Posts Tagged ‘277 Fury’

Ian McCollum: “Why The M7 And 6.8x51mm Are Bad Ideas”

Sunday, December 7th, 2025

I’m not enough of an expert to know whether the new M7 U.S. battle rifle chambered in 6.8x51mm is a good idea or not. But I’m pretty sure Ian McCollum is such an expert, and he says it’s a bad idea:

  • “I have thought from the very beginning that this program was a bad idea.” As evidence by this snippet from 2019.
  • “I really didn’t expect that that the US Army would adopt anything from the NGSW program. We do have a long history of doing weapons development trials, looking at all the options, and adopting nothing new. And that’s what I thought would happen here. Obviously, it didn’t.”
  • “I had a chance to do some shooting with a civilian 68 by 51 or 277 Fury Spear rifle, the civilian version of the M7 several years ago. It was a good rifle. Um, like as a technical thing, it worked well. It handled well, but that doesn’t mean that it’s a good idea for the military to adopt it.”
  • “This video isn’t about the rifle itself. It’s about the doctrine and the concept behind its adoption, which is the part that I think is a really bad idea.”
  • “There were two main justifications that are typically given for the decision to get rid of the intermediate, light recoiling, highc apacity cartridge, the 5.56 [NATO], and replace it with a much higher pressure, much heavier recoiling, much physically larger and physically heavier cartridge, the 68 x 51[mm].”
  • “The first one is when we were in Afghanistan, US troops were often taken under fire by enemy forces from ranges at which they could not effectively respond with their little wimpy 5.56 M4s. And that’s very true. Something like 50% of combat engagements in Afghanistan took place in excess of the practical engagement range of the M4.” Taliban would routinely ambush U.S. troops from higher in the hills “800 or 1,000 meters away.”
  • “And so the justification is often given that if we had some big honking rifle with a magnified optic on it that could reach out to 800 yards, well then, by gosh, we could have taken that dude out.”
  • “And my counter to that is that the world has changed since we were fighting in Afghanistan.”
  • “But if that were happening today, you know what the answer would be? It’s not rearm everybody in the Humvee. It’s you have a box of a couple of little one-way attack drones sitting in the Humvee.”
  • “We’ve all seen the drone footage from Ukraine. Like that’s exactly what would happen if we were in Afghanistan dealing with that situation today. There’s no need for a new small arm to do it.”
  • “And it’s so totally counterproductive to make all the sacrifices of going back to a full power battle rifle in order to be able to do what you can do more effectively with, I don’t know, a couple thousand military procurement one-way attack drone.”
  • “The second justification was armor penetrating capability. Our potential near-peer allies are developing really good, next generation body armor and we need our infantry weapons to be able to defeat that body armor. And I think this is also a mistake, or I think the adoption of the M7 is not the ideal solution to that problem either.”
  • So they needed armor penetration but want to keep the rifle short for usability, and to put a suppressor on it. “This is how we end up with a 13-in barrel that has to achieve 30 something feet per second, which means you have to jack the pressure, the chamber pressure of the cartridge way up in order to get a high, you know, 140 or 130 grain bullet at 3,000 plus FPS.”
  • “Now we have an 80,000 PSI cartridge. And interestingly, looking at Cappy Army’s video, in order to try and mitigate the weight issue, Sigs M71 actually cuts the barrel down even shorter to 11 in. And the SIGR rep that they had in that video was talking about potentially upping chamber pressures to 125,000 PSI…Maybe that’s that’s a typo. Maybe that’s a misspeaking thing.”
  • 80,000 PSI is already really high. Most cartridge pressures top out around 65,000 PSI. At 80,000 PSI, the M7/.277 Fury is already the highest pressure cartridge in the world. 125,000 PSI is simply insanely high.
  • “To me, that’s just mind-bogglingly insane. Like, at that sort of pressures your barrel life is going to be abysmal. Your parts life and everything is going to be abysmal. Like that’s that’s not a really good compromise to achieve higher velocity.”
  • “There are capabilities out there for armor penetration that are much more focused on bullet construction and don’t need to have necessarily the sort of super hyper velocity that you get out of an 80,000 PSI cartridge.”
  • “I recently had the chance to visit CBJ in Sweden. The 65 CBJ cartridge is a pistol caliber cartridge that uses some velocity, but also a lot of material science and projectile design to create a remarkably effective, to many people a shockingly effective, armor penetrating cartridge without having to do a whole lot. And they do it in the chamber pressures of 9 by 19 parabellum.”
  • “If you took the guys from CBJ and you told them, ‘Right, here’s a DoD contract. We need you to come up with an armor-piercing loading for standard 5.56 carbines that will go through and whatever they want to get, whatever they want to be able to defeat with the M7, with the 68 x 51. Give that standard to the guys at CBJ. Tell them they’re going to be doing it out of a 14.5 in barreled M4 carbine with a .223 chamber. And I’m willing to bet that they can they can do it. They’ve got 30 years of expertise developing, designing the small details that make so much difference on a project like this.”
  • That ammo is always going to be expensive, but not as expensive as adopting an entirely new battle rifle.
  • “Every new military weapon out there has some sort of whoopsie, we messed that up and we had to recall a bunch of guns and fix them. Like everyone in history always has it. It’s going to happen on the M7 if it’s not already. It’s going to happen on the M249 or the M250s if it hasn’t already. And all that’s incredibly expensive and I don’t think actually necessary for the goal of being able to defeat significant good armor.”
  • “If you put a tenth that amount of money into development of a 5.56 armor penetrating cartridge, you now have the ability to issue that really fancy expensive ammo when it’s necessary, or standard 5.56 ball and retain all of the benefits that we already have in 5.56 carbines.”
  • Then there’s the issue that most infantry soldiers aren’t really good at hitting anything out in the ranges the M7 is supposed to fill a need for. “And my concern with that is every time the US has gone into a war, they’ve ended up in the aftermath doing some research and trying to figure out what worked and what didn’t.”
  • “What is the effective range of an infantryman with a rifle? The answer that pretty much always comes back is 100 to 300 meters. At 100 meters, infantry are really good at hitting stuff with rifles. At 200 meters, they’re reaching their effective limit. And at 300 meters, it’s really rare that anyone’s doing anything very effective.”
  • Plus NATO studies showed “In 70% of cases, 300 meters was the maximum range that you could actually see a person standing up.”
  • “So when you consider all of the compromises that go into, and the expenses that go into, trying to generate a rifle that can give an infantryman a 600 meter effective reach out and touch that guy range, well, 70% of the time it’s a total waste, because the dude could be standing upright and walking around slowly with no idea he’s under observation, but he’s not under observation, because you can’t actually see someone 300 meters away when you’re prone.”
  • And that’s when someone is standing up. “Go look at footage from Ukraine and tell me how often are guys just standing up straight in the middle of nowhere.”
  • “Compromising a lot of the other capabilities of an infantry small arm in order to attempt to give the infantry a rifle that is effective at 500 meters, in my opinion, is a waste of time and it’s a really bad choice, because most of those infantry cannot make any sort of practical, effective use of that capability at 500 meters. They can do it to 200. The really good ones can do it to 300. And that’s where it falls apart.”
  • “It would be much better to maximize the effectiveness of the rifle within the the operational envelope that we know they’re really good in. Take a rifle and optimize it for one to 200 yards and go with that. Embrace that and then accept that you’re going to need other options for longer shots.”
  • Then take better marksmen and give them sniper rifles optimized for that role. “That’s absolutely well worth it. But what’s not well worth it is trying to turn everyone into the unit into that guy and in the process massively compromising their ability to maintain fire superiority because they run out of ammunition.”

