|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 6,870 Likes: 2
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 6,870 Likes: 2 |
Fifty some years ago, the masses proclaimed it was the end of the world as the US military abandoned the M-14 in favor of the AR-15/M-16. The round was incapable of incapacitating the enemy. The rifle was pure junk. "The toy from Mattel".
I personally always felt the 5.56 was extremely under powered for a combat weapon. But when you are planning logistics for combat where you expect 50,000 to 100,000 rounds to be fired for every enemy casualty, I suppose size and weight of those rounds must be a major consideration.
I am excited to see that our fighting forces will be equipped with a dependable man stopper. Especially when that man is armored.
I doubt the teething problems with the weapon or the ammo will hold a candle to the problems our troops experienced in Vietnam with the introduction of the 5.56 and M-16.
Yes, 80 Kpsi will be hard on barrels. They make new barrels every day, screw a new one on. My Uncle told us they used to shoot the fifties until the barrel glowed bright red. Screw it off and put a new one on. Several times a night. That was 80 years ago, I bet we have the tech to do it today. "I personally always felt the 5.56 was extremely under powered for a combat weapon" - maybe, but I sure as hell don't want to be shot by one! Can't argue that point. Still, If I have to take a round, my chance of survival with a wound from a 223 vs 30-06/308 are significantly better. The ballistic tests with the Fury performed in this video are VERY impressive. The ballistic tests with the Fury performed in this video are VERY impressive. I don't deny that, still, more of a Special Opps weapon if you ask me, then again, the days of the average GI in a firefight are a thing of the past.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 69,775 Likes: 42
Campfire Kahuna
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 69,775 Likes: 42 |
So following the history of US military rounds crossing over with extreme popularity in the civilian market...
Do you see this round following suit?
Is that dual metal case even reloadable?
Edit to add: I saw where they are claiming this round can be reloaded.
Last edited by rockinbbar; 05/01/24.
Molɔ̀ːn Labé Skýla!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 6,870 Likes: 2
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 6,870 Likes: 2 |
[quote=rainshot]My opinion is it's an answer to a question that never should've been asked. It's too complicated. It's a ballistic nightmare because it's going to burn barrels. It doesn't better what we have or what we could use to better advantage. The case is complicated and untested under battle conditions where logistics can be a problem. They're going to do what they want despite what any logic would dictate.
If it works they'll keep it.. If it doesn't work they'll probably keep it. I'm sure the MIC is happy, regardless of the troops' plight on the ground. Yep.[/quote Off thread subject: Good job, nice dog!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 13,521 Likes: 4
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 13,521 Likes: 4 |
Fifty some years ago, the masses proclaimed it was the end of the world as the US military abandoned the M-14 in favor of the AR-15/M-16. The round was incapable of incapacitating the enemy. The rifle was pure junk. "The toy from Mattel".
I personally always felt the 5.56 was extremely under powered for a combat weapon. But when you are planning logistics for combat where you expect 50,000 to 100,000 rounds to be fired for every enemy casualty, I suppose size and weight of those rounds must be a major consideration.
I am excited to see that our fighting forces will be equipped with a dependable man stopper. Especially when that man is armored.
I doubt the teething problems with the weapon or the ammo will hold a candle to the problems our troops experienced in Vietnam with the introduction of the 5.56 and M-16.
Yes, 80 Kpsi will be hard on barrels. They make new barrels every day, screw a new one on. My Uncle told us they used to shoot the fifties until the barrel glowed bright red. Screw it off and put a new one on. Several times a night. That was 80 years ago, I bet we have the tech to do it today. "I personally always felt the 5.56 was extremely under powered for a combat weapon" - maybe, but I sure as hell don't want to be shot by one! Can't argue that point. Still, If I have to take a round, my chance of survival with a wound from a 223 vs 30-06/308 are significantly better. The ballistic tests with the Fury performed in this video are VERY impressive. The ballistic tests with the Fury performed in this video are VERY impressive. I don't deny that, still, more of a Special Opps weapon if you ask me, then again, the days of the average GI in a firefight are a thing of the past. Watched the video. Well it did go bang every time except for the first try. The ballistic test being ammo loaded with a solid copper 113 gr. bullet going 3049 fps. Not bad. Even with a mono metal bullet it did not penetrate the body armor at close range. Accuracy was pitiful for a scoped rifle. Both guys mentioned the rifle being heavy. Full auto tests did not exhibit any special controllability, better than a M14 on full auto. I would say that the 7.62x51 could easily have matched the "Fury" in any of the tests. If it shot better it might work as a long range rifle pretty good. The average GI may very soon find himself shooting at someone, not sure who.
