Hi-Point Firearms Forums banner

.277 Sig Fury

10K views 61 replies 13 participants last post by  ajole 
#1 ·
The discussion on the Hornady 6mm ARC in another thread got me thinking about another new cartridge that should be available sometime this year. The Sig .277 Fury. This cartridge is designed to compete for the military's desire for a new belt fed machine gun. It shoots a 6.8 mm (the military seems to be attached at the hip with 6.8mm) 140 grain bullet at 3000 FPS from a 16" barrel. Pressure is over 80,000 psi. It has a brass case with a stainless steel head to contain the pressure.

Sig Sauer has a new rifle for the hunters that want this new cartridge. Called the Cross, it is a precision style bolt action. Retail will be about the same as MSRP of the Ruger Precision Rifle.
Air gun Trigger Gun barrel Gun accessory Machine gun


The cartridge itself is reloadable, shares the case head size and length as the 308 Winchester.
Writing implement Office supplies Wood Pen Material property


Sig Sauer says that even if they do not win the military contract, they will still go ahead with the project as they already have the years and money invested in it.
 
See less See more
2
#2 ·
It may come slowly, really slowly. Sig is shutting down their German manufacturing by September. No telling where their finances will be.
 
#3 ·
I will only have interest in the .277 Sig Fury round if the military adopts it. This cartridge could possibly become the standard Army soldier's ammo for their rifle. We shall see.
 
#6 ·
Already planning your battlefield recoveries?
 
#17 ·
Why? Weight is always a consideration.
It's round that is less effective than most rifle rounds. They can level up in caliber to an intermediate round (such as a 6.8 millimeter caliber that uses a 110 grain bullet) that is more lethal and gets a longer effective range over 5.56 x 45 and still be able to carry a good deal of ammo.
 
#19 ·
It's round that is less effective than most rifle rounds. They can level up in caliber to an intermediate round (such as a 6.8 millimeter caliber that uses a 110 grain bullet) that is more lethal and gets a longer effective range over 5.56 x 45 and still be able to carry a good deal of ammo.
You are double the weight at square 1. 5.56 can take out a hog, and a deer with the right projectile. If the marines had to qualify with irons with 5.56 at 600yds(?) what are we talking about here?
 
#5 ·
This ^^^^^ is where I am at as well.
 
#8 ·
I read elsewhere pressures "up to 80,000 psi", so I assume real life will have lower pressures for most loadings.

I'm skeptical of the hybrid case. I think it'll take some time to understand how the cases behave after they've corroded some, and sit for a while in a hot chamber (different thermal expansion properties of the metal).

The chinese communists did some research and came to the conclusion the "ideal" is in the 5.8 to 6.2 mm range. Seeing the progressive trend from 6.8 SPC to 6.5 Grendel to 6mm ARC, the US is/was moving towards that 5.8 to 6.2mm range. To jump back to a 6.8 (.277") bullet PLUS new cartridge technology, seems not to fit the pattern of a successful cartridge.

From Sigs perspective, the development cost is sunk. Bringing it to the market is gravy money.

I don't predict commercial success on this one.
 
#9 ·
The thing is, the US isn’t looking for just a rifle bullet, they want a do it all bullet, for rifles and light machine guns/squad automatics. So....compromises will happen.

But at certain levels, the compromise isn’t too bad. The 6.8 isn’t going to reach .308 levels of kinetic energy in a machine gun, but it might have better terminal ballistics at the right speeds, with the right construction; and it should definitely do the same in regards to 5.56 in either role.

The 6.5 and 6 mm may have better ballistic curves, and might even have really good terminal ballistics in meat targets, but they aren’t going to make a .308 scared.

The real question is, what weight bullet is the military 6.8 using to get that 3000 FPS number we’ve all heard, and what does that do to the equation? If it’s only 100 grains or so, there will be questions about it. That’s great for a rifle when compared to 5.56, assuming load out weight isn’t too bad, and good compared to an M249, but is it enough to let the more general purpose automatics do their jobs, or do we end up with 6.8 + .308 in the system, with a 6.8 that isn’t “that” much better than a 5.56, this requiring the .308 guns to take care of business anyway?
 
#10 · (Edited)
The real question is, what weight bullet is the military 6.8 using to get that 3000 FPS number we've all heard, and what does that do to the equation?
Not 100% sure, but looks to be in the 135-140gr range.

From tactical-life.com, "This added pressure will drive a 135-grain bullet from SIG's Hybrid Match cartridge 3,000 fps from a 16-inch barrel, and produce 2,694 ft.-lbs. of energy. The 135-grain bullet has a respectable .488 G1 BC.

