OKIE2
Well-Known Member
the 7 mag and the 264 case is the same the 300 win has a longer case by 1/8 inch and the shoulder is longer too.
.264 Win Mag vs. 7mm Mag
- Thread starter Rhino Hunter
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
Take a look at this reloading press. It may be the one for you. Very easy to change calibers without without re-adjusting the dies each time you use it. I have had their XL-650 since 1993 and love it.
Dillon Precision: Reloaders, Reloading Equipment, Bullet Reloading, Bullet Reloaders
http://www.dillonprecision.com/#/Dillon_Reloading_Machines-8-1.html
joseph
PS: I suggest you call them and tell them what calibers you plan on reloading now and in the future before you order anything from them. There are a lot of things you may buy that you do not need to get started. There are a lot of good re-loaders out there and most companies have very good warranties especially Dillon. Another suggestion might be a good turret press. I think that a single stage press is way to slow and you will upgrade to a faster press so for a little more money why not start out with one which will be much easier to use in MHO.
Dillon Precision: Reloaders, Reloading Equipment, Bullet Reloading, Bullet Reloaders
http://www.dillonprecision.com/#/Dillon_Reloading_Machines-8-1.html
joseph
PS: I suggest you call them and tell them what calibers you plan on reloading now and in the future before you order anything from them. There are a lot of things you may buy that you do not need to get started. There are a lot of good re-loaders out there and most companies have very good warranties especially Dillon. Another suggestion might be a good turret press. I think that a single stage press is way to slow and you will upgrade to a faster press so for a little more money why not start out with one which will be much easier to use in MHO.
Last edited:
OKIE2
Well-Known Member
Buy a Savage , Stevens or Marlin then you can buy any caliber barrel you want
and change it your self don't pay a gunsmith $100.00 or more to it for you on any other brand of rifle. It is a lot cheaper to buy a barrel than a whole new rifle for a different caliber. For a 6.5 caliber you have the
6.5x55
6.5x284
6.5 remington mag
264 win mag
6.5 rcm
6.5 wsm
all of these will do what you want in a 6.5 caliber.
I have 2 264's and the 6.5 rem mag love them both.
But if you go with the 25-06 get the 25-06 ackley it will run right beside the 257 weatherby
87 grain bullet at 3920 fps
and change it your self don't pay a gunsmith $100.00 or more to it for you on any other brand of rifle. It is a lot cheaper to buy a barrel than a whole new rifle for a different caliber. For a 6.5 caliber you have the
6.5x55
6.5x284
6.5 remington mag
264 win mag
6.5 rcm
6.5 wsm
all of these will do what you want in a 6.5 caliber.
I have 2 264's and the 6.5 rem mag love them both.
But if you go with the 25-06 get the 25-06 ackley it will run right beside the 257 weatherby
87 grain bullet at 3920 fps
silvertip-co
Well-Known Member
I carried a 264 win mag LH Sav 110DL from 1966 thru 1988 and reloaded for it a LOT( mostly 140gr over H870). Lest we all forget, the the 264 fell out of favor ( lead ballon comes to mind) when the "gun press" discovered ( years after the .264's creation) that the bullets actually had a dual diameter. And that ship sank in favor of the 7mm Rem Mag.
Having had 5 , yes 5, 7mm Rem Magnums I now believe this cartridge to be the superior of the two cartridges based on the quantity of factory loads available and the number of very good bullets available to be reloaded( I no long reload, sold my whole outfit cheap to a returning Iraq war vet). Plus you do get to shoot up to 175gr in the 7mm and only up to 160 gr in the .264.
Altho the .264 was superior in the Savage 110, the 7mm Rem Mag is not. A Sav 110-111 in 7mm is a shoulder tenderizer that kills on both ends. The best 7mm I had was a Model 70 Blk Shadow with factory 26" bbl. It was a pleasure to shot and shot like a laser. The rifle had ability wayyyy beyond my own. And as soon as I get a dang job I'll be having another one.
Good luck with your selection.
Having had 5 , yes 5, 7mm Rem Magnums I now believe this cartridge to be the superior of the two cartridges based on the quantity of factory loads available and the number of very good bullets available to be reloaded( I no long reload, sold my whole outfit cheap to a returning Iraq war vet). Plus you do get to shoot up to 175gr in the 7mm and only up to 160 gr in the .264.
