- Thread starter oda175365
- Start date
The 260 Rem and 7mm-08 case is the same length as the .277 Fury, they stick 139gr Scenars in them all the time. Bergers .277 130gr VLD has a BC of .490 and works fine in a 270-08 also same length as the 277 Fury. The hornady 145 eld-x has a BC of .536. I don't think the military feels like a .600 BC bullet is needed for combat.
| 270 Caliber (.277 Diameter) | ||||||
 | 130 gr VLD Hunting | 0.462 | 0.236 | 1.025 | 1:11″ | 27501 |
 | 130 gr Classic Hunter | 0.490 | 0.251 | 0.964 | 1:10″ | 27570 |
 | 140 gr VLD Hunting | 0.504 | 0.258 | 1.010 | 1:11″ | 27502 |
 | 140 gr Classic Hunter | 0.528 | 0.271 | 0.962 | 1:10″ | 27571 |
 | 150 gr VLD Hunting | 0.518 | 0.265 | 1.054 | 1:10″ | 27503 |
 | 170 gr EOL Elite Hunter | 0.662 | 0.339 | 0.935 | 1:9″ | 27575 |
Last edited:
I’m certain Sig developed the 277 very similar to the 6.5 PRC to fit magazine length. The question is will they get the chamber dimensions correct?
The Berger 170 gr EOL Elite Hunter is a step in the right direction, beating most 6.5mm projectiles BC's, I don't think they could be shot fast enough in a similer capacity case the make the difference. Another issue is that the only 170grn .277 bullet option is very close to the 180grn 7mm class of bullets in which there are alot more options.
I think most people would be interested in those projectiles LOL, with a lead core jacketed bullet it seems a pretty tall order ?
.A 7mm SS shooting a 195 EOL should cover it though so that's the ball park with more normal pressures. The 195 EOL has a G1 of .755
according to berger.
The Berger EOL line of bullets wouldn't exist if it weren't for a partnership between Berger, MOA custom rifle, and Extreme Outer Limits (EOL). MOA produced rifle's in various calibers including 270 win which were custom rifles that weren't limited to SAAMI specs so they were able to do a longer chamber to increase the COAL of the rounds they shot beyond that of SAAMI spec COAL and they fit their 270 rifle with a 1/8 twist barrel. So yes the 170gr is a step right direction for available 0.277 bullets but at least in 0.277 calibers it's not something that's beneficial to those without a custom rifle that's built for the EOL's.
270WSM would be interesting with that bullet.
0.536 isn't going to cut it at least not me I want 0.750 or close enough.
0.536 might have been a good BC 20 years ago.
I think 7mm SAUM is pretty interesting with the 195gr EOL that's rocking a 0.755 BC.
Ya I would like to see this in 7mm too at least if they're going to stick with garbage 140gr'ish pills in 0.277. They should have the velocity to drive a larger bullet so I don't see a reason to stay with the 6.5mm. Shit Hornady lists a 0.795 G1 on their 7mm 180gr that'd be so much more FK'n awesome than a 140gr in 0.277.
Last edited:
i’l buy one of these and do a shoot out vs my scout. The weight is impressive. I like the fix but always thought they were overpriced so never quite made the leap.
Those 180’s bullets fly well.
At 80k I’m curious to what a 7mm version would do with 168 and 180 bullets.
The 180’s at 2900 are pretty impressive.
It would be excellent for target shooting and hunting.
Last edited:
The first link claims that the CROSS shot a .47 MOA 5 shot group with Federal’s 168-grain Gold Medal Sierra Matchking. it will aslo be offered in a new caibler, 277 Fury.
SIG Cross Rifle: SIG Returns to the Bolt Action Market
Sig has chosen to re-enter the Bolt Action market, and the result is a super-modern chassis-based Sig Cross.www.recoilweb.com
New Sig Sauer CROSS Rifle, Company's 1st U.S. Made Bolt-Action Hunting Rifle :: Guns.com
A precision bolt-action hunting rifle designed and manufactured in New Hampshire, Sig Sauer's CROSS was announced this week.www.guns.com
Most first reviews are just commercial advertising try finding a bad one.
