I made some posts years ago about the 270-08 - (270 Redding) this new round seems awful ‘Hot’ pushing 270 Win speeds in a 16” - yes, I see the steel case head.

Anyone have the facts vs published stats?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/.277_FURYYou

So the industry seems to be making some push in the 277 space like the 6.8 Western.

After many cartridge ‘newbies’ that flopped in the recent years, Anyone expect these new rounds to be very successful commercially?

The Sig round is spec'ed for 80,000 PSI and was/is designed for the US Military. Sig said if they weren't chosen they would produce theirs for the civilian market

https://www.sigsauer.com/blog/category/company-news

Loaded w/ 150 gr. ABLR's...?

The 6.8 WESTERN will give one an honest 600 yd. hunting rifle (1500 ft-lbs).




GR

I don't see it being commercially successful mainly due to the case. How many manufacturers are going to completely retool to produce cases for a single cartridge? I'm guessing Sig would likely be the only manufacturer.

It's said to be totally non-reloadable so many including myself would not be interested.

That's what I have heard as well, partly because one of my editors was thinking about having me do an article on it. As I remember, he contacted Sig and that's what they said.

Can most rifles handle 80 000 psi?

The NAS3 pistol cases just need special dies and this looks similar. Unless the cases are compromised after firing I don't see why the Sig round would be unable to be reloaded. It will be a terrible flop, though. Too proprietary to have success. I don't see the 6.8 Western taking off either and that one doesn't make sense to me, being called "6.8" you don't have the ".270 brand name recognition", so why bother with 0.277" when it could have been 0.284"? And if it was 7mm then why bother with this at all?

But if it leads to more 6.8 bullets that's a good thing.

The cartridge and the rifle were designed from the ground up for 80,000 PSI

Which rifle? Reckon I've been living under a rock.
Rex

With an almost identical case to the 270 WSM, except for having a little less powder capacity than the WSM. I remain to be convinced how much better it'll be than a 270 WSM with a 8" twist barrel.

It’s
The Western’s shoulder and neck are designed for long, heavy, slippery bullets, 175gr, to be exact. So is the chamber spec and barrel twist. The .270 WSM is for about 150gr, tops.

Thanks. So we won't be able to rebarrel a Ruger or Remington then. Have to buy the Styer rifle.

The cartridge and rifle are from Sig

Good feedback. One might think the industry would take notes.........from those rounds that were a big success..........and big failures.

I agree with the comments above.

What kind of barrel life do you get with 80,000 psi?

This round was developed for the military to meet their requirements of 3000 FPS from a 16" barrel in a 308 sized case with 140 grain bullets. The only way was to i crease the pressure to 80 000.

Sig said from the get go they would produce the rifle and ammo for the civilian market even id not selected by the military. Their wete 3 companies that made the short go and Sig won the contract

I saw a video of a Sig factory rep saying it would be reloadable.

I can see if this performs like this in a short 16" barrel being an great option. I like my short scout 308 rifle a lot but it honestly performs well enough for me as it can reach far enough for most hunting.

The question is that if one is already geared up with tools that work why go with the next industry game changer? Also, while i like Sig pistols and some of their products ive been burned by them in customer support. These companies like having product line and then introducing a new line and cutting out support for older customers who keep using what they term "legacy" products. Im not big on how the firearms industry supports past products and will probably keep chugging along with the old 308, 30-06, and soon to be 270.

It might have military uses. That would make sense to me as a non relodable round.
Like Jack said" It will lay the daisies low" especially at 80K!

Muzzle blast will be unforgiving.

Well, as long as we're being exact let's look at some of those shoulder and neck dimensions of the 6.8 Western and the .270 WSM.
Shoulder diameter = .5381" for BOTH
Shoulder angle = 35 degrees for BOTH
Datum diameter = .441" for BOTH
Neck length = .276" for BOTH
Neck outside diameter = .314" for BOTH (this one would be expected to be identical, unless the new case were for some reason spec'ed with thinner or thicker brass)
All the aspects of the case head and heel of the two cases are also identical.
As near as I can tell from comparing the case drawings the only difference between the two is the shoulder/neck/OAL on the 6.8 Western are all moved back .0805" from that of the 270 WSM, with the accompanying small reduction in powder capacity. That's it. They're otherwise identical. So that .08" would let you hang on to a little more of the shank of a long ogive bullet, and have to worry less about part of the ogive being in the case mouth when loaded to the desired OAL. Well, worry 8/100ths of an inch less, that is.
My point is just screw in a 8" twist barrel and cut the same throat on them both and the two are pretty much peas in a pod.
Perhaps that 8/100ths is a much bigger deal than I understand. I'd welcome someone explaining how important that may be, seriously.

Best to all,
Rex

Oops. I meant Sig, not Styer.

Oops. I meant Sig, not Styer.

What really made the 6.5 Creed a success was its performance as a target round; hunters were dragged along kicking and screaming at first. Now its position there is being challenged somewhat by smaller-caliber cartridges with less recoil. Clearly, this one has more whack and bang, so that use is out, unless somehow it can replace the bigger rounds like the .338s for really long shooting.