Altho the .264 was superior in the Savage 110, the 7mm Rem Mag is not. A Sav 110-111 in 7mm is a shoulder tenderizer that kills on both ends. The best 7mm I had was a Model 70 Blk Shadow with factory 26" bbl. It was a pleasure to shot and shot like a laser. The rifle had ability wayyyy beyond my own. And as soon as I get a dang job I'll be having another one.
Good luck with your selection.
huntokanogan
Well-Known Member
Rock Chucker has a re-loading "set" that has pretty much everything you need to get started. You will find other needed items as you go, but this is a good place to start. It's called the Rock Chucker Supreme kit. Most places it sells for $280 - $300. That doesn't include dies, brass, bullets and powder. So realisticly you're looking at $400 - $450 to get started. You'll save that in no time by not paying for ammo anymore though and you'll be amazed how cool it is to "make" your own rounds. Go for it!
Oh ya.....264 Win mag in a rem. 700 Sendero is my take on the deal
Be a renegade! Go with something other than a 7mm.
Oh ya.....264 Win mag in a rem. 700 Sendero is my take on the deal
Be a renegade! Go with something other than a 7mm.
Long Time Long Ranger
Well-Known Member
264 winchester hands down in your case. You have an elk rifle with your 300 winchester. The 264 winchester is a better deer/antelope or anything smaller rifle than the 7mm remington. I own both and have shot both for many years. The ballistics of the 264 winchester will beat the 7mm remington and do it with less recoil. Both are extremely accurate rifles.
Basically here is the low down. The 264 winchester shoots a .612 bc bullet up to 3200 fps and one of the best hunting bullets made with a .572 BC up to 3350 fps that is good for elk and moose size game. The 7mm remington shoots a .617 bc bullet between 3000 and 3100 fps on average. If you want to go with a high quality premium hunting bullet in the 7mm remington for something like elk or moose the bc numbers fall off significantly for the 7mm. Some people use the bergers in 7mm for elk size game and lose many elk to bullets fragmenting and no penetration due to this. Not a good choice unless you hold yourself to the high shoulder shot which is not good to limit yourself while hunting elk or moose in most situations.
My wife loves to shoot the 264 winchester long range because of less recoil and the ballistics are amazing. I have never found the 264 winchester to be any more finicky than anything else to load for. Matter of fact most loads shoot very well in it. The same case shoots fantastic in 257 through 338 by several manufacturers so why should it be any different in 264.
Basically here is the low down. The 264 winchester shoots a .612 bc bullet up to 3200 fps and one of the best hunting bullets made with a .572 BC up to 3350 fps that is good for elk and moose size game. The 7mm remington shoots a .617 bc bullet between 3000 and 3100 fps on average. If you want to go with a high quality premium hunting bullet in the 7mm remington for something like elk or moose the bc numbers fall off significantly for the 7mm. Some people use the bergers in 7mm for elk size game and lose many elk to bullets fragmenting and no penetration due to this. Not a good choice unless you hold yourself to the high shoulder shot which is not good to limit yourself while hunting elk or moose in most situations.
My wife loves to shoot the 264 winchester long range because of less recoil and the ballistics are amazing. I have never found the 264 winchester to be any more finicky than anything else to load for. Matter of fact most loads shoot very well in it. The same case shoots fantastic in 257 through 338 by several manufacturers so why should it be any different in 264.
Nomosendero
Well-Known Member
Well said! I used 3 different 7 mags for years, great round but I use a 300WM for Elk and above now. I just bougt a Lipsey 264 Ruger Number 1 , I favor the 264 over the 7RM for all animals smaller than Elk for the reasons that LTLR have mentioned in previous posts, so no need to repeat. I found after careful study that the 264 will mirror the 257 Wea. in lighter bullets of the proper matchup, (115BT vs 120BT 115-120NP vs 125NP, etc.) with the added ability over the
257 Wea. of using 130-140 Bergers that are in a different league for extended ranges. Then in comparing to the 7mm, the 140Ber does better for these animals smaller than Elk & to get the speed that a 7mm 180 Berger would need to beat the 264 requires the STW case, so there you go.
Long Time Long Ranger
Well-Known Member
Very well stated. I also have a couple 257 wby's. You added some other good points.
silvertip-co
Well-Known Member
not a lot of shooting diff but the 7mm rem mag ammo is wayyy more available at lower cost and with more variety. newbies need to know that the 264 failed when the world found out that the bullets were dual-diameter. i carried a 264 for 25yrs before switching to 7mm.
