Traditional twist rate and Bullet design / weight. I'm a fan of the 257 Roberts and the 270 WSM
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
L! You responded to a deleted (banned) member.VarmintBob
Well-Known Member
If there had been a 6.5-06 at the time the 270 was introduced, there would not be a .270 win today. I had a 270 win as my first deer rifle. I built a 6.5-270 a few years ago and it is my favorite rifle now. The 277 caliber has always been an odd duck. 25 cal is a bit small. The Swedes have been shooting through moose a hundred years with the 6.5x55.
wildcat westerner
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2009
- Messages
- 680
I have both 25's and 6.5's. The Ackley book on wildcats had a .25 quick twist cartridge the featured a 1-7 twist barrel and 160 grain bullets back in 1954, I believe. When 1-8 twist barrels virtually did not exist, how the wildcatter ended up with a 1-7 back then is a mystery.
A few thousandths of an inch in bore diameter can be incredible. Back in the 60's Remington sprung the 7mm mag on the public and could not meet the demand. The difference between .264 and .284 was apparent to most hunters at the time and barrel life of the 7mm could be proven to be better. The real reason Remington was so successful is they put their research into the bullets and the Corelokt was excellent for its time. The .264 Win mag languished, by comparison. Nowadays with all the superior 6.5 bullets available, the .264 magnum is a much better cartridge than it ever was back in the 1950's.
A few thousandths of an inch in bore diameter can be incredible. Back in the 60's Remington sprung the 7mm mag on the public and could not meet the demand. The difference between .264 and .284 was apparent to most hunters at the time and barrel life of the 7mm could be proven to be better. The real reason Remington was so successful is they put their research into the bullets and the Corelokt was excellent for its time. The .264 Win mag languished, by comparison. Nowadays with all the superior 6.5 bullets available, the .264 magnum is a much better cartridge than it ever was back in the 1950's.
Bghunter338
Well-Known Member
Can't agree with you any more!!!!
you are correct, however. when did need have anything to do with it? we love diversity!
There were some bad arse wildcatters back then.
Both my .257 WBY and .264 WM has 1:7" built to explore the heavy bullet offerings.
don't know anything about the blackjack , I will be looking it up. but. does it outperform the 26 nosler?
Patton243
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2016
- Messages
- 412
.257 diameter offers nothing IMO compared to what a 6mm or 6.5mm cartridges can do. Are .257s bad? No. I just see no point in getting one when the other diameters clearly have better bullet selections and more aftermarket support these days.
mono bullets are not solids
I have read all the posts on this one and had to grin from ear to ear reading some of the comments, so I figured what the heck, I would give my 2 cents too. I own a custom 257AI built on a WWII Mauser action, a custom AR variant of a 6.5 Creed, and an off the shelf 260 Rem carbine. All 3 shoot sub-minute of angle and at 100 yds less than a 1/4" groups. I bought the 257AI for hunting in Europe and small Tx Hill Country deer as a good friend had a 257AI Winchester Featherweight that was both deadly and very accurate. Between the 3 guns I have killed well over a hundred wild pigs (many at night), dozens of Roe Deer, and other critters. I like the right tool for the job so any bigger game I use one of my 7mm or 300s. Anything past 600 yds the same thing. I feel that if we are going to hunt we owe the critters one shot clean kills. With the exception of hunting in Africa I have seldom had any critter go far after being hit. So where am I going with this? To me all 3 calibers are very similar in both recoil and terminal performance. I prefer my 257AI because I have a sentimental attachment to it and have experienced amazing hits. I hit one Roe deer quartered away from me going into a rib. He dropped on the spot and was literally field dressed due to the broken rib slicing his belly open and no single organ still in tact. At up to 600yd I don't see any real performance or accuracy differences between the 257 vs the other 2 guns. That having been said, I have switched over the Remington 260 over the other 2. The main reason is as I get older I like carrying the lightweight rifle over distances. Also it is a relatively cheap gun (compared to my customs) so I don't mind the abuse it gets in the field nearly as much. It is also easier to bring up on the fly if I need to get off a fast shot. In summation, I think all 3 are similar and will get the done. As seen in this post, you can argue one over the other and go back and forth but in the end unless you are getting down to true ballistic technical data all 3 are close and will get the job done so go buy all 3 like I did and pick your favorite, LOL.
The 131 Black Jack is a bullet, 26 Nosler is a cartridge.
Remington has a history of flopping with their cartridge design. 6mm & 280 being prime examples. With a little more forethought the 260 would have been well intrenched and the 6.5C would still be a cartridge for matches only.And if Remington would have come out with a 6.5-06 in 1970 instead of the 25-06, we wouldn't even be talking about this!
If I were starting from scratch, I'd pick 25 cal over 6mm or 6.5 for a short action cartridge. If you compare using modern bullets, there are advantages on both ends of the ballistic spectrum - in velocity and in BC. Here's a quick comparison for reference:
I used conservative velocities here, at 5000ft elevation, 50 degrees, 60% humidity, 30.01Hg
It requires a 3000 fps MV (6.5 PRC speeds) from the 6.5 to have similar energy to the 135 Hyb in 25 Creedmoor.
I used conservative velocities here, at 5000ft elevation, 50 degrees, 60% humidity, 30.01Hg
It requires a 3000 fps MV (6.5 PRC speeds) from the 6.5 to have similar energy to the 135 Hyb in 25 Creedmoor.
Last edited:
Recent Posts
-
-
Let’s see your custom 6.5-300 Weatherby/6.5 Weatherby/Wright/Hoyer- Latest: Aussie Hunter Steve
-
-
-