Dog I rescued in January ![[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]](https://i.postimg.cc/yYDjsxrQ/IMG-0124.jpg)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 13,521 Likes: 4
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 13,521 Likes: 4 |
So following the history of US military rounds crossing over with extreme popularity in the civilian market...
Do you see this round following suit?
Is that dual metal case even reloadable?
Edit to add: I saw where they are claiming this round can be reloaded. I note that there is some ammo out there loaded in standard brass cases. Personally I would rather have a 260 Remington or 7-08. A lot of military rounds became very popular because ammo was cheap. The 5.56 and the AR15 are incredibly popular. We probably won't see a flood of civilian M7 rifles on the market due to cost and I don't see the Fury being special at all.
Dog I rescued in January
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 26,101 Likes: 20
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 26,101 Likes: 20 |
So following the history of US military rounds crossing over with extreme popularity in the civilian market...
Do you see this round following suit?
Is that dual metal case even reloadable?
Edit to add: I saw where they are claiming this round can be reloaded. Sig, IIRC, has or is also introducing a brass case at 60-65K for sporting purposes.
People who choose to brew up their own storms bitch loudest about the rain.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 5,356
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 5,356 |
I believe some of the haters of the .277 Fury are just tore-up because it uses the same caliber bullet as the .270 Winchester, which many members here at the 'Fire love to berate. 😄
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2016
Posts: 3,161 Likes: 14
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Dec 2016
Posts: 3,161 Likes: 14 |
So following the history of US military rounds crossing over with extreme popularity in the civilian market...
Do you see this round following suit?
Is that dual metal case even reloadable?
Edit to add: I saw where they are claiming this round can be reloaded. It's an expensive .270 Winchester, shoe-horned into a short action. Only a kool-aid drinker would even consider it. GR
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2016
Posts: 60,890 Likes: 60
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: May 2016
Posts: 60,890 Likes: 60 |
Are the rifles going to be water cooled? 80k psi, two piece case in a hot rifle in combat conditions….what can go wrong? Most everything. Haha! Yep
I am MAGA.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,290
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,290 |
So following the history of US military rounds crossing over with extreme popularity in the civilian market...
Do you see this round following suit?
Is that dual metal case even reloadable?
Edit to add: I saw where they are claiming this round can be reloaded. I note that there is some ammo out there loaded in standard brass cases. Personally I would rather have a 260 Remington or 7-08. A lot of military rounds became very popular because ammo was cheap. The 5.56 and the AR15 are incredibly popular. We probably won't see a flood of civilian M7 rifles on the market due to cost and I don't see the Fury being special at all. 260 or 7-08 would have made too much sense
Originally Posted By: slumlord
people that text all day get on my nerves
just knowing that people are out there with that ability,....just makes me wanna punch myself in the balls
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 11,528 Likes: 6
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 11,528 Likes: 6 |
A 14 pound rifle. Ridiculous.
A camel is a horse designed by a committee.
Don't blame me. I voted for Trump.
Democrats would burn this country to the ground, if they could rule over the ashes.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2016
Posts: 60,890 Likes: 60
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: May 2016
Posts: 60,890 Likes: 60 |
another issue with this is that the Army is going to issue this crap first to the Airborne troops. The ones in first by parachute, with dicey resupply and support, and any possible extra manpower that shows up would be using different weapons and ammunition. A recipe for disaster. Generally speaking...do the US troops spend a great deal of time and effort searching for ammo? Covering dead bodies trying to find rounds?
