quote:

Originally posted by vapodog:
A new Shilen or Douglas barrel is a minimum of #4 contour to reach 26" length....muzzle dia of .650

IMO that's a bit heavy.....I wouldn't build if the 26" was set in concrete.

A #2 contour will finish at 24" and be .600 at the muzzle......about 3/4 pound less!

quote:

just sell me the dies and brass and your worries go away

quote:

Hmmmm interesting, in the other 264 thread you said you built your 264 WM with a 23 inch barrel. That's like putting an inline six cylinder in a Corvette. Lot's of standard cartridges will be "right" there with a 23 inch barreled 264 WM.

BTW Shilen barrels are following the E.R. Shaw route, that is cheap and can buy them everywhere. Not the same quality that Shilen grew famous on. I'd take a Douglas any day of the week over a Shilen.

quote:

Originally posted by SmokinJ:
I'll still bet a 6.5/284 would push that light weight bullet close to the 264 WM and not wear that barrel out as fast in addition to more economical.

quote:

I'll still bet a 6.5/284 would push that light weight bullet close to the 264 WM

quote:

Originally posted by ramrod340:

quote:

just sell me the dies and brass and your worries go away

Jim it really warms my heart how you are always looking out for me.

No way in heck I'd go to the trouble of a 264Wmag in a 24". Heck buy a hawkeye

quote:

Originally posted by ramrod340:

quote:

I'll still bet a 6.5/284 would push that light weight bullet close to the 264 WM

So??? Economical?/ Let's see I have wmag brass and dies so I would have to purchase them. Have a magnum action not a std. Would take a heck of a lot of powder saving to pay that out. Not to mention I HATE the 284 rebated rim.

I know I could also simply rebuild my 6.5PDK wildcat and almost match wmag velocity (from actual experience). Or a 6.5-06 would also get real darn close. OOPs I own a magnum action.

I was thinking of a McGowen CM barrel is this taper:
Shilen #2 S2 1.200" 2.50" N/A .575" 26" 3 lbs

quote:

Originally posted by vapodog:
You buy that 26" McGowan Edit in: CM barrel, rent a reamer and make the trip to my shop and we'll have it in the mail to Toomany Tools for bluing the same day..... ...

quote:

lay it out in the Snow so it can go ahead and begin RUSTING right away.

quote:

Originally posted by Stonecreek:
Ramrod: I have over four decades of experience with .264's. They're not for everybody, particularly someone who depends on factory loads, but for a dedicated shooter/handloader they can be very rewarding.

First, what is the magazine length of your Mark X? The .264 needs plenty of length. The "usual" 3.35" magazines for '06-length cartridges (which are often used for the 2.5" magnums) are too restrictive. I like to seat most of my heavier bullet loads out to around 3.45" or so.

Second, be sure NOT to use the standard SAAMI chamber which has zero leade. You don't need excessive "freebore", but you do need enough leade to seat your bullets out where they belong without jamming into the lands.

Third, a 26" barrel does tend to be a little unwieldy, expecially if it is as heavy as .650" at the muzzle. A 24" barrel sells the .264 a little short. I'd look for a contour the ends up at about .600" at 25" for a manageable hunting rifle. A fluted barrel also seems a good option for a .264, but you may not want to spend the extra money.

The slow powders you have on hand are good ones to try in a .264. It is the 140 grain bullet that really milks the most out of .264 performance for medium game, and I think you'll find that the slower the better for that bullet. IMR-7828 will likely be too fast, and it might surprise you that Retumbo may be faster than you might think. You may need to try US-869. My personal favorite is WC-872, but remember that surplus powder varies in burning speed from lot-to-lot, so my experience may or may not be typical.

Depending on your particular barrel and chamber, you should be able to get the 140's up to 3150-3200 fps before reaching unsustainable pressures. I suppose it may be true that the .264 will use up a barrel quicker than smaller cases on the same bore, but you're absolutely right that barrel life is totally irrlevant to a hunting rifle -- after all, it's not the only hunting rifle you'll be shooting and running an average of twenty rounds a year through it, including load development, checking the zero, and hunting shots, would be a large number for most hunting rifles. If its useful life is only 1,000 rounds, then you've only got fifty years of shooting before your grandchildren will have to worry about a new barrel.

By the way, one of my .264's will be 47 years old this year and was my ONLY hunting rifle for the first twenty or so years I owned it (bought it when I was 14 years old). I've abused it in every way possible and I can't even guess at how many rounds have been down the barrel. It still puts the first shot out of a cold barrel exactly where you want it, and will always group under an inch. Somehow its "burned up" barrel is still able to toss copper-clad lead where you want it when you want it.

quote:

Originally posted by SmokinJ:

Stone, a completely different tune that I get from you in pm's. I've read Stonecreeks comments on the .264 many times and can't say he has ever posted contrary to his former postings. He has been quite consistent on the cartridge and it's reloading data.

This time in the public forum you got it pretty much right. BTW all that experience RC claimed to have is yours...not his. He admitted in pm's he's not a rifle shooter and just got started into rifles, shotgunning being his forte.

My best friend in Tulsa, Ok has an original pre 64 264 WM and it's still shooting great and has recently taken Elk. He doesn't go out blasting away target shooting and the bore is still pretty decent. As you said a hunting rifle, that will be around a lot longer too.

