accurate is that radar when it is blocked by cardboard, unless there is a sending unit outside the window somewhere?
I’ll stick to my auld 270 Win. For deer here in Ireland, where shots are not long, it’s perfect. I use Hornady Super performance ammo. I’m 69 and have no problem with the extra half kilo weight in my Steyr rifle. Great video.
Own neither but still a good learning opportunity.
I think many will consider barrel life. Great video.
I have been saying this for a long time now incorporating the hybrid case technology with the 5.56 nato or even the 6.8SPC or any cartridge even the 9mm Luger of course the guns will need to be beefed up or stronger metals used but I think this is the next step for higher pressured rounds that brass case alone can’t handle.
30 super carry was the attempt to make a high pressure pistol cartridge, and that never really took off. intermediate cartridge weapons are a smaller market, don't think we'll see that without a major western government's patronage.
The barrel life of 277 will be shorter than 270 .
most likely. Plus as he kinda mentioned, there are hotter loads to 270, and they won't have the same barrel and bolt shredding effects that the hotter 277's will.
Sig claims that barrel and bolt life of the high pressure is good for at least 10,000 rounds. That could be the time when there's too much erosion to be considered safe or something else.
@@Ratkill9000 Actual optimal bbl life without noticeable loss of precision, if initial user reports of the M7 are anything to go by. (Apparently not an amazingly accurate system to begin with, though.)
The lifespan of other parts will be shorter with the 277 Fury.
@@texpatriot8462 Not necessarily. It's neither a direct gas system like the AR nor a simple recoil/blowback. The gas flow is adjustable at the block, and the short-stroke piston should limit transfer of force. Along with the flow-through suppressor this should all do a reasonable job of keeping the aggression down. Only the containment surfaces -- trunnion, bolt head and locking lugs, and chamber and barrel walls -- should be directly subject to the extra pressure, and these have been reinforced accordingly.
Btw everybody, .277 Fury refers to the all-brass, standard-pressure commercial cartridge; the extra-hot military round is currently just the 6.8x51. (Unless that's changed recently.)
Military / sniper use 308 Win / 7,62 Nato has an estimated accuracy life of 8 to 10 K shots, .270 Win estimated at 5 K and Fury ??? About 3 - 4 K rounds ???
Man I wish you had the 13” barrel version. I want to see those numbers compared but guessing about 100-150fps slower than the 16” barrel. Awesome video
Interesting and educational comparison. Thanks
I dont know what to say other than thank you for posting the information i was curious what the full pressure Furry would do and now i know. Good job done.
Tim, good testing and actually shows the capability of the new 6.8 x 51mm and bi metal cartridge. I think is a good choice for the military maybe not for every single Trooper but a good portion. You may not see this rolled out to the Marines or the Air Force but, the US Army has definitely bought all in on it. Thanks for your content Tim.
What is the difference in cost between these two cartridges ?
I keep remembering the test you did of 556 77gr standard pressure VS 556 extreme pressure. Velocity with the same projectile weight wasn't worth measuring. But the high pressure stuff was wasting barrels at an extreme rate. I always keep that in mind when I hear about 'high pressure' military rounds
First, nice objective look at the rounds. As usual, well done.
Naturally they are different. The higher operating pressures of the fury put it into another performance class. My question is “Do I need it?”. Answer”NO”. My .270s do the job I need them to do perfectly. I’ll stick with them. Nothing negative on the Fury. Just something I don’t need to invest in.
How does that Garmin give accurate speed behind cardboard?
I didn’t expect that.
.277 fury will go the way of the 6.8spc - just give it a year or two
6.8 Spc was a terrible round. 277 has many advantages
I see them going back to 7.62 NATO.
What's so bad about 6.8spc?
@@patroit5192 Didn't offer any real advantages in combat over 5.56 while having drawbacks including bolt breakage due to the larger diameter case head.
It would probably have been OK-ish if it'd been introduced as part of a whole system, and not shoe-horned into the AR15.
@@immikeurnot Where ever did you come up with the nonsense that 223 breaks bolts?
I have owned AR 15s before Bill Clinton was president and not once has an AR 15 I own broken a bolt.
I also own one AR 15 in 7.62x39 and a new AR 15 I did in the Nazi German cartridge of 7.92x33 Kurz and no broken bolts here.
