277 FURY vs 6.5 Creedmoor: Mistakes Were Made!

On this episode of Ultimate Barrier Testing, we will be comparing the performance of the 6.5 Creedmoor to the 277 FURY on 4 different targets. Each target is worth 25 points, for a grand total of 100 points. Whichever cartridge ends up with the highest score will be the winner. Testing was setup at 50 yards. Thanks for watching!
*These tests are meant for entertainment and educational purposes only. Do not try any of these tests at home!
Big thanks to @infectedoutdoors for lending his upper for this test!
277 FURY: SIG 135 gr FMJ
6.5 Creed: S&B 140 gr FMJ
#midwayusa

[@Bshwag]

After watching your 308 vs 277 and this video I'm convinced that these 277 rounds are expanding on impact.

[@narref04]

I honestly think that in both tests... the 277 is dumping more energy where it needs too. Thus making it the best at stopping the bad guys. That 6.5 would prob be better against a vehicle.

[@jakecheck3225]

Yep 277 is hitting fragmentation velocity like a 556 would.

[@JoshSweet]

Faster bullet means more explosive fragmentation

[@gnd111]

Ultimate kill shots

[@RaspK]

The lumber test suggests that the inner rings of the lumber made the bullets tumble; if you notice closely, there's some keyholing action going on.

[@CplSkiUSMC]

I'd like to see the steel base .277 Fury through a 24" barrel. That thing would be screamin!

[@jimellenw]

for sure. The 6.5 Creedmore is living off folk lore.

[@CplSkiUSMC]

@@jimellenw Yeah, 6.5CM is an okay cartridge but nothing special. You'd never think that if you listened to all the hype because Hornady has become a marketing master.

[@williambell9466]

Awesome video as usual man. The energy dump from the .277 on the first test, 6x6, ply and steel plate, was incredible. Love the content you put out. Quickly becoming one of my favorite guntube channels. Nice tactical crocs btw 😂😂😂

[@ShaunZimmerman668]

On the first test an the concrete paver and board. Way more energy cleaner hole an split the wood! And that was a draw. I don't think!

[@snwbrdbum14]

+1 for tactical Crocs. He even had the adventure-strap engaged

[@WyFoster]

Look at the diameter of the hole in the steel the .277 throws out. That thing has some ENERGY

[@bananaballistics]

You aren't kidding. The sand box displays the thump difference

[@trofchik9488]

I mean, yeah. It's 6.8 vs 6.5. And, if they had the same bullet caliber we could safely say that one wasted more energy to make bigger hole instead of going deeper.

[@WyFoster]

@@trofchik9488 I don't know about you, but I prefer my bullet energy dumped in the target instead of passing through.

[@trofchik9488]

@@WyFoster It's barrier penetration being tested here so, going deeper means better in this case. Terminal performance on flesh? -- Yeah, bigger hole would be better.

[@SKARA101]

@@trofchik9488 right but that 277 velocity allows for a heavier bullet and some steel penetrator action.

[@Sare204]

.277 Fury, simply because it can only go up in performance, based off the case technology. The tested cartridge is essentially a double underloaded variant of the 6.8x51 which will be used in combat. The steel base variant is technically considered the "Training ammo" whereas the military variant will have improved projectiles, in addition to increased pressure.

[@Sightbain.]

100% these test are a very misleading when you aren't using the military bullet construction or velocity. Still fun to casually watch but not worth drawing any conclusions off of.

[@brokeandtired]

The steel base two part case is for extra strength for the non training round, the all brass is the down loaded training/civilian ammo. Otherwise you're correct, this was the "wimp" training ammo.

[@brokeandtired]

The steel base two part case is for extra strength for the non training round, the all brass is the down loaded training/civilian ammo. Otherwise you're correct, this was the "wimp" training ammo.

[@Hornet135]

It’s unlikely 6.8x51 will ever see combat. It’s one of those great army choices.

[@A_potato9772]

​@@Sightbain.Not really! Comparing commercial projectiles to penetrators is apples to oranges and would be highly misleading. Further 80k psi is just moronic, have fun with throat erosion degrading your barrel within 500 rounds. It's suspicious that the military hasn't sent a single fury rifle for field testing anywhere.

