For mountain hunting I asked my smith for a rifle. We finaly found that the 6,5x68S would be the right choise.
Then I read an article in a hunting magazin about the 264 winchester magnum. My gunsmith couldn't give me informations about this round, he never had any contact with the 264.

So my questions
- compare it with the 6,5x68
- which bullet weights are possible
- reloading easy?
Which rifles are chambered for the 264?

Burkhard

Both a bit overbore for my taste. Of all of the 6.5 calibers I dont think that any of them have any significant improvment over the 6.5X55. The 6.5/06 will come close to the ballistics of the 264 Win, but it never became a propritaty cartridge due to the 270 Win.

Saeed did an interesting test quite some time ago comparing the 6.5X55 with the 308 Win for accuracy using quality components and the same Hart action for both chamberings. While it is not a conclusive test, the 6.5 bested the great 308.

The Swede is a very underappreciated round. It wont burn out a barrel like the old Winchester magnum and will kill deer sized game just as dead.

If you want to go with that much power, I would suggest a 7x64. Much more efficient, lots of power and range.

when it comes to 6.5 caliber there's a tough time to significantly beat the 6.5 X 55..

However in Germany there's the 6.5 X 57 as well and probably more.

The .264 Winchester Magnum is a very overbore cartridge. Essentially it's a necked down 7 MM Rem Mag or very close to it. I've used it and find it to be a spectacular cartridge but as is said.....no more so than a .270 Winchester.

As soon as the 6.5-06 becomes a factory round I'm making one. It's also a great round. However in the end it's very difficult to outshine the old Swede if it's properly handloaded.

If I was a Kraut, I'd be looking to the 6.5 X 57 however.

Sorry Vapo but a properly designed 264 is orders of magnitude more rifle than the 270.

It's a moot point for Burkhard because (a) the factory guns were never set up to maximze the potential, (b) the factory ammo wasn't either.

In a custom rifle with a 27"-28" barrel and proper throating it is a superior high velocity game round.

quote:

Sorry Vapo but a properly designed 264 is orders of magnitude more rifle than the 270.

Tigger.....you knew that would require a reply.....

I've owned both and can easily assure anyone that when it comes to game typically hunted with this class of cartridge that there is no cartridge that is orders of magnitide greater than the .270 Winchester. This includes the .270 weatherby and any other cartridge with the majik name "MAGNUM" attched to it.....and further I'll stand behind that statement using a .270 Winchester in a 22" featherweight barrel.

Sounds like we need a bunch of beer and a campfire to settle this one! The calibers may be similar but the class of cartidge isn't the same. And as fast as the 270 Weatherby shoots 130s, I just don't think it can be classed the same either because of the bullets. 160 gr 6.5 bullets are just magic to me when you can drive them as fast as a long barreled 264 can do it. I would take mine over my 7 STW any day.

.264WinMag is DEAD, it was killed by 7mmRemMag.
RWS--7mmRM 10,5g KS V200=790m/s, E200=3277J
RWS--6,5x68 8,2g KS V200=795m/s, E200=2591J
And....

.270Winnie is a "BASTARD child" of 7x64 and hardly worth--- As a European I would rather have the Brenneke.

Its not dead, Paola, just in a comma. Actually, I shoot the 6.5/7Mag wildcat which is very much alive!

quote:

Originally posted by Burkhard:

Then I read an article in a hunting magazin about the 264 winchester magnum. My gunsmith couldn't give me informations about this round, he never had any contact with the 264.

So my questions

- which bullet weights are possible
- reloading easy?
Which rifles are chambered for the 264?

Burkhard

As far as I know this is the last rifle here chambered for the .264 Win Mag

There's a few used guns out there and it's an easy to do custom by rebarreling any current 7 MM Mag gun.

Reloading is a snap and bullet weights are world wide...typically people use the 140 grain for hunting here. Also the selection includes 87, 100, 120, 129, 140, and 160 grain.

The .264 win mag will push the 160 grain bullet to 2,900'/sec....that's 883 meters/sec for the europeans here.

vapodog...you have a pm

I must be getting "mellow" in my old age . I picked up a 6.5x55 CZ 550 FS a year ago and I'm now in the process of trading a .270 Win 70 Fwt for a .260 Rem Kimber 84M at my favorite gun grotto. The intermediate 6.5s loaded with 125-140gr fodder are all I need for deer for the most part. If I ever need more gun for open country mulies and/or elk, I'll grab my 7mm Rem Mag.

