Friends-

Rather than hi-jack the thread regarding .300 H&H versus .264 Win Mag, I thought about posing the following question:

Is the .264 Win. Mag an under achiever or not?

While I am a huge proponent of .30 Caliber, I have more than a passing fancy for 6.5/264 a'la my 6.5 WSM. I would also like to have a .264 Win Mag in my battery. If I look at current reloading manuals regarding the .264 WM, the velocities look a bit on the anemic side and as a result, I ponder whether the reloading manuals have neutered the .264. P.O. Ackley called the .264 WM vastly overbored. Intuitively, something in me says a .264 ought to push a 140 grain bullet between 3300-3400 fps and a 150 grain bullet 3200-3300 fps.

Instead you see published velocities in the 3100-3200 fps range and on the lower end of that range. On that basis, that would lead one to go the route of a .264 STW wildcat if one really wanted to push the 3400 fps envelope which is my idea of overbored.

What are your thoughts? Thanks in advance.

The .264 Mag enjoys a very slim margin over the 6.5-06 and the .270 Weatherby enjoys an equally small margin over the .270 Winchester and the .257 Weatherby enjoys about the same margin over the .25-06. Further the gains of the 7MM Rem Mag over the .280 Rem ain't anything to write home about either.

It's a wonder that any of these magnums sell to anyone. Only the 7MM Rem Mag seems to have been successful and I'm not sure why that one made it. I doubt the .264 Mag is under rated....it's right there with it's pals the .257 Wby, the .270 Wby and the 7MM Mag.

I have the "Westerner" model that Winchester introduced the .264 in, with the original stainless 26" bbl. I can easily obtain a chhrono'ed 3250-3275 fps-mv with the 140 NP over IMR-7828 and have gone faster. the accuracy is good and it shoots FLAT. I prefer this cartridge over any other magnum round under .338 bore, it is perfect for long shots on the powerline cuts and it will do the job on Elk and Moose, as well.

I would not own a .264 with a barrel under 26" and intend to try Ramshot Magnum powder now that I have used up my supply of 7828. The recoil is about like my .270 and .280 rifles, but, the performance is superior with the requisite long barrel and very slow powders; I rate this an underestimated cartridge.

John Barsness recently took a .264 Westerner through its paces with current powders, and it kicked butt and took numbers.

I think the article is in the Jan Rifle/Handloader. If you don't subscribe, check the online magazine table of contents and chase down an issue.

It needs a 26" barrel.

jim

I have owned 2 Rem 700 264 mags with 24" bbls and and max loads were right at about 3100 fps with 140g bullets using IMR 7828. Both of these rifles were pretty finicky to reload for. I sold both rifles and moved on to the 6.5-06 which I personally like much better. As "kutenay" said, this cartridge absolutely demands a 26" bbl for performance !!!!! I thought is was interesting that my Ruger #1 in 280 with 26" bbl could shoot 140g bullets faster than my 264 Mag with 24" bbl !!!! Nevertheless, I would agree that the cartridge is underrated......LR

I have one, but have hardly shot it, it is at the smith right now with some problems. barrel is only 23" though. I got a great price on it initially and have always wanted one, but after talking to a gunsmith friend would go with the 6.5x06 for an efficient cartridge that did its job right.

Red

30 Caliber Mag Fan,
I have and enoy shooting a Win 70 Classic in .264 W/ a 26 in barrel. I have experimented with several powders including H4831, RL22, H1000, RL25, and H870.

My observations with these powders and 140 gr bullets support the findings usually quoted by gunwriters and reloading manual data. I have been unable to quite reach 3200 fps with any dependable and accurate load in my rifle. I have occasionally chronographed a faster load during workups, but they always suffered from high velocity deviations, poor accuracy, pressure spikes, or a combination of all three.

As mentioned earlier, John Barsness' article in the Feb. Handloader is the most up to date information on this caliber. He was able to work with some of the new powders now available for magnum cartridges, such as Magnum and Retumbo.