I am MAGA.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 20,292 Likes: 24
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 20,292 Likes: 24 |
another issue with this is that the Army is going to issue this crap first to the Airborne troops. The ones in first by parachute, with dicey resupply and support, and any possible extra manpower that shows up would be using different weapons and ammunition. A recipe for disaster. Generally speaking...do the US troops spend a great deal of time and effort searching for ammo? Covering dead bodies trying to find rounds? No. I do know of one instance in Afghan when resupply couldn’t happen for a month, however. Why supplies couldn’t be air dropped in I have zero clue but that was what I was told in first hand accounts.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 44,765 Likes: 26
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
OP
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 44,765 Likes: 26 |
Fifty some years ago, the masses proclaimed it was the end of the world as the US military abandoned the M-14 in favor of the AR-15/M-16. The round was incapable of incapacitating the enemy. The rifle was pure junk. "The toy from Mattel".
I personally always felt the 5.56 was extremely under powered for a combat weapon. But when you are planning logistics for combat where you expect 50,000 to 100,000 rounds to be fired for every enemy casualty, I suppose size and weight of those rounds must be a major consideration.
I am excited to see that our fighting forces will be equipped with a dependable man stopper. Especially when that man is armored.
I doubt the teething problems with the weapon or the ammo will hold a candle to the problems our troops experienced in Vietnam with the introduction of the 5.56 and M-16.
Yes, 80 Kpsi will be hard on barrels. They make new barrels every day, screw a new one on. My Uncle told us they used to shoot the fifties until the barrel glowed bright red. Screw it off and put a new one on. Several times a night. That was 80 years ago, I bet we have the tech to do it today. "I personally always felt the 5.56 was extremely under powered for a combat weapon" - maybe, but I sure as hell don't want to be shot by one! Can't argue that point. Still, If I have to take a round, my chance of survival with a wound from a 223 vs 30-06/308 are significantly better. The ballistic tests with the Fury performed in this video are VERY impressive. The ballistic tests with the Fury performed in this video are VERY impressive. I don't deny that, still, more of a Special Opps weapon if you ask me, then again, the days of the average GI in a firefight are a thing of the past. Watched the video. Well it did go bang every time except for the first try. The ballistic test being ammo loaded with a solid copper 113 gr. bullet going 3049 fps. Not bad. Even with a mono metal bullet it did not penetrate the body armor at close range. Accuracy was pitiful for a scoped rifle. Both guys mentioned the rifle being heavy. Full auto tests did not exhibit any special controllability, better than a M14 on full auto. I would say that the 7.62x51 could easily have matched the "Fury" in any of the tests. If it shot better it might work as a long range rifle pretty good. The average GI may very soon find himself shooting at someone, not sure who. .308 shooting 3061 fps?
Slaves get what they need. Free men get what they want. Rehabilitation is way overrated. Orwell wasn't wrong. GOA member disappointed NRA member 24HCF SEARCH
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 44,765 Likes: 26
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
OP
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 44,765 Likes: 26 |
Fifty some years ago, the masses proclaimed it was the end of the world as the US military abandoned the M-14 in favor of the AR-15/M-16. The round was incapable of incapacitating the enemy. The rifle was pure junk. "The toy from Mattel".
I personally always felt the 5.56 was extremely under powered for a combat weapon. But when you are planning logistics for combat where you expect 50,000 to 100,000 rounds to be fired for every enemy casualty, I suppose size and weight of those rounds must be a major consideration.
I am excited to see that our fighting forces will be equipped with a dependable man stopper. Especially when that man is armored.
I doubt the teething problems with the weapon or the ammo will hold a candle to the problems our troops experienced in Vietnam with the introduction of the 5.56 and M-16.
