US Military Selects New Rifle and Ammunition

[CoElkHunter]

@375 Ruger Fan
You is a silly sausage. The Whelen is a hunting cartridge not for warfare use.
I may like the Whelen but am also a practical one as well.

.30-06 was for warfare? Would be an easy thing to ream out the barrel to .35 and send those 250 grainers down range at some 3500fps at 80,000psi. Ha! Ha! Ha!

 

[BigSteve57]

358 win is the obvious military choice.

My recommendation would be Winchester but in .243.

 

[rdog]

My recommendation would be Winchester but in .243.

That has to better than a 5.56.

 

[CraigV]

There may be several thoughts on this post, so apologies up front.

Ok, whether it's shooting people or animals, it's about shot placement.

It's also a bit about evolution. Animals have been prey for millennium. Man has been been a predator for a bit less. So, when we hit an animal with a projectile, the response is different that when striking a human. Instincts kick in, and almost always, the animals instincts are to run. Be it pain threshold, shock, will to survive, it's just nature.

This proposal has been active for some time. I believe the original proposal was for a .30 cal projectile at that same velocity. Some friends developed a round/firearm for the selection. It was a 35 Remington, necked down to .30 cal. It was fast and accurate. They named it the 300 Viper. They submitted it for SAAMI , but don't know what ever happened. Obviously didn't make the cut.

We, and most of the world used to use .30 cal projectiles in all our rifles, but at some point, (can't honestly recall when, but not that long ago), decided it was better to carry more ammo, and actually wound our opponent than to kill him. This had several benefits. It caused psychological impacts on his fellow soldiers, required at least 3 people to evacuate him, and put a strain on the medical/logistical support. Dead soldiers require a hole, wounded soldiers require care, and potentially lots of it.

Then there are the actual number of soldiers who fire their weapons in combat, and at the enemy. Read the books by RET LTC Dave Grossman. He gives great insight into what occurs in a firefight, going back over 100 years.

We all want our soldiers to be solid in a firefight, but the facts simply don't support it. The actual number of troops who engage is suprisingly low. We also have policies where when in contact, the first call is for either air support or artillery (where possible). The last thing nations want is to see their sons killed, and posted on social media.

So, it sounds like a decent round. Will the top troops adopt it, probably not, because they actually hit what the aim at, and actually shoot. Maybe in the GPMG, but we will see. Will it become the standard issue for infantry, maybe, again, wait and see.

 

[rdog]

Having personally experienced the short cumming of the 55 grain 5.56 on humans i an a fan of the 7.62 x51, but too much recoil, too heavy ammo for a infantry rifle man, I got exited about the 6.5 Grendel & 6.8 SPC proposals but this 277 Fury appears excessive except for a GPMG & the old 7.62x51 does that job well , Why?????

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

My recommendation would be Winchester but in .243.

@BigSteve57
If the rifle was heavy enough it would be better to throw it at your opponent, that would do more damage.
Bob

 

[CoElkHunter]

Having personally experienced the short cumming of the 55 grain 5.56 on humans i an a fan of the 7.62 x51, but too much recoil, too heavy ammo for a infantry rifle man, I got exited about the 6.5 Grendel & 6.8 SPC proposals but this 277 Fury appears excessive except for a GPMG & the old 7.62x51 does that job well , Why?????

I wonder what the ft. lbs. and velocity of recoil this .277 Fury has compared to the 6.5s, 6.8 SPC, .308, etc. in an AR platform?

 

[Tanks]

I wonder what the ft. lbs. and velocity of recoil this .277 Fury has compared to the 6.5s, 6.8 SPC, .308, etc. in an AR platform?

Actually, the specs of the .277 Fury are amazing. I am building a 6mm Dasher rifle that hits that velocity with a 26" barrel in a platform that will weigh 20-21.5 pounds. And that is with a 105 grain projectile.

 

[roverandbrew]

Having personally experienced the short cumming of the 55 grain 5.56 on humans i an a fan of the 7.62 x51, but too much recoil, too heavy ammo for a infantry rifle man, I got exited about the 6.5 Grendel & 6.8 SPC proposals but this 277 Fury appears excessive except for a GPMG & the old 7.62x51 does that job well , Why?????

You ever use 77 Grain?

