Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Custom Rifles & Wildcats Ruger 77/256 win mag

If a guy wanted to build one of these what bullet(s) and barrel twist would you use?? I am thinking about building one of these off the new Ruger 77/357 for turkeys and vermin in Pennsylvania (and maybe a deer if situation is "right"). so I'm thinking speer 87 grain hot-cors at the heaviest and maybe the barnes 80 grain TTSX (if it would open at velocities down to 2000 fps or so??)

Iterested in any and all opinions and please feel free to tell me I've gone to far

PennDog

I have owned a couple of Marlin 62s in 256 Win Mag. For shooting turkeys, coyotes, and 'chuckes, I like the 86 grain Remington 25-20 bullet. At the slower 256 Win Mag velocities, the 75 grain Sierra HP or VMax might be viable deer and antelope bullets, but I have not used them for that purpose. I had a few boxes of the Hornady 60 grain FPs, but I don't think that they would penetrate very well, so while they they wouldn't be my 1st choice for deer with the 256 Win Mag, I'm sure that if the distance isn't too far and you aimed to put a hole in the lungs, they'd work OK.

As with many short action cartridges, your bullet choices might be limited by the COAL allowed by the magazine.

JEff

Thanks Jeff.....the magazine seems to have "plenty of room" for a longer seating depth. I think that if I want to try deer either the speer 75g or 87g may work. Will have to try some other 75g bullets to see what they do at the velocities I'm likely to get?? It should be fun It may be my "perfect" truck gun for yotes here in PA?

PennDog

IIRC, Tahnka has posted some of his use of a 256 Win Mag on pronghorns. The 75gr Vmax seemed to work. A quick search will bring up those posts.

For varmints, if accurate - I'd run 125s in the 357, my 158 loads clocked 2050 w/Lil Gun in my Marlin Lever. I would take that load to 150 yds w/o hesitation on deer sized game.

No doubt, you will drop recoil using lighter pills.

Thanks Pointer....that bullet may be "perfect" for this project!

PennDog

FWIW, I emailed Barnes last week. They said they test the 80 TTSX down to 1800 fps.

Thnanks Bluedreaux...loks like I have some testing to do

I wouldn't do a .256 in the Ruger.
For one, you need to run the bullets, either the 60 gr. Hdy or the 86 gr. Remington SP no more than 1500 fps. to keep from really tearing up the edible stuff.
For shooting edibles, I've had great luck with standard wadcutter or semi wadcutters out of the .357/.38 Special at no more than 900 fps.
Last of all, the .256 is a miserable case to make. E

E's right about making .256 cases out of .357 brass. When I had a .256 and needed brass, the thought occurred to me that the .22 Rem Jet was also based on the .357 case. A little Bullseye, cream of wheat and a plug of tissue paper and cases were easy to form. A quick trim and they're done. Over several years I think I formed about half of the 500 piece bag of Jet brass with very few case failures during forming.

Thanks for the tip Ward......I really do not need to worry to much about making brass at this point (I managed to stockpile a bunch from a local gun shop when they went out of business several years ago - got both loaded and component brass - but if I do have to the jet brass is a great idea).

And Emericus, I have shot dozens of turkey with several cartridges ranging from the .221 fireball to the .270 wincheater - all with high velocity expanding bullets and as long as the hit is where the wing junctions the body I have lost VERY little meat and absolutely no turkeys. Guys used to tell me to use full metal jacketed bullets at the velocities that you suggested and mostly what happened (for me anyway) was birds running off with small caliber holes through them.....now that is wasting some meat .

PennDog

I suppose a 22 RF Mag is not legal where you hunt?

Actually the 22RF Mag is legal here for tukeys and such but I guess I just want something different and I do have a bunch of ammo/brass for the .256 and have always thought that is was a neat little round......nothing more and nothing less. I realize that there are many things that I could spend my money on - but being a "rifle looney" and possibly a psyhchotic one at that, this seems like a fun little project. I have plenty of other rifles that would work for the applications that I described, but again this seems like fun.....and FWIW I did shoot the .357 with a few different brands of ammo and it shot OK but not great - my marlin .357s easily out shoot this rifle (this was actually my primary determining factor to consider this build). That all said I do realize that this is as practical as "teets" on the prevebial boar

I based my comments on my experiences with the .25-20. As long as you are confident that you can hit that spot, I'm sure anything will work.
The 86 gr. SP will expand at 1500 fps.
If I wanted a small, compact rifle with the .256's ballistics, I'd do a .25/222 Remington. Also known as Wooter's Tooter, named after John Wooters who developed it. E

The .256 Win Mag is cool!

Build one so I wont have to!