Seeing that you are in Germany, I would opt for the 6.5x65RWS

6,5x55 SEis a wonderful performer and can be fit into very light guns like the Sauer 202 LAW, and the R93 Blaser. The 6,5x57R or 6,5x65R would make a splendid single shot

Aleko

Myself I have a 6.5x57R K95. It has a good trigger, excellent stock design but is a little too light for me to want to shoot at a high dollar trophy of a lifetime when my heart is thumping. I did shoot a nice chamois at 250yards and a mouflon at 200yards with a shot apiece but it took more skill than my standard weight 6.5x55 or 7x57.

When I go again (as I must it was such fun!) I want a 8.25-8.75lb rifle with straight comb, 1.75lb trigger pull and low mounted 6x42 Swaro shooting a bullet of 0.45 or better at around 2,800fps.

Both are possible with my 6.5x55 and 7x57 but neither are legal

With 120 gr bullets 3300 to 3400 fps the .264 is a fair measure flatter than a .270 .

quote:

a properly designed 264 is orders of magnitude more rifle than the 270.

Now THAT'S funny!

Vapo, Ruger just made a run of 264 WM SS M77 MKII's with a gray laminated stock. I handled one Saturday at the local shootatorium. Nice rifle.

I'd rather have a 270...

Personally, I'd stick with the regular old 270 Win. and forget any ideas of a 6.5 cartridge.

AD

quote:

Vapo, Ruger just made a run of 264 WM SS M77 MKII's with a gray laminated stock.

Brad, we're talking guns and cartridges here..... you're talking Ruger. That's different.

Ouch

I would build a 6.5x.284 on a std. or Mauser action. This would allow you to seat bullets out & get a few more fps. Just about the right bore to powder ratio for a 6.5. Being that you are over the pond, maybe a 6.5x55ai.

Thank you for all the informations. As I see its nearly impossible to use a 264, no rifles, no brass no factory ammo.
Your advices to take the 270 maybe right but very hard to find in Germany.
I have a Mauser in 6,5x57 with a 12x56 S&B scope for fox hunting during night time from the high seat, maybe I should try this rifle first for the mountain job, as its is only for chamois.

Burkhard

Burkhard

What type of game is on the menu? Gams, Ibex, Rothirch, Muffel, Murmeltier ??
A 6,5X68 with 1-8 in twist should be perfect for bullets 130 -140 grains.

Another nice caliber is 6,5X64 Brenneke, brass has been available and can be formed from 270 win or 3006.

If you want a exotic caliber 6,5X63 Messner Magnum might fill the bill. http://home.snafu.de/l.moeller/index.html A bit more information about rifles and calibers

264 win mag is almost dead and factory loaded ammo can be very hard to come by in Europe.

Cheers
/JOHAN

.

That's not rude, but do try this one:
The Marsian

Think I would go with a good .270 WCF, IF I did not have a 6.5-06.
LLS

quote:

Originally posted by Paolo9,5x73:
That's not rude, but do try this one:
The Marsian

It's always pleasing to see folks thinking "outside the box" as they've done here.

In this case however I'm even more thankful that they've acted on their thinking on their own nickel and not mine.

quote:

Vapo, Ruger just made a run of 264 WM SS M77 MKII's with a gray laminated stock. I handled one Saturday at the local shootatorium. Nice rifle.

I'd rather have a 270...

Brad, I am much impressed with Rugers and laminated stocks. I wish my 260 was so equipped instead of a conoe paddle.

Can you please give a little more detail on the 264. Esp barrel length and contour.

Ruger used to make a very nice 25-06 in the old days of tang safeties with a 26 inch heavy magnum contour barrel. I would hope that if they are building a 264, they have revisited that same barrel.

About ten years ago I found a Win 70 classic in 264. It is a replacement for the Ruger 25-06 which I earlier described. When asked about the cartridge, I describe it as a 25-06 on steroids.

The cartridge also does a pretty fair job of replacing either the 270 or the 280 Rem if all cartridges are loaded to equivelent pressures. And with 140 or 160 gr bullets in the 264, the 7mmRem mag has very little actual balistic advantage over it.

quote:

Originally posted by tiggertate:
Its not dead, Paola, just in a comma. Actually, I shoot the 6.5/7Mag wildcat which is very much alive!

Tiggertate,

How is your 6.5/7mag wildcat different from my 264Win?
Have you changed the shoulder angle or taper of the case?

I am only asking because we have necked my 264 brass up and loaded it for the 7mag on occasion and also ran 7mag brass through my dies to shoot in my 264.