My 7wsm 26" Brux bbled shoot circles around any 264 Win mag. 120gr V-max - 180 gr Berger VLD and I'm ready for any game in the lower 48. Well placed shot will put down a Brown bear and his side kick Mr Moose.
OKIE2
Well-Known Member
I'm not lucky enough to live where there are bears and elk or moose to hunt.
So deer and analope is our big game in Oklahoma.
So I never use more than 100 grain bullets on our 110 pound deer.
But my choice of rifle is my 264.
So deer and analope is our big game in Oklahoma.
So I never use more than 100 grain bullets on our 110 pound deer.
But my choice of rifle is my 264.
Long Time Long Ranger
Well-Known Member
If a guy does not reload and shoots over the counter bullets only the 7mm remington is the best choice of these two. But if a guy reloads the 264 winchester will outperform the 7mm remington in a long range hunting situation considering quality hunting bullets currently offered. I have both, shoot both at long range and have killed animals with both. Here are the things to consider.
First with Berger long range bullets which are primarily good for deer size game and smaller in these cartridges unless you stick to the perfect broadside high shoulder shot which doesn't happen as often as other shot opportunities. Fragile bullets that are known to fragment are not good choices to try and drive through large animals like elk, moose, bear, etc. with poor shot angles. Also do not consider energy figures based on ballistic programs with bullets that fragment because they are only accurate if your bullet stays together. Quality premium hunting bullets can be considered more for energy figures because they hold together better do drive that energy through tough muscle and bone of large big game animals. You can't just quote energy figures because they are not accurate in many hunting bullet applications.
With Berger bullets that I shoot long range in both these rifles here are some figures based on JBM calculations at 5000 feet where I live with average accuracy loads for both cartridges. My 264 winchester with 140 bergers drops 30 inches less at 1000 yards and has 5.5" less wind drift than my 7mm remington shooting 168 Bergers. Both zeroed 2.5" high at 100 yards and based on a 10 mph wind.
The 7mm remington shooting 180 bergers drops 40 inches more than my 264 winchester and drifts 4 inches further in a 10 mph wind.
The improved 280 remington cartridges and the 7mm WSM shoot the same velocities about 100 fps shy of the 7mm remington and come up even further short of the 264 winchester.
The previous loads are good for deer size animals and smaller unless you shoot the high shoulder shot where they will drop about anything that walks at that point. For large big game like large bull elk, moose, big bears, etc. these cartridges need to be loaded with premium quality hunting bullets that are known to hold together to get the maximum energy driving through big tough animals. This is where the 7mm begins falling off from other calibers at long range hunting. If you look at BC numbers with quality hunting bullets there isn't much out there. The 160 Accubond with a .531 BC is about the best out there. The Barnes bullets are excellent but the BC numbers posted are less than the accubond. For the 264 winchester I shoot the swift scirroco with a .571 BC that is probably the best premium lead core bullet on the market and capable of holding together and driving through an elk at many shot angles as is the 160 7mm acubond bullet.
So considering the best bullets for large big game such as elk the 264 winchester shoots 48 inches flatter at 1000 yards with 11 inches less wind drift than the 7mm remington with a 160 grain accubond. Again the improved 280 cartridges and the 7mm WSM fall further behind the 7mm remington.
That is why I said what I did earlier in this post.
First with Berger long range bullets which are primarily good for deer size game and smaller in these cartridges unless you stick to the perfect broadside high shoulder shot which doesn't happen as often as other shot opportunities. Fragile bullets that are known to fragment are not good choices to try and drive through large animals like elk, moose, bear, etc. with poor shot angles. Also do not consider energy figures based on ballistic programs with bullets that fragment because they are only accurate if your bullet stays together. Quality premium hunting bullets can be considered more for energy figures because they hold together better do drive that energy through tough muscle and bone of large big game animals. You can't just quote energy figures because they are not accurate in many hunting bullet applications.
With Berger bullets that I shoot long range in both these rifles here are some figures based on JBM calculations at 5000 feet where I live with average accuracy loads for both cartridges. My 264 winchester with 140 bergers drops 30 inches less at 1000 yards and has 5.5" less wind drift than my 7mm remington shooting 168 Bergers. Both zeroed 2.5" high at 100 yards and based on a 10 mph wind.
