it seems like all the 264 win data I can find is pretty anemic, an example is lyman 48th lists a max of 59grains of RL22 for a 140 grn bullet, good hell I run more than that in my 270 win and a 130 bullet. I guess what I really am looking for is what do I need and how much of it do I need to get into the 3200fps area with a 140 grn bullet from a 26" barrel .

What you're lookin' for is not very common. May be too much to expect.

about the same response as mr starling.
I had one once and didnt think it served up any more than the 270.
I used H4831 140gr sierrs best velosity was 3110f/s H4350 was a bit slower around 3050f/s.
I used 8 1/2 120 ww primers. and had no problem, tried some cci mag primers and my groups got worse.
My best loads were with H4831 toped with a 125gr nosler about 3220f/s.
Dave

Open up your Speer number 8 manual, that's the one I started loading for it with. Do a search of 264 mag loads, it's all been hashed over, pretty resently ta-boot.

CC,
While there are posts from time to time on the various forums on loads for the .264WM, there are also a few published sources for the .264WM using newer slow powders. As a for instance, Speer #14 has loads for the 140gr. slug using many powders, even Retumbo and US869. They use a 24" barrel, however, so I would expect higher velocities from a 26".

Another source is Rifle's "Handloader" magazine, issue #233, February 2005, which has an article by John Barsness titled "New Powders in the .264 Winchester Magnum". In this article, he lists some selected loads with a 140 gr. Speer bullet. He used an old pre-64 Model 70 Westerner (The ACTUAL "Westerner", the one with the 26" barrel). He had no problem exceeding 3200 fps using both Magpro and Magnum, and Retumbo was close. The Winchester factory loaded 140 gr. Power Points even clocked at 3186 fps in his rifle.

The old standby for the .264WM with 140 gr. bullets is H870. If you have some H870, or H5010, the old Speer manuals have loads listed for these, which should get you to 3200 fps as well.

is there a link to that article so I can read it?? 264 data frankly sucks, as for it being no better than a 270 thats horseshit, go to your ballistics program and run a 140 berger at 3200 fps the bullet has a bc of .640, it will utterly kick ass over anything a 270 can offer especially at long ranges 500-600 yards and beyond, wind drift is nearly half at these distances. in order to beat it your gonna have to shoot something with a bigger case than the STW or move to something big in the 338 class.

Cummins, I think you'll need to just work up some loads little by little and see when you start seeing pressure signs. That's the only way you'll get reliable data for warm/hot loads for your gun. In my 264 WM, I start to see pressure signs below manual listed maximums for some powder/primer combinations. Yet for other combinations I can safely go above the max listed in manuals with no pressure signs at all. I am able to get 3200 with 140 grain bullets, but the load I use took a while to find and won't necessarily be safe in a different gun.

quote:

I had one once and didnt think it served up any more than the 270

let me clarify that statement. (Old reloaders make bold statements)
the 264mag is an overbore as you probably are aware of. it operates at around 50k pressure as does a lot of cartrages in this group.
a 270 with a 22" barrel will produce close to the ssame ballistics as a 264 22" barrel with the same weight bullet the only thing we will do with the diffrence is split hairs and piss on the other guys foot.
the 264 is prone for pressure spikes when you get close to max loads. accuracy goes out the window. slower powder do not gain any thing except better load density higher pressures and lower velocities.
Just be cautious about those ballistic program and work up slow with the 264. I do not recommend more than a few grins of powder change when you are approaching max also what you see in cooler weather will be diffrent than warmer weather.
as stated before the best powder I used was H4831 140gr loaded near max which was 62grs.
to achieve 3100f/s 22" barrel. seen a lot of strange things at 62.5 grs TOO HOT like blown primers stiff bolt and extractor marks and that was only 1/2 a grain.
with a 26" you max get another 100 feet a second but my guess is the pressures will be over the top. when you get to the max velosity it is time to stop.
Use a chrony and work up from from 3 to 4 grains low and watch for velocities to drop off or staythe same. with each 1/2 grain change you should see 20 to 30 feet a second changes
Dave

quote:

Originally posted by hivelosity:
... Use a chrony and work up from from 3 to 4 grains low and watch for velocities to drop off or staythe same. with each 1/2 grain change you should see 20 to 30 feet a second changes
Dave

The problem is that this Method is not SAFE with all Powders. You can get well beyond a SAFE MAX with some before you ever see this happen.

