bullet performance in 264wmg

09 January 2011, 18:45

I am looking for advice regarding bullet choice in my 264winmag.
I have been using A-max and Lapua Scenars, both extremely accurate but one or two failures have got me looking for a replacement.
I am open to suggestion but with the limited amount of bullets available in the UK the choice is somewhat depleted.
Nosler 130 Accubond
Swift 130 scirocco
berger 130 VLD
are readily available, Shooting is limited to 500yds.
I have been told that for medium sized game the Scirocco is too hard,what experiences has anyone had with the above and what would you choose..

regards
griff

09 January 2011, 19:01

Cane Rat

Of those bullets the Accubond would be my choice for hunting but the Berger will most likely be more accurate.

11 January 2011, 22:32

Stonecreek

I would agree with Cane Rat and try the 130 Accubond as my first choice.

HOWEVER, if your .264 has the standard SAAMI zero-leade throat, the Accubond will have to seat far deeper than I find practical. If you have such a throat, then you might find the 125 grain Partition more adaptable to your rifle.

I doubt the Scricco being "too hard" since it has a pure copper jacket, but by the same token, the pure copper jacket tends to foul bores rather quickly and badly.

11 January 2011, 23:53

ramrod340

quote:
HOWEVER, if your .264 has the standard SAAMI zero-leade throat, the Accubond will have to seat far deeper than I find practical. If you have such a throat, then you might find the 125 grain Partition more adaptable to your rifle.

I use nothing but the accubonds anymore. For light as well as heavy game. StoneCreek makes a good point about the lenght of the accubond. Wouldn't hurt to try.

12 January 2011, 00:03

vapodog

quote:
Nosler 130 Accubond
Swift 130 scirocco
berger 130 VLD

Of those I'd be picking the Accubond.

I've also used the 120 BT and the 125 partition from Nosler with good success.

My favorite 6.5 bullet however is the 6.5 120 grain Northfork HP....

12 January 2011, 00:08

Pancho

130 gr Accubond - You'll never look back.

12 January 2011, 02:10

griff

Thanks for the replies, will take on boards everyones suggestion and go with the Accubond.
The rifle is a custom build and the throat was chambered for a 140gn Lapua Scenar.

regards
Griff

12 January 2011, 02:43

Stonecreek

quote:
The rifle is a custom build and the throat was chambered for a 140gn Lapua Scenar.

In that case the Accubond is a good bet.

12 January 2011, 03:01

rcamuglia

quote:
Originally posted by Stonecreek:
I would agree with Cane Rat and try the 130 Accubond as my first choice.

HOWEVER, if your .264 has the standard SAAMI zero-leade throat, the Accubond will have to seat far deeper than I find practical. If you have such a throat, then you might find the 125 grain Partition more adaptable to your rifle.

I doubt the Scricco being "too hard" since it has a pure copper jacket, but by the same token, the pure copper jacket tends to foul bores rather quickly and badly.

I would choose the 130 gr Scirocco as my first choice. It has a higher BC than most of the other 140 grain hunting bullets.

It has a long secant ogive allowing it to be seated out further if your chamber has no throat. It also has less bearing surface than the Nosler bullets. I have found higher velocities with this bullet as opposed to the long bearing surface Noslers.

I think the amount of fouling you will get hugely depends on your barrel's quality. I have about 100 rounds down my bore and at least half of them with the Scirocco. It has stopped copper fouling virtually completely. It is becoming faster as well.

The last cleaning session had at least 30 rounds of Scirocco through the bore and I got absolutely no copper fouling (Blue or Green) out of the barrel even after using Wipe Out...

12 January 2011, 21:25

MuskegMan

Check out these threads at 24HCF:

http://www.24hourcampfire.com/...php/topics/4769172/1

http://www.24hourcampfire.com/...php/topics/4795483/1

12 January 2011, 21:47

rcamuglia

These tests in the link are for velocities far short of what a .264 WM will produce, yet good for evaluating the bullets....

140 gr Accubond: BC: .509 Retained 90 grains of weight

The 130 gr Accubond: BC of .488

130 gr Swift Scirocco: BC of .571 Retained 125 grains of weight

12 January 2011, 22:05

SmokinJ

quote:
Originally posted by rcamuglia:
These tests in the link are for velocities far short of what a .264 WM will produce, yet good for evaluating the bullets....

140 gr Accubond: BC: .509 Retained 90 grains of weight

The 130 gr Accubond: BC of .488

130 gr Swift Scirocco: BC of .571 Retained 125 grains of weight

RC, the point that eluded you is that the 264 WM being a magnum with much more velocity is most often used for long distance hunting. Those 6.5x55 100 yard velocities will be very much like the velocities the 264 WM with have at much more further distances. You'll have to look at the ballistics charts to see where those velocities and yardage cross one another.