Remember Ruger RPR that was touted as half a moa and 1600y rifle in bunch of first reviews.
I don't think Sig designed this to be a paper puncher, not with 16 and 18" barrels. I'm sure there are plenty of other rifles out there that will work for you.
If I decide the .277 isn't going to work I may use the platform and the component cases if they will handle 80k and make a wildcat that will.
Exactly, also, it's not like Sig would have chosen .277 for it's LR bullet selection. The Army specified the .277 bore and doesn't care about 180gr ELDs because they will be using .277 EPR-type bullets. Sig just brought the existing .gov development to the market and paired it with common Sierra bullets for the initial offering. This is a hunting type rifle first and foremost, and there are plenty of decent hunting bullets in .277 bore. Inside of 400 yds where I take my shots on meat, good bullet construction trumps a match level BC for me. I'd love to have both, but I don't think there is much around here that I couldn't kill with something like a 150gr AB, IB, or ABLR. I'd love to see a 160gr or 165gr AB introduced at some point.
I'd probably be more interested in a 7mm adaptation than a 6.5. I've taken a few elk, deer and antelope with the 6.5, and it works fine, if I want more, I want more bullet.
There is no doubt more .277 bullets will be developed. They can use the same per caliber formula and come up with .277 bullets very close to what the 7mms are. Seems like the .277s would be 12-18gr lighter than the 7mm using the same form factor.
Actually the 6.8 is gaining ground and a good choice as a deer and hog round used in an AR15.
Personally, I'd be more interested in bullets like the 160gr AB, 168gr ABLR, and LRX @~2,850 fps and even the 175gr partition @~2,750 fps for hunting. The parent case is longer than the Creedmoor, but I don't see why you would have any problem running pretty much whatever bullets you want within the COAL of binderless AICS mags ~2.95" if the chamber throat allows.
RL17 seems to pretty reliably be the top powder in QL for velocity in a simulated 7mm Fury ( 7mm-08 AI with case capacity adjusted to 60gr and pressure at 80 ksi). Loads are compressed, but not unreasonably so, Sig stated that they have been working on a few new powders optimized for the case, something with RL17 or a bit slower burn speed and higher volumetric density would probably be about ideal.
The 60gr capacity is the overflow capacity I wound up with to get the performance Sig is specifying for the .277 Fury out of a 16" barrel at 80 ksi with the 135gr SMK and 140gr TGK. The net case capacity is less and depends on the bullet and oal you are using. Assuming they'd use the same case necked to 7mm, I used the 7mm-08 AI with the volume adjusted up to 60gr overflow to simulate the 7mm Fury. I did most of my guestimating with 160gr Accubonds @ 2.86" so there's plenty of room in an AICS to play with other bullets. If you have a better basis for your rumminations on a non-existent cartridge based on an as of yet unpublished case, I'd love to hear it.
Obviously Quickload is just a rough simulation when the SAAMI chamber dimensions aren't out yet, but it's better than throwing WAGs out. If you have questions about specific bullets, go ahead and play with your own model in QL, be sure to share your results.
Same reason everyone uses long actions to build 6.5x284s.
I’m curious as to the speeds of a 150, 162, 175 and 180 bullet out of a 7-08 AI at 80K
some QL data from another member here
22” 308-80k = a juggernaut at 2800+
22” 6.5CM- 80k= a 140 class bullet at 3000+
24” 7SAUM- 80k= a 180 hybrid at 2950ish.
some QL data from another member here
22” 308-80k = a juggernaut at 2800+
22” 6.5CM- 80k= a 140 class bullet at 3000+
24” 7SAUM- 80k= a 180 hybrid at 2950ish.
Last edited:
You're free to do whatever you're inclined to do, I don't think I've spent more than 30-45 minutes playing with QL on this, but the 168gr and 162gr in your photo look like they'd be good options to me, especially with the COAL stretched out a little more to mag length. You asked why folks were interested in a 7mm version, and that's my answer. For the 160gr to 175gr bullet class I'm interested in hunting with, the case looks like it would work well, and velocities should be pretty good, to boot. I don't see any credible reason you'd be restricted to 140gr bullets in AICS mags, and not everyone wants to run 180gr and 195gr 7mm bullets in a hunting rig.