Emericus: You are absolutely correct and I have always lusted after a 25/222 - when Mr. Wooters wrote about it in the 70's....guess that is one of the reasons I've always had a "thing" for a compact .25 caliber. I think the thing about the Ruger 77/357 that makes it so appealing to me is the size of the rifle would match the cartridge "perfectly".....a "little" more so than the 25/222 in a sako L461 (although that combination would be REAL nice ).

Chrome: I When I get it built I'll be sure to get some photos up

With the kind plug from Pointer, I thought I'd chime in here. Pardon begged if some of it is redundant from what I've already posted.

I would agree with someone who would categorize .256 brass forming to be moderately labor intensive, however, I would not use the term "miserable". I was surprised to find out that I was in the minority amongst .256 experimenters in utilizing the two forming dies I purchased with my Marlin 62. Most guys are/were just carefully (incrementally) running good, properly lubed (yellow).357 brass into the FL die, and they report no great amount of mortality/hiccups. More than one skipped annealing.

The forming dies at the first step result in a ".30 Winchester Magnum", the second produces a ".270 Magnum", and the FL die spits out what you need (albeit requiring trimming).

Predicating case forming is the process of annealing (which somehow I escaped and/or avoided in over 40 years of reloading). Encountering some variation in getting it just right at first, and utilizing an old aluminum ice tray for the "bathtub", I happened to bump the tray slightly at one point. Owing to a "perch belly" existing on the old tray, it spun just like a ball-bearing lazy susan on my benchtop, allowing the torch to evenly apply itself to the case standing in water. Very soon, I had a technique that was amazing in its consistency, and my "victims" exhibited the rainbow purple shoulder and neck just as they should. I felt kind of like a mean kid equipped with a Cracker Jack magnifying glass and a healthy supply of bugs. Even an evil chuckle escaped my lips more than once. Mortality is almost nonexistent using case forming dies and annealing. In 400 rounds (some for a friend upon whom I bestowed another Marlin 62), I lost one piece of brass, and that was early in my then-unexperienced efforts.

I would avoid fireforming if such avoidance is available, since case life (at least in the Marlin 62) is less than what would be called durable. Most .256 shooters (with the Marlins) report maximum life at less than 5 firings (perhaps three if stout loads are the order of the day). A bolt gun may improve on that. Fireforming may take one of those "reincarnations" away. One interested/experienced party suggests starting with .357 Maximum cases to put its thicker walls to use toward case life. This is my next experiment.

I found the "chore" of forming .256 to be quite enjoyable (as I do most any reloading task), and for the handloader previously familiar with annealing ,forming and trimming, it should be absent of any misery. I work slowly with any gun project reserving the time necessary to to a good job, and can honestly (and perhaps discouragingly to speedsters) report that 100 rounds takes (me) about six hours start to finish, including chamfering and priming to be ready for charging. This included minor distractions such as diverting attention to a John Wayne movie, letting the dog out, making a sandwich, etc.

As to bullet choice, I tried everything available in weights of 75g or less. The 75g Hornady VMax stood head and shoulders above the rest for accuracy, challenged only by the Sierra hollowpoint. At .256 velocities, (2360fps muzzle) this "varmint bullet" performed on Pronghorn much as any respectable big game bullet: penetrating extremely well, breaking bone while destroying soft tissue such as lungs and heartsack. More velocity was attainable, but accuracy dropped off.

I would be very interested in knowing if PennDog's Ruger conversion is successful, and contrary to what others have posted, would highly encourage such an effort. In my going on 3-year experimentation with the .256, it is quickly rivaling the respect and favoritism I have heretofore reserved for the .250-3000 Savage. Mostly because it's "weird".

Tahnka:

Thanks for ALL the great information....when I get to the point where I have to do some case forming I will follow your advice!!

My only real limitation thus far in the Ruger conversion is OAL of the magazine (1.770"). While this will work easily for factory ammo and the bullets meant for the .256 & 25/20 the bullets that I would like to use will need to be "modified" (i.e. your treatment of the polymer tip on the v-max). With the modifications it should still work OK.

I like you am a huge follower of the 250-3000 and have always enjoyed it's ability to "over-achieve". While the .256 will certainly be limited in some ways, it will be fine for the applications I have in mind. I too have a Marlin 62 and a T/C contender in this caliber and it has been "inspiring" to see what this little cartridge is capable of (nothing "magical" - unlike the .250-3000 - but more than what I thought initially, and both are VERY accurate!!)

BTW I am lusting after your 62 - and you may be right that may very well be a factory deluxe given the configuration (or at minimum a very good fascimile!!)

Thanks again and I'll keep you updated on the progress!

PennDog

I saw a 62 Marlin for sale not long ago. Don't know if it is still there. I saw a Ruger single shot pistol, ( the "Hawkeye" ?) go out the door too. Had one of those for a while when they first came out. You are quite right. A fascinating little round. E