Don’t want to get caught making the same arguments against it that the anti-Creed guys made, but I’m not sure what this one will do for hunters that ain’t already being done with already established PRCs, Noslers, Wbys, etc. which are pretty well established. No dog in this one at all, so I’ll just sit back and eat my popcorn. I’m certainly not buying any more rifles (honestly Honey)!

What you are missing is - This is a different cartridge than the .270 WSM.

If they made it the same - except long-loaded heavy, non-stabilizing, improperly seated bullets for the std. .270 WSM Bbl... what would the result, commercially, be?


So it's different.

And, being different, along w/ the faster 1:8 twist, it can also incorporate changes that improve the cartridge RE: the design load - a 175 gr. ELD bullet.




GR

Adam, yes, MB would be very bad.....in a 16"

I'm thinking about 10 boxes would do it.

Ha! lol, GR, that aspect of it is the ONLY part I am NOT missing. I totally get the marketing thing.

80,000 psi is the difference. Whether that is something civilian shooters want, with all its advantages and drawbacks, won't be know until it hits the market and people start using it.

In the mean time, the ossified traditionalists who hate change will clutch their 30-06s ever tighter, and "sagely" opine it will fail before anyone actually gives it a try.

Not the marketing thing, but the branding thing.

It would be a "slip-n-fall" waiting to happen.

Looks like the new case should be easily formed from .270 WSM brass, and you will need a new Bbl. for the twist, anyway, ...as well as the new bullets.

Don't see the drama for someone already into the .270 WSM.




GR

Think it is a spec driven design.

Translating it into the civi hunting or target market makes it awkward.

Its unique features - don't really solve any existing problems, and, in fact, create a few new ones.




GR

Good comments folks.....yes I agree GR.

Btw folks, how did that WSM go over for Winchester? No doubt they were good rounds......but never set any sales records.

Personally, I'd probably just as soon opt for a 280 or 7RM if I wanted this performance in a hunting rifle. I get the 16" barrel spec driven, but the blast indeed let alone barrel life would be tough, as least in shorter military rifles.

When my friend told me he was hot to trot for a new cartridge; the 277 Sig and gave me the spec, I off the bat told him I wouldn't do it. Upon reflection I took a more rational look at what it was and what it brought. First question I asked was what does it do different? The ballistics are already achievable in existing cartridges. So what we're left with is the package. They're doing it in a smaller package, with a shorter barrel. Then I asked how are they doing it? They're running 80Kpsi!!!. New case design, new rifle design. Cool stuff.

The tech excites me. The tech applied in the 277 Sig is meh for me. But can you imagine the tech applied to a case like the 30-378 weatherby?

I looked back at history (I'm not a historian so forgive any inaccuracies)...but I probably would have been one of the luddites panning the advent of rifled barrels vs smoothbores. And I would have probably dismissed smokeless powders and the smaller, faster bullets that they brought as a flash in the pan (pun intended). "...a 45-70 does everything I need it to do".

In the end, I'm not excited by the 277 Sig...but I am excited about the possibility of brass that withstand 80Kpsi...I am excited about new rifle designs that can contain similar, and the loading tech that generates a controlled 80kpsi (vs accidental 80kpsi that some have bumbled into).

It's interesting brass technology indeed. I guess I am getting complacent with the current line-up of cartridges and components.

I saw a video of a Sig rep saying it is reloadable.

II'm not a military man so can't comment on their need for such a round. As a hunter however, I can attest to being a witness of a fella using a standard 7mm-08 in a standard M-70 rifle to tip over a mule deer at a (Leica measured) 550 yards. He did this by firing only one shot and it was time for field dressing.


While the standard .308 Winchester comes "close to this, the 16" barrel requirement makes it a bit lacking. The difference is mostly academic however as the difference in the field as a hunting gun is so little that it wouldn't prompt me to buy one.

As to the military, I'm reminded of the medical term "cerebralanalinversion" as it does seem to fit quite well here.

Yawn. An answer to a question nobody asked? Flogging old technology much like the internal combustion engine? At 80K psi? Hey, let's put TWO turbos on it & call it a Creedmuchmore.

Now if only they could amplify a light beam thru a ruby or something, that might really shoot like a laser... oh wait... it's all mirrors & smoke.

Maybe somebody in the pent-agony has a kid who just graduated from engineering school & needs to pay off xer's student loans.

Besides... it's a 270. How exciting.

The question was asked by our military

They would be far better served by making a Democrat seeking missile.

I agree with the OP this is the new 270-08. New is always fun! I have a 270 Redding 9-twist x 23" barrel on a Savage 99, achieving 3000fps wit 130g and 2900 with 140g. that's probably pushing near max pressure for my comfort zone, but I'm pretty sure that it's not producing anything like 80,000 psi. The steel-base case is an interesting concept, can't wait to hear more about the rifle. It must be belt and suspenders technology to get the 80,000 psi SAAMI approval.

What’s the current pressure peak cartridge???

I was always under the impression it wasn’t the 270 win at a round 70k

It would truly be a paradigm shift if there was some advancement that increases that 10-15%

It could turn a 308 into a 30-06 or a 358 win into a 35 whelen.