SIG's 277 Fury Hybrid Hunting load features a 140-grain bullet with a .508 G1 BC, launching from a 16-inch barrel at 2,950 fps. That one produces 2,706 ft.-lbs. of muzzle energy, too."

I just read the case is 3 pieces, not 2. There's a 3rd piece inside the case that locks the brass and steel together. It also uses a proprietary gun powder. Remington 700's and others could theoretically be chambered for this, but they won't be sufficiently durable under the pressures and stresses, so other people making rifles in this caliber are unlikely. Sig's also planning a 6.5 Fury in the future. The case will not fit in an AR-15 platform either. This will be a giant commercial belly-flop.
 
#11 ·
I was going to say what @Shopfox said. The military loading is supposed to be 135 grains, the hunting load is 140 grains.
 
#24 ·
The United States Army has over $950,000,000 in funding to upgrade the Army rifles from what I read.

The 30-06 cartridge was used from about 1903 to 1958 (55 years) and then replaced. The 5.56 x 45 was adopted in 1964 by the military and is in use presently in 2020. It is about 56 years for 5.56 millimeter and history repeats itself. Likely the military is going to a better rifle round especially since they have the funding to do so.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shopfox
#25 ·
The United States Army has over $950,000,000 in funding to upgrade the Army rifles from what I read.

The 30-06 cartridge was used from about 1903 to 1958 (55 years) and then replaced. The 5.56 x 45 was adopted in 1964 by the military and is in use presently in 2020. It is about 56 years for 5.56 millimeter and history repeats itself. Likely the military is going to a better rifle round especially since they have the funding to do so.
The 7.62x51/.308 Win has been in service for what, more than 60 years now?
 
#29 ·
I hope the new military round fires at least a 100 grain bullet that shoots at the very minimum at least 2,500 feet per second muzzle velocity.

And Knight's Armament makes good stuff but it is way over priced.
 
#31 ·
I spent 2 1/2hrs last week listening about how bad Glocks were, their mags are junk, 22 different versions. Crap PSA BCG, Spikes lowers are so great, blah-blah, Sig great, 77 Sierra match king, etc............ it was Gucci-ville gunshow on ice. :rolleyes:

Didn't our military hang on to the idea we needed to reach out to 1000+ yards (or whatever it was) too long? Don't they have "designated riflemen" to do the reach out and touch someone jobs? That's how we had a 7.62x51 in a close quarter jungle.

And just for the record 9mm Luger has been around 100+ years and is more popular than ever.

Is the 5.56 all of a sudden failing? :lol: did something happen in the space time contindEE-um? Face it they have been dinking around for years with all kinds of stuff.

80 watt plasma is a game changer. Why play with powder anymore? :lol:
 
#32 ·
Is the 5.56 all of a sudden failing? :lol: did something happen in the space time contindEE-um? Face it they have been dinking around for years with all kinds of stuff.
Lets see.... FMJ 55-62 gr bullets out of a 14.5" barrel is unsurprisingly not as effective as the same bullets coming out of a 20" barrel.. and reports from Afghanistan and Iraq seems to indicate they aint as effective as 7.62 at most ranges against drugged up fanatics... and for long range, seems .338 LM and .50cal BMG are where its at...
 
#33 ·
I get it TNTRAILERTRASH. You are attached to the 5.56 x 45 fail to see it's short comings and do not want to see it go. :D

I think it will be replaced as the main military round and you do not. Time will tell who is right but I have history on my side. (You are talking about pistol rounds being around forever and that is a different scenario.)

And I agree with you that the normal infantry do not really need to be able to reach out and kill out to beyond about 400 yards in most scenarios with a normal infantry rifle. This is what the designated marksman is for. Hopefully the military sees this as well and goes with an intermediate round (like the 6.8 x 43 cartridge) because the longer range rounds weigh more and it will limit the ammo count on what the normal infantry soldier can carry.
 
#35 ·
The story on the new round being considered as I understand it is that our recent foes have learned to stay some 400 or more yards out, thereby effectively reducing the effectiveness of our ground units. The .223 just is not cutting the mustard. Nor will rounds like the 6.8 SPC.

What is pretty clear is the whoever makes the decision about what caliber our troops need, they are fixated on the .27 caliber. In the world, the .22, .28, and .30 calibers have been getting all the attention. Recently the .24 and .26 calibers have been added to that list. The .25 and .27 calibers have been largely forgotten. When is the last time you have seen an ELD bullet in those two? Might just be a boon for the .27 caliber.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shopfox
#36 ·
I think a .26 or .27 caliber with a long streamlined bullet with a high BC, should work pretty good at long range. Time will tell what they do. Also the .277 Sig Fury at 80,000 PSI does sound a little HOT!
 