Last edited:
I'm appropriately ashamed to admit it around here, but the elk and antelope I killed this year were both dispatched by bullets with G1 BCs below 0.5.....
I honestly don't really expect to see a 7mm Fury anytime soon. The Sig rep in one of the articles/videos said they had plans to bring out a 6.5mm cartridge and possibly some long action cartridges based on the Fury case. Short magnum 7mms haven't exactly been smash hits in the market, so while I think a 7mm Fury would be neat, I'm not holding my breath.
Last edited:
You suggesting that a heavier bullet would have a negative impact on terminal performance?
"If they build it they will come"....
Just because there isn't too many bullet offerings now doesn't mean there won't be a lot more in the future.
The problem as you noted is really all about the AICS max mag length. With a .150"ish freebore the Berger 170 has a decent .655 G1 BC and will feed just fine as a single feed load. For LR hunting I'm good with that. Usually you have plenty of time to set up and compose your shot at extended distances. In a tactical situation a 150 grain bullet would work just fine out to 600 yards and beyond.
IMO - the Fury is a much better replacement for the .308 and .223 but it is not ever going to replace the 300 Win Mag or Norma. in the sniper role. It' was never intended for that purpose... Also remember this will not be the only caliber offering for the FURY case design....The .277 cal was picked first not because of what you wanted but what the military wanted and their pockets are stuffed full of money and of course SIG wants a piece of that contract.
Be patient. Rest assure there will be many more options coming down the pike.
Think about this... Will a 156gr Berger fit in a AICS mag with the 6.5 PRC SAAMI .188" freebore?? The answer is no, unless you dial in a whole lot of jump like .1+ inches .
What kind of offerings do you see the .277 to be in?
The success of this and all of the new Hp cartridges will be on SAAMI and CIP willingness to establishing an industry wide pressure limit spec for actions and barrels that will use these Hp cartridges. Just like when the +P & +P+ gun cartridges came out years ago. The manufacture will have to disclose that future firearms can or cannot handle the higher pressures.
It's all about liability and lawyers....
The advantage of SIG using the .277 cal in a standard improved 308 case geometry is that there are no short action cartridges in that caliber. IMO - Since the .257 cal also does not have any standard 308 based cartridges I think it would be the next caliber to be selected. SIG has mentioned more cartridges are forthcoming. I also wouldn't be surprised if future HP magnum versions are also being looked at if the sales warrant it.Like it or not, the Hp cartridges are coming! Weight and size limitations force us to go this direction. We now have the tech, tools and materials to make it happen. The firearms industry should embrace these Hp cartridges because it will get a lot of people to upgrade to a new platform. (a tastier cheese for the mouse trap) Just keep in mind that the Fury will not match the performance of a SAUM or WSM but it will be comparable to the -06 cartridge speeds while using a few inches less barrel in a short action. That is still a WIN, WIN to me!
Good eye!
I didn't notice that. But during production a short action .532" bolt head with a few changes in the receiver could easily work for a future short magnum cartridge. Now will it be a user friendly interchangeable design...?
Last edited:
The success of this and all of the new Hp cartridges will be on SAAMI and CIP willingness to establishing an industry wide pressure limit spec for actions and barrels that will use these Hp cartridges. Just like when the +P & +P+ gun cartridges came out years ago. The manufacture will have to disclose that future firearms can or cannot handle the higher pressures.
It's all about liability and lawyers....
Like it or not, the Hp cartridges are coming! Weight and size limitations force us to go this direction. We now have the tech, tools and materials to make it happen. The firearms industry should embrace these Hp cartridges because it will get a lot of people to upgrade to a new platform. (a tastier cheese for the mouse trap) Just keep in mind that the Fury will not match the performance of a SAUM or WSM but it will be comparable to the -06 cartridge speeds while using a few inches less barrel in a short action. That is still a WIN, WIN to me!
