Thoughts on the .257 Weatherby for these animals?

Big Sky

Feb 26, 2002
Northeast Montana
First off I'm no long range hunter as I haven't developed the skills yet, but it is a goal of mine to extend my range. So please bare with me if I ask some elementry questions. I am currently planning on having a .257 Weatherby built with a 28" SS Pacnor barrel in number 5 contour. Initially I thought about having it fluted but on further contemplation I'm thinking of leaving it alone. It will be built on a Rem. 700 ADL action and bedded in a McMillan stock, possibly the A2? Weight isn't a huge factor but I need to be able to carry it from time to time, so I don't want a rifle that weighs over 15 lbs. My intent is to use the rifle specifically for deer (both mule deer and whitetail) and antelope. It may get some use on coyotes as well if opportunity knocks. I live in the wide open country of eastern Montana, where shots can be from point blank to as far as one cares to shoot. Personally I want to be deadly from 400 to 600 yards. I know that may not impress the experts here, but it's a distance I feel comfortable with starting my adventure into long range shooting. Is there any real draw backs to the .257 Weatherby that I should know of for the intended purposes I have? What would be the maximum range the .257 Weatherby would be considered effective for killing deer sized game? Man, I hate sounding like such a greenhorn, but I got to start somewhere.
Hello Big sky and welcome

The 257 Weatherby will be fine for the ranges you want to be proficient at, 400 to 600 yards.

The problem wuth the 25 cal is a shortage of good higher BC bullets for it. 100 gr is what I used to shoot in mine along with the 25-06 and 25 Gibbs.

Just a suggestion, the 6/5/300 Weatherby with the 140, 142 and 155 Gr Sierra MK (Real good BC) can be made into a fine rifle at 15# or less and will out perform the 257 Weatherby hands down.

Just a thought since you live in an area to reach out further and have the rifle to do it, once you perfect the 400 to 600 yard range.

Good luck with your decision and the 257 will do what you want at 400 to 600 yards which was your original question.

Darryl Cassel

[ 02-28-2002: Message edited by: Darryl Cassel ]
Darryl thanks for the input. I'm pretty set on the .257 Weatherby although I have no doubt your suggestion of the 6.5 would be dandy choice. I had someone email me and suggest using an HTG stock rather than the A2, which also sounds pretty reasonable. Anyone have much experience using the HTG stock?

[ 03-01-2002: Message edited by: Big Sky ]
Big Sky.
This board would be a good place to ask if these guys have there big guns free bored like Weatherby does.
I know where your comming from on this 257 thing,been there.You might try reading about my Booboo over at 24hour.
" TARGET=_blank>[url]</A>

I have built 5 rifles with Mcmillan HTG or general purpose hunting stocks I guess you could say I like them ;-).My last gun I got away from the HTG and went with a High-Tech, saved about a pound.

Big Sky,
If you are a big guy you might find the pistol grip on the A2 a little skimpy - I have fairly big hands and my little finger actually hangs below the grip on my A2. Needs another inch or so. Doesn't do that on the Marksman or HTG stocks. Best fitting heavy McMillan for my hands is the McHale, but it is HEAVY.

In my opinion the Marksman and A-2,3 and 4's are not "carrying stocks" if you are going to hunt much with the rifle. If you really want to try a tactical stock the A-3 is lighter than the A-2 - similar feel.
Good luck. Half the fun is making these decisions.
Dave7mm, thanks that was a good read. I don't know how that one got past me the first time. Ian thank you as well for the input. Decisions, decisions.....!
Big Sky,
Another thought.On several of my GP stocks I had the action skidded forward .5 of an inch
The rear tang of the action does not match the stock exactley like it should.But it doesnt hurt a thing.This gives you a whole lot more room on the grip for your hand.
It works very well.
Warning! This thread is more than 23 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Recent Posts