I know to get the most out of a .257 Roberts a long action is best. I built my .257AI on a 98 action for that reason. However With my 115 grain Partition load I would only need to seat the bullet a tad shorter to fit a 700 short action. So anyone out there with a Roberts on a short action?

I always thought that the 257 in the short action was a big waste of time; it was done because it was considered a pest gun at the time; good heavy bullets were not available.
I have a Ruger 77 long action, with a really long throat. I seat bullets only .1 inch into the case, and fill the case with powder, using 25--06 data. Works well.
I would never put one on a short action....even with a standard length throat.

My brother left us one, Rem M700 short action. I just have to seat our favorite load with 117 Sierra's a bit deeper.
The other .257 Roberts we have are Ruger long action M77, M96 Mauser, Rem M700 Classic long action.

Never heard of the 257 Roberts referred to as a "pest gun". Oh well, I have now. So I guess the 250-3000 must have been/is in the same class.

I've had a 257 Roberts on a short action 700 for many ears. It handles the 120 NP just fine and gives about what you'd expect for velocities at about 2860 FPS. I'm thinking of re-barreling to a heavier contour and going 257 AI just because it would be fun.

Mark

quote:

Originally posted by craigster:
Never heard of the 257 Roberts referred to as a "pest gun". Oh well, I have now. So I guess the 250-3000 must have been/is in the same class.

Laughable !
My .257 seems to handle some fair sized pests. Have yet to recover a bullet from mature Mule Deer bucks all pass throughs, 117 Sierra's
https://i30.photobucket.com/al...sNovember2012008.jpg

The term "Pest Gun" comes directly from Elmer. As everyone knows, when the 257 first came out, bullets were fragile and these small bores were designed for deer at the most, with varmints definitely in mind. Nowadays, with our much more capable bullets, we tend to think of them as big game cartridges.
You guys need to read more Elmer books and articles.

quote:

You guys need to read more Elmer books and articles.

Nope I had my fill of him when I was a preteen and teenager, I read plenty of his ramblings, those writings were old then and even though I was an inexperienced youth I couldn't agree with him then and can't agree with him now.
At the time I was killing piles of deer with a 22/250 and testing any bullet available to do the job. I worked through a lot of hearsay and wivestales during that period and he was one of the biggest tellers of both in my opinion.

Ok, you hate Elmer; got it.
But the history of the 257 is still this; when it was developed, it was hamstrung from the beginning with a very low pressure limit, 45K psi, and a useless bullet, the 117 grain round nose, a short OAL.
Thereby severely limiting it's capability and potential. No one uses it now, as it was in 1934.
I am sure no one (including me) who loads it withe modern bullets, to modern pressures, will say it is not a very capable cartridge.
But in the 1930s, it was a relatively short range, small game, (deer at short range) cartridge. Nothing like what is is now.
And further, no reason to use a short action. Which was the OP's issue. My opinion. And I have owned and built more than a few 257s. I really like the caliber, but again, not as it was originally produced.

Remington M7MS (20" Mannlicher stock) in .257 Roberts here. I get great results with the 117 SGK or ProHunter over 43.0 gr. of H4350 for about 2,800 fps.

Absolutely one of my favorite cartridges. Low recoil, excellent accuracy.

What's not to love about the Roberts?

Remington originally brought the .257 Roberts out in its Model 30 rifle, a civilized 1917 Enfield, with a .30-'06 size magazine.

When the 722 appeared, which, as the model number implies, was built to handle the then new .222 Remington cartridge, it was offered in it as well. One of the main criticisms leveled against the latter was the shortness of the magazine.

Unfortunately, that was not what Remington did on the Model 30. The magazine box for the 257, and other short cartridges of the era, was blocked off in the front and rear, to accommodate the short, factory stub nose, ammo. They did not simply use the original 30-06 mag box, as we would do today, because they didn't have the long pointy bullet factory ammo that we do now.
So, it had a short magazine in a long action.
It was made for factory loads.
I always liked the 257, had my first one in 1980, and it should still be a super popular cartridge, but it was hampered from the beginning with the round nose bullet at 2650 or so, velocity. And was killed again when the 243 came out.

Don, I have a 722 in 257. Don't have any probs. Message me if you want to talk about it.

I’ve had many 257s both long and short actions. The difference in velocity potential, all
else equal, is about 50 FPS. Not enough to worry about in my book

I have two .257 Roberts rifles - - a short action Dakota 76 and a custom Ruger No. 1. The Dakota feeds all the rounds I have tried in it with no problems and the Ruger, well the action IS short, but unlimited.

From what I have read about Ned Roberts developing the 257 was ne was building a long range target round. Hunting was not in the design features.
Most target rifles being single shots action length was not so much an issue. A shorter action is considered to be stiffer so it can be more accurate than a long action.
Leo

I have 2 different short action Roberts in my safe. Neither one is a Remington. The Win 70 is an AI, and the Savage is a standard Roberts. I have no problems with bullet seating depth on either rifle. With either one I can seat either a 120 Partition, or a 115 Ballistic Tip to just off the lands.