The numbers Sig has given for the .277 Fury are fully equal to what you could get out of a .270 WSM in the same length barrel, or a .270 Winny with 6" more barrel. If you go to a longer barrel on on the Fury, performance is going to be much more like the WSM than the Win. Just like the .277, a 7mm Fury should be pretty close to the 7mm WSM at equal barrel length, the .280 is a lower pressure round than the .270, and will probably need even more extra barrel to give equivalent velocities.
Folks don't think pressure be like it is, but it do.
Last edited:
Also, Sig has said that a 6.5mm Fury is next, I'm sure it will be designed such that it can't be chambered in the Creed or .260 to help keep the window lickers of the world safe. I'd be floored if Sig ever brought out a .257, the quarter bores are perennially unpopular compared to most other bore size options.
With that higher pressure you don’t really need a magnum case.
WSM/SAUM performance with a 308 bolt face and short action is plenty good enough for me.
Yes and no.
Maximum pressure in a rifle barrel happens within a several inches after the bullet leaves the cartridge and where it happens depends on the burn rate of the powder. All of the powder is still not totally burned at that point. Ideally all the powder should have expended all its energy by the time it leaves the barrel.
Sig will be using a VERY fast burn rate powder in the .277 Fury to go along with a very short 16" barrel. Going to, let's say, a longer 26" barrel won't give you the increase you think because the pressure curve/drop within the barrel, pushing that bullet, will drop considerably faster.
Same thing happens when large magnum gun cartridges are used in rifles....
Sure, you could use heavier bullets and a slower higher energy powder but you will find that you quickly run out of case capacity long before you pressure out. It's still all a compromise. There are no free lunches...
Of course if the Hp+ designs become a commercial success then the powder companies will follow suit with suitable powders for them. When that happens you will see similar or maybe better performance compared to the WSM or SAUM using heavier bullets and longer barrels.
Last edited:
“The firearms industry should embrace these Hp cartridges because it will get a lot of people to upgrade to a new platform.”
I think the DT and AI people just be buying new bolts and barrels
I think the DT and AI people just be buying new bolts and barrels
Negative, you're overestimating the difference in burn speed of the powders we are talking about, and the impact of the powder burn speed on normal length barrels. The powders that QL estimates should give the best velocities in the .277 Fury are in the RL17 burn speed range, they'll gain lots of velocity past 16". Also, it's not really about how much powder is "burned" by the time the bullet reaches the end if the barrel, it's about the pressure behind the bullet. As long as the force from pressure behind the bullet is higher than the force from the pressure in front of the bullet and the drag force from the barrel on the bullet, the bullet will accelerate.
People get caught up in the % of powder burned in whatever barrel length, but it doesn't directly matter, what matters is the area under the pressure curve (which you can substantially Jack up by using higher MAPs), most powders are going to give within a few percent of full burn in a 16" barrel.
Out of a 16" mocked up .277 Fury, QL estimates that 55.3 gr of RL17 should push a 140gr TGK to 2,978 fps.
For the same load in longer barrels, QL predicts:
18" - 3,065 fps
20" - 3,139 fps
22" - 3,203 fps
24" - 3,258 fps
26" - 3,308 fps
For comparison, here are the top loads with the same bullet predicted by QL for the .270 WSM (64 ksi) and .270 Win (65 ksi) using available powders at the same barrel lengths.
.270 WSM, 140gr TGK, 70.3gr RL26
16" - 2,902 fps
18" - 3,014 fps
20" - 3,109 fps
22" - 3,191 fps
24" - 3,262 fps
26" - 3,326 fps
.270 Win, 140gr TGK, 63.3gr RL26
16" - 2,865 fps
18" - 2,973 fps
20" - 3,064 fps
22" - 3,142 fps
24" - 3,210 fps
26" - 3,270 fps
So the impact you are expecting from the use of faster burn speed powder could be a factor, but it would be a very minor one compared to the difference in MAP, and you shouldn't really be able to notice it until you're in the longer barrels (24"+).
Also, the MAP difference between the .270 Win and .280 Rem (65 ksi vs 60 ksi) means the performance of the .280 is going to come up quite a bit shorter as compared to the 7mm WSM, and a theoretical 7mm Fury.
