So I’m not the only one... 264 Win Mag

[Bbear]

No, elkaholic, you aren't the only 264 WM'er out here. Got one after getting rid of my 300 WM and 338 WM due to my shoulder not letting me enjoy them any more. Getting 3200 or so with RL33 and the 142 gr ABLR. Did a number on my last elk. Took a couple hill country does with it as well. Just enjoy shooting it.

 

[elkaholic]

No, elkaholic, you aren't the only 264 WM'er out here. Got one after getting rid of my 300 WM and 338 WM due to my shoulder not letting me enjoy them any more. Getting 3200 or so with RL33 and the 142 gr ABLR. Did a number on my last elk. Took a couple hill country does with it as well. Just enjoy shooting it.

Actually, I don't own a 264 WM and never have
However, I'm fully aware of what they are capable of. I'm and old geezer who was in school when the WM came out.but studied ballistics before many cared much about "needle blowers" as they were called.
I use to marvel at the velocity and flat trajectory. They were at least partially responsible for me pursuing the 6.5 cartridges over the years, and my affection for the bore!

 

[wildcat455]

Just get one with a twist fast enough for whatever bullet comes a long.

Running a factory 9 twist now, probably move to a 7.5 or 8 twist.

Truthfully, I am only looking to run the Berger 156 gr once it finally comes out.

Running Hornady 147 ELDM currently.

 

[Trnelson]

Running a factory 9 twist now, probably move to a 7.5 or 8 twist.

Truthfully, I am only looking to run the Berger 156 gr once it finally comes out.

Running Hornady 147 ELDM currently.

I am putting together another 264 win now specifically to take advantage of the 150g+ bullets. I chose a bartlein transitional twist barrel with an 8 to 7" twist. With modern bullets and powders the standard nine twist is pretty well lacking.

 

[elkaholic]

I am putting together another 264 win now specifically to take advantage of the 150g+ bullets. I chose a bartlein transitional twist barrel with an 8 to 7" twist. With modern bullets and powders the standard nine twist is pretty well lacking.

Let us know how that works out! I almost bought one a few years back and changed my mind the last minute.

 

[wildcat455]

I am putting together another 264 win now specifically to take advantage of the 150g+ bullets. I chose a bartlein transitional twist barrel with an 8 to 7" twist. With modern bullets and powders the standard nine twist is pretty well lacking.

Yes, the 9 twist has been stretched to past its practical limitations by the heavier weight offerings for sure.
That Bartlein trans twist sounds like the way to go. Sure hope you post up how it works for you!

 

[Edd]

Running a factory 9 twist now, probably move to a 7.5 or 8 twist.

Truthfully, I am only looking to run the Berger 156 gr once it finally comes out.

Running Hornady 147 ELDM currently.

I'm anticipating building a larger capacity 6.5 in the near future. I have a couple of 8" twist barrels on hand but have 7" twist on order.

Hammer Bullets has a nice looking 137 gr copper bullet I'm wanting to try. They say it needs a 7" twist.

 

[Canhunter35]

I need you to clarify what you are saying here.
"All things equal" and "heavy 7 mm bullet" contradict each other. All things equal is all things equal, not all things equal, EXCEPT...

Your final statement about less recoil is simply untrue. Compare a 140 gr bullet at 3200 fps out of a 264, and a 139 gr bullet at 3100 fps out of a 7 Mag,
And the 7 Mag has more recoil. By .1 foot pounds.
19.2 ft pounds of recoil energy for the 264 in this case, and 19.3 foot pounds for the 7 Mag.
Essentially, the same amount of recoil for a given bullet weight at a given speed, with equal weight rifles. It just physics.
Here's a link with the data.

https://www.chuckhawks.com/recoil_table.htm

Sure I'll clarify. I think a 264wm a fantastic round. Recently seriously considered building one.
What I was saying is: rangefinders and improved bullets have made most magnums come into their own as the article states for the 264.
I'm not running the numbers or intending to, but a 264 running a 140 at 3200fps and a 7rm running a 180 at 3kfps would be pretty similar in wind I'm guessing at least until most reasonable hunting distance but the 264 will have less recoil than the 7rm while achieving the same ballistics. All I meant was that the arguments from 60 years ago about what's better still are the same

 

[RT2506]