The 7mm remington shooting 180 bergers drops 40 inches more than my 264 winchester and drifts 4 inches further in a 10 mph wind.
The improved 280 remington cartridges and the 7mm WSM shoot the same velocities about 100 fps shy of the 7mm remington and come up even further short of the 264 winchester.
The previous loads are good for deer size animals and smaller unless you shoot the high shoulder shot where they will drop about anything that walks at that point. For large big game like large bull elk, moose, big bears, etc. these cartridges need to be loaded with premium quality hunting bullets that are known to hold together to get the maximum energy driving through big tough animals. This is where the 7mm begins falling off from other calibers at long range hunting. If you look at BC numbers with quality hunting bullets there isn't much out there. The 160 Accubond with a .531 BC is about the best out there. The Barnes bullets are excellent but the BC numbers posted are less than the accubond. For the 264 winchester I shoot the swift scirroco with a .571 BC that is probably the best premium lead core bullet on the market and capable of holding together and driving through an elk at many shot angles as is the 160 7mm acubond bullet.
So considering the best bullets for large big game such as elk the 264 winchester shoots 48 inches flatter at 1000 yards with 11 inches less wind drift than the 7mm remington with a 160 grain accubond. Again the improved 280 cartridges and the 7mm WSM fall further behind the 7mm remington.
That is why I said what I did earlier in this post.
LTLR, here are two loads from JBM Ballistics. The first is for a .264 Win Mag and the second is for a 7mm Rem Mag. This is about as close to apples to apples in my mind as you can get. What is interesting is that the .264 does indeed have 7.4 inches less drop at 1000 yards. However, a Key piece of information that I feel is being overlooked when the .264 is so heavily favored is the remaining energy at 1000 yards. The 7mm Rem Mag has 195.7 Ft Lbs more energy. Now I realize that energy is not the only thing that helps to make a clean kill, however it is important. The .264 is estimated with a 140 grain Berger VLD doing 3100 fps. The 7mm is estimated with a 168 grain Berger VLD doing 3050 which are realistic estimates from my experience. Some rifles will vary and I understand that based on barrel material, length, twist, etc. Is there anything that I may have overlooked that would be critical? I hope to learn where I can and do not profess to know everything. Just the angle I am looking from.
.264 Win Mag
Manufacturer: Berger Description: VLD (Litz)
Caliber: 0.264 in Weight: 140.0 gr
Muzzle Velocity: 3100.0 ft/s
Sight Height: 1.50 in Line Of Sight Angle: 0.0 deg
Cant Angle: 0.0 deg
Wind Speed: 10.0 mph Target Speed: 0.0 mph
Temperature: 30.0 °F Pressure: 29.92 in Hg
Humidity: 30.0 % Altitude: 7000.0 ft
Std. Atmosphere at Altitude: No Pressure is Corrected: Yes
Zero at Max. Point Blank Range: No Target Relative Drops: Yes
Column 1 Units: 1.00 in Column 2 Units: 1.00 MOA
Round Output to Whole Numbers: No
