Oomingmak

OP............ on my .257 Bee I find a Leupold 4.5 -14 is about the right amount of glass.

Ridge Runner

sorry for the hijack, this is one of my passions, will listen to anyone who has an opinion if its legit, but some seem to think its wrong just cause it is, because this might happen (have they witnessed it happen?) or it could lead inexperienced folks to try it and possibly wound a game animal, yes wounding a game animal to suffer a long slow death is bad, but until they can confirm that there are more animals wounded beyond 500 yards (which they have not nor will they ever do) then they're opinion doesn't count.
RR

jerry d

How do you guys that don't favor longrange hunting feel about the use of snipers in warfare?

CalHunter

RR, thanks for offering an olive branch to the others but, in fairness, you were only one of many who "hijacked" the topic and that is kind of what makes topics fun around here. Many topics do change as the posts come in or develop into more as it were. Long Range hunting is a legitimate topic and would do well as its' own topic.

In answer to the OP's questions, about the effective range of the .257 Weatherby Mag, yes, it would be effective at 500-600 yards. I'm sure somebody on the site has likely hunted with one at those distances. Just from a ballistics aspect, it would definitely have enough power for deer and antelope at those ranges.

It's a bit harder to answer your question about scope power for those ranges since the amount of power you would think is necessary might be different from somebody else's perspective or needs. I think it was NoMercy who brought up another issue to consider which is the higher power adjustable scopes frequently have a higher power low end (I believe his example was 6.5 power on the low end).

If you have a buddy who actually owns a .257 Weatherby Mag, that would be an easy enough answer--simply ask to shoot it at those ranges with whatever scope he has on it and see if it's enough magnification. If that's not available, you may want to shoot whatever rifle of yours has the highest power scope at 500-600 yard targets and see what you think about the power needed. If you have a reasonable spotting scope, you could further check what minimum amount of magnification you think is necessary. Good luck in your quest--sounds like a fun one.

Bbj270

I have a leupold 3-9 on my 257 wby. Works fine would not hesitate to take a 500- or 600 yard shot with it. Works fine only have a couple of places where a 600 yard shot is possible. Most are 200 and under,and most of them are under 100. the farthest shot with the 257 was about 200. Deer drop in its tracts. If I was going to focus main on long range I would get at last a 4-12, but never felt under scoped with the 3-9 on it.

Oomingmak

Generally I would agree with you. I moved up to the 4.5-14 on my .257 a number of years ago as I found I liked a bit more power for shot placement on coyotes and marmots at long range. That said, there is no doubt a 3-9 is enough glass for most hunting situations.

Nomercy448

One of the reasons I stand up so much on high magnification scopes is that I do more coyote hunting than anything else. Coyote hunting at mid to long range, for me at least, is a very different thing than big game hunting at that range - visually - so I have different expectations and requirements from my optics. While pronghorn are larger than coyotes, they're still considerably smaller than whitetails, so the same philosophy may apply for you in this decision.

A coyote will be about half as tall, half as thick, roughly half as long, and half as deep chested as a whitetail deer. Equally, a coyotes lungs are about half as long and half as deep, and their hearts are half as large in diameter and length. By and large about 1/4 the mass and half as large in any given dimension. What that means: A deer's vitals at 9x are the same size in your scope as a coyotes vitals at 18x. Your aiming hold on a deer at 100yrds is visually equivalent to a coyote at 200yrds. Similarly, the target is much less forgiving, since the actual target - the vitals - is cut in half, meaning less margin for error in placement.

So when I'm hunting coyotes, I have less margin for error, and a smaller target in front of me. It's harder to see, and harder to hit. As such, I want enough magnification to manage that change. Since I do more coyote hunting than deer hunting, I get used to having the higher mag, and I tend to carry that over to my big game rifles too.

super_hunt54

RR, The one thing that you can not solve with a math calculation, trig, geometry, algebra, or any other equation is the natural movement of a live game animal during the time it takes from trigger break to bullet impact. A relaxed whitetail simply feeding along without a worry in the world can take a step in that amount of time and turn a perfectly placed heart lung shot into a rear gut shot. Now yes sometimes a gut hit deer will simply take a few bounds or even just a couple of steps and bed down. But just about as often they will run for a couple of hundred yards. Now, you have gut shot a deer at ,lets say 700 yards. You know the hole is going to seal up as 99% of gut shots do so NO BLOOD. So now you have to travel 700 yards to where you hit it. Were you able to keep sight of the deer? Maybe, maybe not. Lets assume you couldn't so you will have to rely on trailing. No blood, your screwed and so is that poor creature you just gut shot because you were too damn lazy to get in to a reasonable distance. I don't give two hoots how good a shot you are. You can not control that creatures movements nor can you predict them. I am more than capable of placing 10 out of 10 in the 10 ring at ranges 1000m+ and I absolutely refuse to take a shot past 300 yards on a live big game animal for that one simple reason. You ask for proof when the simple truth is, how many people come on here or even when talking to your face talk about "the poor shots" they made or "brag" about the stupid decisions they made to take a shot at 700 yards? The proof is how many bones are found each year from gut hit deer and elk from people that are just too lazy or have no woodsman skills to get within reasonable shot ranges. I sir have a little more than 40 years hunting under my belt and have had long range experience galore and have very well seen with my own 2 eyes the error of longer than 400 yard shots on live game. You paper targets and gongs DO NOT MOVE in your practice sessions.

So you say my opinion doesn't count? I have seen all this ...Deleted by CalHunter... with my own eyes. I have seen the poor animals days later after suffering horrible and painful long deaths because of shear stupidity and just downright being lazy.

...Deleted by CalHunter...

Ridge Runner

62 shothere beyond 500 yards, haven't not recovered one yet, you have placed no hard data, facts, or proof that more are lost at long range than at close range, you have never shot them at long range you don't have a clue about what/how I do cause you didn't read all of my posts, so NO! your opinion means nothing, because you don't know enough to know you just don't know

...Deleted by CalHunter...
RR

Topgun 3006

Never mind!