If I remember correctly he was able to slightly exceed 3200 fps with one of these newer powders using the 140 gr bullet.

Based on my experience with this round versus the 7mm rem mag, and experience with the 7mmSTW (which I also have experimented with quite a bit). I would be very surprised to see a person achieve 3400 fps with a 140 gr in a 6.5STW with a chamber pressure below 65,000 psi.

I would suggest that if you really wish to push that 3400 fps velocity number, drop back down to the 120 gr projectiles. There are sveral which have very respectable BC's, including the Nosler Bal Tips. I have also used the 100 gr Nosler BT for ground squirrels. They are absolutely devestating and flat shooting even if MV is held down to 3400 fps, and a little easier on the barrel than larger bullets at maximum velocity.

When performance is equal shooters seem to prefer the 270 bore size over the 7mm bore size.

So far as I can tell the 270 Wby is far more popular than the 7mm Wby and the 270 WSM is far more popular than the 7mm WSM.

Mike

About the .264 "needing" that 26 inch barrel......not in my experience with the lighter slugs. My 24 inch barrel will push the 120 s to 3400 easily , and the 100 s to 3600+ , with RL25 . My opinion is the double based powders help somewhat in shorter barrels . I have never noticed any touchyness or fussyness, even with max loads on 90 degree plus summer days , and in fact , I get get very little deviation across the chrono with RL25.

quote:

Originally posted by kutenay:
the accuracy is good and it shoots FLAT. I prefer this cartridge over any other magnum round under .338 bore, it is perfect for long shots on the powerline cuts and it will do the job on Elk and Moose, as well.

Funny, hearing this from the same guy that wrote this...

I couldn't agree more and I have seen the results of long range sniping at Elk, Moose and Mule Deer by guys with .300 Weatherby Mags. only too often. When I was a young buck, 40 years ago, in the B.C.F.S., we would frequently find the decomposing bodies of wounded animals which had been shot at and later died in agony in the Elk and Flathead Valleys of S.E. B.C. After some checking around, we could often find the high points on logging roads where the shooting had come from, empty brass and, often, beer bottles told an ugly tale........I will NOT shoot over 300 yds. because that is the maximum length of my club range that I can practice on and I do not think that anyone should shoot at game over 400 yds., period.

The .264 Win. Mag. is not an under-achiever.

It can be MADE into an under-achiever by the shooter, but the cartridge in and of itself is superb, it'll live up to Winchester's original claims, and it's really one of those little-appreciate rounds (like the .300 H&H, .270 Wby., and 7mm Wby.) that really deserves a second-look and better yet, a revival.

But you can indeed turn it into an under-achiever by having it built with anything less than a 26" barrel, and by improper load development. You need a chronograph, and you need really slow-buring powders. Take your time, work your loads up carefully, and you'll be rewarded with superb performance on medium game at long range.

Oh, and don't let the barrel any warmer than "luke" at the range. Barrel life tends to be a mite short with this cartridge, and heat is what breaks things down internally. If you take it easy at the range, barrel life can be a lot longer......

AD

yes

quote:

Originally posted by Cold Bore:

quote:

Originally posted by kutenay:
the accuracy is good and it shoots FLAT. I prefer this cartridge over any other magnum round under .338 bore, it is perfect for long shots on the powerline cuts and it will do the job on Elk and Moose, as well.

Funny, hearing this from the same guy that wrote this...

I couldn't agree more and I have seen the results of long range sniping at Elk, Moose and Mule Deer by guys with .300 Weatherby Mags. only too often. When I was a young buck, 40 years ago, in the B.C.F.S., we would frequently find the decomposing bodies of wounded animals which had been shot at and later died in agony in the Elk and Flathead Valleys of S.E. B.C. After some checking around, we could often find the high points on logging roads where the shooting had come from, empty brass and, often, beer bottles told an ugly tale........I will NOT shoot over 300 yds. because that is the maximum length of my club range that I can practice on and I do not think that anyone should shoot at game over 400 yds., period.

