264 win mag vs. 7mm rem mag

[idaho elk hunter]

I think I can do better than that. Since their is so many doubting people I am building a Browning A Bolt (yuck) for a close friend of mine and will be finishing up this week I will video tape on the chrony what results I get. This will be interesting for me also. A factory barrel that is only 26 inches long. The COAL is not as far as I would like it but it does seem to work well in the modified Browning clip. The throat is of coarse what I put in all of my rifles I do not put the SAMMI spec 3 degree angle in it. I instead put a 1 degree minus 30. It matches the 175 Nosler LRAB much better and helps with the accuracy I want to achieve in all of what I build. It puts less strain on the bullet jacket ( Berger) This bullet will be seated .010 off this style of lands. This is tighter that I normally want but the customer is always right. The internet has made him a expert. If it was my own I would have it .035. Loads will be worked up from a starting point of 72 grains of RETUMBO in a Winchester case, Fueled by a Winchester MAGNUM primer. 3.5 in COAL. I typically like 3.7 with this bullet. I really am anxious what this puts out. If I had to bet on the 26 in factory tube and the shorter COAL with this seated so minimally off the lands I would guess 3150 as a minimum velocity Depending on if the barrel is Fast, etc. I must tell you that all bullets are MOLY coated. I will tape this and put it on this forum. Lets see who can guess the closest!!

 

[dave elliott]

the 7mm rem mag gives you better choices in bullet weights. i like the bc of the 7mm also. the 264 is a fine round no doubt.

 

[lookinlong]

In 1987 I was in a pond shop and my Pastor said, "that 7mm rem mag is a good gun and it will shoot a long ways." $250. with a 3-9 on top. Seem to work for me. I looking for a new scope right now.

 

[gohring3006]

im with billr on this one unless u luck into an accurate load for the 264 early ur barrel will need replaced by the time u figure it out but that's half the fun in load development so i say burn the barrel then put another on and burn it to "yee ha!"

 

[gohring3006]

What ever a 264 and 308 will do a 7mm (284) will do better! That will get Broz all fired up..

the 7 is just a 100 fps off the 06 if I wanted to load to 65,000 psi like the 06s clones "270etc." I could come pretty close to the 7 mag peformance with heavier bullets with higher BCs and SDs that ought to get you fired up

 

[spokane]

Got to go with the 264 Win, hands down! The grandfather of the 7mm, 338, and largely the 300 Win. Someone voted the 7mm over the .264 (or 6.5) because of bullet selection. I find there to be more than a great selection of 6.5 bullets! Someone else said that his 7mm Sendero kicked too hard. While it might kick slightly harder than the .264 win, in a 10+ lb rifle, there shouldn't be any problem with recoil, try shooting my 7 lb 300 Wby!!

While ultimately, I do like both cartridges, I prefer originality! If the .264 Win originally came out with a 24 inch barrel and the wrong twist to stabilize. However, if Wby had a 6.5 Wby, I probably wouldn't even be interested in this discussion. Kind of something grand about the Ackley Improved and Weatherby Cartridges! If Weatherby would have allowed others (Rem, Win, Browning) to freely manufacture his rounds in their rifles, I think that they would be more common! Remington has some special run 257 Wby 700 rifles (for example) those things are collectables!

If you guys are concerned about the short neck length, why not just lengthen it like I did?? I have a 264 Win with a .295 neck. The longer neck helps with seating, especially with longer VLD bullets! I shoot 140 grain bullets 3300 fps! Currently, I have over 2000 rounds thru the barrel and it is showing a little erosion. The last time I reloaded, I seated the bullet out .1 futher, and my groups have always been under 1/2. Instead of arguing back and forth about the short neck and the possible negative factors associated with it, just resize some 7mm Rem brass, use the longer neck and negate the possible negatives. On the plus side, it makes seating a whole lot easier!!

While I wish that Wby had a 6.5, I don't know why the .264 Win isn't more popular, other than it had the wrong barrel length and twist when it came out. With the slower burning powders, improved barrels, and better bullets of today there is more reasons to shoot the .264 Win.

My .264 Win is my favorite to shoot, and it has never let me down!!

Kill more wolves!!

 

[68w]

I'm actually considering a 264 wm right now. Wanted a flat shooting deer rifle without a ton of recoil, which was actually 257 Roy or 264wm but better .264 bullets available. I will get a 7mm sometime too but more likely a fast twist 280 or 280ai. They cover a lot of the same territory 6.5 85-160gr and 7mm 100-195 gr. 264 has less recoil and shoots flatter higher BC hunting weight projectiles for coyotes and deer. Big 7 can shoot heavier higher BC projectiles but either would be quite fine for anything but big bear. If in bear country I'd rather have the 7 with the heaviest toughest bullet I could load. Where the 7 shines is availability... All kinds of rifles and ammo options. 264 options are very few and pricey, likely have to reload to use it often, and not likely to just find ammo laying around stores for it. My friend has a 7rm he has had and shot for years, and he loves it. When he comes over to shoot coyotes and I hand him a 243 or a 223 he has a smile and a sigh of relief, not that he would admit it. Without a brake it can be a thumper.

 

[Frank in the Laurels]

Out to 300 either will do for most game with equal approx bullet weights, however from 300 on I'd say the Big 7 holds the advantage and when you put the 168's and up in her there's no comparison... Big 7 smokes the pip squeek !

 

[dougfinn]

I'd like to start a rant on the 264 win mag vs. 7mm rem mag. It seems like everyone has something to say about these two and I'd just like to hear what you all have to say. I'm posting this as a poll just because I want to see where we are at in the long run on this debate. Please feel free to post any evidence you feel relevant to this discussion.

 

[dougfinn]

I've owned both. Found the .264 bullets tended to blow up going through deer. Killed them but not very quickly. 7mm has heavier bullets and I never had one blow up on me. I'll take the 7mm anyday.

 

[Creedmoor shooter]

Out to 300 either will do for most game with equal approx bullet weights, however from 300 on I'd say the Big 7 holds the advantage and when you put the 168's and up in her there's no comparison... Big 7 smokes the pip squeek !

The 264 win mag a pip squeak????? I shoot the 7mm mag but I'm not about to call the 264 win mag a "pip squeak". The 7mm does have a advantage but not as much as you think it does

 

[ranger30]

My family has been shooting 264 win mag since the early 60's. We have 3 Pre-64 Model 70's, my father's, mine and my brother. Thousands of rounds through them and I could not begin to guess how many deer and elk have been dropped with them. Where we hunt the average shot is probably in the 350-500 range. I would estimate that 90% of the time the animal is found within a few yards of where it was shot, often they just collapse where we hit them. In my 29 years of hunting, I have never had to track an animal shot with the 264. 140 SBT on top of H4831 does the job. With the success we have all had with that rifle cartridge combo, I have never had need to use anything else. None of the rifles are close to shot out. I will leave mine to my kids when I am gone.

 

[MAGA]

my vote is with the big 7mm mag

168 gr. bullet @ 3,000fps is going to crush just about anything in North America.

 

[walding1989]

My .264 win mag with 140 bergers @ 3230fps drops deer and hogs in there tracks.