#41 ·
One thing for sure. Not being in the military means we are allowed to use hollowpoint, expanding bulleta thats far more lethal than FMJs since we don't gotta follow US military ROE ;)

From my own research, it seems the 6.8 Rem SPC meets a lot of the critieria, other than 100+ gr bullets at 3,000fps from 16"? Barrels. Even in shorter barrels, the 6.8 SPC seems to be more energetic and speedier than a 5.56 from same length barrels... which is a large factor in my pistol build decision. I'm actually torn between building a 20" 6.8 C7 clone, or the "pistol" Commando clone... but seeing as my lower is officially a pistol lower on the transfer paperwork; I guess pistol first, then a 6.8 20" upper for the M4 style lower I have under my 16" .223 Wylde carbine
 
#45 ·
One thing for sure. Not being in the military means we are allowed to use hollowpoint, expanding bulleta thats far more lethal than FMJs since we don't gotta follow US military ROE ;)
The United States never signed. :)

Peace favor your sword ( mobile)
 
#42 ·
@CamoDeafie said (my quote feature quit working) NewOne thing for sure. Not being in the military means we are allowed to use hollowpoint, expanding bulleta thats far more lethal than FMJs since we don't gotta follow US militaryROE ;)

Just to add some controversy here, is the hollow point a more lethal option than the FMJ? I believe we can make the case that it is a better stopper, but not more lethal. Penetration trumps expansion.

When the 9mm was being considered as a replacement for the 45 acp, barracks talk was that the 9mm would kill you faster than the 45, but the 45 would stop you faster than the 9mm.

the deep penetrating, smaller diameter 9mm stands a better chance of penetrating barriers and reaching vitals, but the larger diameter 45 imparts more energy to the target.

in the end the important thing is to stop the threat, not kill the threat. Down and out is better than dead on your feet.
 
#43 ·
@CamoDeafie said (my quote feature quit working) New
One thing for sure. Not being in the military means we are allowed to use hollowpoint, expanding bulleta thats far more lethal than FMJs since we don't gotta follow US militaryROE ;)
Just to add some controversy here, is the hollow point a more lethal option than the FMJ? I believe we can make the case that it is a better stopper, but not more lethal. Penetration trumps expansion.
thats a good question. Lots of gel tests, lots of real world experiences seem to say that certain shapes and forms are better than simply pointy FMJs... like the Semi Wadcutter in certain calibers, or the hard cast lead slugs and bullets, or the "controlled expansion" designs out there

When the 9mm was being considered as a replacement for the 45 acp, barracks talk was that the 9mm would kill you faster than the 45, but the 45 would stop you faster than the 9mm.

the deep penetrating, smaller diameter 9mm stands a better chance of penetrating barriers and reaching vitals, but the larger diameter 45 imparts more energy to the target.
looking at the NIJ standards, it seems Level II doesn't stop .45acp, but does stop some 9mms at a certain velocity ;)
in the end the important thing is to stop the threat, not kill the threat. Down and out is better than dead on your feet.
Depends on how the courts and lawyers view things; a firearm is a lethal weapon therefore shooting to kill is a legitimate, lawful self defense use, if the shooter was in fear of life, whereas using "less than lethal" has been brought up as "the shooter was not in enough fear of life to warrant a lethal shot" :rolleyes:
 
#54 ·
From what I have read the 6.8 x 51 round used by the military will be in two different pressures presently. The lower pressure rounds will be used for training and high pressure 80,000 pounds per square inch rifle rounds will be used for combat. The 6.8 x 51 round also feeds out of 7.62 x 51 magazines.

I also hope they lengthen the 13 inch barrels to at least 15 inches on the M-7 rifle. But they all have sound suppressors on the rifles which will help preserve our soldiers hearing.
 
#55 ·
From what I have read the 6.8 x 51 round used by the military will be in two different pressures presently. The lower pressure rounds will be used for training and high pressure 80,000 pounds per square inch rifle rounds will be used for combat. The 6.8 x 51 round also feeds out of 7.62 x 51 magazines.

I also hope they lengthen the 13 inch barrels to at least 15 inches on the M-7 rifle. But they all have sound suppressors on the rifles which will help preserve our soldiers hearing.
Except, they’re probably not doing any of that. The 6.8 may be dead, yet again, because everyone suddenly realized the gains over .308 aren’t all that great, the scopes that made the gun special don’t work that well, and the cost for general issue was insane.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top