Yes, 80 Kpsi will be hard on barrels. They make new barrels every day, screw a new one on. My Uncle told us they used to shoot the fifties until the barrel glowed bright red. Screw it off and put a new one on. Several times a night. That was 80 years ago, I bet we have the tech to do it today. "I personally always felt the 5.56 was extremely under powered for a combat weapon" - maybe, but I sure as hell don't want to be shot by one! Can't argue that point. Still, If I have to take a round, my chance of survival with a wound from a 223 vs 30-06/308 are significantly better. The ballistic tests with the Fury performed in this video are VERY impressive. The ballistic tests with the Fury performed in this video are VERY impressive. I don't deny that, still, more of a Special Opps weapon if you ask me, then again, the days of the average GI in a firefight are a thing of the past. Watched the video. Well it did go bang every time except for the first try. The ballistic test being ammo loaded with a solid copper 113 gr. bullet going 3049 fps. Not bad. Even with a mono metal bullet it did not penetrate the body armor at close range. Accuracy was pitiful for a scoped rifle. Both guys mentioned the rifle being heavy. Full auto tests did not exhibit any special controllability, better than a M14 on full auto. I would say that the 7.62x51 could easily have matched the "Fury" in any of the tests. If it shot better it might work as a long range rifle pretty good. The average GI may very soon find himself shooting at someone, not sure who. Did you actually think the way they were shooting that rifle would lend to any accuracy whatsoever?
Slaves get what they need. Free men get what they want. Rehabilitation is way overrated. Orwell wasn't wrong. GOA member disappointed NRA member 24HCF SEARCH
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 3,791 Likes: 2
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 3,791 Likes: 2 |
I thought we already went down this road with the 6.8 SPC II.
It doesn't seem like the gain was worth all the research, development, and the money spent.
Of course, that is most assuredly the reason why.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 6,725 Likes: 2
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 6,725 Likes: 2 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 8,789 Likes: 6
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 8,789 Likes: 6 |
There always supplying our troops with weapons they could have used in the last war.
The squareheads developed caseless ammunition 40 years ago.
The H&K G11 is fugly looken.
Way to small of a caliber.
A 6.5 projectile of 140g in a caseless configuration could be run as fast as you wanted not lugging all that extra weight around
Why anyone would want to lug around brass cases is beyond me.
Much less a steelhead.
Another idea from back in the 70s.
dave
![[Linked Image]](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ea/Logo_Schmidt_%26_Bender.jpg) Only accurate rifles are interesting.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2016
Posts: 12,163 Likes: 19
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jan 2016
Posts: 12,163 Likes: 19 |
I have no problems with the caliber. no doubt it performs somewhat better than some other cartridges available now. it is the case and the pressure that concerns me. There are far more capable people that love it and are better qualified to opine on it than me. Dave Tooley likes it. I think he's doing the barrels and has tested it. To my simple way of thinking it's far too complicated a mess to be serious about for combat. They built the rifle around the case and it's considerable goat glands. one thing's for sure the enemy is not liable to pick it up and use it. They spent tons of money designing and building around a case that gives them not a heck of a lot more improvement than a necked down .308 or a Creedmoor for that matter. Many years ago Bliss Titus did some work on a 250 savage necked up to 277 with some success but it never went anywhere.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 44,765 Likes: 26
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
OP
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 44,765 Likes: 26 |
I thought we already went down this road with the 6.8 SPC II.
It doesn't seem like the gain was worth all the research, development, and the money spent.
Of course, that is most assuredly the reason why. I'm not sure about what you're saying about a 6.8 SPC II. I have one I built from an LEO 6920. NEW: barrel, bcg, magazines. The weight difference from a 5.56 6920 is minimal.
Slaves get what they need. Free men get what they want. Rehabilitation is way overrated. Orwell wasn't wrong. GOA member disappointed NRA member 24HCF SEARCH
|
|
|
|
|
547 members (222ND, 219DW, 1Longbow, 10ring1, 204guy, 1beaver_shooter, 65 invisible),
2,650
guests, and
1,173
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,194,481
Posts18,529,664
Members74,033
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