[@hammerheadms]

Unless they .277 Fury sells the high pressure variant on the market, I just can't see any reason why someone would choose it over 6.5CM, .308 Win, or 7mm-08. This low pressure variant doesn't do anything that these other cartridges don't. Now if the high pressure one makes it to the civilian market, and performs as well or better than .270 Win...? We might have something that mountain hunters could really be interested in.

[@nextlifeonearth]

They sell the steel base variant.

[@hammerheadms]

@@nextlifeonearth I didn't realize they hit the market yet. Do you know anything about them? I'm eager to see if they perform as well as they are touting.

[@CR67]

Right. The 277 seems redundant. What can it do that the others can't if you jack all their pressures to 80,000 psi?

[@eladfitz5673]

Yet another great video, also thanks to Midwayusa for sponsoring you. I have started buying from them some 7.62 X 54 R that I couldn't find anywhere.

[@Bubben246]

That's because it's fighting itself... again.

[@cypherzer0589]

The .277 certainly much more velocity behind it, giving it much better penetration at closer ranges. However I'd be interested to see how both rounds perform on target at longer ranges from 100 yds to 1000 yds, as well as a comparison of ballistics, drop, drift, velocities, coefficients, etc. Barrier penetration alone isn't enough to really have an opinion one way or the other, and every cartridge should be evaluated for it's intended situational use. Good video.

[@timclaus8313]

For a battle rifle, 500-600 yards is the realistic max useful range.

[@Sare204]

i.e Armor penetration beyond 300 yards.

[@timclaus8313]

@@Sare204 Not sure how long the Fury is overall, but the Creedmore needs to be run through an AR 10 length action.

[@cypherzer0589]

@@timclaus8313 there are loads of 6.5 creed chambered ARs, it's not really hard to find

[@timclaus8313]

@@cypherzer0589 They are readily available, but in the larger AR10 platform built around the 7.62 NATO/308 Winchester, not the AR15 platform.

[@kennetholsten5468]

Would be interesting if the bullets fired in the sand medium could be measured and retrieved to compare how far they went and condition of bullet; came apart, stayed straight, etc. Love watching your videos. Appreciate the work. Also like Midway.

[@aaronfarnsworth7653]

Maybe a small shop vac? Slowly vacuum up the sand until a projectile or fragments are uncovered. You may be able to approximate how much penetration was achieved in the sand. With a scale, you could tell how much weight it retained. Then dump the sand back in the box from the vac and test the next round. It would require regular cleaning of the filter in order to maintain enough vacuum and would likely expend some sand each time that would need to be noted and replaced to maintain the same weight/volume of sand in the box.

[@johnm3907]

I don't think you will ever see bullet on this channel go though it. I skip that part of vid every time.

[@PhycoKrusk]

The .277 looks like it will be better for barrier penetration out of a shorter barrel (especially the high-pressure variant, but with its high ballistic coefficient, the 6.5mm will probably hold up better at longer ranges. With only a barrel and bolt change, the XM5 can be transformed from a wall-busting fighting rifle to a far-reaching long rifle and back again.

[@JeRKII]

I have to say in your style of tests this is the best comparison video so far. BTW good luck on the Gundies

[@ChadGillum]

gotta love the range crocs

[@BeardRubEnjoyer]

Dude, these are so fun to watch. Fascinating science.

[@markchapman2585]

Such a great channel. You didn't want to try 80.000 psi round in your civilian rifle lol. Awesome content Cheers 🍻

[@centurione6489]

What's the point of comparing the two, again?

[@markchapman2585]

@@centurione6489 same reason you watched.

[@jeffreyhutchins6527]

@@centurione6489 To make stupid people ask what's the point.

[@tagg946]

really dig your channel dude, youre going to be going places on YT. keep it up.

[@crazy8sdrums]

It is too soon to tell if .277 Fury was a mistake for the military as the civilian versions are neutered. They have spec'ed .277 Fury for DMR, designated marksman rifle, and that higher velocity would make it more suitable for longer distance.

[@garycox7508]

This. I understand the need for click-bait titles, but it's really apples and oranges if one is talking about the military procurement decision while testing the civilian version at the much lower pressure then mil spec. Still, a cool video but the results have nothing to do with the stated premise.

[@crazy8sdrums]

@@garycox7508 The US military likes to test a variety of weaponry but they are very slow to adopt. It is why the M16/M4 has been used for almost 70 years, using the same caliber. I am sure they tested the heck out of this new .277 Fury and that it will excel at the mission it is aimed at. On paper, it seems like a winner albeit expensive.

