6.8x51/.277 Fury?

robin banks said:

so all of that stuff on that rifle is needed to fight goatherders?

Click to expand...

I'm seeing passive aiming, active aiming, PID using either IR illumination or white light for darkened areas during daylight OP's not requiring NOD's, a muzzle flash suppressor and recoil mitigation device, and a magnifier to PID friend from foe.

So yes, against even gOaThErDeRs. The military has a different set of requirements than us civilians. Case use is everything here.

robin banks said:

so all of that stuff on that rifle is needed to fight goatherders?

Click to expand...

You're falling into the trap there of always fighting the last war. The US military's equipment choices need to be setup in line with fighting ANY opponent around the globe, not just focusing on combat in the middle east like we've had recently.

There's a reason why those "goat herders" are so ineffective against US troops - a good part of it is lack of training, but also there is the fact that most of them have cold war era rifles with no optics. Gear acts as a force multiplier - I don't have an issue with our troops having whatever they need.

Granted, I don't think the .277 Fury was a good idea (essentially going back to 7.62 NATO but not exactly) - if I were making choices I probably would have looked at something like the original 6.8 SPC that they first looked at a decade or so ago or something like 5.56 NATO necked up to 6.5mm instead to keep ammo weight and recoil down. Still, the cartridge choice is my only disagreement - we're well overdue for a more modern rifle.

robin banks said:

so all of that stuff on that rifle is needed to fight goatherders?

Click to expand...

What is your combat experience against "goat herders"?

If this cartridge came out in a 1:8 Twist or 1:8.5 I would buy it over the PRC sisters.

mgmorden said:

You're falling into the trap there of always fighting the last war. The US military's equipment choices need to be setup in line with fighting ANY opponent around the globe, not just focusing on combat in the middle east like we've had recently.

There's a reason why those "goat herders" are so ineffective against US troops - a good part of it is lack of training, but also there is the fact that most of them have cold war era rifles with no optics. Gear acts as a force multiplier - I don't have an issue with our troops having whatever they need.

Granted, I don't think the .277 Fury was a good idea (essentially going back to 7.62 NATO but not exactly) - if I were making choices I probably would have looked at something like the original 6.8 SPC that they first looked at a decade or so ago or something like 5.56 NATO necked up to 6.5mm instead to keep ammo weight and recoil down. Still, the cartridge choice is my only disagreement - we're well overdue for a more modern rifle.

Click to expand...

In the not to distant future mini drones and dog robots are going to be kicking everyones tail.

Well

mgmorden said:

You're falling into the trap there of always fighting the last war. The US military's equipment choices need to be setup in line with fighting ANY opponent around the globe, not just focusing on combat in the middle east like we've had recently.

There's a reason why those "goat herders" are so ineffective against US troops - a good part of it is lack of training, but also there is the fact that most of them have cold war era rifles with no optics. Gear acts as a force multiplier - I don't have an issue with our troops having whatever they need.

Granted, I don't think the .277 Fury was a good idea (essentially going back to 7.62 NATO but not exactly) - if I were making choices I probably would have looked at something like the original 6.8 SPC that they first looked at a decade or so ago or something like 5.56 NATO necked up to 6.5mm instead to keep ammo weight and recoil down. Still, the cartridge choice is my only disagreement - we're well overdue for a more modern rifle.

Click to expand...

It is 7.62NATO PLUS 20,000 psi.

A lot of misinformation regarding the cartridge!
The milspec round fires a 139gr monolithic bullet at 3,300fps from the SAW barrel.
NOT the same loading as the commercial 6.8x51 Sig Fury. (Which IS just a .270-08)

The SAW and PDW have a SUPPRESSOR, not just a muzzle brake. The PDW (XM5?) does get 2,800fps from a 16”bbl. The bullet is analogous to the current M855 mk III which is a monolithic bullet with a hardened penetrator (sorta like an Amax or Silver Tip). On “soft tissue it acts as an expansion plug enhancing effectiveness. A penetrator on light armor, (ie: helmet).
Again, it was intended to give superior performance against a near peer opponent wearing ballistic armor.
We now know that Russia “Ain’t”. But China, maybe...
It was never intended to replace the M4, but to equip SOF, and such.
(Some of the nomenclature may be wrong. I’m not a “tactical guru”, just a curious distant observer.)