True about the slow powders and about the 872 but you won't burn all the 872 in a 264 barrel that is 23 inches short.

quote:

Originally posted by vapodog:

quote:

Originally posted by SmokinJ:

Stone, a completely different tune that I get from you in pm's. I've read Stonecreeks comments on the .264 many times and can't say he has ever posted contrary to his former postings. He has been quite consistent on the cartridge and it's reloading data.

This time in the public forum you got it pretty much right. BTW all that experience RC claimed to have is yours...not his. He admitted in pm's he's not a rifle shooter and just got started into rifles, shotgunning being his forte.

My best friend in Tulsa, Ok has an original pre 64 264 WM and it's still shooting great and has recently taken Elk. He doesn't go out blasting away target shooting and the bore is still pretty decent. As you said a hunting rifle, that will be around a lot longer too.

True about the slow powders and about the 872 but you won't burn all the 872 in a 264 barrel that is 23 inches short.

SmokinJ....please post photos of your .264, I'd love to see it......I posted mine on the reloading forum on a thread there.

quote:

This time in the public forum you got it pretty much right. BTW all that experience RC claimed to have is yours...not his. He admitted in pm's he's not a rifle shooter and just got started into rifles, shotgunning being his forte

quote:

You haven't gotten pm's from him defending RC and I'm not about to post any pm's....against rules. What he posted here today is more to the truth.

quote:

Originally posted by TC1:
Come on guy's, let's get back on the .264WM thing. I'm sure Ramrod340 would appreciate that.

Vapo, you didn't ask me but here's mine anyway. It's ugly as hell but the muzzle does the talk'n anyway.

The rifle was built by John Farner. Now John builds a beautiful rifle and gets no credit for the bad taste looking at this will leave in your mouth I picked all the components and he was gracous enough to put it all together.

It sports a 27 1/2" long 1 in 8" twist fluted stainless barrel, Timney trigger and sits bedded in a McMillan stock. All the metal has been ceracoated and a S&B 3-12X50 Zenith rides on top.




Here's the "beanfield" stand I use it in. I'm running electricity out to it next year. (joke)

quote:

Originally posted by SmokinJ:
Now you are talking out of your ass RC about death threats and I sure would love to have the names of those that sent that to you so management can take action. You see RC when the "trolls" can't defeat me they resort to outrageous lies, such as you have now. You now have the ability to turn a thread into shit like the other trolls.

For all reading notice RC did admit he doesn't have much rifle time and is being advised by Stonecreek just as I have said.

So come on RC let's have the names of those spreading the death threat manure. Let me guess idabull and swheeler huh?

quote:

Originally posted by rcamuglia:

quote:

Originally posted by SmokinJ:
Now you are talking out of your ass RC about death threats and I sure would love to have the names of those that sent that to you so management can take action. You see RC when the "trolls" can't defeat me they resort to outrageous lies, such as you have now. You now have the ability to turn a thread into shit like the other trolls.

For all reading notice RC did admit he doesn't have much rifle time and is being advised by Stonecreek just as I have said.

So come on RC let's have the names of those spreading the death threat manure. Let me guess idabull and swheeler huh?

I don't lie.



My Brux barrel is a 1-8 as well. Good choice

quote:

Originally posted by SmokinJ:

quote:

Originally posted by rcamuglia:

quote:

Originally posted by SmokinJ:
Now you are talking out of your ass RC about death threats and I sure would love to have the names of those that sent that to you so management can take action. You see RC when the "trolls" can't defeat me they resort to outrageous lies, such as you have now. You now have the ability to turn a thread into shit like the other trolls.

For all reading notice RC did admit he doesn't have much rifle time and is being advised by Stonecreek just as I have said.

So come on RC let's have the names of those spreading the death threat manure. Let me guess idabull and swheeler huh?

I don't lie.



My Brux barrel is a 1-8 as well. Good choice

What would call leading us to believe you've been reloading and shooting the 264 WM for decades????

Let's quit the fighting RC. Yes the 8 twist is fine if you are going to shoot the heavier bullets. It's not needed, especially, with the magnums for lighter bullet.

That pre 64 my best friend has was mine. I sold off my 264 WM's and moved on to other rifles, mainly smaller capacity 6.5 cartridges. No flys on the 264 WM I just moved on to other cartridges and I quit Elk hunting. RC if you're going to be shooting that far you think you need a higher magnification scope? What power is the scope you are using? For your next long range flat shooting try a 257 Weatherby Magnum. Nice rig you have there and some nice territory you were shooting in.

vapordog..if you're going to just be hunting deer why not something lighter and short barreled like say 260 Rem, 6.5 Swede?

quote:

Originally posted by vapodog:

What bullet do you like in that thing?

quote:

vapordog..if you're going to just be hunting deer why not something lighter and short barreled like say 260 Rem, 6.5 Swede?

quote:

Ignored post by SmokinJ posted 27 December 2010 23:59

quote:

Originally posted by TC1:

quote:

Originally posted by vapodog:

What bullet do you like in that thing?

I'm using 129gr hornady SST's in front of a healthy dose of Ramshot Magnum powder.

Terry

quote:

Originally posted by SmokinJ:
[BTW all that experience RC claimed to have is yours...not his. He admitted in pm's ...