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

[Rhett Crider]

I built/ modified a M70 EW 264WM last year. My favorite rifle right now. I had Precision Barrel Works chamber a Bartlien 8T 5R in a 3B contour at 26", flute, bed it and change the trigger. He pushed the throat I want to say 0.060". It works great w/ factory mag when I load the 143ELDX. 3.340 OAL w/ 0.025 jump. The Berger 140 Elite has a 0.075 jump when loaded to my mag max. I bought another mag box and will try to modify the back plate so I can extend the OAL on the Berger. Looks like it should work. Pretty sure the factory box was 3.400. Cartridge w/ 140 Elite is 3.446 OAL w/ 0.025 jump.

 

[wildcat455]

That's what I was afraid of.
I like loading long and burning slow powder, and it's always worked out well in the Remington's. I do like the positive feed of the Winchester. I Was thinking re throating if it was short, but if the mag length was short, that leaves me single feeding.

My Remington load with 147's is at 3.368" COAL. That's with a .010" jump. It's 2.760" Base to lands, and 2.750" BTO.

 

[stx]

264 WM is a great cartridge......I have 2 of them. One I don't shoot...it's a 1950s Browning Safari Grade that belonged to my Dad and I'm keeping it as an heirloom to pass down to one of my sons. The other is an early 70s M700 with 24" stainless barrel. The only thing done to it is bedded in a synthetic stock and a Jewell Trigger installed. It shoots 140 VLDs and 127 LRXs less than .5 MOA. I can't imagine ever being without a 264 WM.

 

[Rhett Crider]

I'll post on the mag box modification when I get it done. That will make a big difference if it will feed. Mine is control round feed which I prefer. My load w/ the 143 @3.340 is 68.3 of Retumbo and 3020 FPS. 1/4 MOA at 200. That's why it's my favorite.

 

[wildcat455]

I'll post on the mag box modification when I get it done. That will make a big difference if it will feed. Mine is control round feed which I prefer. My load w/ the 143 @3.340 is 68.3 of Retumbo and 3020 FPS. 1/4 MOA at 200. That's why it's my favorite.

Yeah, please do. I prefer CRF too, but pretty much all the magnums I have are on Remington platform for the larger magazine box, and distance to lands to get those long bullets out of the powder space.

My load for my Sendero with the 147 ELDM is:

74 gr RL33
Winchester Case
Federal 215M
CL 2.490"
BTS 2.113"
BTO 2.750" .010" J
COAL 3.368"
3214 FPS

Still trying to close the group up on it, going to have a guy I know that does load development on the side take a whack at it. See if the problem is me, my methods, my expectations, or if it is the rifle.

I'd like to try Retumbo, BMG50, and VV N570.

I'll keep your load specs for Retumbo in mind, and see how it shoots for me. That's a pretty sweet load!!

 

[Rhett Crider]

You definitely got some velocity going. You might play w/ that new IMR 8133 and Retumbo. I've got a 28 Nosler in the build stage right now and I'll be starting w/ 8133 once I get it from my Smith.

 

[LeddSlinger]

Poor brass quality is what's killing some of the belted mags for me. When I can get top quality Lapua or Peterson brass it just makes life easier, especially when pushing speed limits.

My son and I still shoot 6.5 Remington Magnums. Both very fast and extremely accurate. With 1 in 8" twist 26" long barrels, they will both push 140gr Berger over 3200 fps using various slow burning powder charge weights less than 60 grains. So they are also very efficient considering bullet speed to powder charge ratio.

Down side is that since Remington brass is the only thing available for the 6.5 Rem Mag, you have to be careful when hot rodding the cartridge to its maximum potential of about 3230-3250 fps with 140gr bullets because the primer pockets won't last.

The 264 Win Mag has the same issue with available brass. It's a fast round, but be careful pushing it to its full potential.

 

[Morrison]

http://sportingclassicsdaily.com/264-win-mag/

Well, actually I knew I wasn't the only one...
January 2018 article, so it's relatively recent, and may be worth someone's time to read if they are in to 6.5mm cartridges.
For some, this is not anything new. For others, it might provide insight on why some of us love this cartridge so much.
The author does a pretty good job of promoting application based decisions on cartridge choice, probably better than I could do anyway.
So here it is. And as always, your choice is your choice. No one else can impose their set of requirements on you if you are informed and know what your requirements are.

I believe the trend in 6.5mm bullets increasing weight and BC (due primarily to other "new shiny" cartridges) will benefit those who shoot the 264 win mag.

Berger is due to release its offering, I think in 156 gr. weight.
Powder and barrels have caught up... this may be the final piece of the puzzle for the 264 as well.
It may or may not go back into an across the board production rifle offering, but that won't break my heart, considering the quality of production rifles these days.

Please discuss after reading the article!

There are so many .264 cartridges out there, I love the reference to new and shiny. The .264 WM is outstanding, but I am amazed at how the 6.5 Swedish is ignored. With new modern receivers and barrels this cartridge from 1896 can compete and in some cases is superior to these new shiny .264's. I discovered this cartridge after I built my first 7 X 57 for deer and fell in love. I now have 2 of the 6.5 Swedish rifles and according to the ballistic books it out performs the 6.5 Creedmoor.

 

[Bill264]

I've been hunting with a .264 Winchester since 1973. It's in an old pre-64 Model 70. Everything I have shot has dropped on the first shot and most did not require a follow up. I've taken 2 Dall sheep at over 500 yards, Alaska moose, caribou, mule deer, whitetails, pronghorns, etc.

Wish it had a faster twist to stabilize the higher BC bullets, but that gave me an excuse to buy a 6.5 Creedmoor.

With those two rifles I have all I need in 6.5/.264. Which means I have all I need for most North American hunting (but don't tell my wife, she might question all the other guns I have).

 

[Canhunter35]

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.

What velocity difference are you seeing between barrel lengths? I'm guessing substantial that ur wanting to build a 32"!

 

[LTH181818]

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.

 

[Pdurry]

I had a 264 built over 1 year ago. People asked me what I was thinking building a "barrel burner". I explained true it was an old cartridge that may have been back then, but times have changed along with the bullets, barrels, and powders. When I shoot they just look on with their mouths open!!

 

[LeddSlinger]

I had a 264 built over 1 year ago. People asked me what I was thinking building a "barrel burner". I explained true it was an old cartridge that may have been back then, but times have changed along with the bullets, barrels, and powders. When I shoot they just look on with their mouths open!!
View attachment 104606

They are barrel burners. Any 6.5 that pushes 140gr bullets up around 3200 fps is gonna be a barrel burner. No way around that. If a person wants to shoot targets all the time for fun, they'll be having to change the pipe a lot more often than most would like. If used as hunting rifle with some occasional practice and sighting in, the barrel will last many years

 

[wildcat455]

DrillDog,
Winchester, Hornady, Norma, Nosler all make 264 Win Mag Brass. Those companies and a few more also make 300 Win Mag brass. Lapua doesnt.

Not sure what magnums you are referring to, but you may want to try ADG brass to see if they make what you are looking for. I know ADG brass for 300 WM and 338 LM is pretty solid. I think there was talk about making SAUM brass too, but I don't shoot it so I didn't follow it...

Hell would have to freeze over before I let a company like Lapua determine what I shoot based off what they create. Seems like allot of folks are getting by just fine without Lapua brass...
Not meant to offend you, just stating my thoughts on the subject.