Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Deer Hunting .257 Cal Bullets?

Ok, so let's say you've settled on the Sierra 117 BTSP in a .25-06 @ 3000 fps. And let's say that you don't shoot over 300 yards. Now with a bc of .410 sighted in 2.6 inches high at 100 yds it zeroes at 250 yds and has 4.9 inches drift at 250 yards in a 10 mph cross-wind. Let's suppose that same 117 bullet had a bc of .610 (which is not unreasonable). Still sighted in at 2.6 inches high at 100 yds, at 250 yds its 0.4" high (negligible difference) but wind-drift is only 3.2 inches instead of 4.9 inches. At 300 yards the difference in drift is 7.3 inches versus 4.6 inches and nearly an inch less drop. So even if limiting your shots to 300 yards, it would be better to have higher bc .25 cal projectiles. Instead of defending these poor bc .257 projectiles, you all should be doing what I'm doing- advocating an improvement in their bc.

Totally agree, I'll never give away BC, but I do have a couple cool 25's I like to hunt with and work great for me. I also have the smattering of 243, 264, 284's, etc that handle the longer, pointier, bitchier bullets.

But none of it makes a real difference at the ranges or the places the 25's get hunted. I still don't have too much trouble out to 600 with the 25's as long as the winds aren't hammering, but until I get up to the Mashburn or RUM nothing in between really does much better either.

It shouldn't be the case that if you want a .257 hunting bullet in the 100-120 grain range with a good bc, there's only one option at 110 grains that's a mono. Otherwise, you're forced to drop down to 6mm or up to 6.5. You can get a 90 grain hunting bullet in 6mm with a bc of .490, a 100 grain hunting bullet in 6mm with a bc of .515, a 123 grain hunting 6.5mm bullet with a bc of .510 but there's no 100 grain .257 anywhere near .500. Instead, you're looking at a pathetic .393. There's also no 115-120 grain .257 bullet that has a reasonable bc. I could just blame the bullet manufacturers, but it's also the .257 owners at fault (by not creating the demand) who are just satisfied with burying their heads in the sand and thinking that because they mainly shoot short to medium ranges, bc has no significance. Or alternatively, they use an invalid argument that so long as they have reasonable accuracy (at 100 yards) and quite good terminal performance, "who cares about bc".

I don't disagree. I will put a 7.5 on my gun when it's time. For right now, I am still working on wearing out my current barrel.

The 257 bullets are slowly tricking in. I don't know if anyone is holding their head in the sand but until makers start putting them on factory guns it won't change too much. We're in the minority with the heavier, longer, High BC'ed bullets. If the makers start building quick twisted guns guys can still shoot 100 BT's but also the 130+ bullets starting to trickle out.

I bet that'd be sweet in my little 250 Savage!

First off, I don't think I have shot at a deer at 300 yards more than once. And that was a wounded deer that was escaping.

Second, I there is a 10mph wind at 3 oclock, I'm for sure not to shoot at a deer at 300 yards even on the rare occasion that I would see one at that distance.

Lastly, a 2.5" difference in wind drift is insignificant. At 300 yards the group from even a 1MOA rifle, from field positions is bigger than that.

Bottom line, for me and the vast majority of deer hunters, BC above .4 us superfluous.

If having a super BC turns your crank, by all means go for it and enjoy your/our sport.

I think I'll not be joining the high BC band wagon.

Thanks SouthTexas for taking the time to respond. Here are my counter points: 1. Animals suitable to shoot with a .257 are not just limited to deer. For example pronghorn, aoudad, sheep, mountain goat, coyote, wolf etc are often shot at more than 300 yards. And while most of the deer that are shot may have been at less than 300 yards, that doesn't mean that I would want a cartridge and bullet that wasn't very capable at well beyond 300 yards...especially if I didn't have to give up anything to get it. 2. If you've got a really good buck at 300 yards, and you can't get closer and it's near the end of your hunt then a high bc bullet is a better option (all other things being equal) than a low bc bullet for having less wind drift - whether it's a 5 mph, 10 mph or 15 mph wind. And it's not just less wind-drift. It's also a slightly flatter trajectory with less drop and it's also a slightly greater impact velocity. I would take the shot. 3. The less wind-drift for a bullet the better, whether its 2.7" less or 1" less. If a 300 yard group from a 1 MOA rifle is already big enough, you certainly don't want to compound that and make it bigger with more wind-drift if you can use a bullet that doesn't drift as much. And again, it's not only less wind-drift but a flatter trajectory if you don't dial in 4. Saying a bc above .4 is superfluous is like saying having a bullet with superb accuracy is superfluous to having reasonable accuracy, and superb terminal performance is superfluous to reasonable terminable performance. 5. Having a good bc of around .5 for medium weight bullets to around .6 for slightly heavier bullets isn't "super bc" in 2023, when compared to other calibers on each side of .257 - it's just what one should expect given our current technology and understanding.

Thanks for the response. It's ok to agree to disagree. I bought a 6.5CM to see what all the fuss is about. I really like it. Very accurate right out of the box with factory ammo. Here's the part you will disagree with: For deer hunting, I prefer 120gr bullets in the CM. At 2900ish, they are just right for my hunting needs. In fact it is a ballistic twin to my beloved 257R. I have no need or interest in 140gr bullets in the CM. If I'm after bigger game than deer and want a heavier bullet I'll use a 270/280/'06/7mag. Probably with a bullet with the BC of a ping pong ball . Works for me...

If I were into long range target completion, the high BCs would be a necessity. But not for my hunting needs. YMMV

Your hypothetical 257 bullet wouldn't stabilize in the 1-10 twists of factory 25 caliber rifles, hence the reason said bullet doesn't exist.

I mentioned in my first post that 7 twist should become standard for these high bc bullets. There was no need for me to keep mentioning 7 twist barrels. High bc .257 bullets do exist...and they have fast twist barrels.

A 7 twist standard is not going to happen.

The high bc 257 bullets aren't in weights that have any advantage over 6.5s.

Yes, but if they started to make 100-120 grain high bc bullets (which is what I'm advocating) then there would be an advantage over both 6mm and 6.5mm, via that weight category. You need a 7 twist for the high bc mono bullets in that weight category.

A high B.C. 100 grain .257 bullet??

High B.C. mono?

110 grain Badlands Super-bulldozer, .570 bc, requires 7 twist, mono.

Hey, if it sells more rifles and bullets, and guys enjoy experimenting, I’m all for it. But I fail to see where high BC bullets in .257 would have a significant advantage over BOTH 6mm and 6.5mm.

Just curious, do you happen to be a stockholder in Badlands Super-bulldozer? ;-)

You don't see the advantage because there's no advantage to see, unless you own a barrel company that sells fast twist 257 blanks or have a vested interest in Badlands bullets!

Hmm… looked on their website:

6.5 135gr; BC=.700
6mm 100gr; BC=.600
257 110gr; BC= .570

Where is the “advantage “ ?

I suspect we will see a 25 Creedmoor or a 25 PRC of some sort (25-08 with 30 degree shoulder?) with a fast twist before long. The trend in shooting sports is certainly in that direction.

The advantage is that bullets around 110 grain in .257 have less recoil than the 6.5 bullets around 123 or more grains and better sectional density than light bullets in 6.5mm, and more frontal area and weight than 6mm bullets around 90-100 grains and can be griven faster than 6mm bullets around 110 grains because of the larger bore. .257 bullets around 100-120 grains are the "Goldilocks" for all-round bullets for both small game, varmints and up to deer size game.

Yes, I own the company. Is there anything wrong with that? No, I don't ...just kidding...no interest whatsoever.