[@garycox7508]

@@crazy8sdrums I don't disagree and I was attempting to agree with your original statement. The test shown in this video is not representative of what the mil-spec ammo will do, thus while entertaining, is basically useless in answering the question of "did the military make a mistake?" I think we are saying basically the same thing...I just wanted to make clear that I wasn't trying to contradict you. The Sig Spear (for one) is available as a civilian version..and full pressure ammo can be purchased to feed it if BB wants to actually answer the question "for realz".

[@crazy8sdrums]

@@garycox7508 Totally cool, neighbor. TBH, I am pretty interested in .277 Fury. 5.56 is too weak for some stuff, and .308 is too much. The .277 should be in between both but with better armor defeating ability and flatter trajectory. I think BB was kind of latching on to the responses of some of the other gun guys on utubes. There is a lot of skepticism, and even a fair bit of angst about the choice of ammo. 6.5 Grendel seems to have rallied a lot of fanboy support and I think many were rooting for the military to use it too...but were let down when the .277 Fury was chosen. I am not invested in either, but from how it is on paper, I think I would opt for the .277 Fury.

[@crazy8sdrums]

@@garycox7508 There is also a rumor that the military is going to entirely switch over to .277 Fury for all of their infantry rifles. Unconfirmed rumor...but some hints have been dropped about that. IMO, that will have a negative impact on the civilian market initially...and it already is affecting 5.56 prices a bit. Lake City has been ordered to retool everything to .277F and stop producing 5.56 for the civilian market. It can be viewed as an attack avenue at the 2a, making it more difficult for civies to feed their scary black rifles. Be vigilant!

[@troyspurling1910]

This isn't even a contest with the military 277 ammo

[@matthewcrow3181]

Love your channel!! Would definitely like to see a 270win vs 6.8 western video. It would be interesting to see how much better the 6.8 western would do. I’m interested in purchasing a 6.8 western but I’m not sold on just hype alone I would like visual data.

[@PineyJustice]

The 6.8 western is going to be much more accurate, handle far higher BC bullets, so much less effect from wind and be about the same power level.

[@cvabuck5489]

Yes, I second this request.

[@Diesel045]

Awesome test and great channel you have here good sir.

[@user-es5vz5ry2j]

Thanks for another great video. Both are impressive, but I'm leaning to the 277 Fury. It does have the cooler name.

[@caiooca5793]

Fury or 300 blackout are the only options with cool names. Pick your poison.

[@frankbrowning328]

It's a fine test for those rounds tested. However, you would need the military load for the 277 Fury and a load that would have to be developed by the military for the 6.5 Creedmoor to have an accurate representation of which cartridge is capable of penetrating deeper in a given media.

[@jagx234]

Military load is 6.8×51. Do not ever(assuming you could steal some) shoot it in a rifle marked .277Fury

[@TheVillainInGlasses]

@@jagx234 Not unless you want a gnarly scar like KentuckyBallistics

[@johnm3907]

80000 psi. Do you know what that means?

[@frankbrowning328]

@@johnm3907 Yeas, sure do

[@johnm3907]

@frankbrowning328 no civilian rifle can fire that bullet yet.

[@joyroc885]

Would be interesting to see how the military round will do. Could you do 6.5G vs 6mm arc and 6.8spc?

[@irafowlerjr.7492]

Fantastic channel, great and helpful info, really enjoy, thanks

[@dankdaze42069]

That could be a new series idea trying steel versions of each cartridge to see if it's any stronger 🤔 or makes any difference

[@Raccoonactual]

Steel is less dense than lead. To construct a bullet of similar weight to a lead one, the steel bullet would be far longer. The longer bullet would take up more room inside the case for powder, so you'll lose a lot of velocity and risk pressure spikes. Also a solid steel projectile will be very hard on barrels because steel doesn't deform easily to match the rifling in the barrel. Every shot will start taking material from the rifling with it.

[@lawerancedodd690]

I love your videos!!! Funny yet informative. Keep up the awesome work.

[@GunsBlazingRanch]

Answering the important questions we all have. 🙌👍

[@ssWinni]

Love the video. Also this new barrier testing versus is a great idea. If i remember correctly you mentioned in a video you were in TN? So if you ever want to bring out some of my 'fun' rifles it would be a short drive. Shoot me a message if you're interested!

