I've been saving up for a long range bean field / western type gun. I'd pretty much decided on a Accumark in 257 Wtby.

Last weekend I was in a gun store and noticed a Ruger all-weather stainless M77 in 264 Winchester Magnum. I did not know they were making these in this caliber. It has a 24" tube. I don't have too much experiance with Ruger rifles but really like their scope mounting system. The gun looks nice enough.

My questions are which of these two would be better for plains / mountain hunting of antlope, mule deer and the like, maybe even elk? Will the Ruger likely be accurate enough for long range work? I guess I really like the price break on the Ruger over the Accumark but I don't want to spend too little and kick myself later. I handload ammo and will for this rifle so cost of ammo is not that big of a deal. The 264 round looks good enough on paper but I have to ask myself why it mostly disappeared. Is it inaccurate, too loud, kicks like a mule or what?

Thanks for any insights.

don't know about the 257 Weatherby, and I just got my 264 back from the shop today, haven't ever gotten enough time to really play with it. The story of the 264 is that it is a good round, just almost too much case for the bore dia., is that underbore? Anyways, the 7mm came out and was pushed very hard, had some writers talking it up, and outstripped the 264 in popularity. They hold on with some guys, I was always intrigued by it, love the way it looks. To me it is like an exotic sportscar.

Now, if I can get mine to frickin' take reloaded ammo I'll be set.

Red

Both are great rounds, if you plan on using the gun more for varmits, take the 257, if you plan to use it more for big game, take the 264. I have a M700 rem in 264 and with 140 grain bullets over max loads of H870 it will do 3250 fps and has a laser like trajectory. Mine will shoot 1 inch 3 shot groups all day long...but forget about shooting 5 shot groups unless you are willing to let the barrel cool first!

regards,
Graycg

The .264 had alot off bad press abot being a barrel burner & then Win. cut the bbl. on thee factory rifles to 22" & perf. suffered. If the .264 is overbore then the .257 definetly is. Either will be a great plains rifle for deer / antelope but if I were even thinking of elk, then I would go w/ the .264One of htose really long 140gr NPs @ 3100fps would do an elk in. For a varminter/deer combo, I'ld drop to a .257Roberts or .25-06.

I'd also really prefer a 26" barrel for either of these rounds. - dan

i am guessing it would be about like comparing the 270 to the 280. case volume, length etc are about the same. ballistics are close and both require a 26" tube to get the most.
the win brass is cheaper! 6.5 bullet selection is better but if it is a hunting gun primarily then that argument is void. the 25 has a great selection also. if elk are a strong possibilty the 6.5 goes a little farther in favor of larger bullets but the 25 will still drop em'.
if your budget allows you can grab a 700 in 7 mag for $300 or so and rebarrel in your flavor. with a nice stock you should get there for $1000 or less and have a top quality rig!
good luck and happy shootin'
woofer

The .257 Weatherby in an Accumark is one of my all time dream rifles. They have the best of everything and the performance speaks for itself. Nothing else comes close. 100 grain Partitions at 3700-3800 are THEE definition of flat shooting.

In my opinion the 264 is just a weak 7 Mag with about the same recoil. The real appeal of going to the 25 caliber rifle is the minimal recoil. I limp wrist my 25-06 AI and it only kicks a bit more than my 22-250 Varminter.

The cost is what helped me decide.
Ruger Mark 2 all weather in 25-06. $420 on sale (They come with the magnum 24� barrel profile)
Hogue Overmolded stock $89. Nice pillar bedding and is a joy to handle.
Home made target trigger job $0. Breaks at a crisp clean 32 ounces every time.
Sold skeletonized plastic canoe paddle for <$40>
Action trued, lugs lapped and barrel rechamber to 25-06 AI $125
I polished the action to a chrome finish myself and it looks really sharp with the brushed finish on the barrel.


Total rifle that shoots .3�s with 75 grain V-Maxes going 3950 fps and 100 grain Partitions at 3550 into .4�s cost me $594

Now add on a Leupold VX-II 6-18 AO off E-bay NIB for $325 and I have my bases covered from digger squirrels to deer. I take this rifle everywhere and have made the most amazing shots with it. I just love the way that Hogue stock feels. The 24" barrel is a nice handy length too. I am now having a hard time justifying an Accumark for $1200+ even though I already have a Burris BD 8-32 for it in the safe. I don�t think I would ever shoot it.

The AI shoots cheap brass and I load full house loads for fire forming and they shoot super so I never loose a lick. Some of my brass have been loaded 20 times now and with the regular 25-06 Lee Collet dies they just don�t seem to grow or split.

Ballistically they seem about the same. I have an ultralighweight 257wby and love it. A 100gr Nosler Partition at nearly 3700 fps is a antelope/mule deer's worst nightmare. If you want an elk, a 120gr Swift A-frame or a 115 Barnes Triple Shock should take care of any elk under 250 yards.
If this is your dream gun, I would go with the 257 and never look back. However, if you're indifferent as to the exact caliber, given the price break and very similar ballistics, I would go with the 264.
Good luck.