Many of us would love to see a 10MM 16"-barrel Carbine using 60 grain Liberty Civil Defense VS a 556 16"-barrel rifle using 60 grain ammo as well, shooting out to 100 then 200 yards. Who wins in muzzle energy and accuracy????? You might be extremely surprised.
I’m a big time .270win fan and also a short action cartridge fan. I would be very curious to build a .277Fury and make my own load for it. I’ve also kicked around the idea of take a 6.5Creed case and blowing out the neck to .277 to essentially make a 6.8Creed. I’m mainly looking at brass availability in comparison with Fury versus the Creed.
Lake City 7.62 brass is available for very little compared to Creedmoor brass.
@@mylifecademychannel-wt2srit’s different dimensions
It's called a 270 redding. Been around 50 years. Look it up.😮
No one makes 270Redding dies anymore or they’re over $400
You know they had a .270wsm back in the day. The .270 WSM can have a muzzle velocity of 3,700 ft/s with a 90 grain bullet, 3,295 ft/s with a 130 grain bullet, 3,250 ft/s with a 140 grain bullet, and 3,136 ft/s with a 150 grain bullet.
The 270 WSM is a better comparison for the 277 Fury at high pressure.
It won’t go that fast in a 16 or 20 inch barrel though
The Brands of WSM cartridge are back in stores here in the Pacific NW.
I build and sell AR 10 uppers in all of the WSM magnums, and I have an AR 10 upper in 300 WSM for sale now ready for a new owner for $1700
Next upcoming builds is in 6.5-300 WSM and 7 mm WSM AR 10 uppers
It’s crazy to me how many people are choosing to ignore the advantages with the new cartridge setup. Having a 270 in a 16” semi auto is pretty devastating. But no, “muh 270!” prevails.
How the fuxk can that Garmin read through the cardboard?! That's wild!! I gota get one! Thats impressive 👏
It’s just radar. Paper/cardboard is invisible to it.
Radio signaling
You hear Radio signals through cardboard and pape., and more. Radar uses high frequency radio waves, so it won't travel through as much, but it will travel through thin materials like that.
The only thing holding the 270 win back if you prefer to shoot bullets over 150 grains is it's barrel twist rate . The 6.8 western rifles have a faster twist rate ,
1 : 8 vs 1 : 10 of 270 win production barrels .
With regards to reloading, I'll take a 30 degree shoulder angle over a 17.5 any day all day.
Obviously not the same, the SIG cartridge is designed to achieve 270 Win velocity out of a 16" barrel, where 270 would normally get there with a 24" barrel.
I picked up a used Savage cheapo scope combo gun in .270 Winchester for $150 back in 2001. It has been a great deer gun for twenty years. I would love something new, cool looking or maybe even threaded for a can, but I just can't justify the expense.
Good testing but, still not impressed for military use or economy on 277 Fury. The bimetal case isn't standard issue, the full brass case is. The Bi-metal is being used like AP ammo was issued in 7.62 or 30-06. Not sure you can reload bi-metal, can you? The 270 you can reload to all sorts of bullet sizes and comparatively cheap. Not sure on Fury. Still thinking US Army is reinventing the wheel
Typically you’re only bumping the shoulder and resizing the neck which are both still brass on the bi metal case so it shouldn’t really be different in regards to being able to be resized but at 80k PSI who knows what will hold up.
.270 winchester doesn't fit in a short action autoloading (AR10 or equivalent) modern military pattern receiver.
And if you are going to build a XL action auto loading military pattern rifle... (and the only reason you'd need to do that is for wet work or paper work beyond 1200 yards) there are FAR more effective rounds to chamber it in. Ever wonder why you seldom (if ever) see someone belly up to the line at an ELR match shooting .270 winchester?
The round has some limitations...
277 fury gives you energy levels similar to .270 winchester, but with a twist rate allows for longer, high BC bullets you can't use in an off the shelf. 270 winchester hunting rifle.
They didn't "reinvent the wheel" they improved the wheel for military use.
@@stinkyfungus the 6.8 Creedmore is far better in long range shooting, not that Pvt Snuffy is going to be able to hit beyond 200 meters anyways. They are inventing a round and rifle that would have been nice in high mountains of Afghanistan (where they shot at us with 100 year old Mosins) but worthless everywhere else.
