.264 Win Mag vs. 7mm Mag

[Long Time Long Ranger]

3200 fps with the 264 winchester is not a super hot load. Several powders will safely do that. On the contrary there is no way I am touching off a 7mm wsm loaded to get 3200 fps with a 160 grain bullet. You are risking blowing your gun apart and killing yourself. Most 7mm rem mags get around 3050 fps with a 160 grain bullet and they are faster than your 7mm wsm.

 

[meatyrem]

Totally agree with LTLR,

That's stw or ultra mag velocity. I don't see how that is possible out of a wsm.

IMO I think the 7mm is too close to what he already has (300 win). Whatever he can do with his win mag he can do with a 7mm.

I think the 6.5 bore will suit him well. The 264 wm or any of the other 6.5 bores. Order you a sendero 264 win mag and don't look back. I'm sure if you ask someone can shoot you some good loads in your direction. If I was looking at a deer/speedgoat rifle, I'd look into the 257's also. But like the others had said you get good bc with 6.5's. Good shootin

 

[Iron Worker]

Where did I get those loads ? Reloader's Nest - a reloaders resource I started 5grs below listed charges with each powder and worked my way up. I have had no extraction problems no ejector marks and first and foremost no enlarged primer pockets. Unless my Chronograph is wrong those are the velocities I'm getting. Its a 26" Brux cut rifled barrel. I was shocked my self. My charge of 70grs of Re#25 behind a sierra 160 gr GK is 5grs less then a posted load of another shooter. Also I tested known loads of other guns through chronograph at same time to make sure I wasn't getting error. So guys it is what it is. I don't blame you one bit for being skeptical .

 

[cornstalker]

Wow. This one is a doozey........

I guess, from a simpleton's point of view, I really don't understand what the argument is. I may be wrong, but the way I see it is that they are scale model equivalents.

Let's use the ever popular Berger bullets for example. The 6.5 140 has a BC of .612 and the .264 will push it safely 2900 to 3000 fps.

The .284 168 has a BC of .617 and the 7mm Rem Mag shoves it along at around 2900 to 3000 fps.

Wow, .005 difference at a common velocity makes virtually no difference whatsoever. The deciding factor should be the size of your quarry. Obviously the 7mm RM will have a bit more energy for larger animals. Deer on down, who cares....

For that matter, plug a 6.5-284 at 28-2900 fps with a 26" barrel and a 140 into your ballistics calculator and see how little difference it really makes.


In terms of the original thread question, I would pick the .264 for the simple fact that it kicks less and will drop any deer or antelope at any range the 7mm will. I would likely opt for a 6.5-284 though.....

 

[Iron Worker]

Well Berger makes a 180 gr VLD also its BC is way up there also. But hey its all good .

 

[cornstalker]

Well Berger makes a 180 gr VLD also its BC is way up there also. But hey its all good .

Then the velocity drops into the 26-2700's, but you are right on the money when you said "hey, it's all good".

 

[huntokanogan]

Does swift make the sirroco bullet any heavier than 150 grains for a 7mm?
I've been playing with Accubod 160's and VLD 168's out of my 7mm STW
They both shoot well but I have loading issues with the VLD (length) and don't want to customize my gun for just one load.

 

[Scot E]

Does swift make the sirroco bullet any heavier than 150 grains for a 7mm?
I've been playing with Accubod 160's and VLD 168's out of my 7mm STW
They both shoot well but I have loading issues with the VLD (length) and don't want to customize my gun for just one load.

150gr is it for the Scirocco in 7mm.



Cornstalker, the 264 WM is not a 2900-3000 fps cartridge. 3200 fps is easily obtained with reloading and almost every OTC load is that fast as well. Using 2900-3000 fps for the 264 WM is not an apples-to-apples comparison. Not even close. And the big point being made in this thread is that IF traditional hunting bullets are used, ie bullets that hold a significant amount of their weight to ensure adequate penetration through bone and lots of tissue, then the BC's of the .264's vs. the .284 are not comparable either. The .264's win out by a considerable margin. Remember we are talking long range shooting here. Comparing ballistics out to 5-600 yards isn't what we are talking about.

 

[600BP]

RH, IMHO I would only purchase a new rifle in a caliber that I can readily find factory ammo for without problems. I only say this because your original question, several pages ago, stated that you do not reload as of yet. Reloading is a great way to amp up the rifle you already have. However, if you do not reload, an uncommon caliber may not be the way to go at this point. Before anyone starts pounding the keyboard at me, let me point out that neither the 264 or 7mm is "uncommon" to me. However in some parts of my state, unless you have a 30-30, 308, or 30-06, you are S.O.L when you go to the local gunshop for ammo. By saying this I am in no way recommending you purchase any of these three calibers. I am just pointing out that a rifle only works well when there is ammo inside of it. Reloading is a different animal, and components can be purchased through many avenues. BUT as you said earlier boss, you do not reload as of yet. Something you may want to consider. Just adding my 2cents to the bucket.

