.257 weatherby mag
- Thread starter triton
- Start date
In a Mark V where you get the long freebore (so you can seat bullets out and pack the case with powder), and 26" pipe, it make sense. In a 24" barrel, there's just not enough difference between it and the .25-06 or .257 Improved to turn my crank. YMMV, but that's a LOT of extra powder you're burning for 100-150 fps...
Fassteel said:
That isn't even the max load for the 257 with that bullet, its RL25 at 3528, which is over 200fps
Barnes reloading manual Maximum loads, highest fps selected
100 gr XLC
25-06 3424 imr4831
257 3756 reloader 25
115 XFB
25-06 3043 reloader 22
257 3316 reloader 22
5th Edition Nosler Manual Maximum loads, highest fps selected
120 gr Partition
25-06 3090 IMR 4831
257 3402 IMR 4831
100 gr Partition
25-06 3352 IMR4350
257 3602 AA3100
Try selecting max for each cartridge, not max load for one and non maximum for the 257. Still 200-300 fps in most circumstances. Which powder works best for the 25-06 is not necessarily the same one that works best in the 257, don't compare a certain powder, compare a max load for each. The 257 is a magnum cartridge, the 25-06 is not. It burns more powder and with is carries more recoil and muzzleblast. For the 257 I would select a premium bullet such as Nosler Partition or the Barnes.
If you handload, the 257 is a superior cartridge. If you don't handload buy the 25-06. There is nothing wrong with the 25-06. If you are handloading the difference is price is minor. I got brass for my 257 that has been loaded over 10 times, the Weatherby brass is built by Norma. Costs 70 bucks vice 30 for the 25-06 (for a 50 pack). I don't use enough brass to make a difference. If you are shooting that much and going thru that much brass, then buy the 25-06.
I can't see shooting that many rounds at the range with a Magnum to burn out a barrel, if you want a target rifle, pick another smaller caliber. If its for hunting, you will never burn out the barrel in your life. You don't have to load it to maximum it depends on what you are hunting, for range practice, it does not have to be loaded that hot. The 300 win mag shooting 130gr XLCs push 3600 fps, I haven't heard of them burning barrels. The standard 223 using 40gr XLCs pushes 3900fps. Is the 223 listed as a really barrel burner?
Its really going to come down to which rifle you want, unless you want a Weatherby you are not getting a 257 without rebarrelling something. And in a Weatherby they make the 257 and not the 25-06 except for the Ultra Lightweight and the Mark v Synthetic. Vanguard only makes the 257.
I had a 25-06 which was a nice rifle, but ended up traded up to the 257 and haven't been happier. The case for the 257 Weatherby is the exact same case as the 270 wby and 7mm wby. Its just necked down. Look at your reloading manual. The 7mm wby is hotter than the 7mm Rem mag, so it should give you a good idea of the case capacity over the 25-06.
Here is a 5 shot grouping out my my Vanguard, out of the box with no work done to it.
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a344/mylesrom/120Nosler-65gr7828.jpg
Last edited:
stubblejumper said:
Try Nosler Reloader Number five 115 Partition
25-06 3116 IMR 4831 52.0 grs Highest fps listed for the 115grs
257 3433 IMR 7828 69.0 grs
even at 3197fps listed in manual 4, which is not listed in manual 5 that is still over 235fps difference, not 88fps
These figures that I published early are correct. If 200-300 fps aren't important to you, then buy the 25-06. Less recoil
You should also look at bullet energy levels, taken from Barnes Manual muzzle energy and (200 yards)
100 gr Bullet
25-06 2288 (1655)
257 2629 (1929)
115 gr bullet
25-06 2310(1680)
257 2750 (2021)
Last edited:
My data is also correct.
However in both cases the nosler data(and the other manuals that I quoted) uses a 26" barrel for the 257wby and a 24" barrel for the 25-06.Since your vanguard only has a 24" barrel ,your velocities will be 80fps to 100fps less than the velocities posted in the manual.That 235fps will therefore become 135fps to 155fps.Coincidently 150fps is the number that several people have posted here.