The amounts of money expended in development sounds immense, but compared to 1 Helicopter, or 1/100th the cost of a 5th-Gen fighter aircraft, it sounds like chump change to give our troops a battle field superiority.
It IS the cost of progress...
Barrel burner? Yeah, but considering a single round is probably $5, It’ll probably last long enough to burn up $10,000 worth of ammunition!

GooseGestapo said:

The bullet is analogous to the current M855 mk III which is a monolithic bullet with a hardened penetrator (sorta like an Amax or Silver Tip). On “soft tissue it acts as an expansion plug enhancing effectiveness.

Click to expand...

I've never heard of an M855 mk III cartridge. Perhaps you mean M855A1 EPR?

M855A1 is comprised of three components: 1) copper base core, 2) steel penetrator tip, 3) guilding metal jacket.

Upon impact, the bullet breaks into 2 pieces - the tip and base, with the jacket fragmenting.

I think the army is quickly going to find that what they asked for is not what they wanted. But these programs are not meant to make sense, they are meant to spend your money. I am enthusiastic about the hybrid case technology, but I hope it gets scaled down to something like an SPC size case with a 6.5mm bullet. I think that would be the sweet spot for range and full auto use, and not ending up with a 13 lb rifle after all the widgets are bolted on.

GooseGestapo said:

A lot of misinformation regarding the cartridge!
The milspec round fires a 139gr monolithic bullet at 3,300fps from the SAW barrel.
NOT the same loading as the commercial 6.8x51 Sig Fury. (Which IS just a .270-08)

The SAW and PDW have a SUPPRESSOR, not just a muzzle brake. The PDW (XM5?) does get 2,800fps from a 16”bbl. The bullet is analogous to the current M855 mk III which is a monolithic bullet with a hardened penetrator (sorta like an Amax or Silver Tip). On “soft tissue it acts as an expansion plug enhancing effectiveness. A penetrator on light armor, (ie: helmet).
Again, it was intended to give superior performance against a near peer opponent wearing ballistic armor.
We now know that Russia “Ain’t”. But China, maybe...
It was never intended to replace the M4, but to equip SOF, and such.
(Some of the nomenclature may be wrong. I’m not a “tactical guru”, just a curious distant observer.)

The amounts of money expended in development sounds immense, but compared to 1 Helicopter, or 1/100th the cost of a 5th-Gen fighter aircraft, it sounds like chump change to give our troops a battle field superiority.
It IS the cost of progress...
Barrel burner? Yeah, but considering a single round is probably $5, It’ll probably last long enough to burn up $10,000 worth of ammunition!

Click to expand...

Monolithic means all one material. A Barnes TSX is monolithic, all copper. A M855A1 (assuming that is what you meant by M855 mk III???) bullet is not monolithic since it is compromised of three different materials.



The bullet the new bullet used in 6.8x51 Fury is almost certainly not monolithic although we do not know its exact construct at this point. The Army developed that internally and have kept it close to the vest. There is no realistic way to make a monolithic bullet that can defeat ridged ballistic plates due to the hardness need while still having to be able to obturate into the rifling of the barrel. At best is is a two part bullet with a hard core and a gilding material jacket to interface with the barrel. We do know that it is "green" so assuming no lead is a safe assumption.

The civilian version of the 6.8x51 is identical to the military version with the exception of having access to the particular bullet they intend to use. The cartridge, chamber dimension and pressure are the same. The US Military is using a pressure testing system nearly identical to the SAAMI method. This is different than NATO or CIP (the European version of SAAMI)

https://saami.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/277-Sig-Public-Introduction-Orig-2020-11-11.pdf <-link to SAAMI specification sheet with denoted 80,000 psi MAP and a nice bright yellow warning to go with it. It's a bit more than 270-08.