I got my 264 Win. Mag. in a trade from my hunting buddie. He got it from a friend who owned a gun shop. A fellow came into the shop with a Rem. 700 mag action and a 9" twist #4 Shilen CM 28" .264 barrel blank and wanted to send it off to have it barreled. When he discovered the cost of doing this he decided he could get the just then released 700 Sendero in 264 Win mag much less expensive. Shop owner worked out a trade for the parts and sold the man a Sendero. Now at shop owners cost to have barrel put on action was MUCH less than what he quoted the fellow. Shop owner sent parts to smith with instructions to make barrel as long as he possibly could. When barreled action arrived it had a 27 3/4" barrel. A stock was needed for it and my hunting buddie had a stock and the shop owner and he got to horse trading and my buddie ended up with the rifle. He only shot it with Winchester 140 gr factory ammo to sight it in and since it was deer season at the time he did kill one deer with it. My hunting buddie had been after me to get back a Rem 700 in 270 Win. I had gotten from him a number of years before. So we did a trade and I ended up with the 264 Win mag. Retumbo and 130 Accubond does 3350 fps and sub MOA accuracy. First deer I shot with it was across a green soybean field a touch over 500 yards, think it was 515 yards. At the shot before the rifle reached it's full slight recoil, less than any 7 mag I have shot, I heard the bullet POP. I thought at the time "man that was quick". When the rifle came back down and I looked out into the field it was empty. Now this buck had come into the field really quickly with his head down trailing where a doe must have crossed when it was too dark for me to see it that morning. When he stopped for just a moment is when I thought I had better shoot because he may start trailing quickly again and I don't take shots at moving game that far away. After the shot I was not exactly sure of the exact place this buck was at in the 1000+ acre green soybean field. I like to have never found that buck. I actually about tripped over him walking up and down the rows. When shot the buck was slightly angled right shoulder toward me. Bullet stuck front edge of right shoulder and exited about mid way back in the rib cage of left side with a quarter size hole. Buck dropped dead before he hit the ground because his legs were folded up right under him. I have killed quite a few deer from 25 to 500ish yards with this combo since and all have been DRT. Yah, I like my 264 Win mag.

 

[wildcat455]

I'm not running the numbers either, but I believe the 7mm will have greater energy at reasonable hunting ranges, due to the increased weight of projectile, and similar speed.

That is what I suspect made it the preferred cartridge. I don't think the 264 will ever be a 7 Mag. No more than I think the 7 Mag will ever be a 300 Mag. But I think the latest heavy for caliber bullets for the 264 will aid in making the 264 and other 6.5mm cartridges more viable, and improve their popularity.

It was never my intent to get into a "which is better" because that is subjective. As others have said, shoot what makes you happy.

Thank you for the clarification.

 

[reeldawg]

I always wanted a .264 Win Mag. Bought one last year, played with it a little bit. My 6.5 Sherman did the about the same thing with less powder.

Jay

 

[MagnumManiac]

I am a 264WM MANIAC!!
I currently run 3 F-Class barrels with 1:8" twist @ 26", 28" & 30". Will be trying a 1:7.5" twist 32" barrel next season, have the Bartlein blank sitting here now.
I also have a custom built on a Rem 700 Sendero action with both the 1:9" twist factory barrel and a 1:8" twist Hart 28" barrrel for hunting LR and I just ordered a Win Model 70 EW in 264WM. It's unfortunate factory rifles come in 1:9" twist rates primarily, a 1:8.5"-1:8" would be much better.
I really like this cartridge, it makes LR hits as easy as bigger cals without the need for a brake.
RE33, H50BMG & Retumbo all work much better in this cartridge over yesteryears faster powders.

Cheers.

 

[wildcat455]

MagnumManiac, thanks for posting up!
Any worries on the 7.5 twist 32" tearing up jackets or heating cores from friction?

All my experience with the 264 is in Remington rifles, first one was a 721, and current one is a Sendero.

I have another question on your Winchester EW you ordered, Any idea on how it is throated, and what's the mag box length?

 

[MagnumManiac]

Wildcat455,
I don't think there will be a problem with the 1:7.5" twist with billets in the 156-165gr weight/length. I don't use any pills lighter than 130gr, so it shouldn't bother them. I usually run 140-142gr pills, so the twist that fast shouldn't bother them.

The EW is an unknown quantity at present regarding throat length, however my EW in 338WM is significantly shorter than my Classic Stainless I had in the same cartridge, about .080" shorter in fact. The mag box runs 3.400". The chamber is also far tighter.

I have heard over the inter web that the 264's have a throat only .060" long TOTAL!
This is way too short for me, my 700 barrel is throated for 140gr Berger or Nosler ABLR 142's. The RDF line will also fit nicely in the .200" throat. My comp guns run .220" for some extra wiggle room for powder.

If the EW is short, I will extend it to .200" so I can run well into 3200fps with 140-142gr pills.

Cheers.