Last edited:
stubblejumper said:
The Nosler is tested with a 26" barrel in the wby, but the Barnes data are both tested with a 24" barrel, not a 26" barrel, so the 300 fps stands for the Barnes data. So the figures are correct and comparable. Burning 15grs of extra powder is going to make a difference in velocity. The stats are in Barnes manual.
Last edited:
For the record,I have actually owned a 257wby,a mark V ,fibremark with a 26" barrel.My own rifle produced right around 3550fps with the 100gr partition,but accuracy was nothing special despite a great deal of load development.After several hundred rounds,I had it rebarreled with a match grade stainless barrel with much less freebore,and bedded the action.The result was a maximum of 3500fps but it became an honest sub 1/2" shooter.I certainly have nothing against the 257wby,but it does need a 26" barrel tp reach published velocities,and even then the gain over the 25-06 will not be nuch of an advantage to the average hunter.After owning two mark Vs,I am also unimpressed with the accuracy that they delivered in stock form.The vanguard is a great value for the price,but it should have a 26" barrel when chambered in the weatherby cartridges.
:
I have owned 3 Vanguards, all have been excellent shooters. The best being the 257, but I had to try 4 different loads to find one it really liked. Check the link to the target I posted below, its a 5 shot grouping. Took two Whitetails with it last year. Absolutely nothing has been done to the rifle. Since the data in the barnes manual is listed with a 24" barrel, I have to assume you are really not losing that much by shooting the Vanguard. Plus at 499.00 for the sythetic black, I think you are getting a lot of rifle in a 257 Wby. I have shot the 200 stevens in 25-06 and to me it kicked worse than my 257 in the Weatherby. Due to stock design and a hockey puck for a recoil pad. With the equivalent stock and recoil pad the 25-06 will kick less of course.
Its the same argument of does the 300 win mag have a real world advantage over the 30-06?? Are the deer really going to notice a difference. I doubt it. If you are one gun hunter and mainly hunting deer and every few years you wish to go after an ELK on occasion, the 257 would be a better choice than the 25-06. 300 ft pounds of energy would be appreciated. Its hitting just as hard as the 270 win in Engery.......Granted there are better choices. If you have a 30 cal, then that is preferable...
I like the Mark V's, however at about 3 times the price difference, you are not getting 3 times the accuracy. The Vanguards are able to shoot as well or close to the Mark V's. However, the Mark V's are a higher quality rifle.
As with any brand, its possible to have a 600 dollar rifle outshoot a 1500 dollar rifle. But we were comparing cartridges not rifles.:beerchug:
If you handload buy the 257...... If you don't I wouldn't buy it.
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a344/mylesrom/120Nosler-65gr7828.jpg
stubblejumper said:
I have owned 3 Vanguards, all have been excellent shooters. The best being the 257, but I had to try 4 different loads to find one it really liked. Check the link to the target I posted below, its a 5 shot grouping. Took two Whitetails with it last year. Absolutely nothing has been done to the rifle. Since the data in the barnes manual is listed with a 24" barrel, I have to assume you are really not losing that much by shooting the Vanguard. Plus at 499.00 for the sythetic black, I think you are getting a lot of rifle in a 257 Wby. I have shot the 200 stevens in 25-06 and to me it kicked worse than my 257 in the Weatherby. Due to stock design and a hockey puck for a recoil pad. With the equivalent stock and recoil pad the 25-06 will kick less of course.
Its the same argument of does the 300 win mag have a real world advantage over the 30-06?? Are the deer really going to notice a difference. I doubt it. If you are one gun hunter and mainly hunting deer and every few years you wish to go after an ELK on occasion, the 257 would be a better choice than the 25-06. 300 ft pounds of energy would be appreciated. Its hitting just as hard as the 270 win in Engery.......Granted there are better choices. If you have a 30 cal, then that is preferable...
I like the Mark V's, however at about 3 times the price difference, you are not getting 3 times the accuracy. The Vanguards are able to shoot as well or close to the Mark V's. However, the Mark V's are a higher quality rifle.
As with any brand, its possible to have a 600 dollar rifle outshoot a 1500 dollar rifle. But we were comparing cartridges not rifles.:beerchug:
If you handload buy the 257...... If you don't I wouldn't buy it.
