Posted: 1/10/2020 9:25:14 PM EDT
| Hey all does anyone know if this will be offered in a heavy barrel or if a barrel swap would be doable on this? |
| I think it is only that one barrel profile for now. It is designed to be a lightweight hunter so I don't see a heavy comp barrel being likely. It will have a proprietary barrel extension... there will be people who can spin a custom barrel for it and add the extension but you will probably have to cannibalize your factory barrel to get it. |
|
Quoted:
I'm not sure why they built this. Alot better can be had all around the board. Maybe chasing sig fans? |
|
Quoted: Really? Other than the giant market of "I want a cool gun" guys and the hunters that would love this... I hate Sig but I will be buying one. Some will be truned off by there not being a magnum offering but for the size and weight with the available calibers (minus 277 Sig Fury) this will most likely be a home run. Jury is still out on the Fury. Doesnt seem all that much better, ballistically, than 308 or 6.5. The Cross seems like a great value at $1600 street. Go watch some of the videos up on Youtube and you'll see how they're setting up the bolt lugs, one piece receiver, etc, to safely shoot 80k psi rounds. Everything is also user-serviceable, from barrel changes to full length pic rail on top. The trigger is proprietary, but so what -- if the Cross is even moderately successful there will be lots of aftermarket options if that's your jam. |
|
Maybe I plugged the numbers into my ballistic calculator wrong but when I ran the numbers they put out it was not as potent as you described. The lower/conventional pressure ammo will be far less as well so I dont think there is much of a market for it. Given that, If I was wrong, and the Fury ammo is actually delivered and at less than $1 a round I may jump in and test the waters. As for a 24" barrel for the Cross...pass. That takes away from the intent, for me. ETA: Just ran the numbers they put out. 135 grain at 3000 fps and a 0.488 BC 1k= 1403 fps, 590 ft/lbs, 24.6 MOA drop 140 grain at 2950 fps and a 0.508 BC 1k= 1419 fps, 626 ft/lbs, 25.1 MOA drop Creedmoor 140 grain ELD-M (mine at least) 140 grain at 2825 fps and a 0.646 BC 1k= 1517 fps, 715 ft/lbs, 27.61 MOA drop Technically the Fury beats it at drop. Thats it. I will take a higher BC bullet with any extra impact I can get. Keep in mind, this round will be pricey!! Keep it in the realm of the Creedmoor pricing and it will succeed but they will spend a lot of money omn the trials and will most certainly be passing that on to the consumer. The next gen weapons trials are also not aimed at an immediate replacement of all M4s in the Army. This is only 100k. A lot, but not for the Army. |
|
Quoted:
Maybe I plugged the numbers into my ballistic calculator wrong but when I ran the numbers they put out it was not as potent as you described. The lower/conventional pressure ammo will be far less as well so I dont think there is much of a market for it. Given that, If I was wrong, and the Fury ammo is actually delivered and at less than $1 a round I may jump in and test the waters. As for a 24" barrel for the Cross...pass. That takes away from the intent, for me. ETA: Just ran the numbers they put out. 135 grain at 3000 fps and a 0.488 BC 1k= 1403 fps, 590 ft/lbs, 24.6 MOA drop 140 grain at 2950 fps and a 0.508 BC 1k= 1419 fps, 626 ft/lbs, 25.1 MOA drop Creedmoor 140 grain ELD-M (mine at least) 140 grain at 2825 fps and a 0.646 BC 1k= 1517 fps, 715 ft/lbs, 27.61 MOA drop Technically the Fury beats it at drop. Thats it. I will take a higher BC bullet with any extra impact I can get. Keep in mind, this round will be pricey!! Keep it in the realm of the Creedmoor pricing and it will succeed but they will spend a lot of money omn the trials and will most certainly be passing that on to the consumer. The next gen weapons trials are also not aimed at an immediate replacement of all M4s in the Army. This is only 100k. A lot, but not for the Army. |
There's also the barrel life issue running at 85ksi. I suppose that one is going to fix itself with the price of ammo.
