Long Range Hunting Online Magazine

Go Back   Long Range Hunting Online Magazine > Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment > Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics

Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics Applied Ballistics


264 win mag vs. 6.5x284

LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Unread 06-20-2013, 06:24 PM
Platinum Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Spokane, WA
Posts: 3,969
Re: 264 win mag vs. 6.5x284

The .264 if the rifle is put together with a proper barrel length for the case capacity.
Reply With Quote

Unread 06-20-2013, 07:59 PM
Platinum Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Northeast
Posts: 3,664
Re: 264 win mag vs. 6.5x284

I think the choice really depends on what you want to do with the rifle. For mid range shooting with conventional bullets many like the 264 better due to the higher velocity. For sheer long range accuracy using the best high BC bullets, my experience has been that the 6,5x284 typically trumps the 264 mag. For shooting from 50 yards to 1000 yards the 140 VLD's at 2950-3000FPS seems to be the sweet spot with excellent terminal performance on game over this entire range. This bullet seem to have been made for the 6.5x284, as it currently offers the best ballistics for this caliber, and, it is a remarkably accurate combo with a 1:8 twist. The VLD's tend to blow apart on game at very high velocities at closer ranges. At 500-1000 yards I doubt a mule deer could tell the difference between the two calibers. I think there are a couple of other benefits to the 6,5x284. As much as people comment on the barrel life of the 6.5x284, it's better than the 264. Recoil is nil, and it a cinch to load, particularly with good Lapua brass available.IMHO.

"Let us speak courteously, deal fairly, and keep ourselves armed and ready"-T. Roosevelt
Reply With Quote
Unread 06-20-2013, 11:28 PM
Silver Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Colorado
Posts: 314
Re: 264 win mag vs. 6.5x284

I have to go with my standard answer. You need one of each...
Reply With Quote
Unread 06-21-2013, 05:05 AM
Gold Member
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 991
Re: 264 win mag vs. 6.5x284

everytime a post comes out about the 264 people hint that if you dont have at least a 26 inch barrel its useless. Ive got a 24 inch barreled hawkeye. Its no tack driver. typical ruger it took a ton of load developemnt to find a couple good loads that shoot moa. It will push a 140 to 3200fps and a 130 to just over 3300. thats about everything your going to get out of a 7mag and alot more then a 270! I know that this is a long range fourm and some here want the absolute most velocity out of there guns. But that 24 inch 264 is a deer killing machine and its fairly light and handy to carry. I also had a 24 inch vanguard 257 and now have a cdl in 257 with a 26 inch barrel and it gives about 75 fps differnce and the same is about the differnce in my 300 wby 24 inch and 26 inch guns. I dont think any load in any one of those guns goes more then a 100 fps faster then in the longer barrel. Alot of this predudice came from the old days when 4350 was considered slow and 4831 was the mag powder. Now with modern powders many rounds considered overbore are far from it. Same goes with barrel life. The 264 had a bad rap for years. Im sure if you run something like 4350 at 60k its going to eat barrels for lunch. that and the fact that most factory ammo for it was ww ammo and they used ball powders at those burning speeds and thats just more of a barrel burning recipe. Id bet the differnce in barrel life between the 264 and the 7mag is but a couple boxes of shells if you load properly and if you load your 264 with powders like re25, 7828, h1000 ect its going to last longer then a 6.5x284 thats loaded with re17 or 4350 ect.
Reply With Quote


Thread Tools
Display Modes

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:23 PM.

All content ©2010-2015 Long Range Hunting, LLC