.256 Winchester Magnum

R

roy reali

New member
This evening I was looking through my copy of Cartridges of the World. More specifically I was thumbing through the "Obsolete" Cartridge section. I came across the .256 Winchester Magnum Cartridge. Why didn't this round work?

It launches a 60 grain bullet up 2800 feet per second and a 75 grainer some three feet per second slower. While these are not Earth-Shattering ballistics, this would seem to be an ideal round for small game and varmints. At reasonable distances coyotes would be toast.

In the notes section it states that several handguns and rifles were introduced in this round. Universal even made a semi-auto carbine for this cartridge. That would be about the dandiest jackrabbit gun around.

So, has anyone here had any experience with this round? Any theories why it has failed?
 
My book only shows the 75 grain bullets at 2400 fps which is 400 fps slower then what you are showing. I imagine that the case was a real PITA to make from .357 Magnum brass. From what I did find in a quick search is the rifles and pistol chambered for it had very short life spans. Plus with the .257 Roberts and .25-06 out there which are far more devastating on varmints and far more suitable for big game up to deer sized because they could use heavier bullets.

http://www.chuckhawks.com/256Win.htm

http://www.reloadbench.com/cartridges/256w.html
 
It may have something to do with a few things, such as: What other ctg came out about that time? How hard did Winchester push it on the market? Was more than one or two rifles chambered for it? Did Winchester try to poof it up and inflate it's little ego by advertising performances that it had no hope of safely achieving? There could be a whole lists of reasons why a ctg flops or dies. But on that note- there's much wonderment and head scratching as to why some others are still holding on.
 
About 25 years ago I traded a Martini-Cadet in .256 Win Mag. I found it a very good fox and Kangaroo round, and very well suited to the little Cadet action.

Like most young men obsessed with speed and power I eventually traded it on something else- and have regretted its loss ever since.
 
If memory hasn't failed, the 256 WM was originally chambered in the Ruger Hawkeye, a very nice single shot pistol in the 60"s. Can't remember why it didn't do well.

There's on up on gunsamerica but no pic.
 
It was brought out as an "answer" to the .22 Jet and the .221 Fireball.

None of them were particularly well received by the shooting public.

The .22 Jet could have serious set back problems when used in a revolver, something that was reported on extensively at the time, and that didn't help any of the .22 bottlenecked handgun cartridges, no matter what their application.

The most commonly available firearms for the .256 were Marlin lever-action rifles. Dandy, but not accurate enough to interest the varminting crowd, and not heavy enough for deer.
 
As others have noted, the 256 Win Mag lacked zip, and there were only 2 guns made for it: the Ruger Hawkeye, a version of the Blackhawk with a fixed breech mechanism that was problematic; and the Marlin 62, which was only offered for 2 years and not very many were actually sold due to quality and price. When you look at how other cartridges were launched at about the same time, it was almost as if they expected it to fail so it did. I have seen Winchester 92s rechambered for 256 WinMag, and it's kinda cute, but no winner in the hunting arena due to the iron sights on a 92. Not enough OOMPH to interest big game hunters, too much for small edible game, and there are better varmint cartridges available.
 
.256 Win. Marlin 62

I have one of these Marlin 62 rifles and it is a nifty little cartridge to play with. The rifle itself had potential but Marlin gave up on it too soon in my opinion. It is a handsome devil but could use some improvement. I wish that the magazine capacity was greater than 3 + 1 in the chamber. I also think it could use a stronger bolt locking surface as mine stretches the cases if using maximum recommended loadings.

It is not particularly hard to make the cases for. After annealing the .357 brass, I use a .30 Luger sizing die as the intermediate step between .357 and .256 diameters. I bought the RCBS die made for this purpose but in my experience found the Lee .30 Luger does a better job . I have had no trouble using nickel plated cases as some people reported they did.

As has already been mentioned, the cartridge/rifle combination itself isn't well suited for heavier bullets due to overall magazine length consideration and 1-14" rifling twist.

Is a fun little plinker but maybe just got beat out by other cartridges back in the time it was introduced. Back in the days of muscle cars and magnumitis guns it just didn't fit?
 
I think the nail in the coffin of the .256 was the failure of the revolver companies to come up with a solution to bottleneck setback.

I read an account of a custom .25 Hornet revolver that shot flat and did not set back or stick. Probably not as fast as a .256 but it Just Worked.
 
Scorch said:
As others have noted, the 256 Win Mag lacked zip, and there were only 2 guns made for it: the Ruger Hawkeye, a version of the Blackhawk with a fixed breech mechanism that was problematic; and the Marlin 62...
Click to expand...

There was also the Universal Vulcan, a variant of the M1 Carbine chambered in 256. Colt announced and advertised a 256 WM Python, but never sold any.
 
A RIMMED bottleneck case in an era where rimless (and belted) rule. Too light for big game, not made in guns accurate enough for serious varmint hunters.

Not a bad pest round, and the guns it came in would do for that, BUT the public wasn't looking for a new pest round in those days.

Like the .22 Rem Jet, the .256 was based on the .357 Magnum case, but I doubt more than a handful of people with serious reloading OCD actually made cases out of .357, as it was a multi stage process (or the brass would fail) and a serious pain in the butt to do. Pretty sure most folks just bought factory brass when they could get it, or most likely just bought ammo, and reloaded it.
 
OP is 11 years old.
However, the Rem Jet didn't sell either. Neither were chambered in enough guns. Likely not enough interest in 1961 for there to be much in the way of components either.
 
The most commonly available firearms for the .256 were Marlin lever-action rifles. Dandy, but not accurate enough to interest the varminting crowd, and not heavy enough for deer.
Click to expand...

I guess someone forgot to ask the .243 on deer?

The reality is that a lot of cartridge can push 75 grains to all sort of high velocities.

How many cartridges do you need to do the same thing.

If it does not do something no one else does then natural selection kills it off. It may even be a tad better but not established and dies off.

We don't need 20 cartridges for the same job. One becomes the norm (sometimes two) and you have all sorts of component for it reloading or availability when needed.

Some ares you can count on 30/30 over the counter, some 30-06 etc. If you need a box of ammo that counts big time not the 256 whupeee 1000 miles away.
 
My friend has a Marlin lever in that caliber. Years ago He asked me to be on the look-out for 68 Gr HP Speers because such bullets were becoming hard to find. Bought a couple box off EBay for him. Fairly accurate little rifle. Although with a scope. Outstanding accuracy was the usual as he too was a home reloader. I assume my friend shot allot of deer with his. As the rifle still his favorite to tote in the woods or hammer vermin in his yard after dark.
 
"I guess someone forgot to ask the .243 on deer?"

Despite the fact that this is an 11 year old thread, I'm curious why you think the .243 and the .256 are in the same class, RC?

The .243 churns up nearly triple the energy of the .256.

They're not even remotely comparable.



"How many cartridges do you need to do the same thing."

I've often posited that virtually every shooting situation on earth would be easily resolved with the following:

12 gauge
.22 LR
.30-06
.375 H&H

There you go. The ultimate 4-cartridge battery.

Now where the hell is the fun in that?

Such limitations would make places like this very, very dull indeed.
 
article

Since this thread has been raised from the dead.....the latest issue of "Rifle" magazine has an article on the .256. The focus is on the Marlin Levermatic rifle, little on the cartridge at all.......a pity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top