All trade-offs. Recoil, speed, pressure, weight, longevity, length, cost... Is what it is. I'm skeptical of the longevity of this one (Fury, and other 85-135ksi projects currently going on), personally. But that doesn't mean anything. |
|
FWIW,
6.5 Creedmoor, 16" w/135 A-tip at 2650fps stays supersonic longer and passes the 135 Fury for energy around 600-700yd at sea level. Has less windage throughout and is within 2-3 MOA elevation within and extending past the useful range of the cartridges. Obviously not apples to apples-- maybe some decent low-drag .277 bullets will come out of this that will make the extra 25ksi worth it, but given the current information I'm going to guess it's going to eat through barrels and cost a lot more for being a half-notch up from standard .470" bolt face cartridges. Kind of in line with a WSM or SAUM cartridge with the only benefit being magazine capacity? Interesting development but like I said, unless they come out with a better (cheaper) way to make barrels tougher and last longer, I don't know that this one will stick. But what do I know... hell most people are probably running 70-75ksi with their hand loads anyway 
|
|
Quoted:
FWIW, 6.5 Creedmoor, 16" w/135 A-tip at 2650fps stays supersonic longer and passes the 135 Fury for energy around 600-700yd at sea level. Has less windage throughout and is within 2-3 MOA elevation within and extending past the useful range of the cartridges. Obviously not apples to apples-- maybe some decent low-drag .277 bullets will come out of this that will make the extra 25ksi worth it, but given the current information I'm going to guess it's going to eat through barrels and cost a lot more for being a half-notch up from standard .470" bolt face cartridges. Kind of in line with a WSM or SAUM cartridge with the only benefit being magazine capacity? Interesting development but like I said, unless they come out with a better (cheaper) way to make barrels tougher and last longer, I don't know that this one will stick. But what do I know... hell most people are probably running 70-75ksi with their hand loads anyway But even that being said, the fury is really shining at hunting distances of under 400 yards with a lot more energy. I like the idea of having blasting ammo at 60ksi to help with barrel life and stepping up to the 80ksi when shooting long range and for hunting. It would just be a different profile in my ballistic app is all. |
|
I’m interested, in a couple interviews I saw from shot they hinted at a 6.5 fury coming down the pipe and barrels being sold separately. Getting nearly 3k FPS out of a 16” barrel with a 140 grain .264 round with a better b/c would be perfect for me. They also said a long action is in the works and I’m betting the 338 Norma will show up there. The weight and length are what interests me |
 New! Sig Cross Bolt Action Rifle Review |
| I like it. My Fix by Q is a great rifle but the Cross price point is very competitive for a rifle of similar weight, footprint and design. I'm also glad they are pushing new boundaries with cartridges and I have no doubt a number of manufacturers will be spinning up barrels for these soon. |
|
Quoted:
I like it. My Fix by Q is a great rifle but the Cross price point is very competitive for a rifle of similar weight, footprint and design. I'm also glad they are pushing new boundaries with cartridges and I have no doubt a number of manufacturers will be spinning up barrels for these soon. |
| That video said the msrp is 1,499 everything else I’ve seen has been 1,775 |
|
Quoted:
That video said the msrp is 1,499 everything else I’ve seen has been 1,775 Quoted:
That video said the msrp is 1,499 everything else I’ve seen has been 1,775 |
| The 277 Fury is a cool innovation and if it works out a big step up, but I'm skeptical if the case they're using to make it be able to get to 80K psi is something that will catch on and stick around. The rifle itself though is very tempting...I am thinking an aftermarket 18 or 20" carbon fiber 6.5CM barrel on this platform would be a fantastic hunting setup...definitely has my interest |
|
I want one in 277 Fury just because it's cool. It's an actual advancement in cartridge design unlike anything we have seen in the last 100 years. If it turns out to be a dud so be it. I'd just have it rebarreled to a common caliber. Also, I won't be on the list for the first batch it being a Sig and all.