[@ReviewsSolutions]

You could 3d print sand filled “plates” of varying thickness to see which rounds go through sand the best?

[@goodbyemr.anderson5065]

why when steel plates work better?

[@ReviewsSolutions]

@@goodbyemr.anderson5065 because he tests with sand anyways so it would be cool to see the effect of different materials.

[@trashcompactorYT]

I feel like the sandbox dimensions should be reduced by maybe 1x1 inch to give a chance for high performance cartridges to penetrate it. Great testing as usual B.B.

[@TheFluffedLife]

The 277 looked like it was tumbling on that first test.

[@alexalb2012]

Possible, military want it to tumble for more damage in tissue.

[@toddparsons2980]

I don't think I remember anything making it through the sand box. Thanks for this. The 277 Fury is an interesting round.

[@smartbull6382]

5.56 has I believe. But that’s a fairly small projectile moving very fast. Have to look at some of his older videos to be certain.

[@timclaus8313]

@@smartbull6382 Try loading a 55 gr bullet in a 243. Pushing 4000 fps out of a 22" barrel.

[@johnm3907]

​@smartbull6382 really? I'd bet money against it

[@Rickkari7]

Impressed with the 6.5. I didn’t think it would be that close. I hunt with a Grendel and it is impressive for it’s size. The fury does hit hard though.

[@halfcirclehranch6877]

I think the wood block may show why they chose the 277 Fury over the Creedmoor. It looks like the Fury destabilized and tumbled passing through the wood block. This may have translated, during testing, to greater terminal performance in tissue. Since military can't use bullets designed to expand or fragment, one that just happens to tumble in soft tissue is a great advantage.

[@RowbotMaster]

Technically not a warcrime

[@halfcirclehranch6877]

​@RowbotMaster it's just that it goes against the Hague Convention, which the United States follows

[@blue_ridge_shooting7668]

Next time I see someone say "lol 6.5 needs more" I'm sending them this video.

[@alfredocuomo1546]

So my first question is why such low velocity out of the 6.5 Creedmoor, granted they usually come out of a 24" barrel but your readings appeared to be several hundred feet slower than I usually see on these test. I mean one would think 2500 ft/sec out of a 20" barrel, what's up.???

[@christopherlease]

Great channel I love it. Do you think you could replace the sand with ballistic gel or something that you can compare the penetration. Multiple boards or wet sand and excavate each bullet to determine the one with the better penetration? Incidentally can you compare the 6.5prc with the creedmore?

[@jfess1911]

The practice ammo is thin walled and soft lead. Part of its purpose is to cause less damage to targets, so similar construction bullets would be needed for any decent comparison. Also, the practice ammo is loaded to about 55,000 psi instead of the 80,000 for full pressure stuff.

[@robbehr8806]

Great video! On the subject of 277, I wonder what will be the trick to prevent over penetration, especially for law enforcement. 5.56 turns sideways and fragments. 9mm and other pistol calibers have lots of expanding options. What will be the case with 277?

[@cavemanjeff4251]

It would be nice to know the specific brand/load for your test rounds.

[@ClinttheGreat]

@cavemanjeff4251 It's in the comments: 277 FURY: SIG 135 gr FMJ 6.5 Creed: S&B 140 gr FMJ

[@cavemanjeff4251]

@@ClinttheGreat ok, thank you much

[@jp_0]

Consider the following comparison: 556-M855a1 vs 6x45 (6mm-223) with a custom high pressure chambering in a steelhead case (like the military 277 Fury) for allowing a quicker/higher pressure powder.

[@jameslipscomb8971]

Needs to be the full power .277 fury for any of this to matter.. full power ~80,000 psi loads with the steel base.

[@robmeglaughlin325]

Waste of time.

[@TheRepublicHasBeenLost]

On Ron Spoomers channel they are saying the Military lowered it to 70k psi. For better accuracy and barrel life

[@gonad84]

Love midway. Picked up a couple knives from them a few months back

[@henryc7548]

Can you test 308 accelerator type sabot from eabco with 55 grain m193 projectiles? They are supposed to achieve 3900 fps from the muzzle

[@manthisisreallygood2051]

the 6.5 is super cool, because it just ignores the mere thought of ballistics and is super accurate, but the 277 is a monster

[@GianmarioScotti]

Can you find an intermediate thickness of mild steel plate?

