woof
Member
Google ".257 Roberts short action" and you will see a list of links discussing that the 7x57 and .257 are too long for short actions.
257 Roberts
- Thread starter viking499
- Start date
- Status
OK Woof believe what you want. Just try not to spread bad information on the web ok?
Just one question though and then I'm done. A short action length is generaly 2.8" correct? Is 2.775" shorter than 2.80"?
Instead of believing others maybe you could find a SAAMI length longer than 2.775? Since you like to Google try this 'SAAMI 257 Roberts length'. Please come back and tell us how long SAAMI says the standard length should be, please. You do know what SAAMI means right?
I'm done, have a nice day.
Just one question though and then I'm done. A short action length is generaly 2.8" correct? Is 2.775" shorter than 2.80"?
Instead of believing others maybe you could find a SAAMI length longer than 2.775? Since you like to Google try this 'SAAMI 257 Roberts length'. Please come back and tell us how long SAAMI says the standard length should be, please. You do know what SAAMI means right?
I'm done, have a nice day.
Bigfoot be careful there were some threads not too long ago polling whether or not someone would shoot bigfoot. 
As far as long vs. short actions for the Roberts, I always thought that a long action would work better. There are a few problems with the SA like magazine feeding with handloads and whether or not there is enough leade. And if you reload, definitely want the LA so you can seat the bullet out further. YMMV...SA will work, but you have to stay with factory OAL.
As far as long vs. short actions for the Roberts, I always thought that a long action would work better. There are a few problems with the SA like magazine feeding with handloads and whether or not there is enough leade. And if you reload, definitely want the LA so you can seat the bullet out further. YMMV...SA will work, but you have to stay with factory OAL.
woof
Member
Bigfoot, Unlike you I don't claim to be an expert in all things. But you are now choosing to ignore the fact that the web is full of discussions by people who are doubtless more expert than you or I saying a short action will not accommodate a .257. Now if you want to garner some respect for yourself I suggest that instead of trying to insult ME, you instead show US a link to where a rifle described (by it's maker or someone speaking with authority) as short is chambered for .257. So far you are generating heat but no light.
For starter's here's a paragraph from an article at rifleshootermag.com:
"The Roberts case, at 2.233 inches, is too long for a short action, but creates a lot of wasted space in a .30-06-length action. It is a wonderfully efficient and effective cartridge, but it is not as good as the .25-06. And even with the excellent "+P" factory loads currently available it is at its best when handloaded. So I think it should be returned to its original wildcat status."
http://www.rifleshootermag.com/ammunition/cartridges_without/index1.html
For starter's here's a paragraph from an article at rifleshootermag.com:
"The Roberts case, at 2.233 inches, is too long for a short action, but creates a lot of wasted space in a .30-06-length action. It is a wonderfully efficient and effective cartridge, but it is not as good as the .25-06. And even with the excellent "+P" factory loads currently available it is at its best when handloaded. So I think it should be returned to its original wildcat status."
http://www.rifleshootermag.com/ammunition/cartridges_without/index1.html
WOOF,
Look at the Remington 722 in 257 Roberts.
The difference between a Rem 721 (LA) and Rem 722 (SA) is the action length.
Regardless of the dis-information elsewhere, the Max OAL case length for the quarter Bob is 2.775" It does not take a rocket scientist to figure out the 257 will fit a Short Action. I own a Rem 722 in 257Bob, it works.
Look at the Remington 722 in 257 Roberts.
The difference between a Rem 721 (LA) and Rem 722 (SA) is the action length.
Regardless of the dis-information elsewhere, the Max OAL case length for the quarter Bob is 2.775" It does not take a rocket scientist to figure out the 257 will fit a Short Action. I own a Rem 722 in 257Bob, it works.
woof
Member
Sweden, I guess I should have said I was talking about the present not a half century ago. The 722 is a 1950s rifle. There is no standardization for what is short and what is long. Compared to Safari length actions they are all short. I've even seen an old definition that defined short as .30-06 length.
But that minutia aside, the Remington 722 is not what is considered short action TODAY, and a 57mm case is too long for those actions that are. Refer to the link above.
I have no desire to be in an argument but by a vast margin short action cartridges today are not thought to include the .257.
But that minutia aside, the Remington 722 is not what is considered short action TODAY, and a 57mm case is too long for those actions that are. Refer to the link above.
I have no desire to be in an argument but by a vast margin short action cartridges today are not thought to include the .257.
Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow
member
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2007
- Messages
- 13,146
There were two popular wildcats (popular as wildcats go, anyway), that never completely caught on for some reason, which were a .308 win necked to .25:
1. ".25 Souper" - yes "Souper" not "Super" - I dunno.
2. ".250 Durham Jet"
IIRC.....
New Kimber is short action.
My new Kimber 84 select grade is in a short action, but my Ruger Hawkeye, Cooper 22, and pre-64Win. are long actions. The short action has a few disadvantages with long ogive bullets that need to be seated shorter then the rifling by up to .035, NB-Tips, Accu-bonds, RCore-lockUltrs and some spitzers have quite a jump to engage rifling if you want the cartridge to be able to cycle from cartridge box to chamber and be able to unload a loaded round without the tip hitting the chamber lip. Theres lots of information out there on throating depth with round nose bullets in the earliar history of the Bob. I'm not sure why this is my favorite cartridge, but whenever I look in my safe allthe Bob's are in the front row.
My new Kimber 84 select grade is in a short action, but my Ruger Hawkeye, Cooper 22, and pre-64Win. are long actions. The short action has a few disadvantages with long ogive bullets that need to be seated shorter then the rifling by up to .035, NB-Tips, Accu-bonds, RCore-lockUltrs and some spitzers have quite a jump to engage rifling if you want the cartridge to be able to cycle from cartridge box to chamber and be able to unload a loaded round without the tip hitting the chamber lip. Theres lots of information out there on throating depth with round nose bullets in the earliar history of the Bob. I'm not sure why this is my favorite cartridge, but whenever I look in my safe allthe Bob's are in the front row.
Float Pilot
Member
Since the action length guys have us heading down the Silverton canyon narrow gauge rail road, an intermediate length Mauser action such as a Yugo M48 or even a Mexican 1910, would make a fine basis for a 257 Roberts sporter.
I know my short action Ruger M77MKII all weather is slightly longer than a Rem Model 7 short action since I can load my bullets further out than my buddy can with his Rem Seven.. I am not sure if it is the actual action length or the magazine box that is the difference, and I do not loose any sleep over it.
Taters... tamators;;;
If you do not handload, finding 257 Roberts ammo may not be all that easy. Oddly enough I found 8 boxes in my little town. All covered with dust.
I know my short action Ruger M77MKII all weather is slightly longer than a Rem Model 7 short action since I can load my bullets further out than my buddy can with his Rem Seven.. I am not sure if it is the actual action length or the magazine box that is the difference, and I do not loose any sleep over it.
Taters... tamators;;;
If you do not handload, finding 257 Roberts ammo may not be all that easy. Oddly enough I found 8 boxes in my little town. All covered with dust.
I had one built on an FN Mauser action years ago. I always seated the bullets out to contact the rifling, and my handloads would not fit in a Remington 722 magazine.
The .257 is in my opinion much more manageable than the .25-'06. Less recoil and bast. Probably much longer barrel life. Flexibility of using 120 grain bullets counts for me, something the 6MMs cannot do.
The only cartridge I like as much is the 6.5X55.
The .257 is in my opinion much more manageable than the .25-'06. Less recoil and bast. Probably much longer barrel life. Flexibility of using 120 grain bullets counts for me, something the 6MMs cannot do.
The only cartridge I like as much is the 6.5X55.
NCsmitty
Member
I'm not here to discuss whether the 257 Roberts fits a SA, as it makes a difference in the make of the rifle. If you want to handicap yourself and a fine caliber with a short OAL, go for it.
When you're able to seat your bullets out, IMO it's a plus. You're not infringing on the powder space, and that's a common problem that most SA cartridges have to deal with, because of the short magazines.
Seating your bullets out to .020 off the lands most often will enhance your accuracy. You cannot, as a rule, do that with a SA rifle.
I agree with Float Pilot, that a Yugo intermediate might be ideal as a base action to build a 257 Roberts on.
When handloaded to +p+ levels, the 257 Roberts will flirt with 25-06 velocities. It's a very efficient round.
NCsmitty
When you're able to seat your bullets out, IMO it's a plus. You're not infringing on the powder space, and that's a common problem that most SA cartridges have to deal with, because of the short magazines.
Seating your bullets out to .020 off the lands most often will enhance your accuracy. You cannot, as a rule, do that with a SA rifle.
I agree with Float Pilot, that a Yugo intermediate might be ideal as a base action to build a 257 Roberts on.
When handloaded to +p+ levels, the 257 Roberts will flirt with 25-06 velocities. It's a very efficient round.