From my point of view they both can be moved along quite fast with the lightweights (100's). And both would work great for deer and lopes with such a load. (check out what a 264 with a good 100 grainer will run, I'd guess it to run quite hard as well)

Next, I'd say I'd be for betting on a Ruger being more accurate than a Wby each and every day and twice on Sundays.

Lastly, to me there are no flies on either for elk. Yeah I do believe that the 264 with those 140's have quite an edge on the 120/25 combo. But both will work just fine.

And lastly if one is patient and takes a good broadside or a shot with a slight quarter away that 120/25 combo will work to a heck of a lot more distance than 250 yards...

Just my thoughts.

Dogz

Depends on what you wanna spend I guess........there are quite a few good used .264 s floating around that can be bought for a song. And contrary to some popular opinions , the .264 works just fine in a 24 inch barrel . 120 s at 3400 fps is no problem and hangs right in there with nearly any other flat shootng load in any caliber . Also with the lighter bullets , the .264 doesn't kick anything like a 7 mag. I doubt you can tell the difference blindfolded between the 257 or 264 .



A 257 is going to be a custom job or a Mark 5 , either quite a little more money than a used .264 . I do think the Vanguard is going to be coming out in .257 though......a good rifle but I believe it's going to have a 24 inch barrel and you might not quite get those real fancy speeds. I do think you would have to lean on the .257 pretty hard to get those 37 to 3800 numbers......

Thanks for the responces. I have a 300 Wtby so the elk issue is not a huge one. I have never had good accuratcy with lighter bullets (less then 200 grain) with my 300. Obviously this much reduces the versitility I expected from the gun and is some of the driving force for this project. It's a Vangard, but I always wondered if it has more to do with the freebore that Weatherby rounds have then the quality of the gun. With fully loaded 200 gr A-frames it will shoot 1" at 100 yrds if you keep it cool. I've tried a lot of recipes for 150's and 165's and none were accurate enough for ethical long range shooting on game, at least to my standards.

I read in the load books that the .264 usually has very short troats. Should I expect better propability for accuratcy from a standard troated round then a freebored one? Or will a 257 Wtby be the tack driver they claim it is? Having been down this road, I have no problems giving up a little performance, or paying more if I can get a round / rifle that is less "fussy". Any first hand experiance with either of these setups?

Thanks again.

Both are hot rods.The ballistics of the 6.5mm 140gr are great.For almost that level of performace without the overbore headaches,a simple 270Win is the answer.I went with a 264,and is it fun to load! I should think 257Wea be more of a challenge.Either rifle barrel to be must be both fast and super accurate to be worth the effort.

A couple of more of my thoughts on this. First off there is a lot of guns that I would use the term tack driver, but that and Wby is not something I'd be for saying. They will shoot to their 1.5" guarantee and sometimes much better, but I do believe one can do much better for a lot less cheese!

Now as to the speed thing of a 24" vs 26". A while back for giggles (it is a long story) but I took a 26" 5 weight Schenider 257 Wby tube and cut it to 23". My good math tells me that is a 3" deduct. The b4 and after speeds came to about 92 fps difference if I recall right. That'd be about 30 fps per inch. Honestly I don't sweat the whole tube length thing much other than for feel. But to me it is not about speed it is about how it feels with a certain action/stock/weight of tube.

And lastly, yeah I'd be the first to agree with the fact that some of those 37-38 speeds has to come from really leaning on it. I do feel more than I'd feel comfy with.

Just my thoughts...

Have a good night

Dogz

Pop-perhaps you didn't catch my statement about cutting a tube from 26" to 23" using a 257 Wby. I lost right around 30 fps per inch. So, if you take a 26- to a 24 you're gonna lose about 60 fps. I've done this lil experiment with several mag cal's and feel very comfy that right around 30fps is what you will lose per inch bobbed off.

To me, I'll take that bit of loss for a bit shorter rifle each and every day. And twice a day for rifles to be caried for hunting.

Try this take a load and run it sighted right on at 100 with the bullet going say 3600 and then do the same with the same sighting and all except the bullet is going 3650 and see what the difference of drop is at 500 yards. I'd be for betting that the difference in drop will be less than a inch. I really don't think that this is a real world big difference.

Now for fun try this, go and get 10 rifles of the same make and the same cal and the same tube length. Say they are all 26", I would be willing to bet you a bowl of Chugwater chili that there will be as much as 150 fps difference in those 10 tubes using the same load, and that being with all the tubes at the same length.

Just something to think about...

Really, I find the reason for more length is balance and not speed. If I wanted more speed there would be a lot more at stake here than say 2".

Just my thoughts from accross the border.

"GET TO THE HILL"

Dogz

I choose the .257.

I'll have to put in my vote for the 264 win mag. I almost have to I own 2 of them and still shopping for a third!! I will have to admit I'm also in the market for a good 257 wby mag too.