• If you are being asked to change your password, and unsure how to do it, follow these instructions. Click here

Short barreled 257 Wby

I had a guy build me a custom .300 Win with a short barrel (22") and an Ultra 5 suppressor. When it's time for a new barrel, I'll be going 2" longer.

The problem would only be magnified in a .257 Wby. For a hunting cartridge, it's hard to come up with something more overbore than this one. Looooong barrels & sloooow powder are the way to go.
 
There's a lot of really misinformed opinions here.

A 22" 257 Weatherby with still be faster than a 26" 25-06. Anyone who'd be happy with the performance of a 26" 25-06 would be just as happy with the performance of a 22" 257 Weatherby, plus have a more packable rifle.
 
wytail said:
My bad, I directed my question to you1/4-bore, when it should have gone to Feenix. My apologies. Hey Feenix, What velocity are you getting with the 131's with your suppressor? TIA.
Click to expand...
Sorry, but I jumped to the 145s instead. There is not much information, and I just wanted to establish a baseline. I am getting 2954/2956 FPS on my initial range time with 64.5 MAGPRO - load development is still in progress. I am just trying out powders that I already have open.
 
What's the length and G7 Bc of the BH 145s?

I don't understand how you create a website promoting long range bullets but don't list the length or BC for them. It would probably save them thousands of phone calls and emails.
 
Frank in the Laurels said:
..not to short, you'll defeat the purpose of all that powder....switch over to the 25/06 if you go much below 24 inches, it'll save you a lot of powder and you'll get tge same basic velocity...
Click to expand...

This. All that unburnt powder is going to result in a lot of excess muzzle blast, recoil, and flash.

If you want to go short go down to something like the CM or 25-06 and leave the WBY as is.
 
Last edited:
FEENIX said:
This!
Click to expand...
yorke-1 said:
There's a lot of really misinformed opinions here.

A 22" 257 Weatherby with still be faster than a 26" 25-06. Anyone who'd be happy with the performance of a 26" 25-06 would be just as happy with the performance of a 22" 257 Weatherby, plus have a more packable rifle.
Click to expand...
Before you bandy about people posting misinformed opinion might I suggest you actually look at a loading manual. Almost all list 2506 at 24" and 257 Bee at 26" Despite that, and with burning 15 to 20 percent more powder, the Bee has between 100 and 150 fps advantage over the 2506. Cutting a 2506 by 2 inches to 22" while cutting the 257 4 inches means there will be very little real world velocity difference between the two at the shorter length. The 2506 is already a lot overbore, the 257 is even more overbore, so both will have significant muzzle blast and it gets worse the shorter you make them.

If I wanted a 20 or 22" quarter bore I would build a 25 284. Way less powder than either, less muzzle blast, easier to suppress, same speed as the 2506, light recoil and fits on a short action.
 
Dean2 said:
Before you bandy about people posting misinformed opinion might I suggest you actually look at a loading manual. Almost all list 2506 at 24" and 257 Bee at 26" Despite that, and with burning 15 to 20 percent more powder, the Bee has between 100 and 150 fps advantage over the 2506. Cutting a 2506 by 2 inches to 22" while cutting the 257 4 inches means there will be very little real world velocity difference between the two at the shorter length. The 2506 is already a lot overboard, the 257 is even more overboard, so both will have significant muzzle blast and it gets worse the shorter you make them.

If I wanted a 20 or 22" quarter bore I would build a 25 284. Way less powder than either, less muzzle blast, easier to suppress, same speed as the 2506, light recoil and fits on a short action.
Click to expand...
No argument about the practicality of a 25-284 but this comparison between the 25-06 and the 257 bee is skewed I think.

You'd have to be pretty selective in what data and ammo you'd look at to make a case that a 25-06 is only 100-150 fps slower and out of 2 inches less barrel. That's a 25-06 loaded to
The gills and a "lawyered up" .257 weatherby:

Nosler load data for weatherby cArtridges is especially ridiculous in how underpowered they make them look: probably the only way they can claim that the .30 Nosler OUTPERFORMS the .300 weatherby with a straight face 🤣

They don't water down cartridges like the 270 win, 25-06 rem, or even my .300 win mag too bad….it's caused me to ask

"what's in it for them to hamstring all the weatherby cartridges they have data for?"

I have a theory….🤣🤣🤣
 
Calvin45 said:
No argument about the practicality of a 25-284 but this comparison between the 25-06 and the 257 bee is skewed I think.

You'd have to be pretty selective in what data and ammo you'd look at to make a case that a 25-06 is only 100-150 fps slower and out of 2 inches less barrel. That's a 25-06 loaded to
The gills and a "lawyered up" .257 weatherby:

Nosler load data for weatherby cArtridges is especially ridiculous in how underpowered they make them look: probably the only way they can claim that the .30 Nosler OUTPERFORMS the .300 weatherby with a straight face 🤣

They don't water down cartridges like the 270 win, 25-06 rem, or even my .300 win mag too bad….it's caused me to ask

"what's in it for them to hamstring all the weatherby cartridges they have data for?"

I have a theory….🤣🤣🤣
Click to expand...
I use Hodgdon Data because they tend to be agnostic. I have a 257 bee and had a 25 06. I know my load development data shows no more than 200 fps difference, both are 26 inch barrels, even on the light bullets. I do however keep my loads below the ragged edge on all loads because I want reliable hunting rounds that extract well in all temperatures. I have a lot of Weatherby cartridges and do really love them, but they just aren't what I would make a 20 inch mountain rifle out of. Guy has to take max advantage of what a cartridge capacity provides and 70 grains of powder out of a 22 inch barrel isn't doing that but to each their own. I never tell others they have to do what I do, just try to help by providing my hands on experience vs what is so often Google info.
 
Dean2 said:
I use Hodgdon Data because they tend to be agnostic. I have a 257 bee and had a 25 06. I know my load development data shows no more than 200 fps difference, both are 26 inch barrels, even on the light bullets. I do however keep my loads below the ragged edge on all loads because I want reliable hunting rounds that extract well in all temperatures. I have a lot of Weatherby cartridges and do really love them, but they just aren't what I would make a 20 inch mountain rifle out of. Guy has to take max advantage of what a cartridge capacity provides and 70 grains of powder out of a 22 inch barrel isn't doing that but to each their own. I never tell others they have to do what I do, just try to help by providing my hands on experience vs what is so often Google info.
Click to expand...
Fair enough man. I also wouldn't make a 20 inch wby as id worry about my eyebrows igniting haha!
I also find hodgdon the least biased but they're pretty conservative on a lot
Of cartridges.
 
Do it and run ur can. Then build a longer barreled one and have both if you want. I love my short barrels. I have an 18" 338 lapua i run a tbac 338 on and it is edited.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

T
Powders for Short Barrel Magnum
2
Replies
14
Views
3K
teejj
T
redchinviking
  • Poll
How long is your short barrel?
3 4 5
Replies
56
Views
5K
Damage Inc.
Damage Inc.
OG-danimal
Short barrel 7mm
2
Replies
21
Views
2K
CCAguns
CCAguns
W
Short barrel 33?
2
Replies
16
Views
6K
808mike
808mike
C
Short barrel ballistics
Replies
9
Views
9K
1300meters
1

Recent Posts

Top