NCsmitty
GooseGestapo
Member
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2003
- Messages
- 6,164
I'm rather partial to the .257Roberts.
I've owned one for a third of a century, and own two at present. I know a little about the chambering.
1. It can, has, and is able to be built on the short action format. I have a Remington Mod7 (actually 2), but the 7mm08 is the one in question. It will handle a loaded round of up to 2.830" oal in the magazine. Most all bullets seated to this length will either be contacting the rifling, or near it. This is due to the short throat in the chamber. The Remington custom shop will build you a .257Robts on the M7 action.
SAAMI max oal for the 257Roberts is 2.775". Hence, it will EASILY fit a short action. I have cycled .257 loaded ammo through it that was intended for my short chambered Ruger M77. Of course it wouldn't completely close in the 7mm08 chamber, it would feed and extract. No problem !! A Sierra bullet(87-117gr PtSpt) seated to 2.83" will touch the rifling in my Ruger M77 .257Robt. but it's a Long action....but dosen't need to be.
2. There are two basic chamber dimensions/designs for the Roberts. The short one was orginally used by Remington in the model 722 and 760 rifles. The 722 being a short action, Remington chose a short throat and estabilished a max of 2.775"oal. All modern factory ammo complies with this standard. My custom M98 uses the longer so called "3in" chamber. It will take cartridges up to and slightly longer than 3.000". A Berger 115gr VLD must be 3.115" to touch the rifling. However, accuracy is only slightly reduced by seating bullets such as the 100gr Hornady, Sierra, or Speer bullets to 2.775" One of the most accurate loads for this rifle is 46.0gr of H380 under a Hornady 75gr HP for 3,550fps. About like a good .22-250 and a 55gr bullet. Only, the "whap" you get when it hits a deer at 350yds is significantly louder than that from a .22-250, or even the .243 and an 80gr bullet at 3,350fps which is "supposed" to out perform the "Bob", only it dosen't..................A co-worker shot 11 deer one night doing population control work. He shot 5, I shot 6. he took 7rds. I took 6........ Even the inmates at the prison that took the deer commented on the difference in exit wounds on those that had similar shot placement. The 75gr .257 left a 50% larger exit wound......Yes, all 5 exited with shoulder/spine, and head shots (the closer range ones...)
3. Most .257Robt shooters handload. Those who own a chronograph will tell you that it usually exceeds the velocities given in the manuals. I ususally "easily" get 3,100fps and occasionally with an "lucky" combination of components (particular mixture of different lot#'s) see 3,200fps. Or, about like what I get from the .25/06.
My best friend is usually driven to a conniption when he see's my "Bob"s get better velocity with a shorter barrel and lighter powder charges.......... (Think barrel quality). His is a MkX Viscount with factory barrel, mine has an E.R. Shaw #2 taper barrel at 22" and is veryyyyyyy smooth. The other a Ruger M77 has the "short" throat, and is even more efficient. It gets the same velocities with 1-3gr less powder........ In reality, the difference, if you hand load, is the .257 and the .25/06 compare like the .308wcf and the .30/06. Not enough to get excited about. Actually, they're closer than that. About like the 7mm08 and .280Rem in equal lenght barrels. FWIW, my 7mm08 gets faster velocities from a 20"bbl than an aquaintances .280Rem. Same powder(different charges-mine are lower...), bullets, primers, and make of case..... Go figure! (It's the barrels...... not the cases......).
4. There is a noticeable difference between the .243's and the .257 in the field. It has to do mostly with bullet construction. John Barsness addressed this in an article on bullet construction several years ago in "Handloader" magazine. It has to do with surface area contact between the jacket and core. To get a .243 bullet to "perform" as intended and "mimic" the .25's, it takes a thicker jacket leaving a smaller quantity, and longer sliver of lead in the core. There is less surface area in the jacket to grip the lead core. Result is at close range, the bullets will "blowup" due to seperation and rupture, and "fail to expand" at longer distances. My brother who has much more .24 experience noticed this about 5yrs ago when we did some deer control work on a lease. 4 of us took 21 deer in a weekend. Three were lost, all with the .243. I took three with a .223, and 3 with the .257. None lost. I've taken over 100deer with the .25's to include the .257wbymag. It is definitely superior to the 24's, and not much different than any other "light medium" between 25 and .33". I do see a little difference between the .25's vs. .30's; about like the difference between the .30/06 and the .338/06. Not really enough to get excited over. Hence, I haven't taken but one deer with the .30/06 in 12yrs. I haven't even taken the .338/06 out this year, and only once last year. (I hunt about 50days a year, sometimes more than 75).
