I don't have one nor have I ever shot one, but knowing the underestimated capabilities of the 6.5x55 and looking at a few ballistics tables it seems to me that the 264 win mag should be the most popular hunting caliber/round in North America. Am I missing something or should I get one built?

[ 06-02-2002, 05:27: Message edited by: ElCaballero ]

Unfortunate marketing on the part of Winchester made the 264 a poor seller. While a few Model 70's were made with 26 inch barrels, they tried to push the 22 inch barrel model as a sort of moutain rifle. Muzzel blast was tremendous, and it hardly beat a 270.

By then, Remington had come out with the 7mm Mag and they never could catch up.

I had a later model with a 24 inch barrel and it was a great long range rifle.

well, if you are interested, they just recently discontinued those new post '94 CRF 70 LTs in .264WinMag and they had 26" bbls.

I have been shooting a .264 in a 24 inch barreled Winchester push feed for a few months and have to say I really like it . Recoil is moderate , muzzle blast seems no worse than most other high velocity rounds , and it has been very easy to work up extremely accuate loads . I have gotten very good speed out of the 24 inch barrel .

It's not something you would want to blaze away within a prairie dog town , but I think it makes an excellent rifle for any open country plains or mountain game. It will shoot just as flat as the STW , 7 mm RUM or other such monsters without nearly the recoil .....

I am looking at .264 with a 22" barrel,has any one worked with that length?Or for that matter the 264?

I've been hunting with a Sako 24" barrel .264 for 37 years. I recently acquired an identical Sako with a 26" barrel.

Way back when, H570 and H870 were about the only powders which did well in the .264. Now there are more slow powders than you can shake a stick at. I really like surplus WC 872 in my .264's. I'm sure that RL 25, VV 170, Hodgdon Retumbo, and a number of others would give excellent results also (but with $3 per pound powder working so well, why would I want to find out?)

With these slow powders, I feel a 24 inch barrel is the minimum, and the 26 is, of course, better. The difference between my two guns runs about 60 to 75 fps (but they have different leades, requiring different seating, and are obviously different barrels, so this is only indicative and not defining).

The 140 Nosler Partition has always given me excellent accuracy and performance on everything from bull elk to coyotes and ground squirrels. I have used the 120 grain bullets some for antelope and whitetail -- they work okay, but I find not advantage, other than they can be propelled fairly efficiently with H4831 or IMR 7828.

I now own a number of similar Sakos in both standard and magnum calibers, and have found the .264 as easy to achieve accuracy as any other caliber. Through the years, it has made a number of 400+ yard kills on whitetails.

As to barrel life, well after 37 years and thousands of rounds, mine's throat shows some roughness, but it still shoots about the same as ever. I'm due a grandchild next month. I'll leave a note for him (or her) to let you know when the barrel finally goes.

Reports like the one from Stonecreek above are priceless as they are from a lifetime of experiance.

I had a .264 Win Mag on a Mauser with a 26" bbl. The twist was 1-12 and the throat seemed to have some freebore in it. Why this combination I can't imagine. I used this rig for long range varmints but I never gave it a chance. Back then I did not have a rangefinder and I did not like to wing away at animals far out. The recoil of that rifle with it's hard butt plate was too much for a summer rifle.

But loading for it was no problem. It's just like any other similar caliber.

The big thing that happened to the .264 Win Mag was the lack of good press. Bad news travels fast and it got bad mouthed. The same thing happened to the .220 Swift.

My .264 Win Mag. experience amounts to one shot, and I wasn't the shooter, but I was very impressed with the caliber.

We were hunting aoudad in West Texas out of a camp with about ten other hunters. My friend and I had given up on the morning hunt and were driving back to camp. About two hundred yards from camp we saw a herd of about twenty aoudad feeding on the side of the mountain about 500 yards away and up at a 45 degree angle. We saw a huge ram feeding about fifty yards off from the herd.

We talked about a possible stalk, or a shot from where we were. We didn't like either option. We felt neither of us had the right rifle for the distance.

We drove back in to camp and started checking the rifles that our friends hadn't taken out. We borrowed a .264 Win Mag. I don't even remember the ammunition.

We left camp and returned back to where we'd spotted them, and found the ram bedded down. We left the vehicle and moved into some trees. I would guess we cut the distance to about 400 yards.

Since neither of us had ever shot the gun, we talked about what we knew of the caliber. Jimmy had spotted the sheep first, so it was his ram. We waited, and after about ten minutes the ram got to his feet. I told Jimmy my feel for the shot was to lay the horizontal crosshair on the line of his back. He agreed, and touched it off.

It seemed like it took a full two seconds for the bullet to cover the distance, and the ram collapsed in the grass. The owner of that gun could have named his price right then. We were stunned.

The .264 Win. Mag. is one of the most under rated calibers around. It came out in the face of fierce competition from the 7mm Mag. There just wasn't room enough in the market for both of them.

Here's a picture of three targets from my .264 during load development. These loads develop 3250 - 3300 fps with 140 grain partitions through a chrony. This rifle has a 26 inch barrel.

I'd say the accuracy and speed are there as is the efficiency of the 6.5 round.

http://www.bambooflyrods.com/images/guns/7828.jpg

[ 06-04-2002, 01:03: Message edited by: parshal ]

I was reading an article in a hunting magazine last night at the store (I can't remember which one, though, maybe Hunting) and it was talking about elk rifles. They had a table with various rifles and bullet weight and velocity. It also had the maximum effective range (excess of 2000 ft. lbs.) for both retained energy and velocity (I forget the measurement). The .264 had more in both categories than quite a few larger calibers listed under it. Quite a bit more than the often compared .270. They listed a 140 grain partition at 2900 fps for the .264. I imagine it's that much better when you figure, when handloading, you can get velocities in excess of 3200 fps.

Very interesting.

[ 06-06-2002, 19:35: Message edited by: parshal ]