Much 'ado about nothing if you ask me.

Install a long action magazine box in your short action along with a long action follower, that's what everyone did back in the day with the 722 and the mod. 70....NOt a bad idea in most calibers including the 250-3000 some said...You then have the best of both worlds..I never used a long box in the 250..

That said I shot many 117 and 120 gr. bullets in my rem 722, 257 and they worked OK, but I preferred the long box and long throat conversions..

I consider the 257 Robts a perfect deer rifle and it served me well on elk as well..Never considered it a varmint gun, although I shot a lot of coyotes and Javalina with it, and back then Eagles were shot on sight..

Elmer was a fanatic on big calibers, over the top IMO..and a caliber raciest!

I was a Jack O'Connor fan, and he and Elmer were not great friends in print or in the real world..pretty much opposites..Jack loved the 257 and 250-3000..He did open up the magazines in the 257s..no need in a 250-3000.

Wow, this is one of those perennial firearms debates that often get’s dragged out of the closet on the forums, in magazines, in coffee shops/diners, maybe even around thanksgiving dinner! Someone here said that the 257 Roberts was developed as a target round. Perhaps partly, but the intended target was Chucks of different names, i.e. marmots. We call them rock chucks out west. Dear hunting was certainly another secondary consideration. There was, and still is to a lesser extent, an easterner vs westerner mindset regarding all around hunting calibers. The Bob has always been considered a serviceable eastern whitetail cartridge. With today’s bullets it’s now considered a solid mule dear round, and some folks even use it on elk.

The long vs short action debate is way overblown, IMHO. Barsness’ “Rule of Four”, where velocity increases only 1% for every 4% gain in powder capacity, seems to indicate that long actions only give a fairly nominal velocity increase. That being said I still prefer the long or intermediate action, loading long & hot, and give me at least a 24” barrel, please. Someone on this forum once wrote that the rule of four doesn’t apply very well to the Bob, but I’d like to see a true empirical comparison made to put some nails in the coffin of this debate.

I my experience there is more difference in "fast" barrels and "slow" barrels than there is in a fraction of an inch in action length.

quote:

Originally posted by ColoradoMatt:
Wow, this is one of those perennial firearms debates that often get’s dragged out of the closet on the forums, in magazines, in coffee shops/diners, maybe even around thanksgiving dinner! Someone here said that the 257 Roberts was developed as a target round. Perhaps partly, but the intended target was Chucks of different names, i.e. marmots. We call them rock chucks out west. Dear hunting was certainly another secondary consideration. There was, and still is to a lesser extent, an easterner vs westerner mindset regarding all around hunting calibers. The Bob has always been considered a serviceable eastern whitetail cartridge. With today’s bullets it’s now considered a solid mule dear round, and some folks even use it on elk.

The long vs short action debate is way overblown, IMHO. Barsness’ “Rule of Four”, where velocity increases only 1% for every 4% gain in powder capacity, seems to indicate that long actions only give a fairly nominal velocity increase. That being said I still prefer the long or intermediate action, loading long & hot, and give me at least a 24” barrel, please. Someone on this forum once wrote that the rule of four doesn’t apply very well to the Bob, but I’d like to see a true empirical comparison made to put some nails in the coffin of this debate.

The issue isn't only powder capacity, it is the ability to seat bullets (esp a problem with long high BC bullets) way out to engage the rifling where it needs to be for the best accuracy.

Shoot the Roberts if you like it, but IMO there are far superior cartridges for a short action or long. Like the Bob, the 7x57 seems to have a lot fans for the nostalgia factor. Fine. Jack liked both, but the dude did most of his hunting before most of us were born.

I don't think it's all nostalgia factor.
both [well all of the X57] cartridges are just about perfect for deer out to 300 yards.
jump it up to 30 or 32 caliber and Elk are now fair game with plenty of bullet weight and speed.

I have had everything [22,6,6.5,7,30,32,35]from 22X57 to 9X57, only one was on a short action and I no longer own it.

My success with long throats is I USE WAY MORE POWDER!!!

That said, by doing so you give the case about the same powder space as an Ackley, therefore I don't have much use for the "#4" opine..My chronograph disputes that theory, assisted by fearless reloading!!

Ive never seen the benefit of a short action for the most part...a 257 Robts, 7x57 and others in a Mauser or mod. 70 is about perfect and how much longer is it than a short action?? does that make a difference? other than in ones mind? it does effect the cartridges ballistics and its like cramming 10 pounds of shit in a 5 lb. bag to use the short action most of the time.... The short action works great with the 22-250, 250-3000, borderline with a .243 and some wildcats..There is a place for everything and everything has its place comes to mind on this subject...

quote:

Originally posted by pap_pap:
I know to get the most out of a .257 Roberts a long action is best. I built my .257AI on a 98 action for that reason. However With my 115 grain Partition load I would only need to seat the bullet a tad shorter to fit a 700 short action. So anyone out there with a Roberts on a short action?