[@intercoastalinterceptor]

Do a distance test.. 500yd on the 3/8 mild steel.. I'm guessing the fury will be better, with more velocity. But I have a 6.5cm db and love it..

[@Naso03]

You’re to only guy that make Crocs look cool! 😂

[@non-binaryjesus]

Pretty much the same cartridge if you don't use the HP 277. Looking at numbers it's probably gonna be a barrel burner.

[@corbinxtitus]

Hey! I have a question - are you running the Moriarti Arms AR10 upper (277 fury)? They claim on their website that it's rated for the Sig Hybrid Ammo, which is 80,000 psi of pressure, but I cannot find any BCG's rated for that, and communication from them is horrible.

[@Bshwag]

I'm guessing that you would only need to get an adjustable gas block so the bolt doesn't fly back as hard.

[@gschgvt2956]

Since the .277 seems to be expanding while still penetrating it seems like that would translate to a bigger hole and more transferred energy on target post barrier penetration.

[@OddBall1958]

Do you have or have you done a video using the old fashion 30-30 Winchester?

[@z1berzerker]

I am a 260 Remington fan... been around since the late 90's

[@miniaturefarmer464]

Easy to make from .243 WIN cases also.

[@capntexas]

They are neck and neck. I’d bet the Creedmoor advantage is the higher BC giving it better penetration at comparatively lower velocities. I’d be curious to see the effect on gel or animals. Seems like comparing 6.8 spc and 6.5 grendel. They end up performing almost exactly the same because at a certain energy level BC wins over muzzle velocity

[@jfess1911]

Yes, the 6.8x51 was built around the bullet supplied by the Army. The 6.5 Creedmoor was designed as a 1000 yard target round and can use sleeker bullets with longer ogives. The case capacity of the 6.8x51 is greater, so even though both are loaded to about the same pressure in this test, the 6.8 has more velocity.

[@albedo0.392]

Thank you for your job

[@CTCAC2000]

hey banana, where do you film(what state)? just curios...

[@lawerancedodd690]

Awesome videos!!!

[@dwightehowell8179]

The real thing in the 277 fury is impressive but so is the price and I don't see other countries being stupid enough to adopt it. That means if we ever have to start feeding those guns a steady diet we'll be lucky to get an adequate supply of the brass cased flavor. I think this was an asinine move on the part of the government.

[@themightycrixus1131]

Love the channel. Burn the crocs though dude. They are for old ladies and regards. 😂😭

[@GammaRayTrae]

I would love to see how 77grain smk 5.56 does in these test

[@alexalb2012]

The XM7 is multicaliber anyway and can shoot 7,62;6,8 and 6,5CM. It’s highly possible that it’s for giving the choice in case the .277 is abandoned for 7,62 or military creedmoor. I think the 6,8 was mandatory by the Army, thus SUG couldn’t use the caliber they would have maybe choose. People are talking about 6,8 steel base, but SIG did a complete line up from 5,56 to 7,62 and more of steel based cartridge (it includes 6,5CM). So I believe it might change depending on ongoing issues, military choice, etc. We’ll see what they will prefer to have in the long term. So yeah the pressure and steel base isn’t limited to .277. But it’s highly possible that like soviet nearly did with 6x49mm. Fully powered intermediate cartridge MCHV might be the futur due to SCHV becoming obsolete.

[@alaindiebra968]

Hello... enjoy your videos... you need to grind that stand and cold blue it so it won't rust that much....

[@sb859]

My man is rockin' the Combat Crocs...strong move if I say so myself.

[@beardoe6874]