No the .257Roberts isn't "magical", it just rides the boundry between small bore (under .17, .17's, .22's, and 24's) and the "light mediums", .25-.30's. It just happens to be "closer" to the .30's in performance than the .24's to be noticeable.
No, I don't "hate" the .24's. I just see them as too close to the .22's in performance to get excited about.
What is fascinating is that I see less penetration, and fewer "bang-flops" with my .257Wbymag than I do with the "bob". Same bullets (same box!), but with 300-500fps more velocity.
Those who can't get excited about the .257 share my opinion of the factory ammo in this cartridge. Except for the Hornady "light magnum" loads, and the Federal Premium 117 Sierra's and 120gr Nosler Partitions which fairly closely match the handloads..........
Just my 1/3 of a century with the "bob".... and "opinion"........Your results may differ......
I've owned one for a third of a century, and own two at present. I know a little about the chambering.
1. It can, has, and is able to be built on the short action format. I have a Remington Mod7 (actually 2), but the 7mm08 is the one in question. It will handle a loaded round of up to 2.830" oal in the magazine. Most all bullets seated to this length will either be contacting the rifling, or near it. This is due to the short throat in the chamber. The Remington custom shop will build you a .257Robts on the M7 action.
SAAMI max oal for the 257Roberts is 2.775". Hence, it will EASILY fit a short action. I have cycled .257 loaded ammo through it that was intended for my short chambered Ruger M77. Of course it wouldn't completely close in the 7mm08 chamber, it would feed and extract. No problem !! A Sierra bullet(87-117gr PtSpt) seated to 2.83" will touch the rifling in my Ruger M77 .257Robt. but it's a Long action....but dosen't need to be.
2. There are two basic chamber dimensions/designs for the Roberts. The short one was orginally used by Remington in the model 722 and 760 rifles. The 722 being a short action, Remington chose a short throat and estabilished a max of 2.775"oal. All modern factory ammo complies with this standard. My custom M98 uses the longer so called "3in" chamber. It will take cartridges up to and slightly longer than 3.000". A Berger 115gr VLD must be 3.115" to touch the rifling. However, accuracy is only slightly reduced by seating bullets such as the 100gr Hornady, Sierra, or Speer bullets to 2.775" One of the most accurate loads for this rifle is 46.0gr of H380 under a Hornady 75gr HP for 3,550fps. About like a good .22-250 and a 55gr bullet. Only, the "whap" you get when it hits a deer at 350yds is significantly louder than that from a .22-250, or even the .243 and an 80gr bullet at 3,350fps which is "supposed" to out perform the "Bob", only it dosen't..................A co-worker shot 11 deer one night doing population control work. He shot 5, I shot 6. he took 7rds. I took 6........ Even the inmates at the prison that took the deer commented on the difference in exit wounds on those that had similar shot placement. The 75gr .257 left a 50% larger exit wound......Yes, all 5 exited with shoulder/spine, and head shots (the closer range ones...)
3. Most .257Robt shooters handload. Those who own a chronograph will tell you that it usually exceeds the velocities given in the manuals. I ususally "easily" get 3,100fps and occasionally with an "lucky" combination of components (particular mixture of different lot#'s) see 3,200fps. Or, about like what I get from the .25/06.
My best friend is usually driven to a conniption when he see's my "Bob"s get better velocity with a shorter barrel and lighter powder charges.......... (Think barrel quality). His is a MkX Viscount with factory barrel, mine has an E.R. Shaw #2 taper barrel at 22" and is veryyyyyyy smooth. The other a Ruger M77 has the "short" throat, and is even more efficient. It gets the same velocities with 1-3gr less powder........ In reality, the difference, if you hand load, is the .257 and the .25/06 compare like the .308wcf and the .30/06. Not enough to get excited about. Actually, they're closer than that. About like the 7mm08 and .280Rem in equal lenght barrels. FWIW, my 7mm08 gets faster velocities from a 20"bbl than an aquaintances .280Rem. Same powder(different charges-mine are lower...), bullets, primers, and make of case..... Go figure! (It's the barrels...... not the cases......).