@@zacharyschellinger4769 unless yo are full length resize for semi auto. Yes 80K psi you probably shoot once and throw it into recycle bin
*_6.8 Western._*
_Thee_ best modern 'do-all' cartridge, IMHO.
(Until we finally get a successor to the .300 WSM.)
Of course, that is assuming we are now bringing hunting rounds into the otherwise stale mix of ubiquitous calibers. You know the standard lot, folks.
Nevertheless, it seems like the .277" projectiles are _finally_ getting some much needed recognition. Although, I have my doubts regarding when/if _We The People_ will ever see the .277 Fury available to the public in a normal capacity.
Which leads us back, once again, to the 6.8 Western for the win.
_"The West is the best."_ *~Jim Morrison • The Doors*
Stay classy my friends.
I still think the military should have adopted the 6.8 SPC instead of the Fury.
I disagree. There were problems with the cartridge as a swap-out replacement for 5.56 in existing rifles, which was the original concept. Check out the LWRC Six8 rifle, it addresses the cartridge OAL issues that haunted the 6.8 SPC in standard AR's.
@Militaryarmschannel what were some of the issues with OAL
Tim, you're forgetting couple things. Barrel life and cost overall. Federal and Hornady has or had light magnum .270 Win ammo. XM7 will have a barrel length of 13-14.5"
I've been following the 277 fury/ 6.8x51mm for a while now and I have actually been surprised by not only the lack of interest but the animosity and hatred surrounding it
It's to the point where it's surprising we get anything new at all in the gun industry period hell if social media is to be believed there's no good reason why any advancement should ever happen, this 100 year old cartridge does everything it perfect and we don't need anything new.........just glad the people from a century ago actually pushed for advancement if they had this mentality revolvers and bolt actions would be the only options SMFH maybe even smokeless powder would have been scuffed at lol
People aren't against advancement at all; they are against defense-spending boondoggles which waste hard-earned taxpayer money on unnecessary projects and/or proposals which could be filled using off-the-shelf components and existing systems. This whole project, 6.8 Fury as well as the rifle system which fires it - is a solution in search of a problem, which will cost the taxpayers tens, perhaps hundreds of millions of dollars which could be put to better and more-productive use. While it is true that the 6.8 Fury offers performance gains over existing cartridges, if it performs as promised (which is by no means a sure thing), those gains are not impressive-enough to justify its price tag and the adoption of unproven new tech.
The other problem is that the Sig Spear 6.8x51mm is a battle rifle, and the more-urgent need is for a more-potent assault rifle and intermediate cartridge, neither of which need is answered by this system.
The 270 is still uses a 30-06 case length of 64.5 while the 6.8 uses a case length of 51mm . So other than being over pressured , more expensive and more damaging to the firearm why not go with the 7mm-08 . But then again follow the money and see which Generals end up on Sigs payroll upon retirement . So the US Army will not only have a cartridge that no one else uses including NATO or the Navy or Marines but will push it anyway reminds me when they adopted the UCP camo pattern that did not blend into any environment BUT they forced it anyways .
270 WSM also exists
What I find frustrating with the fudds that are mad about 6.8x51 is that hunting game is different than hunting people with body armor.
nice, but I'd like to see practical accuracy at 200m.?
Thank you
Algorithmic commentary
Thank you, sir!
7mm-08 master race! Lol jk but the fury seem to be a short action 270 which ain't bad at all. We'll see how it goes but new calibers rarely do well in the marketplace.
There's something to be said for existing infrastructure
That's interesting Tim. It's a cool new round and I've been anxious to see the numbers. As a side note, and speaking of newer technology, how do you like that Garmin Zero chronograph? I need to upgrade again and I think it's time to go Doppler.
Great video, have you shot the cross enough to get some groups out of it?
Tim, i've commented before about your smock (coat), i have a question (or two)... does it have the Union Flag (Jack) on the arm? I keep looking but can't see it if it's there, and do you ever get mistaken (by those who don't know you) for being former/current R.A.F?