I love the Creedmoor, it would be a good military cartridge like 6.5 Swede was but we really missed the boat when the US military insisted on 7.62x51 instead of the 7mm Optimum that the Belgians developed for the original version of the FAL rifle. It split the difference between an intermediate and a full power MBR round but still had the long range terminal performance of a MBR. Ultimately choosing 7.62x51 made NATO step down to 5.56x45 which also made sense but imagine the military surplus if we were going on 70 years of one common ammo and service rifle... Any way, Creedmoor didn't make sense because 7.62x51 was close enough and already adopted, with guns in the inventory and snipers had bolt action options with even better long range ballistics. The 277 Fury is an oddball. I would be glad if it found a niche where it excels but I think the state of ground warfare kind of nullifies its advantages. Nobody is going to carry it in the field unless they have a vehicle hauling the ammo because it's not going to be the common caliber. If a sniper wants a ballistic edge, a 338 Lapua Magnum rifle is heavier but hits a lot harder and a 300 Win-Mag is probably comparable in weight and ballistics and also in inventory. Honestly if we had a breakdown of 5.7x28, 6.8SPC, 6.5 Creedmoor, something like a 7mm Magnum and then 338 Lapua Magnum and .50 BMG, we would have better choices for PDW, Assault Rifle, DMR and various sniper weapon systems. Maybe "something like a 7mm Magnum" could be a 284 Winchester given the steel case 80ksi treatment shooting a 195 grain bullet. The slight problem with that is it would require close to a .30-06 sized action so something like a MG43 if they wanted it in a machine gun (if that can hold the pressure).

[@justinpesce115]

Any plans on doing one with a 6mm ARC?

[@jimscallen6452]

Great video.

[@redfaux74]

Good video Double B.... ❤

[@jondavidmcnabb]

Man!!! I wish you had the 80,000psi rounds and an 18 or 16" barrel system that would work for it. I'm gonna go out on a limb and say 1" of mild steel penetration.

[@jfess1911]

Bullet construction would make a big difference. The current military general purpose bullet has a hardened steel tip (think of a bigger, sleeker M855A1 bullet). A lot of practice FMJ bullets have thin jackets and soft cores to cause minimal damage to steel targets.

[@bananaballistics]

I wish so as well, though I think 1" is a bit of a stretch unless there was some type of penetrator insert in the projectile

[@jfess1911]

@@bananaballistics Have you seen much difference between bullet types in normal cartridges? Apparently, soft lead is needed for the bond in bonded bullets, but some cup in core hunting bullets use harder lead, for example. I know that WWII-era FMJ used a some lead alloys to increase hardness before they went to steel core. I wonder if that makes much of a difference?

[@electric_boogaloo496]

277 fury probably needs the close to 3000 fps velocity as per its design to get the amount of spin to stabilize it. Lower velocity will result in less spin even in the same twist rate hence it started key-holing in the first test. But the full brass case is the gimped round.

[@jfess1911]

The standard barrel twist for the 277 Fury is one turn in 7 inches, that is plenty fast. A standard 270 is 1 in 10". The 6.8 SPC guys can stabilize 130 grain bullets at slower speeds with a 1 in 11" twist.

[@spencerbookman2523]

@@jfess1911 In my experience (sample size of two) my stock Stag Arms chrome-lined 6.8spc upper groups the Hornady 120gr SSTs in about the size of a dinner plate at 100yds (they weren't key-holing, though). Conversely, it grouped the 90gr Federal Fusion rounds inside 1.5in. I also tried a 1:10 twist chrome-lined barrel left-over from when that was a thing. No joy. It was so strange I built a new upper with a stainless barrel as an experiment, and I had no problem with the heavy SSTs through the stainless barrel. Go figure! So, maybe chrome-lined barrels don't like heavy bullets in this caliber?

[@jfess1911]

@@spencerbookman2523 Some barrels just don't like certain bullets. I wish that there was something smarter to say, but it's true. The 120 SST load from Hornady is probably the most used ammo in 6.8 SPC-land, largely because it is usually available somewhere and works well for most.

[@namyun2743]

Miss Creedmoor's wish is my command! Liked! ;3

[@theprfesssor]

The hybrid 80k pressure version of 277 fury gets 2900fps out the M7 which has a 13 INCH BARREL......... That us crazy performance for SBR

[@nadineherrell5426]

Great show. Keep the great testing. Michael Herrell

[@caseybrown5183]

They created a new cartridge based on a new bullet because they wanted to avoid legal problems - learning from past experience. They started with a projectile design optimized for defeating body armor without having to use tungsten.

[@RockinRack]

Is the 80k psi version even going to be available to the general public?

[@imadequate3376]

Not looking good? Looks to me like the .277 expenened most of its energy on the wood which for me means its better than the 6.5 that just continued on through. The .277 looks like it has way more thump than the 6.5 on the target.