 

[375 Ruger Fan]

The 277 Fury cartridge looks awfully large in this video

 

[mdwest]

I’m wondering how (or even, if) reloading is accomplished with that steel base and washer system in place..

Also wondering how the steel base effects wear on the bolt and chamber…

And… how expensive factory loads are going to be… this won’t be an easy load to get fooled up for or to produce I think…

 

[mdwest]

You ever use 77 Grain?

I was thinking the same thing..

Even 62 gr?

I would agree that 55gr is a pretty underwhelming performer in most scenarios..

But I've had very good success with bonded 62gr soft points like the Federal bonded "FBI Load" (not "green tip").. and even better success with 75gr Hornady "Black" Interlocks...

I rarely use a 556 on hog hunts anymore.. but the 75gr interlocks were my go-to round when I was using my 556 AR for pigs.. they fed and extracted perfectly.. flew straight.. and terminal performance on pigs as big as 275lbs was more than adequate... (I have never shot the 75 gr interlocks at a 2 legged animal.. but based on what Ive seen them do to several 4 legged, gristle plated animals.. I wouldnt feel under gunned if I had to deploy them)..

and the bonded 62 gr is what I keep in my "home defense" rifle... I trust it enough that I trust the welfare of my family to it..

 

[Rocco490]

I have mixed feelings on this new cartridge. I wonder what the real world barrel life will be for these weapons? I see it as a potential significant negative for this round in its intended application. And how much harder to control will the rifle be in full auto with this round vs the previous 5.56? I also hope they are planning to have multiple large volume ammunition makers to ensure we can make all we will need in the event of a major conflict as no one else is producing it and tooling up would be very slow with that fancy case. I have to wonder how much better is this ballistically than a 6.5 creedmoor to offset the production issues, development costs, shortened component life, increased recoil and other shortcomings of this new round.

 

[Jimbo12]

Have you seen the optic they're going to put on this thing too?

The weapons will include the XM157 Fire Control optic, which includes a laser range finder, ballistic calculator, visible and infrared lasers, and a compass. That optic is made by Vortex Optics.

 

[Rocco490]

Would of liked to see them develop a 6mm bullet that would yaw and fragment consistently with a decent bc fired from a slightly thicker walled 5.56 nato case at a sane 60-62k max pressure with an 18 inch barrel and intermediate or rifle length gas system and a slightly stronger bolt all using existing m4 ar15 receivers.

 

[Rocco490]

Spending the money on a good optic package I think was an excellent decision on their part

 

[Jimbo12]

Spending the money on a good optic package I think was an excellent decision on their part

Definitely going to improve deadliness and take out a lot of guessing on aim for the infantry guys.

 

[C.W. Richter]

Looks like another group of cronies is going to spend and make a lot of our $$$$$$$$$ off the deal! It seems way too complicated to meet the objective (typ. gov't. at "work.") Cartridges can already handle 65,000 psi+ (It's the guns that are often the weak link) and 51 mm brass cartridges already exist (.308ish size) that'll push a 135ish gr slug 3K fps. (i.e. 260 AI 3,200 fps FL bbl, there are plenty more. A needmore could likely be tuned up to meet the objective. 6.5 has better bc and sd w/ slightly smaller bullets, thus easier to achieve the desired V.) Reinvention of the wheel on our dime! How much more does the 80,000+ psi gun cost? I'm picturing some gun accidents involving a washer reminiscent of a flywheel/clutch assembly shearing Don Garlits' toes off! Gotta love Big Gov't. at work. We have velcro, WD-40 and duct tape as a result...Oh, and LOTS of cancer. They do that well! How much for the O'Connor-16 SLW (steel lockwasher) contract? lol

 

[Rocco490]

At 80,000 psi and the powder capacity of the larger 308 based case from a short 16 inch barrel I bet they need that suppressor to get noise levels down to anywhere near sane levels. Unsuppressed that thing must be loud! 16 inch ar10 is similar length to an 18 inch ar15 plus that big can on the end which is a must for that loud sob and that thing will not be anywhere as handy as the 14.5 inch barreled m4's

 

[C.W. Richter]

If they'd just use Thompson Contenders in battle, they'd NEVER end. Win-Win. $$$$$$$$$$ The .223 was the contender in this dep't.! The earlier, not-just-for-profit wars did seem to end a bit sooner with increasing caliber.