Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Range report with 257 and 270 Allen Magnums....
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="brianwinzor" data-source="post: 59522" data-attributes="member: 1067"><p>Fifty, Great to hear a progress report on the 257 AM, and that you are achieving your velocity goals. 3725 fps with the 130 grain bullet would certainly be a potent package, and it will interesting to see what the 156 grain ULD achieves. </p><p></p><p>I was also interested in what is the maximum length that your REM 700 long action magazine will take and still feed reliably, and was that a restricting factor when you throated the 257AM. Also, about how far below the neck shoulder junction do the 130 grain and 156 grain bullets protrude.</p><p></p><p>You mentioned that you worked up to 94 grains of 8700 with the 156 ULD, and was interested what were the maximum loads of 8700 with the 130 and 115 grain bullets. Also, what was the approximate loading density you believe the maximum loads represent. </p><p></p><p>The reason for my question is that with the 257 AM holding 123 grains of 8700, and the .250 neck holding about 4- 5 grains, it would leave about 118 grains below the neck, (less the amount occupied by the protruding bullet) and I was trying to work out what the real usable space was.</p><p></p><p>A question on case design philosophy, and not a criticism of your design. You mentioned in a previous post that the 257 AM had a neck of .250 inches, which for a case of this size to me seemed less than I would have preferred, bearing in mind that 25/06 has a neck length of .308 inches, and the .257 Roberts about .321 inches. </p><p></p><p>I realise that there has always been considerable debate on the pros and cons of neck length, and wondered whether you had any specific reason for choosing a .250 neck.</p><p></p><p>I agree that 8700 would be the powder of choice, and it is reassuring that it shoots accurately in the 3 bullet weights. However, the lack of loading flexibility with other powders is a potential concern, especially if there are availability problems with 8700.(ie.not available in OZ)I have a good supply of H870, but remember reading on Hodgdon's website that the H870 and AA8700 are not the same powder with different labels.</p><p></p><p>Although I have placed an order with Richard for some 224 and 257 bullets, I can now understand your vocal support for both he and his bullets. One aspect that impresses me, is that he continually seems prepared to make changes to the initial design until he believes he has got it right.</p><p></p><p>I look forward to hearing further progress reports, and as a wildcatter from way back, it is great to see and hear reports from someone who is prepared to push and test the existing boundaries. Good luck, Brian.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="brianwinzor, post: 59522, member: 1067"] Fifty, Great to hear a progress report on the 257 AM, and that you are achieving your velocity goals. 3725 fps with the 130 grain bullet would certainly be a potent package, and it will interesting to see what the 156 grain ULD achieves. I was also interested in what is the maximum length that your REM 700 long action magazine will take and still feed reliably, and was that a restricting factor when you throated the 257AM. Also, about how far below the neck shoulder junction do the 130 grain and 156 grain bullets protrude. You mentioned that you worked up to 94 grains of 8700 with the 156 ULD, and was interested what were the maximum loads of 8700 with the 130 and 115 grain bullets. Also, what was the approximate loading density you believe the maximum loads represent. The reason for my question is that with the 257 AM holding 123 grains of 8700, and the .250 neck holding about 4- 5 grains, it would leave about 118 grains below the neck, (less the amount occupied by the protruding bullet) and I was trying to work out what the real usable space was. A question on case design philosophy, and not a criticism of your design. You mentioned in a previous post that the 257 AM had a neck of .250 inches, which for a case of this size to me seemed less than I would have preferred, bearing in mind that 25/06 has a neck length of .308 inches, and the .257 Roberts about .321 inches. I realise that there has always been considerable debate on the pros and cons of neck length, and wondered whether you had any specific reason for choosing a .250 neck. I agree that 8700 would be the powder of choice, and it is reassuring that it shoots accurately in the 3 bullet weights. However, the lack of loading flexibility with other powders is a potential concern, especially if there are availability problems with 8700.(ie.not available in OZ)I have a good supply of H870, but remember reading on Hodgdon's website that the H870 and AA8700 are not the same powder with different labels. Although I have placed an order with Richard for some 224 and 257 bullets, I can now understand your vocal support for both he and his bullets. One aspect that impresses me, is that he continually seems prepared to make changes to the initial design until he believes he has got it right. I look forward to hearing further progress reports, and as a wildcatter from way back, it is great to see and hear reports from someone who is prepared to push and test the existing boundaries. Good luck, Brian. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Range report with 257 and 270 Allen Magnums....
Top