Yes it does, it’s surplus from the RAF. 👍
@Militaryarmschannel I thought it might, but some of them are velcro so i didn't know whether he would have it on or not. I assume his is sewn on
@@alistairhackney Yes, the patches on the smock are all sewn on.
@@Militaryarmschannel thought so 😁
Army supposedly plans on going to a polymer case on this ammo
17:27 if you're handloading .270Win you're also using at least a little bit more powder per trigger pull.
Why didnt they just use the bi-metal tech on the 6.5 creed. Slightly shorter case that means less bullet intrusion into the case along with room for higher BC bullets. Its what gives the 6.5 creed its advantages over 308 based cartridges in a short action rifle. .277 cal. isnt magical. We spend so much money reinventing the wheel. The standard brass cased fury is just a 50 year old 270 redding😊
Re: "We spend so much money reinventing the wheel."
Yep, that's exactly right. But when you realize that the Pentagon exists not to get the best weapons and equipment for our soldiers at the best prices, but to pad the bottom line of defense contractors, lobbyists and pols, and help that project officer get his next bump in salary and rank, everything starts to fall into place. Our country spends an order of magnitude more money on defense and the military than anyone else, yet our weapons are falling behind those of our potential adversaries. Russia's army now ranks as the most-combat capable in the world, and they do it with a budget a lot smaller than ours. The current Pentagon-DOD system is broken and expensive and does not work as advertised. And lord knows what the PRC are up to - I won't get into that because that's enough nightmare material for one evening!
Is it a game changer?
Depends on the game.
I kind of wish they have a commercial .270 in the .308 case long before this. But it's now a lot better than it could have been. Hopefully more companies will release rifles with this cartridge, since a lot of us don't want to pay the premium price tag Sig is asking.
My conclusion after watching this video: Sig Sauer is 100 percent scamming the American taxpayer and the DOD.
Go watch Ultimate Reloader's video where they push the .308 Winchester to .300 Winchester Magnum performance. They were running a 200+ grain bullet past 80k psi and pretty close to or over 3,000 fps. IIRC, they were using Alpha Munitions brass with a small primer pocket.
I think it would be interesting to see them redo the test with lighter bullets.
Sig and the other competitors developied to what the army wants.
@@jessesmith438
True, but what the army wanted and what the army needed are worlds apart.
Sig Sauer developed & delivered what the DoD asked for. Your issue is with military acquisitions.
@Mk-vc4fx - Re: "My conclusion after watching this video: Sig Sauer is 100 percent scamming the American taxpayer and the DOD."
Yes, absolutely true, but they didn't do it alone - they got in the door because of the ridiculous requirements of the project in the first place.
There's nothing wrong with wanting a performance upgrade to enable the soldier of the 21st century to defeat ceramic body armor at combat ranges. It is the way the Army - "Big Green" and the Pentagon/DOD went about it which beggars belief.
First, the DOD erred in not taking a closer look at off-the-shelf solutions to the problem. If 7.62x51mm NATO AP black-tip didn't do the job, why not and what would it take to make it work? And if .308-cal. wasn't an option, when what about working with existing cartridges in 6.5-7mm, i.e., 6.5 CM, 7mm-08, etc.?
Then to compound matters, the proposed rifle had to use a ridiculously short 13-inch barrel with permanently-affixed silencer/suppressor. This in turn forced Sig to invent new and heretofore untested technology to allow the very high 80k operating pressure, a full 20-25% higher than the existing M80 7.62 round. Namely, a hybrid-case using a steel case head, lock-ring and brass for the remainder.
Few troops "need" a carbine with a barrel whose length is only thirteen inches. Indeed, having a barrel that short defeats the purpose of a battle rifle in the first place, which is to serve as a longer-ranged, harder-hitting alternative to an assault rifle. Battle rifles are longer, larger and heavier than assault rifles precisely because they are designed for a different mission profile than a battle carbine or assault rifle. The DOD/Army appear to have suffered from schizophrenia here - requesting a battle rifle, but waffling and insisting that it is be as compact as an assault rifle or SMG.
Sig's work on the 6.8 Fury looks promising, and if the cartridge and its host rifle system can work, the performance would be very good. But the simple fact remains that many - indeed most - of the performance targets could have been met with off-the-shelf tech and components, and not an expensive brand-new weapon system using new and combat untested tech.