What exactly is your point? You are quoting this guy from a post about half-mile shots. I see you have nearly 2000 posts on this forum. I see why now if all you do is go around picking fights. Oh, look at me. I'm doing it now. How long before I get to 2000?

I currently own two .264's, one of which I've had for 40 years this coming July, and I've worked with three more .264's. I like them, and find them to be high-performing rifles, provided that appropriately slow powders and proper bullets are used. Hint: IMR 7828 is too fast for anything over 120 grains, and the .264 only really shines with 140's.

H-570 (with kernals the size of chunks of matchsticks), now long gone, was my favorite for years. H-870 burned at about the same rate, but is now unavailable. AA 8700 should be similar, but I haven't used any. My current powder of choice is surplus WC-872. It is even slower than H-870 and gives superb results (however, lots of surplus powder can and do vary, so beware.) There are a lot of new very slow powders available like Retumbo and a couple from Vhitavori, but I haven't tried them because WC-872 is so good and so cheap.

I currently own two nearly identical Sakos in this caliber -- one with a 24" bbl and the other with a 26-incher. The 24" is 40 years old, has had no telling how many thousands of rounds through it, has a visibly roughened throat, but still shoots into an inch and places the first shot out of a cold barrel monotonously in the same place two inches high at a hundred yards year after year. It does use a grain or so more powder than when it was new for the same velocity, but so what? A 140 grain Nosler travels 3150 leaving the muzzle. The 26" barrel will boost velocity by 75 fps or so.

If you try feeding this cartridge a diet of IMR 4350 or IMR 4831, then you'll have a hard time equalling, much less besting, a .270 Winchester. But the fact that the .270 is as good as it is says a lot about a cartridge that can, with the right powder, improve on it.

Cold Bore quotes me, out of context, in an apparent attempt to either belittle me or demonstrate that I am not truthful; his finding humour in this escapes me, but, his motives are obvious and not worth further comment.

To put the two quotes into very simple agreement, which is, I think, obvious to most here; I consider any shot at game over 200 yds. to be a long distance shot and this is what I meant. To hit a Deer in the vitals consistently at 200-400 yds. on a windy, mountain powerline cut is not easy, at least for me; the .264 makes this a bit more possible as I think my post made clear.

I've got a pre=64 Westerner in SS and have worked up loads with the 130 Barnes Triple Shock and 140 Trophy Bonded Bear Claw. Stopped working up at 3400 fps with the 130 even though I got up to 3550 before it started blowing primers. Yeah, I know, shame on me, slap my hand!!! I said I backed it back down. Got up to 3250 fps with the TBBC and didn't go further.

Hell of a cartridge! BUT I like the 270 better. Maybe its the gun. The 270 is shooting the 140 at 3175 and shoots the 130 at 3300.

Nothing wrong with the .264, but it cannot be compared to any of the 300 magnums, it simply does not have the bullet weight and cross section of a game bullet is important...The 264 is a fine long range deer rifle and probably a suitable elk rifle, but never has been my choice...I used one a little the year they came out, and it never suited me...

30 Cal-

How's the performance been with your 6.5 WSM? I'm building one on a Montana action that just went in to get stocked.

Pete

talentrec-

I love my 6.5/.264 WSM. Unfortunately, I do no own a chronograph so I have not been able to see what she will do velocity wise. I have been shooting 129 gr Hornady's. Would like to try Barnes 130 gr. TSX. I need to work up a load for 140 gr. Trophy Bonded Bear Claw's; those are great looking bullets.

It will drop a deer and hogs in their tracks, big time.

Who's doing your stock?

30 Cal-

I'm having the stock done by Lone Wolf. One of my buddies built a 6/5 WSM about a year ago, he's been able get the 130 gr Triple Shocks up to 3400 fps without any serious signs of pressure using RL22.