4. There is a noticeable difference between the .243's and the .257 in the field. It has to do mostly with bullet construction. John Barsness addressed this in an article on bullet construction several years ago in "Handloader" magazine. It has to do with surface area contact between the jacket and core. To get a .243 bullet to "perform" as intended and "mimic" the .25's, it takes a thicker jacket leaving a smaller quantity, and longer sliver of lead in the core. There is less surface area in the jacket to grip the lead core. Result is at close range, the bullets will "blowup" due to seperation and rupture, and "fail to expand" at longer distances. My brother who has much more .24 experience noticed this about 5yrs ago when we did some deer control work on a lease. 4 of us took 21 deer in a weekend. Three were lost, all with the .243. I took three with a .223, and 3 with the .257. None lost. I've taken over 100deer with the .25's to include the .257wbymag. It is definitely superior to the 24's, and not much different than any other "light medium" between 25 and .33". I do see a little difference between the .25's vs. .30's; about like the difference between the .30/06 and the .338/06. Not really enough to get excited over. Hence, I haven't taken but one deer with the .30/06 in 12yrs. I haven't even taken the .338/06 out this year, and only once last year. (I hunt about 50days a year, sometimes more than 75).
No the .257Roberts isn't "magical", it just rides the boundry between small bore (under .17, .17's, .22's, and 24's) and the "light mediums", .25-.30's. It just happens to be "closer" to the .30's in performance than the .24's to be noticeable.
No, I don't "hate" the .24's. I just see them as too close to the .22's in performance to get excited about.
What is fascinating is that I see less penetration, and fewer "bang-flops" with my .257Wbymag than I do with the "bob". Same bullets (same box!), but with 300-500fps more velocity.
Those who can't get excited about the .257 share my opinion of the factory ammo in this cartridge. Except for the Hornady "light magnum" loads, and the Federal Premium 117 Sierra's and 120gr Nosler Partitions which fairly closely match the handloads..........
Just my 1/3 of a century with the "bob".... and "opinion"........Your results may differ......
Last edited:
* * sound of crickets * *
Hmm.
Nobody wants to say that it only fits in 1950's short actions or quote some writers article? Come on guys, don't give up so easily. Woof?
Dang it GooseGestapo, looks like you ruined a perfectly good arguement by stating facts.
True I am gloating just a bit but Woof you were way out of line with this one.
Especially when the facts wern't on your side. Don't you agree? Or do you still want me to link a picture of a 722, or Kimber 84, or an A-Bolt, or a Model 7 in 257?
Anyway the OP wanted to know about the 257 Bob. Now he knows that like the 6mm Remington (based on the same case) he can have it in a SA if he wants. It will cost him 100 fps or so but that's a choice between velocity and a lighter rifle. When making that decision it's always a plus to be operating on good information.
Bigfoot
Hmm.
Nobody wants to say that it only fits in 1950's short actions or quote some writers article? Come on guys, don't give up so easily. Woof?
Dang it GooseGestapo, looks like you ruined a perfectly good arguement by stating facts.
True I am gloating just a bit but Woof you were way out of line with this one.
Especially when the facts wern't on your side. Don't you agree? Or do you still want me to link a picture of a 722, or Kimber 84, or an A-Bolt, or a Model 7 in 257?
Anyway the OP wanted to know about the 257 Bob. Now he knows that like the 6mm Remington (based on the same case) he can have it in a SA if he wants. It will cost him 100 fps or so but that's a choice between velocity and a lighter rifle. When making that decision it's always a plus to be operating on good information.
Bigfoot
woof
Member
Bigfoot, The .257 is not a short action cartridge and that's all there is to it. That a custom shop can squeeze it into a Remington 7 (for $3000) changes nothing. If it were truly a short action round the Savage 99 would have been chambered for it years ago and the Kimber 84M would be chambered for it today.
I submit to you that if I were to take a random poll of 100 gunsmiths and dealers and ask them what cartridges are available in today's short action rifles, virtually zero would name the .257 or the 7x57. The .308 family has become synonymous with short action today, along with new short magnums. The other is the .22-250. This is common knowledge and beyond reasonable dispute.
In the real world, where bigfoot doesn't exist, nobody but nobody thinks of the .257 as a short action round. It's too long for short and wasted space in long. Now I can see that you are someone quick to develop a slightly creepy personal attachment to a point in dispute, so you go ahead and have the last word
PS - The OP cannot have it in a short action and if he goes shopping for it he will quickly realize that.
I submit to you that if I were to take a random poll of 100 gunsmiths and dealers and ask them what cartridges are available in today's short action rifles, virtually zero would name the .257 or the 7x57. The .308 family has become synonymous with short action today, along with new short magnums. The other is the .22-250. This is common knowledge and beyond reasonable dispute.