The ultra-high operating pressure of the cartridge, its new technology, and the unorthodox design of the rifle almost guarantee that the new system will suffering teething problems and breakdowns in the field once it is committed to action. And since spares and service support may not be army-wide, let alone across all services, the troops will probably end up using the same weapons they've been using for the last three decades or more, and the cartridges that work with them.
The Pentagon/DOD can always be counted upon to choose the least-cost effective, most-complex and most-expensive "solution" to any military equipment problem, and this episode proves it yet again. But then, it has been a very long time since the five-sided puzzle palace has been in the business of providing the best weapons and gear to our fighting men for the best return on the dollar, hasn't it? It is more about getting that flag or project office that next bump in pay and promotion, and helping the folks down at Raytheon or General Dynamics make their numbers for this quarter.... or in this case, Sig make its numbers.
Which brings up another issue: What does Sig-Sauer have on the folks inside the Pentagon anyway? Blackmail or something? Because all of a sudden, American firms need not apply when it comes to small arms and equipment contracts over at DOD....
@GeorgiaBoy1961 A 13" barrel was not one of the requirements. The NGSW requirements were to drive the new 6.8mm AP projectile at the required velocity and for the overall length of the weapon system to be a certain length. General Dynamics came up with a bullpup design with a 19" barrel and the polymer case to drive the same projectile at the required velocity. Sig just chose a 13" barrel and the hybrid case design of 80k psi chamber pressure to get the same velocity. I am not saying the military industrial complex is not very adept at wasting taxpayer money. I am 17 years and counting active duty. I am very well aware at the Charlie Foxtrot that is the military acquisition system.
I would assume these pressures and velocities, heat and such are increasing the wear and tear on the rifle as a whole but mainly on the throat and barrel? It certainly looks good in context of the perspective mentioned.
I have a 270 and will be keeping it. A great hunting round, consistently 2/3 the price of 277 fury for regular pressure ammo and 1/4 the price for the high pressure ammo. The moderate gains to be found do not overcome the much much higher costs of running this cartridge. I am confident that a 270 rifle in comparable weight can be easily found, especially in a bolt action, but length will always be greater for comparable barrel lengths. I can see these small improvements having value in a military application, but for civilian applications it I guess I don't agree that the benefits out way the costs. And unlike the past, cost of ammo for new cartridges no longer goes down as sales increase. Even fully adopted for military and civilian use the costs will never come down even close to 270. That's not in the marketing plan.
What rifle in the video is chambered in .270? I know it's in a chassis system. The action seems super smooth
Is the “high pressure” longer then the “ low pressure” .277 fury?
No, the case is a hybrid with the base of the case being made of steel, this allows much higher pressures from different powder recipes.
@ look at the rounds when they are side by side the tip of the high pressure is higher then the low pressure. Hence the round would be longer.
I understand it is a hybrid casing, but the bullet tip is higher
@ look at the 7:06 mark and you will see the furthest right round is taller then the middle round. Meaning either the bullet is not seated as deep or the bullet is longer
@ it does look like it, but it can’t be. It must be the angle of the shot. If there was that big of a difference, the brass ones would blow out at the front to fit the chamber. The case dimensions have to be identical. The bullet might not be seated as deep in the HP round, adding the an overall cartridge length, but the case itself has to be identical.
@ unless the metal base has something to do with over all length, I think that once this round finds it way in to service it will dropped quick due to the extra weight. I know that carrying 300 rounds of 5.56 is heavy as shit. And i know as a m249 saw gunner 800 rounds of 5.56 os heavy as hell. Now if you add the weight of 6.8 bullets alone, you will see infantry man dropping out (even now with 5.56 it happens a lot).
Having shot the 6.8x51, do you see any issue with swapping a barrel in an ar10 and running them through it? Possibly needs heavier buffering, and an adjustable gas block? A stronger bolt material? Upgrading those would still keep the cost way below the spear and open up the market to a lot more demand for the ammo.
How did you get your hands on the .277 Sig Cross, that seems like vaporware right now
He's part of the club
Guess the bigger question is. Barrel life? High pressure and speed has to reduce the life expentancy
There is also the logistics of finding the ammo.