I am familiar with an old retired machinist who has a reamer for a 270Marc Magnum. It is a 300 win Mag necked down to 270. Now that would be an interesting wildcat with the new powders available today.

quote:

Originally posted by tiggertate:
Sounds like we need a bunch of beer and a campfire to settle this one! The calibers may be similar but the class of cartidge isn't the same. And as fast as the 270 Weatherby shoots 130s, I just don't think it can be classed the same either because of the bullets. 160 gr 6.5 bullets are just magic to me when you can drive them as fast as a long barreled 264 can do it. I would take mine over my 7 STW any day.

Tigger......I've no doubt you love yer .264. But ain't you trying to put it in the same class as the 7-STW???? Sorry. That dog don't hunt. We're talking squarely 1000 ft./lbs. difference between the two. Anywhere in the world of ballistics, 33% is a significant difference. "The class of cartridge isn't the same".

Burkhard,
I will try to answer your four questions. The 6.5x68 and 264 Win. Mag are are very close in their ballistics with every bullet weight. Bullet weights are available from about 90 grains to 160 grains, and friends tell me that it is as easy as any other magnum to load for. Winchester was making limited runs of this caliber in the Model 70 a few years back, and Ruger has done the same on a more limited basis. I still see used Winchesters and SAKO's in this caliber at gun shops around here. I think that the 6.5x68 would be a great mountain caliber. The 6.5x55 and 6.5x57 are also great mountain rifles (your Mauser 6.5x57 sounds like a great mountain rife) There is nothing wrong with the .270 Win. but the 6.5x68 is rare in the U.S. and it simply appeals to me more. Let us know how the project goes.

Brad, which shop had that 264? Powderhorn?

I don't have one, but have long thought the 264 Win is a great-looking cartridge. Everyone wants to load it till the barrel melts, but there's no reason to. You can get excelletn, flat trajectories out of the best bulelts with only 24" bbl and some of the slower powders.
I like the 6.5-06 even better, since it comes close with less powder and more magazine room.
However, since you mention the 6.5x65, I know 'catting is a difficult task in Germany, but for any of us here, consider a 6.5x68-57 Improved. Chamebred in a M70 or like, with 3.05-10" COL, and you've got yourself a mini-WSM. Not quite as overbore as the WinMag, and a lighter, shorter rifle. Still would need a 24" bbl, but that's not a problem to me.

It is great fun to speculate but you have a perfect mountain calibre already!

My advice would be to get a good 108 or 120gr load and if you can a more compact scope in lower mounts. If you can hit a fox at 100m with it you can hit a chamois at 250m - remember that as 90% of shooting at game is in the head!

Burkhard,

If your 6.5X57 is of a reasonable weight for the mountains then that maybe a good one anyway. The thing that I would do is to get another scope for it that's smaller and be able to switch them.

Given the choice of a 6.5X68S or a 264 WM I would go with the Shuler. It's rimless with a good shoulder and plenty large enough for the 6.5 bore. I happen to have owned 264 WM's for a long time because they are easier to find here. For you the 6.5X68S would be a fine long range rifle. You could use one in the mountains too in places where there was not too much climbing. That's if there is such a place.

I carry my heavy 264 in meadows and sit and watch with it.

As for a compromise my 270 WSM in a Kimber Montana will do about all that the 6.5 magnums will do and it weighs much less.

Probably is no single "right" answer for everyone to this question....

For myself, I have chosen a bit odd combo...a Ruger No. 1 with a 28" pencil-weight Hart matt stainless barrel, chambered to 6.5x53-R.

The alpine hunters of Europe long found the 6.5x54 Mannlicher-Schoenauer round in the M/S carbine to be adequate for chasing around the craggy heights hunting Chamois. This is the same cartridge, except with a rim, fired through an 8-10" longer barrel.

Considering the short action length of the No. 1 action, the combo has an overall length just about the same as your typical bolt gun with a 23" barrel, without the weight of a magazine gun with a regular length one-piece stock.

Anyway, I have found it light and easy to carry, and with either 139 or 156 gr. bullets, quite adequate for medium size game.

Like I say, not for everyone, but it was/is my choice for chasing around in the peaks.

.256 Newton!!

Alf,

what about a single shot break down action in 6,5x65R or even the 6,5x68R. Its light but the recoil!!

Paolo, this is really a very interessting rifle.

9,3 rifleman, who much is the difference in velocity comparing 6,5x57, 6,5x68. I only hunt chamois no distance over 300 meters.

BTW my gunsmith is absolutely against the 6,5x68.

Burkhard

Mike, Shedhorn down in Ennis... $549. I'm betting they'd take less.