Output Data
Elevation: 3.207 MOA Windage: 0.000 MOA
Atmospheric Density: 0.06245 lb/ft³ Speed of Sound: 1084.8 ft/s
Maximum PBR: 391 yd Maximum PBR Zero: 331 yd
Range of Maximum Height: 180 yd Energy at Maximum PBR: 2136.8 ft•lbs
Sectional Density: 0.287 lb/in²
Calculated Table
Range Drop Drop Windage Windage Velocity Mach Energy Time Lead Lead
(yd) (in) (MOA) (in) (MOA) (ft/s) (none) (ft•lbs) (s) (in) (MOA)
100 -0.0 -0.0 0.4 0.3 2974.4 2.742 2749.8 0.099 0.0 0.0
200 -2.4 -1.2 1.5 0.7 2851.0 2.628 2526.3 0.202 0.0 0.0
300 -9.1 -2.9 3.3 1.1 2729.9 2.517 2316.3 0.309 0.0 0.0
400 -20.5 -4.9 6.1 1.5 2611.5 2.407 2119.7 0.422 0.0 0.0
500 -37.0 -7.1 9.7 1.9 2495.7 2.301 1936.0 0.539 0.0 0.0
600 -59.0 -9.4 14.4 2.3 2382.9 2.197 1764.8 0.662 0.0 0.0
700 -87.2 -11.9 20.0 2.7 2272.9 2.095 1605.7 0.791 0.0 0.0
800 -122.1 -14.6 26.8 3.2 2166.0 1.997 1458.1 0.926 0.0 0.0
900 -164.5 -17.5 34.7 3.7 2062.1 1.901 1321.6 1.068 0.0 0.0
1000 -215.0 -20.5 44.0 4.2 1961.2 1.808 1195.5 1.218 0.0 0.0
7mm Rem Mag
Manufacturer: Berger Description: VLD (Litz)
Caliber: 0.284 in Weight: 168.0 gr
Muzzle Velocity: 3050.0 ft/s
Sight Height: 1.50 in Line Of Sight Angle: 0.0 deg
Cant Angle: 0.0 deg
Wind Speed: 10.0 mph Target Speed: 0.0 mph
Temperature: 30.0 °F Pressure: 29.92 in Hg
Humidity: 30.0 % Altitude: 7000.0 ft
Std. Atmosphere at Altitude: No Pressure is Corrected: Yes
Zero at Max. Point Blank Range: No Target Relative Drops: Yes
Column 1 Units: 1.00 in Column 2 Units: 1.00 MOA
Round Output to Whole Numbers: No
Output Data
Elevation: 3.266 MOA Windage: 0.000 MOA
Atmospheric Density: 0.06245 lb/ft³ Speed of Sound: 1084.8 ft/s
Maximum PBR: 386 yd Maximum PBR Zero: 326 yd
Range of Maximum Height: 178 yd Energy at Maximum PBR: 2493.8 ft•lbs
Sectional Density: 0.298 lb/in²
Calculated Table
Range Drop Drop Windage Windage Velocity Mach Energy Time Lead Lead
(yd) (in) (MOA) (in) (MOA) (ft/s) (none) (ft•lbs) (s) (in) (MOA)
100 -0.0 -0.0 0.4 0.3 2926.4 2.698 3194.1 0.100 0.0 0.0
200 -2.6 -1.2 1.5 0.7 2805.0 2.586 2934.6 0.205 0.0 0.0
300 -9.5 -3.0 3.4 1.1 2686.1 2.476 2691.0 0.314 0.0 0.0
400 -21.3 -5.1 6.2 1.5 2569.7 2.369 2462.8 0.429 0.0 0.0
500 -38.4 -7.3 9.9 1.9 2456.0 2.264 2249.8 0.548 0.0 0.0
600 -61.2 -9.7 14.6 2.3 2345.2 2.162 2051.4 0.673 0.0 0.0
700 -90.4 -12.3 20.3 2.8 2237.3 2.062 1866.9 0.804 0.0 0.0
800 -126.5 -15.1 27.2 3.2 2132.4 1.966 1695.9 0.941 0.0 0.0
900 -170.3 -18.1 35.3 3.7 2030.4 1.872 1537.6 1.086 0.0 0.0
1000 -222.4 -21.2 44.6 4.3 1931.3 1.780 1391.2 1.237 0.0 0.0
.264 Win Mag
Manufacturer: Berger Description: VLD (Litz)
Caliber: 0.264 in Weight: 140.0 gr
Muzzle Velocity: 3100.0 ft/s
Sight Height: 1.50 in Line Of Sight Angle: 0.0 deg
Cant Angle: 0.0 deg
Wind Speed: 10.0 mph Target Speed: 0.0 mph
Temperature: 30.0 °F Pressure: 29.92 in Hg
Humidity: 30.0 % Altitude: 7000.0 ft
Std. Atmosphere at Altitude: No Pressure is Corrected: Yes
Zero at Max. Point Blank Range: No Target Relative Drops: Yes
Column 1 Units: 1.00 in Column 2 Units: 1.00 MOA
Round Output to Whole Numbers: No
Output Data
Elevation: 3.207 MOA Windage: 0.000 MOA
Atmospheric Density: 0.06245 lb/ft³ Speed of Sound: 1084.8 ft/s