12 January 2011, 22:34

ramrod340

quote:
140 gr Accubond: BC: .509 Retained 90 grains of weight

The 130 gr Accubond: BC of .488

130 gr Swift Scirocco: BC of .571 Retained 125 grains of weight

I have no doubt that the Scirocco is a good bullet. But I can't ever find them on the 2nds or close outs lists.

12 January 2011, 23:03

vapodog

quote:
Scirocco

This just might be the best bullet ever made.... Having said that I tried them a few years ago and couldn't get good groups and gave up on them.... Mind you this isn't at all a condemnation of the bullet....

I've since read about fouling and then I see that they are changed to the scirocco II.....but there was so many alternatives that I found that do work that I just never tried them again.

Terminal performance experience is nonexistent for me as they never got off the shooting range....seems one don't get a second chance to make a premium bullet.

The A-Frames however are a fabulous bullet..... at least in my experience.

I had the very same experience with Grand Slams.....IMO they are nothing but a great marketing scam.....premium price for a standard cup and core bullet that also didn't shoot well for me but came in great packaging. These too might be a fabulous bullet.....but never got away from the range.

12 January 2011, 23:44

rcamuglia

quote:
Originally posted by vapodog:
quote:
Scirocco

This just might be the best bullet ever made.... Having said that I tried them a few years ago and couldn't get good groups and gave up on them.... Mind you this isn't at all a condemnation of the bullet....

.

I hear ya!

I've also heard that some folks can't get them to shoot. In fact, in my first .264 barrel they wouldn't. I called Swift at that time and talked with the owner. He insisted that they needed to jump .050". Well I never tried anymore at that time but had a few left when the new barrel was installed. I started them like always for development at .030" off and they shot well. After doing the seating depth test it seems that .030" off is the best.

I just bought 900 of them when they were on sale at Midway.

It does seem that they are the best hunting bullet ever made! On the cutaway's of them, look how thick the pure copper jacket is in comparison to other jacketed bullets. The core is pure lead bonded to that thick jacket. What a great profile, ogive, BT, and BC!!

Now I just need to start shooting critters with them!

13 January 2011, 05:54

woods

I have also had a hard time getting Scirrocco's to shoot, that was with 180 gr 30 caliber bullets and 150 gr 284 caliber bullets. When looking for a 6.5 bullet with a high BC decided to try the 130 gr Scirrocco II's and they shot great!

Like rc I found they shoot great right around 3200 fps. I did an Audette which was more to determine powder charge and velocities than an accuracy node

and decided on 54.5 gr for ~3200 fps and then did a seating depth test

The seating depth was just a further confirmation that the further from the lands you seat the lower the pressure and consequently the less velocity you get (I know HC, velocity is not always a direct indication of pressure but most of the time it is). So to keep velocity up I can either seat at .030" off or seat deeper and add a little powder, but .030" is just fine with me.

Anyway IMO the 130 gr Scirrocco II is a different animal than other Scirrocco's I've shot. But it did inspire me to do some more testing with my 280AI and the 150's.

BTW, rc you can add this to your post "Is woods always right" since I'm the one who turned you on to them!

PS: who needs a 264 win mag loudenboomerbarrelburner when you can shoot a 6.5 rem mag

____________________________________
There are those who would misteach us that to stick in a rut is consistency - and a virtue, and that to climb out of the rut is inconsistency - and a vice.
- Mark Twain |

Chinese Proverb: When someone shares something of value with you and you benefit from it, you have a moral obligation to share it with others.

___________________________________

13 January 2011, 08:43

rcamuglia

quote:
Originally posted by woods:
I have also had a hard time getting Scirrocco's to shoot, that was with 180 gr 30 caliber bullets and 150 gr 284 caliber bullets. When looking for a 6.5 bullet with a high BC decided to try the 130 gr Scirrocco II's and they shot great!

Like rc I found they shoot great right around 3200 fps. I did an Audette which was more to determine powder charge and velocities than an accuracy node

and decided on 54.5 gr for ~3200 fps and then did a seating depth test

The seating depth was just a further confirmation that the further from the lands you seat the lower the pressure and consequently the less velocity you get (I know HC, velocity is not always a direct indication of pressure but most of the time it is). So to keep velocity up I can either seat at .030" off or seat deeper and add a little powder, but .030" is just fine with me.

Anyway IMO the 130 gr Scirrocco II is a different animal than other Scirrocco's I've shot. But it did inspire me to do some more testing with my 280AI and the 150's.

BTW, rc you can add this to your post "Is woods always right" since I'm the one who turned you on to them!

PS: who needs a 264 win mag loudenboomerbarrelburner when you can shoot a 6.5 rem mag

14 January 2011, 01:41

MuskegMan

quote:
Originally posted by woods:
PS: who needs a 264 win mag loudenboomerbarrelburner when you can shoot a 6.5 rem mag

Okay, so you've established the 264 Winny is a barrel burner.

Is the 7mm Remmy one also? Does 0.020" make any diff?

14 January 2011, 03:02

rcamuglia

Hey woods,

After really having a good look at your seating depth test groups, you really need to shoot the .060" off load. The .030" off load has too much vertical dispersion.

