|
|
Post by tropimist on Aug 8, 2017 7:32:26 GMT -8
Since the 277 wolverine has now been released to the public domain would it be possible the BHW will produce a 277 in the near future - in these days of high cost of materials, anything that has good results using 556 cartridge seems a logical choice since once fired brass is available for less than 5 cents which goes a long way to reduce costs. The 277 has a pretty good following in the short time it has been introduced - off the shelf ammo is available as well in a variety of options - the velocity and energy results are far better than 300blk in my opinion while offering many of the same possibilities - Short barrel in super and sub for example - BHW does not have anything that fills this niche from what I see - the 6 x 45 is not capable of matching the performance of the 277 - seems an obvious fit in the ar 15 lineup. With the many new powders along with others that perform well in 300 blk, they seem to get really good results in the 277 and the case is shortened a bit less and expanded a bit less than the 300 blk. It would be worth looking into. I will be testing one out soon and will more than likely buy several for the whole family. I just have not gotten the performance out of the 300 that I want - this seems the logical choice.
PS: in my research it seems that someone at BHW named Paul had a spat with some folks on the forum pages around the net - it would be a shame if egos got in the way of considering a particular barrel - no royalties and such are required since now made public - if anything it offers competition to the market - even for the ones that developed it.
Rob
|
|
|
|
Post by GLSHOOTER on Aug 8, 2017 16:02:35 GMT -8
Since the 277 wolverine has now been released to the public domain would it be possible the BHW will produce a 277 in the near future - in these days of high cost of materials, anything that has good results using 556 cartridge seems a logical choice since once fired brass is available for less than 5 cents which goes a long way to reduce costs. The 277 has a pretty good following in the short time it has been introduced - off the shelf ammo is available as well in a variety of options - the velocity and energy results are far better than 300blk in my opinion while offering many of the same possibilities - S hort barrel in super and sub for example - BHW does not have anything that fills this niche from what I see - the 6 x 45 is not capable of matching the performance of the 277 - seems an obvious fit in the ar 15 lineup. With the many new powders along with others that perform well in 300 blk, they seem to get really good results in the 277 and the case is shortened a bit less and expanded a bit less than the 300 blk. It would be worth looking into. I will be testing one out soon and will more than likely buy several for the whole family. I just have not gotten the performance out of the 300 that I want - this seems the logical choice. PS: in my research it seems that someone at BHW named Paul had a spat with some folks on the forum pages around the net - it would be a shame if egos got in the way of considering a particular barrel - no royalties and such are required since now made public - if anything it offers competition to the market - even for the ones that developed it. Rob The Wolverine has a long way to go before it hits SAAMI. Lots of things to occur between now and then and I would guess it will be close to a year before any potential acceptance. It won't be ready for SHOT as the brass is going to take close to a year per MDWS postings. I believe BHW might look at it if it does get SAAMI'd but realistically many are submitted but many fail. The SOCOM is a case in point. True availability of dies will be a huge help to making it interesting to the public. Right now they are sole sourced. Once you step up to a BHW level barrel the cost of brass is not all that much. Any of the 6.8 variants like the 6X6.8, 25X6.8 and 65X6.8 outperform the Wolverine and of course the full 6.8 is a big seller. The original designer released it as a favor and I wonder if that will be an issue down the road as it was just setting on a shelf before MDWS got involved. Most guys don't want to load down now and the 223 brass while attractive is not that big a deal. BHW worked with the 6.5 PCC and the experience was crazy loading pressures to get claimed performance and velocities. Totally worthless for accuracy thanks to the short neck and pressures were measured far in excess of 65,000 psi., you don't want to know how high, so it was a bad niche cartridge all around. The Wolverine will go under tremendous scrutiny by SAAMI. I am excited to see what numbers, if any, come out on the back end. I do know that just supplying a bit of brass and loaded ammunition won't be all the costs. White Laboratories charges about $10,000 for the first shot to evaluate a cartridge. Full SAAMI testing and acceptance will currently run in excess of $250,000, the boys from SHARPS will tell you that, and that is not something most consider walking around money. Paul? The only Paul I am aware of worked with the 6.5 PCC when it came out doing the lions share of the initial work. Once Vic got to feeling like he knew what he was doing Paul bowed out. Currently the only Paul I'm aware of is on AR15.Com and he has nothing to do with BHW nor has anyone from BHW commented on the Wolverine anywhere in the past two years that I am aware of. If you have some links please PM me and I will take a look. Greg |
|
|
|
Post by tropimist on Nov 16, 2017 6:39:42 GMT -8
Hey Greg, Thanks so much for the feed back. The 6.5 PCC just seemed to me like a very bad idea from the start. It was begging for a slower powder to keep pressures in check which begs for a longer barrel to burn the powder in - and yeah the neck certainly can't help much. The sharper angle on the case may be the only positive thing I could say about it. However the idea of a 6.5 wolverine would be more interesting. I am going to try the 277 wolverine out in a 12" barrel. I think it has potential to be an accurate shooter, fun round, and make a good light weight general purpose rifle. For me in a shorter barrel AR15 the good options are few - this is the first one that seems to have the potential to offer better results. I will be doing some testing with it to see how it performs - working up loads, accuracy, etc. I am curious - did you all get any pressure signs in the brass when shooting the 6.5 PCC - if not were the rounds loaded with CCI 41 primers or others with thicker cups and such - hard to imagine a ar15 platform cartridge variant not seeing brass issues at those pressures unless somehow they were very late secondary pressures and such  |
|
|
|
Post by GLSHOOTER on Nov 16, 2017 7:05:16 GMT -8
Yes we saw a lot of pressure signs. I won't even mention how much case head expansion as it's too early in the day to think scary thoughts.
A 6.5 Wolverine won't provide much for real punch when loaded sanely. I'd rather shoot a TCU if I just had to use a 223 case. A 6.5X6.8 or a 264 LBC in a short barrel hwill leave a 6.5 Wolverine in the dust in every measurable parameter and weigh about an ounce less.
I see nothing that a Wolverine offers in a hunting situation that a full 6.8 doesn't trump hands down. The ability to buy a myriad of OTC ammunition loaded by know reputable companies in an of itself would preclude me from building one. Barrel offeringsfrom major respected companies with just a phone call are also a major plus. Subsonic is not a viable argument as in that game bullet weight is king and a 30 caliber in BLK, 7.62X39 or the A-30 sling much heavier bullets.
Greg
|
|
