264 Win Mag LR bullets

[Hoss50]

135gr Berger Classic Hunters. Try some.

They shoot very well in my 6.5x55 that is 1:8.875 at probably 2600fps. They have proven to be quite lethal on deer and cow elk for myself and my hunting buddy. They shoot under MOA from a factory 20" barrel CZ out to 500 yards.

1:9 in a 264 win mag should stabilize them.

 

[Nomosendero]

Would love to hear from the Mathematicians...

You did hear from them, that's who developed the calculators.

 

[Laguna Freak]

All my fast 6.5s are 1:7.5" because I built them to shoot the heavies, so can't help you there. I would not shoot them in my daughter's 6.5 SLR 1:8" though. I run a 130 AR Hyb @ 2925 and they are stupid accurate.

I can tell you I never got adequate results with the 142 NABLR out of any 1:8" twist rifle I tried them in. 6.5 SS, 6.5 SAUM, even a 1:9" Rem Sendero @ 3150fps. Put a 129 NABLR in there @ 3230, and something magic happened. Night and day.

Try them. Not just at 100/200, but at 1000. They could stabilize fine for you. They might fall apart past 500. Only YOUR gun and conditions can tell you what will happen.

JBM Ballistics shows 1.501 SG @ sea level and 59* in a 1:9" twist @ 3150fps. 1.443" bullet w. .140" plastic tip (1.303" jacket length). That is on the cusp of marginal. You go up in elevation, GS increases.

Bison Ballistics shows 1.23 SG same inputs other than no input for plastic tip length, just overall bullet length. Go to 1.303", 1.63 SG.

Berger shows 1.23 GS too, same parameters, no plastic tip length. Go to 1.303" length, 1.66 SG.

Just many others giving you advice from past experience.

You think the result of the plastic tip parameter in the calcs yields CG calculated to move aft in the bullet?

 

[Laguna Freak]

You did hear from them, that's who developed the calculators.

Right. The Calculators Disagree. One is a go. The other is a no-go.

 

[Laguna Freak]

So with regard to Nosler products, I noticed that the 142 ABLR, mathematically handicapped by the Berger calc, still has a higher adjusted BC than the 140 AB.

I really like terminal ballistic performance. If I end up going less than 140 gr, there are some really good options. I'm encouraged by the experiences shared at long range with lighter bullets. Anybody do any killin' with a 130 Scirocco II?

 

[Nomosendero]

Then you don't go with the one that is a no-go.
But if we have a real math guy speak up, all will be well.
As the little Doctor says, follow the science.
But of course we can figure out which makes sense and then see if it proves out at the range.

 

[DJ Fergus]

Ive been wanting a 264 win mag for a long time for no other reason than I don't have one. There's no way that I can justify that I need it with all of the cartridges I'm shooting now in the rifles I've put together. I've contemplated putting a 264 wm together but I just really dont want to spend that much on something I have no justification for. I've thought about just buying a factory Win 70 264 wm. But the 9 twist is what hinders me. I've run 180s in a 7mm that were too long for the twist and had success but this is the only rifle that I have done that with. I've tried it in a few other calibers & cartridges and they just didn't produce the groups I wanted. I'm thinking a fellow might be able to get away with running a 135 Atip in a 9 twist 264 win mag with the right powders such as retumbo or slower burn rate to around 3250 fps mv. The 135 @ 3250 wouldn't be too shabby in bucking the wind & pretty dog gone flat shooting.

 

[fremont]

I shoot 135 Classics through a 1:9 Win M70 SG and they shoot lights out.

 

[lancetkenyon]

So with regard to Nosler products, I noticed that the 142 ABLR, mathematically handicapped by the Berger calc, still has a higher adjusted BC than the 140 AB.

I really like terminal ballistic performance. If I end up going less than 140 gr, there are some really good options. I'm encouraged by the experiences shared at long range with lighter bullets. Anybody do any killin' with a 130 Scirocco II?

What do you consider long range? This whole thread might be pointless if you say anything less than 700-800. A 130 from a .264WM @ 3250 will be more than enough on deer sized game out to 900+ in my opinion. Even over 1000 depending on where and when you hunt.

 

[lancetkenyon]

Another example. Minimum (1:9") and optimal (1:8") twist differences.

Minimum means they can sell to more people. Good marketing strategy, but also means more people saying "I can't get them to shoot in my rifle".

 

[Nomosendero]

Yes indeed !!

 

[Laguna Freak]

What do you consider long range? This whole thread might be pointless if you say anything less than 700-800. A 130 from a .264WM @ 3250 will be more than enough on deer sized game out to 900+ in my opinion. Even over 1000 depending on where and when you hunt.

I disagree with, and dismiss out-of-hand, your assessment of the thread being pointless based on my intended hunting / shooting range. Such a contention is narrow-minded in my opinion. If I was guessing, it might even be an alcohol or other buzz induced assessment on a Friday night. Nothing wrong with that. Done it myself...

But since you ask, target maximum range is that at which the bullet maintains velocity above trans-sonic until such time as the bullet is shown to perform with characteristics of flight stability during trans-sonic and sub-sonic velocities. So, 1400 yards is the likely nearest maximum yardage. It extends a few hundred yards from there based on all variables.

 

[HARPERC]

You ask for math help but, "it didn't take more than 3 square root equations for me to lose interest".

You post "I've been drinking", and assume others are.

You post "I'll post up some visual references to my math problem later", but haven't.

You reject solid real world experience.

I find lancetkenyon consistently reliable.

 

[del2les]

snip...

But since you ask, target maximum range is that at which the bullet maintains velocity above trans-sonic until such time as the bullet is shown to perform with characteristics of flight stability during trans-sonic and sub-sonic velocities. So, 1400 yards is the likely nearest maximum yardage. It extends a few hundred yards from there based on all variables.

Even more the reason to not use a minimum twist, if it even works at SR, for in the LR/ELR trans and sub zones, it is best to use a faster twist than minimum from the beginning. Based on numerous factors, what a calc may state as minimum is not always real world results, so load a few and shoot. But remember, a borderline stable bullet at warmer temps, higher humidity and SR may have unacceptable stability during cooler, dryer or LR hunting conditions and/or lower elevations.

I've had these experiences with a couple of loads/calibers. One example was a 115g Berger in a couple of 1/10tw 25-06's. One rifle would slightly keyhole the bullets at 100yds, and while the other showed stability at 1-200yds, when I tested that rifle/load at 500yds, the bullets had an unacceptably large group.