I wonder what the extra pressure does to the throat
What he failed to state…insultingly and unsurprisingly is that .270 ammo is much easier to find at any store in America and is much cheaper for those of us that aren’t sent ammo for free.
And a gorillion cheap guns chambered in it
1. That wasn't the point of the video at all
2. 270 Winchester will be 100 years old next year..........
3. The Fury is a revolutionary new cartridge design that is barely 5 years old.....it's also proprietary.....SMFH
Give SIG and the market some time, 270 has had plenty
I still don't understand the military changing from 5.56, it worked great for the 14yrs I was in.
@CodyGraham-g6u the stated logic is it will not penetrate the new Russian and Chineese body armor.
277 is to 270 what 308 is to 30-06. Except for the higher pressure rounds that can be used in the hybrid case, which makes it a better ballistic performer
Weight of any rifle depends on how you have it configured, so it's a non-issue. For sheer performance, I see absolutely no advantage to the Fury round except in the heavy grainer, where it has a noticeable edge over the .270 if both are fired from 16 inch barrels. But, that was the whole point of that cartridge.
logistics
Military has a hard on for .277.
It's about the same as saying a .308 and 30-06 are the same. Out of a bolt action with factory ammo yeah basically. Try chambering in various actions or hand loading with 1/3 more powder per case then no, not really.
@Chester_Oliver except it didn't. Hornady followed the same marketing scam they've followed with cartridge after cartridge. They used a proprietary loading and claimed it was the cartridge.
Nobody talking about how the chronograph is still working with a piece of cardboard in front of it. What is this wizardry?
Even if it were a "repackaged .270 win.", you could say the same thing about the .30-06 and the .308.
With the Fury’s high pressure, comes faster throat erosion and shorter barrel life. Not a problem in a bolt-action, but not feasible in a heavy-use semi or full-auto.
Thank you, as you said, it's not likely to be an issue in a bolt action hunting rifle. This video isn't about the military's use of the XM7.
The 276 Pedersen ( 7x51 ) was designed in 1923 and would have been used in the M1 Garand and would have held 10 rounds rather than the 8 rounds of the 30-06 BUT the US did not want it and stayed with the 30-06 . The Brits had played around with several different types of 7mm round and then after WW2 the US adopted the 7.62x51 and forced NATO to accept the round . And now once again we are playing around in the 6.5 & 7mm rounds again , so would we have been better off adopting the 276 Pedersen in the first place or at least adopted it rather than the 7.62x51 .
You act as if the 30-06 was some sort of also-ran or mediocre cartridge, when in reality, most FA historians rank it as the finest center-fire cartridge of the 20th century. One whose record in battle, afield and in competition is above reproach.
Revisionist historians have slung a lot of mud at General MacArthur's decision not to adopt the .276 Pedersen, but his judgment was sound in keeping the 30-06. It isn't simply the costs of switching to a new cartridge and rifle, but retooling existing medium MGs, BARs and rifles in 30-06 for the new cartridge, as well as refitting ammo plants to make it. And not just ground-based systems, but naval and aeronautical small arms, too. Shipboard and aircraft machine-guns would have had to be rechambered, rebarreled, etc. and new ammunition stocks built up. Existing spare parts inventories would have had to be scrapped, and so on. Costs would have gotten out of control in a hurry.
In the midst of the Great Depression, the funding simply wasn't there to do such a switch, not without taking money from some other place where it was needed.
From a cost-benefit analysis standpoint, the switch from 30-06 to .276 would not have made sense then, and it still does not make sense now. Army Chief of Staff General Douglas MacArthur made the correct decision.
@@GeorgiaBoy1961 Not saying the 30-06 was a bad cartridge BUT if it was so good why did the US military ditch it later for the 7.62x51 ? And yes retooling would have been expensive BUT since they had not yet started production of the M1 Garand there would not have been any additional costs . And they could have kept the BAR and 30 cal MGs while still producing the .276 and before you clammer about having to make another cartridge they had no problem in introducing a new rifle and cartidge with the 30 cal carbine .
Kinda puts a hole in yours and Dugout Dougs therory . And you did not explain that the military absolutey refused a smaller cartridge than a 30 caliber hence both the 7.62x51 and the 30 caliber were both 30 caliber . Also when Britain wanted to go with a 7mm cartridge the US forced NATO to make the 7.62x51 the NATO cartridge and they did the same with the 5.56 . And if the US is foolish enough to adopt the 6.8x51 cartridge they will probably try and force NATO to accept it .