Of course all of this is based off the mathematical models in QL and some assumptions I made (60gr case capacity 2.86" OAL and 80 ksi MAP in the Fury). But in general, QL usually matches up with what I see in real life fairly well.
I had a decent load with my old .270 WSM using 140gr Accubonds and heavy load of MagPro for ~3,200 fps out of a 24" barrel.
In my experience, RL26 is magic fairy dust for regular .270 Wins, I've run 140gr Accubonds up to 3,109 fps and 150gr SGKs up to ~3,000 fps out of a 22" barrel using the stuff. Both of those felt kind of hot though, my actual hunting load was 140gr ABs @ 2,940 fps (<0.5 BC, elk died of laughter).
I'm not trying to shill for the .277 Fury, I just think it's interesting, and that it's past time for us to start reaping the advantages of higher pressure cases. I do plan on getting a Sig Cross early on if the promises pan out, but it will be chambered in my trusty 6.5 CreedBro.
Last edited:
Hi,
Just FWIW......Big difference from what the 3 piece case design from Sig says in marketing than from results during the NGSW Ammo prototyping tests....Just saying.....
Sincerely,
Theis
Just FWIW......Big difference from what the 3 piece case design from Sig says in marketing than from results during the NGSW Ammo prototyping tests....Just saying.....
Sincerely,
Theis
Do you mean psi? Ksi is a measure of tensile strength.
ksi is thousands of pounds per square inch. Shear and tensile strengths are measured in units of pressure.
Same, Same. KSI is lazy for KPSI which is lazy for Kilopound (force) per square inch, you see that shorthand more in materials than gas pressures, but it's technically not any less correct.
Last edited:
Which means what? Cases are toast after one firing? I've heard that the loads used for the NGSW ran higher pressures than the commerical variant, but have no idea if that's true or matters.
Last edited:
Thanks.... Very good info ( I don't have access to OL ) I agree with your numbers, but do we really know how the common powders, like Reloader 15, will react with regards to changes in burn rate, (pressure spikes) from the added heat and pressure of running at the elevated 80 Kpsi levels? I doubt the burn curve rate will react the same as they do at 60 Kpsi.
I also am with you that it is time to get on board with the Hp cartridge advantages. I'm considering getting the Sig Cross too but will get it in the 277 Fury. Then again, if Theis should tempt me away from the Sig....
Hi,
Means the internal clip holding the 2 piece case causes havoc on internal burn consistency...there is a reason it was designed for a Squad Weapon program and not a Precision Weapon program.
Notice none of the other front runners in that ammo testing are releasing theirs to the public...much less the precision rifle public.
HP cases are better suited to be improved via alloys and thread together designs...not internally clipped together.
The proper single case design comes from custom blended alloys that are then machined but the cost of ensuring the "blend" of the alloys is proper in regards to alloy property differences from primer pocket to case neck damn sure makes it expensive.
Sincerely,
Theis
Means the internal clip holding the 2 piece case causes havoc on internal burn consistency...there is a reason it was designed for a Squad Weapon program and not a Precision Weapon program.
Notice none of the other front runners in that ammo testing are releasing theirs to the public...much less the precision rifle public.
HP cases are better suited to be improved via alloys and thread together designs...not internally clipped together.
The proper single case design comes from custom blended alloys that are then machined but the cost of ensuring the "blend" of the alloys is proper in regards to alloy property differences from primer pocket to case neck damn sure makes it expensive.
Sincerely,
Theis
Last edited:
As in RCC or something like the Blackwater design?
Hi,
The BWA is the correct 2 piece design but due to threading it is unseen as to how small can get that design down to.
Think RCC with blended alloy, in which base is super strong yet body to neck gets a little softer than base so can resize...Think 3 alloy properties into 1 case.
Sincerely,
Theis
The BWA is the correct 2 piece design but due to threading it is unseen as to how small can get that design down to.
Think RCC with blended alloy, in which base is super strong yet body to neck gets a little softer than base so can resize...Think 3 alloy properties into 1 case.
Sincerely,
Theis