[@juliusluvender5251]

At least you were up front about using the civilain .277 fury. Once we can get mil rounds it will not even be a comparison. 80,000? Thats just nuts

[@timjones147]

New sub. I enjoy your videos. Please slow down on your chronograph results. They just flashed by the screen and I can’t see them

[@HammerheadClassCruiser]

I'd love to see both of these rounds with hardened steel cores.

[@ford_drivingbuilder4225]

have you ever shot at a insulated concrete form or ICF?

[@mitchalvin]

I bet the fmj for the 6.8 fury is target bullets and not the ball ammo used by military

[@78tooth83]

Reading some of the comments. I don’t know if I agree with them. I’m wondering if the 277 is expanding or is it tumbling? It’s a heavier bullet moving around 100 FPS faster. As far as energy dump. Nice

[@FindersKeepers88]

Good, Thx

[@DriveCarToBar]

You gotta make a duct tape handle for your box 'O sand. You could also borrow the guitar riff from Alice in Chains as an intro lick for the Saaaaaannndd In the BOX.

[@grantpiper6358]

extra points for the crocs! man after my own heart.

[@mrfunkybassist]

Where’d u get them tactical crocs?!?

[@ryewaldman2214]

Holy crap that was anemic 6.5 CM. We have a 22" 6.5 CM that shoots factory 143 precision hunter at 2665 fps, which is 2255 ft-lbs of muzzle energy. What brand of ammo was this? It is really under-loaded. I know this is a 20" barrel, but it should still be producing above 2600 fps at the muzzle with a 140 grain pill. Barrel length testing shows typical 6.5 CM loads in the 130-147 range are about 25 fps/inch of barrel. I think a full-power 6.5 CM load will produce 2200--2300 ft-lbs of muzzle energy depending on bullet specifics. You may want to look for a different load (or hand load). It's the penetration test, not the low-recoil plinking load test :)

[@bananaballistics]

It is S&B factory 140 gr fmj. Per the box (whatever barrel length they used) it is rated at 2,657 fps so definitely not as hot as the 143 gr Precision Hunter.

[@adampatterson9404]

Does the 277 stay supersonic as far as the 6.5?

[@itsamk18-ish]

So what you’re saying is 308 is king?

[@jorgesolis9468]

The hybrid 277 case has the same energy in 16 inch barrels that 308 needs 24 inch barrels

[@jameswill1862]

How about testing the 277 brass rounds to the 277 steel cup rounds ??

[@mrunpopularopinion334]

What’s the build or upper on the 277 ur using?

[@donaldcope4982]

I don't know if I have commented before....BBut I love this channel/ Your channel....Just real results. And as a welder/fabricator....You are a staight shooter!

[@ulfearles1108]

What if compare these great cartridges with Swedish 6.5 x 55?

[@hoffi9327]

Awesome. 338 Win Mag vs 35 whelen, please

[@timclaus8313]

I'm good with that. The 200gr Hornady Superformance round out of the Whelen is a screamer. 2900 fps out of my 22" barrel Handy-Rifle.

[@davidnugent5003]

I have to say it's really nice to use midway i for about them they have much better prices. And one thing about the creedmoor it has a awesome name. It ain't as awesome as the the (277 fury),!, but it is more common to build into an AR ten platform and much least much less expensive. Both guns are barrel burners!!And when you have such powerful guns, it's better to go ahead and get something that's more affordable and common, like the creedmoor. It is an amazing cartridge for a dmr setup Set up that you can make for 6 hundred dollars and you can have a great gun. That has a great range..

[@tylervolentine1286]

With that velocity... makes me think that 277 might be a nice low recoil hunting round in the future.

[@MotivatedNurse]

Which bipod is he using

[@leeeng478]

I think the Creedmoor is legally a huge alternative around the globe where military cartridges like the 308 have now been banned for civilian use. It is smart but scary! So now Hornady wants you to buy a weapon that is inferior at all levels for military use or protection. So in America we tend to love are military cartridges they are durable, versatile and accurate. Even canada who runs the F1 Class competition have changed the rules to favor the 6.5 in 1,000 yard competition by banning any 308 cartridge above 155. That is a killer when the 175's are excellent for 1,000 yard competition.

[@guardianminifarm8005]

Pretty surprised that the 6.5 could keep up as well as it did. I expected a much more definite result.

[@denniscraig6022]

This video drove me bananas 😮

[@brandtwebber5761]

Would have thought they would have cut 1/2". Seen a 762x39 shoot through it.