You keep using the term PDW (Personal Defense Weapon) and neither of the weapons, the XM5 or XM250, are PDW. The XM5 is carbine/rifl and the XM250 is a light machinegun.

The XM5 and XM250 are very much intended to be direct replacements for the M4 and M249. This is stated explicitly multiple place in the documents that started the NGSW program and through out its down selection process. Now it may or may not actually happen but the documentation and program clearly states these are being designed are replacements for the current M4 and M249 respectively.

someguy2800 said:

I think the army is quickly going to find that what they asked for is not what they wanted. But these programs are not meant to make sense, they are meant to spend your money. I am enthusiastic about the hybrid case technology, but I hope it gets scaled down to something like an SPC size case with a 6.5mm bullet. I think that would be the sweet spot for range and full auto use, and not ending up with a 13 lb rifle after all the widgets are bolted on.

Click to expand...

The Army didn't want it, but they were directed to do it because a general is still going to general. Remember the UCP? It was a general that wanted it, not us being told to wear it in terrain outside of FOB rocks being used to walk or drive on.

someguy2800 said:

I am enthusiastic about the hybrid case technology, but I hope it gets scaled down to something like an SPC size case with a 6.5mm bullet.

Click to expand...

The hybrid technology is not that great. The plastic and telescoping cases saved a lot of weight. The hybrid case, not really. Probably better to save money and use full steel cases like Russia and China...

MCB; Most what you depict and state is correct.
As to the loading though, I know that the .277Sig is loaded to lower specs which match the .243, .260, and 7mm08 and the cases ARE NOT composite Stainless Steel/brass, but are entirely brass. At least the ones I inspected weren’t. (And were FMJ). Neither was velocities up to milspec.

The personnel I talked to that work at Ft Benning and are associated with the program stated that the initial procurement is for 5,000 XM5 and 1,250 XM250, which will replace the M249 in those Units for whom they’ll be used.
Doesn’t sound like much to me...
I asked if I could get some fired brass. He just smiled and and shook his head... Claimed they were an “accountable” item...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.277_Fury

4th paragraph.

Re: yep! M855A1. Confused with something else...

GooseGestapo said:

MCB; Most what you depict and state is correct.
As to the loading though, I know that the .277Sig is loaded to lower specs which match the .243, .260, and 7mm08 and the cases ARE NOT composite Stainless Steel/brass, but are entirely brass. At least the ones I inspected weren’t. (And were FMJ). Neither was velocities up to milspec.

The personnel I talked to that work at Ft Benning and are associated with the program stated that the initial procurement is for 5,000 XM5 and 1,250 XM250, which will replace the M249 in those Units for whom they’ll be used.
Doesn’t sound like much to me...
I asked if I could get some fired brass. He just smiled and and shook his head... Claimed they were an “accountable” item...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.277_Fury

4th paragraph.

Re: yep! M855A1. Confused with something else...

Click to expand...

But once the hybrid cases and guns designed for the pressure hit the commercial market in great numbers we should see the performance will take modest step up as pressures go from ~65 ksi to approaching 80ksi. With an all brass case version you are limited to ~65-70 ksi even if the gun can handle the 80 ksi. Given the current supply market and the demands of the Army and Sigs' other products it is not too surprising very little of the hybrid cased ammo has hit the civilian market. It was released January of this year but is not currently available any where I have seen recently. Eventually it will be more wide spread and then we will see some fully explore what can be done with an 80,000 psi cartridge. I would think most bolt actions rifles would require little more than the hybrid cases to withstand the extra pressure.

Remember the weapons still have the "X" designation, XM5 and XM250, on them that mean they are not yet fielded programs of record. Sig has made it to the last hurdle by earning the XMx designation but there are lots of weapons (and other systems) that get to the X designation stage and never loose it, only to later get mothballed and forgotten. This NGSW program is the farthest the Army has gotten in a program to replacing the M4 and M249 but that last hurdle to lose the "X" in the designation is not a trivial huddle.