What does the primers look like on the high pressure rounds? Are they flat or cratering?
You may as well add the 7mm Rem Mag.
The 277 Fury at high pressure is more like a .270 WSM or 6.8 Western. 100 ft-lb more energy at 4 inches shorter barrel. Add 4 inches and it’d be at much more magnum velocities and energy.
Could you also use the BC of the bullets chosen to see what the energy is at 100 yard, 200 yards, 300 yards and 500 yards?
There's already a few companies making bi-metalic 556. Black arc has an 80.5 gr berger load leaving the barrel at 2830 fps.
The "FURY": No Cartridge on the Planet can compete with it for its size and application. Spurned from the 7mm "Rum Punch Colonial" design (reamer available from PT&G), which was engineered from the 7mm 30TC cartridge and converted to an 08 Case to shoot 162 ELDX bullets. With a desire for maximum performance in a short action based on the 08 case, Sig had demanded proven and documented load data, which they wanted for the Army's 135-grain armor-piercing 277 caliber bullets. The 7mm SGLC had published documented loads Layne Simpson already developed that rivaled 280 Ackley improved. So it was advised the shoulder height was raised to that of the SGLC only with the "RPC" 30 Degree shoulder for superior feeding & even more case capacity! All this was coupled with the over-engineered two-piece case design from the 9mm Shell Shock technologies case already in production, which guaranteed Magnum performance in a Safer and lighter-stronger package. Presented with this proven information, Sig made the "FURY" a reality to form a working cartridge by creating loads for the 277 Caliber with SAAMI standards. From its inception, the "FURY" was designed for pure, unadulterated power.
I believe it's also the heavy VLD bullets that will be available in the 6.8. It'd difficult to load these into the 270 and there's the twist rate problem too for heavy bullets in the 270. That said, the 270 is awesome for what it was designed for. For a LA LR gun it could totally be modernized to shoot the heavy VLD's, but that outside the original design.
The only two things this rifle has going for it is high pressure rounds and a little less weight. Weight helps with recoil. Lots of hunters and reloaders like a happy medium like me good fps good 3 shot groups with good foot pounds to maximize our factors. Key points that make other factors
Why even go to a new cartridge when 7.62 nato would be just fine as a battle rifle cartridge. Dont get the waste in money and resources. For the new 6.8
We were pushing for 6mm ARC uppers. 308 fucking sucks cause it kicks like a mule, drops fast, and goes transonic way sooner than modern skinny boolets, its also considerably heavier to carry. DMR/SPR work is at 1500-2000m now get with the times old man.
Plate. smaller faster . better against dude wearing plates.
You just don't get it bro, 7.62 x 51 mm is not good enough anymore. Hence the 6.8 x 51mm. This is a more capable round and caliber and can actually penetrate body armor at 300 yd according to the military.
Why? First of all the DOD can’t help themselves when it comes to breaking NATO standardization. It’s a way the US senior military officers flex on their better educated European counterparts. Secondly, follow the money. The Pentagon hasn’t seen a wasteful military spending program it doesn’t love. Whether or not the program produces a better weapon/vehicle is irrelevant. Just inventing a new program acronym gets a bunch of officers medals to add to their stack. And finally, somewhere in this program is either (or more likely both) a senior officer preparing for a post retirement job or a Congressman/Senator looking for Federal funding for their state/district or lobbyist friends. That’s why the DOD is funding a new cartridge/rifle combo all common sense people know won’t work for general military issue.
6.5 creedmore would have been a better choice but, you still run into the problem of higher pressures but not as bad as .277 which is just rediculous
If you think the 270 was a little hard on barrels wait to you feel the fury .
What are the 270 and 277's ft/lbs of energy at different distances though? Comparable muzzle energy is a great start but does the 277 fall off faster than the 270?
Seems like recoil was less in the 277
270 win is a great cartridge. But it’s old. We shouldn’t be surprised that a much newer cartridge is marginally better. The 270 wsm and 6.8 western kinda did the same thing the furry is doing now.