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a344/mylesrom/120Nosler-65gr7828.jpg
Last edited:
All loading data aside since the posted velocities are seldom what is produced in most factory rifles anyway.Let's talk actual velocities.What do your loads chronograph in your rifle?As I stated in my previous post,my factory mark V with 26" barrel produced 3550fps with the 100gr partition in stock form.Any hotter loads resulted in loose primer pockets after only a few firings.My friends 25-06 with 24" barrel,produced 3325fps with the same 100gr partition over the same chronograph.Therefore we have a difference of 225fps with the 2" difference in barrel length.If the 257wby barrel was 24",the difference would again be in the 125fps to 145fps range.Again very close to 150fps.
The reality is that theoretical book velocities mean little,if your load in your rifle won't produce them.Then again,I have seen amazing velocities produced in rifles,that were far above the normal,but the result was very short brass life and pressure signs that were very evident to any experienced handloader.Of course this applies to all rifles in all chamberings.It does however explain some of the velocities that do get posted.
The reality is that theoretical book velocities mean little,if your load in your rifle won't produce them.Then again,I have seen amazing velocities produced in rifles,that were far above the normal,but the result was very short brass life and pressure signs that were very evident to any experienced handloader.Of course this applies to all rifles in all chamberings.It does however explain some of the velocities that do get posted.
Last edited:
I realize that two rifles is a small sample, however I know two guys who have 257 Wby rifles. One is a 26" Bevan King barrel on Savage 110, the other a Vanguard with a factory 24" bbl.
The Savage will get 100 gr bullets way over 3700 fps, the Vanguard more than 3600 with Re25 and Re22.
In both rifles the primer pockets remain tight with repeated reloadings and no case head expansion, and have been shooting these loads for years.
Ted
The Savage will get 100 gr bullets way over 3700 fps, the Vanguard more than 3600 with Re25 and Re22.
In both rifles the primer pockets remain tight with repeated reloadings and no case head expansion, and have been shooting these loads for years.
Ted
Last edited:
stubblejumper said:
look at the Manual, with 100 gr Partitions
25-06 3352
257 3602 is the highest most being closer to your 3550. So you guys seem to be getting almost exactly what the manual states. So the manuals seem to be quite accurate.
70fps per in of barrel. Where are you getting that data from. Most data I have run across lists 20-40 per inch depending on the round. That is 40 to 80 fps.
QUOTE:
Jack O'Connor wrote in The Rifle Book that, "The barrel shorter than standard has a velocity loss which averages about 25 foot-seconds for every inch cut off the barrel. Likewise, there is a velocity gain with a longer barrel." He went on to illustrate this using a .30-06 rifle shooting 180 grain bullets as an example, so his estimate was obviously for rifles in that general performance class.
Other authorities have tried to take into account the different velocity ranges within which modern cartridges operate. The Remington Catalog 2003 includes a "Centerfire Rifle Velocity Vs. Barrel Length" table that shows the following velocity changes for barrels shorter or longer than the test barrel length:
MV 2000-2500 fps, the approximate change in MV per 1" change in barrel length is 10 fps.
MV 2500-3000 fps, the approximate change in MV per 1" change in barrel length is 20 fps.
MV 3000-3500 fps, the approximate change in MV per 1" change in barrel length is 30 fps.
MV 3500-4000 fps, the approximate change in MV per 1" change in barrel length is 40 fps.
The 45th Edition of the Lyman Reloading Handbook also has a table showing Center Fire Rifle Velocity Vs. Barrel Length. Their figures apply to barrels between 20 and 26 inches in length and agree with the Remington figures. The Lyman table shows the following approximate velocity changes:
For rifles with muzzle velocities in the 1000-2000 fps range, the change in velocity for each 1" change in barrel length is 5 fps.
For rifles with muzzle velocities in the 2001-2500 fps range, the change in velocity for each 1" change in barrel length is 10 fps.
For rifles with muzzle velocities in the 2501-3000 fps range, the change in velocity for each 1" change in barrel length is 20 fps.
For rifles with muzzle velocities in the 3001-3500 fps range, the change in velocity for each 1" change in barrel length is 30 fps.
For rifles with muzzle velocities in the 3501-4000 fps range, the change in velocity for each 1" change in barrel length is 40 fps.