In the real world, where bigfoot doesn't exist, nobody but nobody thinks of the .257 as a short action round. It's too long for short and wasted space in long. Now I can see that you are someone quick to develop a slightly creepy personal attachment to a point in dispute, so you go ahead and have the last word
PS - The OP cannot have it in a short action and if he goes shopping for it he will quickly realize that.
Dude.. http://www.kimberamerica.com/rifles/84m/84m_select_grade/93/ There I posted a link for ya, don't know why I did because Johnnd56 already said he owns one.
Why can't he? Looks to me like he can buy a brand new one. Those Kimbers are real sweet too, 5 lb 4 oz, nice wood, good parts fit. Here's the Montana version too in case you want to say that the one above is a blocked long action. http://www.kimberamerica.com/rifles/84m/84m_montana/
So, I know that you Googled the SAMMI length, what was it? The same length as four people here have told you? Meaning that ALL factory loaded ammo is under 2.8". And you still don't think that it will fit in a SA?
In essence you've called several people here liars, real sorry about your loss of credibility.
Bigfoot
Last edited:
Visual aid.
Pic shows the magazine box of a Mdl 70 FW (long action) in .257, note the magazine block on the left (rear) of the box. The available space in the mag is 2.90 inches, measured at the bottom.
Measured some of what I had around the house.
150 gr .308 JHP 2.78"
165 gr .308 Amax 2.78"
175 gr .308 Match 2.78
100 gr .257 Npart 2.76"
117 gr .257 BTSP 2.77"
120 gr .257 NPart 2.75"
Pic shows the magazine box of a Mdl 70 FW (long action) in .257, note the magazine block on the left (rear) of the box. The available space in the mag is 2.90 inches, measured at the bottom.
Measured some of what I had around the house.
150 gr .308 JHP 2.78"
165 gr .308 Amax 2.78"
175 gr .308 Match 2.78
100 gr .257 Npart 2.76"
117 gr .257 BTSP 2.77"
120 gr .257 NPart 2.75"
Attachments
Last edited:
GooseGestapo
Member
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2003
- Messages
- 6,164
"PS"; Remington dosen't have to "squeeze" the .257Robt into a "short" action, (ie:Model 7).
They simply screw on a "factory" .257Roberts "Remington" barrel. Just like they did with the very, very, simular Model 722.
Sorry, but evidently you have never owned a .257Roberts! or handled factory ammo beside the "little sister" cartridge, the 6mmRemington.
Please, lets discuss "FACTS", NOT CONJECTURED OPINION.
Savage chambered the .250-3000 Savage in the M99, with which the REMINGTON competed.
Same reason that Chevy dosen't put FORD engines in it's vehicles....................
HMMMMMMMm
They simply screw on a "factory" .257Roberts "Remington" barrel. Just like they did with the very, very, simular Model 722.
Sorry, but evidently you have never owned a .257Roberts! or handled factory ammo beside the "little sister" cartridge, the 6mmRemington.
Please, lets discuss "FACTS", NOT CONJECTURED OPINION.
Savage chambered the .250-3000 Savage in the M99, with which the REMINGTON competed.
Same reason that Chevy dosen't put FORD engines in it's vehicles....................
HMMMMMMMm
redneck2
Member
wow...bet he's sorry he asked the question now...
I was just wondering.....which is better a 9mm or .45?
never quite understood why someone wants to get into a fist fight over 1/16" difference (or whatever) in the length of a rifle action, but maybe that's just me
I was just wondering.....which is better a 9mm or .45?
never quite understood why someone wants to get into a fist fight over 1/16" difference (or whatever) in the length of a rifle action, but maybe that's just me
SwampWolf
Member
woof didn't call anybody a "liar" in essence or otherwise. He disagreed with you. And just because you say he lost credibility doesn't make it so. This was a pretty good discussion until the egos got invested. woof is arguing that the Roberts has long been considered to be a cartridge intended to be chambered in a long-action rifle and that contemporary variances from this "model" are mostly custom propositions. If I'm understanding this right, Bigfoot and others contend that the Roberts was never meant to be relegated to the long-action and, from the get-go, because it is indeed "short enough", was always compatible with short-action rifles.
And if my "synopsis" of the "discussion"at hand is skewed then shoot me. It would be nice, though, if the discussions stay civil and to the point (that is, addressing the op's concerns).
wuchak
Member
I think the .257 Roberts is one of those cartridges that should be much more popular than it is. Just like the .358 Winchester.
PotatoJudge
Member
Short action, long action, who hunts with repeaters anyway?
- Status