Pete

I have not read of anyone using a Pressure Trace on it,it would be very interesting.As Ken Waters said," the rifle must be both fast and accurate" or words to that effect.The strong point is the balistics of the 140 6.5,the weak point powders.The powder has to be slow,consistant and very lineal.So far in my rifle RL-25 and H-1000 don't work.Ramshot Magnum worked for John Barness.

It is a good cartridge, but it has to many drawbacks when compared to the 7mm Rem Mag (barrel life, muzzle blast, barrel length). The 7mm Rem Mag will push 140 grain 7mms at 3300 fps all day long without any problem and out of a 24-inch barrel to boot.

I would rather shoot the 257 Weatherby, as its performance is at the apex of small-mid bores. It is quite amazing that no cartridge since the late 40s has taken over the 257 Wby. The 257 STW wildcat is there, but the 257 Wby is about at the max powder capacity and performance level in a .25. The STW is more of a good thing, however, it gets to showing more destruction quickly as throat cutting, rapid barrel heating and very short barrel life are the by-products of the cartridge. It is also not as practical in the field as the 257 Wby, as it will need a 3.6-inch action as opposed to a 3.4-inch.

The 6.5 Win Mag died on the vine as it offers nothing on big game over the 7mm Rem Mag, which is more practical on larger game such as elk. By the same token it offers nothing over the 270 Win for game such as pronghorn, deer, sheep, goats, medium sized African PG, etc. I would say it was more hype than fact when it was introduced and it has not benefited all that much from the use modern powders. Never-the-less, it is a flat shooting, hard hitting cartridge just like the .257 Wby, 270 Win, and the 7mm Rem Mag.

Rossi,the point of the 264 is long range,not all round.Notice the long range target shooters use the 6.5-284,not the straight 284.

After researching the 264 for his article John Barness changed his mind about it.Before he had thought the 270Wby was the best long range deer cartridge.We are splitting hairs, here.

For BC I have heard it said with a large measure of common sense,it's 270 for deer,338 for moose and elk.338 for deer in grizzly country.

The 7mmRM ,like 30.06 and 300Magnums is a one gun type of cartridge.

Downwindtracker2,
I chose my 264 specifically for its all around capability. I absolutely loved the 25-06 I had owned earlier, and I recognized the performance and bullet weight advantages of the 270 and 7mm calibers.

With the 264 I can load the 90 or 100 gr bullets and duplicate the performance of my beloved but departed 25-06, or the 257 Roberts for that matter. The differences in performance between the 270 and the 264 when using 120 or 130 gr bullets are so subtle as to hardly be worth mentioning, and with 140 to 160 gr bullets the 264 can be loaded to duplicate the performance of the 7-08 or 280, and it comes so close to the performance of the 7mm Rem Mag that no targeted critter would ever know which you had killed him with.

I got two Ruger stainless mark II 77 rifles last year.I love them ,not only do they hit hard but they are accurate as heck.I went with the Lapula 155 gr mega tip which is a super hunting bullet.I shot two pronghorn at around 350-375 yards.It knocked them flat.I shot a big 8 point buck with it also knocked it flat.I always wanted a 264 glad I finally got some.

I'm going to strongly agree with Allen Day on this one and say that it IS NOT an under achiever, but can easily be turned into one by trying to turn it into something it's not. It's not a brush gun so what in the devil do you need anything shorter than the minimum at least in my opinion 26" barrel on one for? I always hear guys saying that is the problem with the 264 is it's need of a 26" long or longer tube and that a rifle with that long a barrel doesn't "swing well". My first response is always what in the Hell are you doing swinging a long range gun for in any manner that a long barrel is going to cause you any trouble. Then there's the classic line about "with a barrel that long it just gets caught on all the twigs and brush" bit. Once again these guys obviously don't appreciate the 264 for what it is and what it is intended for! Is it a special purpose round? YES! Absolutely, but when used for it's intended purpose of long range wide open shots it can't easily be beat!!!

Finally as mentioned before this critter does run a little warm so it's not the round to be using for spray and pray, but with intelligent shooting practices and sufficient cooling between shots it's no "barrel burner" either!