There is only one way to really know you are at a SAFE Pressure as you approach MAX and it has not changed in over a hundred years.

Best of luck to you.

quote:

Originally posted by cummins cowboy:
is there a link to that article so I can read it?? 264 data frankly sucks, as for it being no better than a 270 thats horseshit, go to your ballistics program and run a 140 berger at 3200 fps the bullet has a bc of .640, it will utterly kick ass over anything a 270 can offer especially at long ranges 500-600 yards and beyond, wind drift is nearly half at these distances. in order to beat it your gonna have to shoot something with a bigger case than the STW or move to something big in the 338 class.

cummins: don't have a link to the article, but here is the data, as always, start lower and work up slowly:

"26" bbl. pre-64 Model 70 Westerner
140 gr. Speer bullet, these are his loads:

RL-25 64.0 gr. 3130 fps
MRP2 65.0 gr. 3114 fps
Magpro 65.0 gr. 3207 fps
Retumbo 65.0 gr. 3171 fps
Magnum 69.0 gr. 3240 fps

JB felt that Magpro and Magnum gave the best combination of accuracy and velocity in his rifle. He didn't test any 100 gr. bullets."

FWIW, I've found that IMR7828 with the 125gr Partition or the 130 Accubond is a great combination for the 264. and those bullets will handle anything that I would use a 264 for.

quote:

where to find real 264 win data??

For me the Hodgdon's website has the best current information on reloading for common cartridges. They also publish the pressures they measured with the loads and I like this a lot!

In all fairness there is a reason so many folks have said that their .270 shoots right alongside.....and that's because it does.

I like the .264 and have since I was a kid.....but it's tough to beat a .270 that weighs less and shorter. The .264 burns a lot more powder with very little extra return.

I had a friend with the Win 70 non-westerner 24" barrel. He used to just fill up the case with IMR 4350 and seat his bullet. I swear! Didn't matter what weight bullet, either. But he was always one of those 'gun was faster, car was faster' type of guys. He didn't want to listen to my voice of reason. The barrel burned out pretty quick. So as not to be in competition with my 25-06 any longer, he re-barreled it to 300 Win mag. He seemed satisfied that it beat my 30-06.

CC,
Olarmy beat me to the punch, posting JB's loads. However, I might add that back issues are still available from Wolfe Publishing. It is an excellent article for any .264WM fan. Go to www.riflemagazine.com, click on back issues, select Handloader, and scroll down to the February 2005 issue.

quote:

Originally posted by vapodog:

quote:

where to find real 264 win data??

For me the Hodgdon's website has the best current information on reloading for common cartridges. They also publish the pressures they measured with the loads and I like this a lot!

In all fairness there is a reason so many folks have said that their .270 shoots right alongside.....and that's because it does.

I like the .264 and have since I was a kid.....but it's tough to beat a .270 that weighs less and shorter. The .264 burns a lot more powder with very little extra return.

I think the hodgdon site illustrates the lack of good data, they only list one load as exceeding 3000 fps, when most agree 3200 fps is not a problem with a 140 grn bullet or at least close to it. also look at the h1000 load it lists a max of 58.5 I have safely run 69 grains of h1000 in 2 different 264's lyman 48th lists 63 gains of h1000 with only 46k cup pressure, why not the full 52k cup?? the data for the 264 is really all over the map, what I am looking for is consistent data that shows max loads with greater charges than my 270 win can run for crying out load, this is a magnum case, it should burn more powder.

quote:

I think the hodgdon site illustrates the lack of good data, they only list one load as exceeding 3000 fps, when most agree 3200 fps is not a problem with a 140 grn bullet or at least close to it.

I would suggest that there's a reason why the data is as recorded on the Hodgdons website and agree that other sources will vary.

That said I believe there also good reason you're finding it hard to get good data.....that being it don't exist in quantity.

Just do like I do....use the published data as a starting point and work up....

One more thing.....I also find that the Hodgdon's data that is listed in PSI and not CUP might be better data as it's newer data and I find it easier to relate to.....

IIRC the original data published for Winchester factory ballistics was 100 grain bullet at 3,700 fps and 140 grain bullet at 3,200 fps and it was later "poo poo'd" badly as quite overstated by several sources.