The 25 fps won't matter.

14 January 2011, 05:33

woods

quote:
Originally posted by MuskegMan:
quote:
Originally posted by woods:
PS: who needs a 264 win mag loudenboomerbarrelburner when you can shoot a 6.5 rem mag

Okay, so you've established the 264 Winny is a barrel burner.

Is the 7mm Remmy one also? Does 0.020" make any diff?

That is the reputation and mostly because the 264 performs best with the slowest powder you can find. Slow powders burn throats out. Overbore cartridges that use slow powders burn throats out. The powders to use are slow like H870 or WC872.

This chart may or may not be accurate but it can be used as a point of reference

but IMO when compared to a 7 mag using H4831 (about the burn speed of RL22) or a 6.5 rem mag using IMR4350 (about the burn speed of RL17), then the 264 win mag could be considered a barrel burner.

rc, rc, rc ....... I know what you are doing! You want me to slow down my 6.5 rem mag so you can brag about how much faster your loudenboomerbarrelburner is shooting!

14 January 2011, 05:42

rcamuglia

Not at all!

You need to pick the best load for your rifle, not the velocity you want! I know you want it to match your aimpoints on your reticle, but that much vertical will be a detriment at long range.

And I want to brag

14 January 2011, 19:25

wildcat junkie

quote:
Originally posted by woods:
PS: who needs a 264 win mag loudenboomerbarrelburner when you can shoot a 6.5 rem mag

Who needs either when a 6.5 X 55 loaded to similar pressure will right on their heels?

15 January 2011, 05:37

Doc

quote:
Originally posted by rcamuglia:
I would choose the 130 gr Scirocco as my first choice.

me too

I found excellent 130/270 Scirocco loads with necked down Lapua .06 hulls, 150 Scirocco/7mag, 180/30.06 and 180/300RUM loads.

If I didn't like to play so much, I can honestly say for most hunting I do, I could easily settle on those 3 bullets in the above referenced calibers for almost 100% of my hunting.

15 January 2011, 05:43

vapodog

quote:
Originally posted by wildcat junkie:
quote:
Originally posted by woods:
who needs a 264 win mag loudenboomerbarrelburner when you can shoot a 6.5 rem mag

Who needs either when a 6.5 X 55 loaded to similar pressure will right on their heels?

Hells bells folks....who needs any of them when you could have just bought a .270 Winchester.....

15 January 2011, 05:44

Doc

quote:
Originally posted by vapodog:
quote:
Originally posted by wildcat junkie:
quote:
Originally posted by woods:
who needs a 264 win mag loudenboomerbarrelburner when you can shoot a 6.5 rem mag

Who needs either when a 6.5 X 55 loaded to similar pressure will right on their heels?

Hells bells folks....who needs any of them when you could have just bought a .270 Winchester.....

I REALLY REALLY REALLY AGREE WITH THAT STATEMENT

15 January 2011, 05:45

jeffeosso

what is the perfrmance of a 264winmag like?
about like a 270 winchester, with more noise and recoil

15 January 2011, 05:45

vapodog

15 January 2011, 05:52

Doc

270 rocks

15 January 2011, 06:49

woods

270

6.5 rem mag

264 win mag

15 January 2011, 06:53

vapodog

quote:
Originally posted by woods:
270

6.5 rem mag

264 win mag

fixed it for ya!

15 January 2011, 06:55

Doc

shouldn't it be a pic of the SR-71 Blackbird representing the 270?

15 January 2011, 07:06

vapodog

quote:
Originally posted by woods:
270

6.5 rem mag

264 win mag

There....fixed it again.

15 January 2011, 09:03

rcamuglia

As soon as you guys can show me some .270 caliber bullets with a BC of .615 (.264 Lapua Scenar) that can be fired at around 3250 fps out of a .270 Winchester, then maybe we'll talk.

.264 Win Mag!

15 January 2011, 17:57

Hot Core

quote:
Whammed in by the esteAmed Mr. Woods:
I know HC, velocity is not always a direct indication of pressure but most of the time it is.

But for sure, Velocity is always misleading about what the Pressure might(or might not) be.

-----

By the way, I see the 270Win as equivalent to a Yugo.

15 January 2011, 18:03

rcamuglia

quote:
Originally posted by Hot Core:

By the way, I see the 270Win as equivalent to a Yugo.

15 January 2011, 18:25

Doc

quote:
Originally posted by rcamuglia:
As soon as you guys can show me some .270 caliber bullets with a BC of .615 (.264 Lapua Scenar) that can be fired at around 3250 fps out of a .270 Winchester, then maybe we'll talk.

.264 Win Mag!

Naaaa, none of that matters inside reasonable hunting distances. But my 169.5 grain Wildcat bullets have a better BC than that, and launched from a 270AM, they dust the 264 and beat it into submission.

Ultimately, inside of 300 yards, a good flat based accurate bullet will put the critter down the same as any other bullet with good hunting conditions.