|
|
Quoted:
I want one in 277 Fury just because it's cool. It's an actual advancement in cartridge design unlike anything we have seen in the last 100 years. If it turns out to be a dud so be it. I'd just have it rebarreled to a common caliber. Also, I won't be on the list for the first batch it being a Sig and all. |
|
Quoted:
I want one in 277 Fury just because it's cool. It's an actual advancement in cartridge design unlike anything we have seen in the last 100 years. If it turns out to be a dud so be it. I'd just have it rebarreled to a common caliber. Also, I won't be on the list for the first batch it being a Sig and all. |
|
Quoted:
Except for the bimaterial case design has been done several times over in the past 100 years Quoted:
Quoted:
I want one in 277 Fury just because it's cool. It's an actual advancement in cartridge design unlike anything we have seen in the last 100 years. If it turns out to be a dud so be it. I'd just have it rebarreled to a common caliber. Also, I won't be on the list for the first batch it being a Sig and all. |
|
I am wondering how broad the implications of the increased pressure round will be. Curious if the bi-component case is necessary to reach these pressures? If not, when why so long to bring to market a beefier receiver/bolt/action to get a higher pressure.
Maybe you are getting magnum velocity in a short action with magnum barrel wear. Still makes the action shorter to get that higher velocity, which is cool. 3,000 ft/s in 16" barrel is pretty decent, even at 135 gr. bullet. Looking at the case, it reminds me of a 308AI necked down to .277". I guess my question is does chamber pressure trump powder capacity when it comes to barrel life? They are related of course, but which one bears the larger impact on barrel life? 264 Win Mag / 7mm Rem Mag at 61-64Kpsi with ~65gr powder vs. FURY at 85Kpsi and ~45gr powder. Which one lasts longer? Not sure of velocity comparisons with some of the larger cases at 16" barrel. Or is 280 Rem a better comparison at ~55gr powder? |
|
Quoted:
I am wondering how broad the implications of the increased pressure round will be. Curious if the bi-component case is necessary to reach these pressures? If not, when why so long to bring to market a beefier receiver/bolt/action to get a higher pressure. Maybe you are getting magnum velocity in a short action with magnum barrel wear. Still makes the action shorter to get that higher velocity, which is cool. 3,000 ft/s in 16" barrel is pretty decent, even at 135 gr. bullet. Looking at the case, it reminds me of a 308AI necked down to .277". I guess my question is does chamber pressure trump powder capacity when it comes to barrel life? They are related of course, but which one bears the larger impact on barrel life? 264 Win Mag / 7mm Rem Mag at 61-64Kpsi with ~65gr powder vs. FURY at 85Kpsi and ~45gr powder. Which one lasts longer? Not sure of velocity comparisons with some of the larger cases at 16" barrel. Or is 280 Rem a better comparison at ~55gr powder? |
|
Quoted:
The steel case head is absolutely necessary to reach those pressure because brass starts to flow somewhere just past 60kpsi iirc Quoted:
Quoted:
I am wondering how broad the implications of the increased pressure round will be. Curious if the bi-component case is necessary to reach these pressures? If not, when why so long to bring to market a beefier receiver/bolt/action to get a higher pressure. Maybe you are getting magnum velocity in a short action with magnum barrel wear. Still makes the action shorter to get that higher velocity, which is cool. 3,000 ft/s in 16" barrel is pretty decent, even at 135 gr. bullet. Looking at the case, it reminds me of a 308AI necked down to .277". I guess my question is does chamber pressure trump powder capacity when it comes to barrel life? They are related of course, but which one bears the larger impact on barrel life? 264 Win Mag / 7mm Rem Mag at 61-64Kpsi with ~65gr powder vs. FURY at 85Kpsi and ~45gr powder. Which one lasts longer? Not sure of velocity comparisons with some of the larger cases at 16" barrel. Or is 280 Rem a better comparison at ~55gr powder? Or so I've heard...
|
Join the Community
Your next conversation starts here.
Create your free account to join discussions, share your experience, save topics, and connect with the AR15.COM community.
- Join discussions
- Follow topics and replies
- Connect with fellow enthusiasts
Already a member? Sign in
Stay informed by subscribing to our Newsletter