Whether or not the Army does adopt this rifle in larger or small numbers it will be interesting to see where this cartridge goes in the civilian market. The Army adopting it fully would sure help though... but I would not bet the farm on that...

A quick delve into Quickloads and using a 139gr bullet in the default 7mm-08 cartridge entry but letting the pressure go to 80,000 psi there are lots of potential powders that appear to get to mid to high 2800 fps from a 16-inch barrel. Bump that up to a 24-inch barrel and 3100 fps is fairly easily. Obviously I am using 7mm-08 case volume and the slightly larger diameter bullet. But the numbers seem to pass the sniff test for me.

I would think the reason for the 16" barrel is the suppressor. A 20 or 22 inch barrel with a suppressor would be a bit cumbersome.

Goosey said:

Probably better to save money and use full steel cases like Russia and China...

Click to expand...

I agree, I've been saying for a long time that I don't understand why steel cases are not in wider use in the west. I guess what I should say is that I am enthusiastic about going to higher pressures which have only been limited by the strength of brass.

someguy2800 said:

I agree, I've been saying for a long time that I don't understand why steel cases are not in wider use in the west. I guess what I should say is that I am enthusiastic about going to higher pressures which have only been limited by the strength of brass.

Click to expand...

The hybrid case has the best of both worlds. You have the stronger steel case head to seal the breach and to take the higher pressures and you have the brass case walls that tend slide and feed better especially when extracting the cases for dirty hot chambers. The other advantage is you can use stronger steel alloys in the case head without worrying about the ability to extrude them into the very thin case walls. This is not a trivial part of making steel case and requires the use of highly ductile (and weaker) steel alloys. The hybrid case dispense with that requirement and you can select an alloy for strength to seal the breach without worrying about ductility.

mcb said:

The hybrid case has the best of both worlds. You have the stronger steel case head to seal the breach and to take the higher pressures and you have the brass case walls that tend slide and feed better especially when extracting the cases for dirty hot chambers. The other advantage is you can use stronger steel alloys in the case head without worrying about the ability to extrude them into the very thin case walls. This is not a trivial part of making steel case and requires the use of highly ductile (and weaker) steel alloys. The hybrid case dispense with that requirement and you can select an alloy for strength to seal the breach without worrying about ductility.

Click to expand...

The other factor of course is corrosion resistance. You don't have to have the same hardness throughout the case. It will have to be in the annealed state to draw the case out but you could then heat treat the case head to harden it. Kind of the opposite of how they do brass cases. When they form brass cases the brass work hardens when they form it and then they anneal just the neck and shoulder with an inductive heater. The head of a brass case is much harder than the mouth is. I don't know if the manufacturers already do this or not when they produce steel cases but the mouth of steel cases that I've reloaded are indeed in the annealed state. If I had a harness tester it would be interesting to test a few cases from top to bottom. I have noticed that when reloading steel cases that you do not get ejector marks or extractor swipes like you do on brass cases so I suspect that the case heads on the russian steel ammo is quite a bit harder than typical brass but I don't have the hardware to confirm that.

halfmoonclip said:

Going to steel cased ammo would require rethinking our case and chamber designs into a more tapered variety. Might not be a bad idea (we reloaders wouldn't much care for it), but in wartime, availability of copper, for brass cases, might be a bigger challenge than steel. Of course, the coming demand for copper, for every(redacted)thing electric, could create the same problem.
Moon

Click to expand...

There is lots of steel case 5.56, 7.62x51, and even 6.5 grendel ammo that functions just fine.

Robert said:

No by all means, critique an actual special operations guy that puts himself out there to educate folks. What's your contribution again?

Click to expand...

so he is doing it for nothing? buying all the rifles ammo cameras and accessories?

C-grunt said:

What is your combat experience against "goat herders"?

Click to expand...

one night I stayed in motel 6

That number would only outfit just one brigade

robin banks said:

so he is doing it for nothing? buying all the rifles ammo cameras and accessories?

Click to expand...

I'm going to ask also, what is your resume here to openly criticize? You don't have to like the person in that video ( I sure do not), but his message is sound and choice of mission kit is training how he would fight.