I have a ,257 Roberts Dakota 76 LH Short Action. It feeds 110 grn. Accubond Nosler factory ammo well. I have never tried heavier bullets. The Accubond is an excellent bullet for deer-sized game.

quote:

You guys need to read more Elmer books and articles.

No I don't.

I had a 257 Roberts built Rem SA into a faux LVSF. Thing absolutely shot lights out. But I sold it when someone wanted it more than me.

I now have a fast twist 22-250 LVSF, shot the original barrel out. The best shooting rifle I own.

It will do anything I would have asked the Roberts to do, so I do not miss the Roberts that much.

Step into the light!

Unless you have dies, brass and bullets to support the 257 Bob for years, build a 6.5 Creedmoor on that short action and enjoy a 130 gr Accubond going 3000 fps with 44.2 grains of RL-16 (your milage may vary). This makes a fine deer cartridge.

There, someone had to say it!

Zeke

quote:

Originally posted by ZekeShikar:
Step into the light!

Unless you have dies, brass and bullets to support the 257 Bob for years, build a 6.5 Creedmoor on that short action and enjoy a 130 gr Accubond going 3000 fps with 44.2 grains of RL-16 (your milage may vary). This makes a fine deer cartridge.

There, someone had to say it!

Zeke

This is how I see it as well. Also, the rifles and ammo come set up ideally for each other. It can be difficult to improve on some factory loadings in the 6.5 CM.

Going off on a tangent here...

I grew up on Jack O'Conner, Elmer Keith, Townsend Whelen, Bob Milek, and many others. Like most things in print, I only believed half of what I read, but... I enjoyed reading all of it.

NOstalgia, I think not, my 7x57s shoot a 175 gr. bullet at the same velocity as the 06 shoots a 180 gr...It has a long throat and magazine on a Mauser action..Thats my elk load, for deer I like a 140 gr. Accubond or 139 gr. Hornady at 2900, about like my 06 or 270 with a a 150....with less felt recoil and in rifle of simulair weight and style..I tried a 7x57 Ackley and didn't get much more out of it and it cost more to prep cases...

Well, maybe a little nostalgia, I feel for those that miss that nostalgia in their makeup, they miss half the fun...

I am on my third 257 Roberts. The first was a 1976 "200th Year" long action Ruger 77. It shot well, but had a very long throat and was heavy. I sold it. My next was a pre-64 Model 70. It shot well too, but was way too heavy for such a small round. A couple of years ago I bought a 250 Savage barrel from Midway made by E.R. Shaw and threaded for a Savage Axis rifle. I had the barrel screwed onto an Axis which started life as a 243. I had to buy a 22-250 magazine for the rifle to feed. Next, I called Shaw and ordered a 257 Roberts barrel like the 250 Savage barrel. I had that screwed onto a rifle which had been a 308. The magazine allows 3" long rounds and the barrel has a short throat, so no problems. I prefer the short throat. I can shoot light bullets and long ones. The rifle is light, but even full power loads with 117 grain bullets (2,900+ fps) don't kick much. It isn't a pretty rifle, but pretty is as pretty does. The 250 Savage rifle will easily give a 100 grain bullet 3,000 fps with 39.5 grains of H4350. Both rifles shoot very accurately.

Well,
Here's what I did, but it was in 284 Win. For all practical purposes an intermediate length round.
We took an early Rem. 700 short action and a Rem. 700 long action magazine box.
I cut the weld in the center rear of the long action 06 box, established a corner to generate 3.075 internal
Dimension, this was accomplished by simply cutting a chunk of bar stock to that length the heating the sheet metal of the box and bending a new shorter length. One side at a time . Re tig weld the center rear of the box. Trim the excess and tig.
With the receiver upside down in a 6 inch Kurt vise, edge find the bottom edge of the feed ramp, calculate the box length vs cutter diameter, x move accordingly, re machine in the rear for the new box, cut the front of the bolt stop back to get next round pick up. Assemble the rifle try feed and function.
A 284 with bullets seated out would feed 3 down. A 257 Roberts probably with do 4 down with out too much trouble and at the same time allow some extra seating. I like the build, it's more or less a cheap way into an intermediate without spending a ton getting a true intermediate action going like a Mexican M98 going. For the most part it a cheap reliable alternative. Ps. Would likely work well on the 6.5 prc for those into newer cartridges,. I'm guessing Kevin Wyatt most likely offers an option. But I think 3.075 to 3.100 is ideal on a Rem short gone intermediate is ideal and his lengths are shorter, so maybe not. 257 likely the 3.075 being best, or improved, make it run with a 25/06 or damn close. In a modded k action, very cool.

I think what must have happened is the 257 Rbts and the 250 Savage were intended for varmints by varmint hunters...Big game hunters of the day bought a box of Peters 117 gr RN bullets at about 2600 FPS as I recall, like I did, and those "weak" old Peters and Remington, RN corelokts (both were the same bullet and load) killed both elk and deer quite well, with more than ample penetration on both, you see slower bullets penetrate very well indeed historically, and penetration kills, then the men in the know opened them up in the throat and magazine and "bingo" we had the first mini magnum!! I'll swear to that in a court of law!