    • And here’s the video that McCollum’s video references:

    In this video, you can clearly hear the Sig rep claim the gun was designed to withstand 125,000 psi. Like McCollum, I have my doubts…

    Tags:, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
    Posted in Guns, Military, video | 28 Comments »

    “Does The US Military’s New Combat Rifle Kinda Suck?”

    Sunday, May 21st, 2023

    Remember the U.S. Army’s Next Generation Squad Weapon, AKA the XM-5, AKA the XM-7, AKA 6.8 x 51mm? Brandon Herrera has managed to get Sig Saur to send him the prototype of the new weapon (the Sig Spear) to test, and…he has some reservations.

    The caveat here is that this is not an actual 6.8 x 51mm XM-7, it’s chambered in 308 Winchester/7.62 x 51mm (two calibers that are extremely close but not exactly the same), so the ballistics and operation are likely to be slightly different. (To make matters worse, the civilian version of the round is being marketed as 277 Fury. As far as I can tell from looking at Gunbroker, 277 Fury ammunition is available now, but models of the Sig Sauer MCX Spear chambered for the round aren’t yet on the civilian market.)

    Pros:

  • Short stroke piston doesn’t need a buffer tube, meaning that the gun can have a folding stock. “Actually pretty cool.”
  • Decent trigger.
  • “This little right side bolt release here. Kind of a fan. Feels a little flimsy, but I like the placement.”
  • Left side fold-out charging handle is good.
  • “Hand guard here offers a lot of space to mount whatever shit you want.”
  • Two gas settings.
  • Silencer works (even if not hearing-safe quality).
  • Likes the flat dark earth (FDE) finish. “In my opinion, it’s a pretty sweet looking gun.”
  • “Gun recoil impulse not bad.”
  • “Running it suppressed it’s not that gassy.”
  • Very reliable, at least over the initial 200 rounds.

    • The cons:

  • “It’s fucking heavy, dude!…Unloaded it comes in at 8.9 pounds. For reference that is one full pound, or 13% heavier, than a full-size SCAR 17, which is also a semi-automatic 308 with a 20 round magazine.”
  • Folding aside, the stock isn’t great and wants to slip.
  • “This charging handle in the back is borderline fucking unusable. It feels, really flimsy, like I feel like I’m gonna fucking break it. And it’s stiff. It is so
    fucking stiff! ‘How stiff is it, Brandon?’ Joe Biden in a room full of school kids.”

  • Potentially the biggest combat problem: Overinsertion of the magazine. “If you put too much force on the magazine when you’re inserting it, you will actually run up past the magazine release and get the weapon jammed.” Yeah, that sounds like a huge problem, and Sig needs to get that fixed ASAP.
  • The spring is a bit hard to get back in.
  • Super expensive right now.

    • From the comments on the video: “The fact that he’s actually able to unironically hold up a Scar 17 as a lighter, more affordable option is just batshit insane.”

    Yeah, looks like Sig needs some more work here before it’s ready to field…

    Tags:, , , , , , , , , ,
    Posted in Global Warming, unions, video | 45 Comments »