The 43rd edition of the Lyman reloading Handbook gave some concrete examples of velocity loss for specific calibers and loads. The Lyman technicians chronographed some high velocity cartridges in rifles with barrels ranging in length from 26" down to 22" with the following results:
The average loss for the .243 Win./100 grain bullet was 29 fps per inch.The average loss for the .264 Win. Mag./140 grain bullet was 32 fps per inch.
The average loss for the .300 H&H Mag./220 grain bullet was 25 fps per inch.
For standard high intensity cartridges in the same test, the Lyman technicians chronographed the cartridges in barrel lengths ranging in length from 24" down to 20" with the following results:
The average loss for the .270 Win./130 grain bullet was 37 fps per inch.The average loss for the .270 Win./150 grain bullet was 32 fps per inch.
The average loss for the .300 Sav./180 grain bullet was 17 fps per inch.
The average loss for the .30-06/180 grain bullet was 15 fps per inch.
The average loss for the .35 Rem./200 grain bullet was 11 fps per inch.
So in the barnes manual, both use a 24" barrel, with a 300 fps difference. Why are you still assuming this is not accurate. The data in Nosler is, so why wouldn't the Barnes Data be the same. Is Barnes just pulling this data out of a hat..... Nosler data is accurate in the real world, I will assume the Barnes data is also just as accurate.
Last edited:
I never stated 70fps per inch of barrel.
What I stated was
The difference between the 25-06 and 257wby was 225fps with 2" difference in barrel.If you subtract 80fps to 100fps(40fps-50-fps per inch of barrel x 2") to account for the 2" shorter barrel on the vanguard,the difference between the 25-06 and the 257wby is now 125fps to 145fps.
The three manuals that I quoted as well as your own nolser data show a minimum of 88fps difference,and a maximum of 300fps difference,and an average of about 200fps difference between the 25-06 and the 257wby, with the 257wby having 2" more barrel.Now subtract that 80fps(2" x 40fps per inch of barrel) and you end up with 120fps.Yet Barnes claims 300fps difference with both having 24" barrels.So you have four reputable manuals that would indicate a difference of less than 150fps,and one manual that claims 300fps.That makes it four against one.Which manuals would a logical person choose to believe would most closely represent the normal velocity differences that you could expect to see between these two cartridges?Do you even own a chronograph?You haven't provided any actual data from your rifle.The fact is,that unless you have chronographed your loads ,in your rifle,you really do not know what velocity you are producing,or how accurate anyones velocity data is for your rifle.Those people that do own chronographs,have learned not to trust any velocities posted in manuals,as the velocities produced in their own guns,are often quite different,sometimes up to 200fps or more.
Last edited:
stubblejumper said:
Right, and it works both ways!
Often the velocities shown in loading manuals are considerably lower than what one actually gets when shooting the exact loads shown in the manual.
If you have chronographed many loads, I am sure you have experienced this as well.
Ted
stubblejumper said:
You have stated not to trust a manual yet your own chrono has proved it to be accurate for the Noslers. Yes I own a chrono. with 120 Partitions and 65 grs of 7823 the manual states 3206 and I was getting 3164. with 67 grains of 7828 the nosler manual states 3312 and I got 3267. So that works out to be 30 - 40fps for 2 inches of barrel length. 2" of barrel makes a very little difference.
And as you stated I am sure the Barnes manual must be full of sh**... Why do you assume the info for the 25-06 is correct in the manuals but the 257 is inaccurate and inflated. Wouldn't they both be equally inflated.
.
Again from the Nosler manual 5th Edition
120 Partitions
25-06 3090fps Fastest load listed
257 Weatherby 3402 Fastest load listed
Now knock off 70fps for the 2" of barrel according the the average provided above still gives you 250fps difference.
This is from the Nosler manual which you stated is accurate.
Triton, get whichever caliber floats your boat and whatever rifle you prefer. Go read other sites, reviews and data. Make your own decision. Either caliber is a solid choice for deer and you won't be disappointed with either one.
Last edited:
Actually you stated that,not me.
So the highest velocity that you are posting for your rifle with a 120gr bullet is 3267fps?That is a long ways from the velocity that Barnes is quoting.And it is about 160fps more than my friends 25-06 produces with the 120gr partition.Again that is very close to 150fps difference.