Maximum PBR: 391 yd Maximum PBR Zero: 331 yd
Range of Maximum Height: 180 yd Energy at Maximum PBR: 2136.8 ft•lbs
Sectional Density: 0.287 lb/in²
Calculated Table
Range Drop Drop Windage Windage Velocity Mach Energy Time Lead Lead
(yd) (in) (MOA) (in) (MOA) (ft/s) (none) (ft•lbs) (s) (in) (MOA)
100 -0.0 -0.0 0.4 0.3 2974.4 2.742 2749.8 0.099 0.0 0.0
200 -2.4 -1.2 1.5 0.7 2851.0 2.628 2526.3 0.202 0.0 0.0
300 -9.1 -2.9 3.3 1.1 2729.9 2.517 2316.3 0.309 0.0 0.0
400 -20.5 -4.9 6.1 1.5 2611.5 2.407 2119.7 0.422 0.0 0.0
500 -37.0 -7.1 9.7 1.9 2495.7 2.301 1936.0 0.539 0.0 0.0
600 -59.0 -9.4 14.4 2.3 2382.9 2.197 1764.8 0.662 0.0 0.0
700 -87.2 -11.9 20.0 2.7 2272.9 2.095 1605.7 0.791 0.0 0.0
800 -122.1 -14.6 26.8 3.2 2166.0 1.997 1458.1 0.926 0.0 0.0
900 -164.5 -17.5 34.7 3.7 2062.1 1.901 1321.6 1.068 0.0 0.0
1000 -215.0 -20.5 44.0 4.2 1961.2 1.808 1195.5 1.218 0.0 0.0
7mm Rem Mag
Manufacturer: Berger Description: VLD (Litz)
Caliber: 0.284 in Weight: 168.0 gr
Muzzle Velocity: 3050.0 ft/s
Sight Height: 1.50 in Line Of Sight Angle: 0.0 deg
Cant Angle: 0.0 deg
Wind Speed: 10.0 mph Target Speed: 0.0 mph
Temperature: 30.0 °F Pressure: 29.92 in Hg
Humidity: 30.0 % Altitude: 7000.0 ft
Std. Atmosphere at Altitude: No Pressure is Corrected: Yes
Zero at Max. Point Blank Range: No Target Relative Drops: Yes
Column 1 Units: 1.00 in Column 2 Units: 1.00 MOA
Round Output to Whole Numbers: No
Output Data
Elevation: 3.266 MOA Windage: 0.000 MOA
Atmospheric Density: 0.06245 lb/ft³ Speed of Sound: 1084.8 ft/s
Maximum PBR: 386 yd Maximum PBR Zero: 326 yd
Range of Maximum Height: 178 yd Energy at Maximum PBR: 2493.8 ft•lbs
Sectional Density: 0.298 lb/in²
Calculated Table
Range Drop Drop Windage Windage Velocity Mach Energy Time Lead Lead
(yd) (in) (MOA) (in) (MOA) (ft/s) (none) (ft•lbs) (s) (in) (MOA)
100 -0.0 -0.0 0.4 0.3 2926.4 2.698 3194.1 0.100 0.0 0.0
200 -2.6 -1.2 1.5 0.7 2805.0 2.586 2934.6 0.205 0.0 0.0
300 -9.5 -3.0 3.4 1.1 2686.1 2.476 2691.0 0.314 0.0 0.0
400 -21.3 -5.1 6.2 1.5 2569.7 2.369 2462.8 0.429 0.0 0.0
500 -38.4 -7.3 9.9 1.9 2456.0 2.264 2249.8 0.548 0.0 0.0
600 -61.2 -9.7 14.6 2.3 2345.2 2.162 2051.4 0.673 0.0 0.0
700 -90.4 -12.3 20.3 2.8 2237.3 2.062 1866.9 0.804 0.0 0.0
800 -126.5 -15.1 27.2 3.2 2132.4 1.966 1695.9 0.941 0.0 0.0
900 -170.3 -18.1 35.3 3.7 2030.4 1.872 1537.6 1.086 0.0 0.0
1000 -222.4 -21.2 44.6 4.3 1931.3 1.780 1391.2 1.237 0.0 0.0
Last edited:
Nomosendero
Well-Known Member
Firecat, that is good data & you did not try to favor one over another with bogus velocities, that is good. I don't think anyone is ignoring energy, but rather what the energy will be used for. With the bullets that you compared, either is fine for Deer & down & both have more than enough terminal effect for that mission & because of that, ease of hitting with better ballistics is the deciding factor & the 264 wins as your numbers show. For Elk at your furthest distance compared, there are better rounds in 300mag & better yet 338 for that. But even if you stayed with theser calibers, again with premium bullets for the big boys the 130 Swift Sc. is mighty impressive.
