Long Range Hunting Online Magazine


Go Back   Long Range Hunting Online Magazine > Chatting and General Stuff > General Discussion

General Discussion Must wear red or OD green socks to participate. I can't see your socks, please be honest.


View Poll Results: 264 win mag or 7mm mag
264 win mag 102 38.93%
7mm rem mag 160 61.07%
Voters: 262. You may not vote on this poll

Reply

264 win mag vs. 7mm rem mag

 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #15  
Old 02-04-2012, 07:25 PM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 200
Re: 264 win mag vs. 7mm rem mag

If I could only own one rifle and it had to be the 264 or the 7mm I would go with the 7mm, I would feel better using it on elk, bear, moose, etc...
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 02-20-2012, 07:22 AM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Northeast
Posts: 2,334
Re: 264 win mag vs. 7mm rem mag

To own one rifle for everything it would be the 7mm mag. Since that would not be the case with me, I would go with the 6.5x284 for up to deer sized game over either. At 1000 yards, no deer could tell the difference between them and the 6.5x284, at least in my experience, has better quality brass availability, less recoil, and is very easy to develope highly accurate loads with the 140 VLD's in the 3000FPS range. For the bigger stuff, I'd use 30 or larger.
__________________

"Let us speak courteously, deal fairly, and keep ourselves armed and ready"-T. Roosevelt
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 03-21-2012, 02:06 PM
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Patagonia Mountains, Arizona
Posts: 757
Re: 264 win mag vs. 7mm rem mag

Quote:
Originally Posted by guns_and_labs View Post
.264 WinMag. Less recoil, higher velocity, same or batter ballistics, what's not to like?
The 264 Win Mag has less range, less downrange energy, shorter barrel life. Lower maximum BC bullets available. Smaller hole. What's to like?

The obvious choice is to own both. It's not which is better. It's which is more suitable for a specific range, target, and conditions. They both have a SAAMI case length of 2.5" and COAL of under 3.35". Both need a 3.6"magazine and handloads to achieve their maximum performance.

You might as well ask whether a 22LR is better than a 50 BMG. They have different uses.
With the 264 WM and 7mmRM there is a lot more overlap where either would do the job.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 08-22-2012, 06:13 PM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 161
Re: 264 win mag vs. 7mm rem mag

I just bought a Sendero in 264. I live in the East and deer is what I hunt. The 264 is a good deer size magnum.If I had the opportunity to hunt larger game like elk I would have opted for a 7mm or larger.As far as power needed goes, I get all I need from my 243 Win, but that don't mean I can't get a new rifle to have fun with.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 08-23-2012, 12:18 PM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: central Louisiana....but from Montana orig.
Posts: 7
Re: 264 win mag vs. 7mm rem mag

In years gone by...and for other game as well as deer... I would've said 7mm...especially with off the rack ammo.Today,with better powders appropriate to the bore size,(not mention better light weight bullets),I'd go .264.I don't mind a 26" Bbl.,so ssssllllooooowwww powders avail. these days allow the use of the 85gr.-165gr. bullet range that will do for about any and all but the BIG bears up close.I don't dislike the 7mm,I've owned 2,I just like the uncommon trail .264 v 7mm....222 Rem. Mag v .223....300 Savage v .308...8mmx62 v '06 and so on.To ME ,the .264 is a BIG deer and down cartridge for long range..........just because I like it as such.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 04-12-2013, 07:41 AM
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 809
Re: 264 win mag vs. 7mm rem mag

I have both and love both. Realisticaly theres little differnce. What one will do so will the other. Its about like comparing a 270 to a 280.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 04-14-2013, 07:43 PM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: The cold part of Montana
Posts: 1,390
Re: 264 win mag vs. 7mm rem mag

Quote:
Originally Posted by Long Time Long Ranger View Post
Well, I just put this post in here to get it fired up and start a good argument but no takers I guess. I think most of you know I have over twenty top 7mm rifles in standard and all kind of wildcats and love to shoot them. I am like Bill, I think you just need both. I have a few 6.5's also. The truth is they are the same case necked to a little different caliber and very similar ballistics. One is a little better than the other depending on what bullet you use and the purpose so they flip flop according to those factors. My wife definitely likes the 264 winchester better because of the light recoil. They are both small caliber with no high bc hunting bullets with sufficient weight to make them good choices for large big game at long range such as elk when there are much better choices that should be used for that purpose. Heavy bullets in the 7mm can not be driven fast enough to change that much. They both fill about the exact same niche for taking deer, antelope and caribou size animals.
So what your saying is that instead you should go big or go home how about be competent with what you have and leave numbers on paper where they belong
__________________
Keep in mind the animals we shoot for food and display are not bullet proof. Contrary to popular belief, they bleed and die just like they did a hundred years ago. Being competent with a given rifle is far more important than impressive ballistics and poor shootability. High velocity misses never put a steak in the freezer.

Joe
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:02 PM.


Powered by vBulletin ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Management Powered by vBadvanced CMPS
All content ©2010-2014 Long Range Hunting, LLC