ERIK

 

[cornstalker]

ScotE

3200 fps is easily obtained with reloading and almost every OTC load is that fast as well.

That still appears to be a bit of a reach to me. I did manage to find some 140 stuff getting up to 3150, but that is the exception, not the rule. I guess I am also assuming that since the discussion is "long range" we are not shooting 120's or round noses, but high BC hunting bullets.

Nosler Accubond
6.5mm 140 BC .509
7mm 160 BC .531

Swift Scirocco II
6.5mm 130 BC .571
7mm 150 BC .515

Hornady SST
6.5mm 140 BC .520
7mm 162 BC .550

Barnes TSX tipped
6.5mm 120 BC .443
7mm 140 BC .412
7mm 150 BC .450

Sierra Gameking SBT's
6.5mm 140 BC .480-.495
7mm 160 BC .455-.472

And the big point being made in this thread is that IF traditional hunting bullets are used, ie bullets that hold a significant amount of their weight to ensure adequate penetration through bone and lots of tissue, then the BC's of the .264's vs. the .284 are not comparable either. The .264's win out by a considerable margin.

Again, ain't seein' it bro.....
Looks like some give and take depending on the bullet.

I am going to need a little help understanding where the considerable margin is. Not trying to be a jerk, just need more info.

Remember we are talking long range shooting here. Comparing ballistics out to 5-600 yards isn't what we are talking about.

I am acutely aware of that. That's why I started my comparison with the Bergers.

 

[Iron Worker]

What 5-600yd shooting isn't long range shooting ? That's nuts .

 

[cornstalker]

What 5-600yd shooting isn't long range shooting ? That's nuts .

LOL!!

 

[Scot E]

ScotE

That still appears to be a bit of a reach to me. I did manage to find some 140 stuff getting up to 3150, but that is the exception, not the rule. I guess I am also assuming that since the discussion is "long range" we are not shooting 120's or round noses, but high BC hunting bullets.

Nosler Accubond
6.5mm 140 BC .509
7mm 160 BC .531

Swift Scirocco II
6.5mm 130 BC .571
7mm 150 BC .515

Hornady SST
6.5mm 140 BC .520
7mm 162 BC .550

Barnes TSX tipped
6.5mm 120 BC .443
7mm 140 BC .412
7mm 150 BC .450

Sierra Gameking SBT's
6.5mm 140 BC .480-.495
7mm 160 BC .455-.472

Again, ain't seein' it bro.....
Looks like some give and take depending on the bullet.

I am going to need a little help understanding where the considerable margin is. Not trying to be a jerk, just need more info.

I am acutely aware of that. That's why I started my comparison with the Bergers.

I haven't bought factory ammo for years so I guess I should be careful saying what is available now. Having said that I have seen Nosler ammo with the 130 AB over 3200 fps, there used to be a couple manf, rem and federal I think, that made 264WM with the scirocco and they were 3200-3250 fps. I think all of those are still available. Keep in mind these were from 26-30 inch barrels so shorter barrels may see less velocity. I am not going off rated velocity either but actual tested velocities.

I don't have a horse in this race as I don't own either caliber. I guess my main point is if I were buying, deciding between the 2 for the smaller of the big game animals like deer and antelope, I would take the better BC which berger has for the real long range stuff and the scirroco has for the weight retention bullet option. Add to the that the higher velocity ( I am very confident that 3200 fps isn't a stretch for the 264 WM velocity) and the results at distance are enough for me to choose the 264. Also the SD for the 264 is very good, aiding in penetration. There is less kick as well making for a more enjoyable, manageable, and potentially more accurate shooter without the need for a muzzle break.

I have a lot of respect and admiration for elk so they get the big guns when I hunt, ie 30's and 338's. So when looking for a smaller gun it seems very reasonable to me to look past the 284 and 270 and go to the ballistically efficient 264 which will put the hammer on anything in the deer and under category.

Run the numbers with 3200 fps for the 264 velocity using the best BC big game scirocco for the 264 and the SST for the 7mm. Compare drop, drift, and recoil. The 264 is it for me if my decision was between those!

My 2 cents my friend!

 

[Bully]

I have several Larger And faster guns, but I always seem to go back to my.264 win. And yes you can easily get 3200 fps out of 26in barrel ,I have two loads that I use with the 140 gr bullets.this is a great old round and with new powders, it can really fly. About Berger bullets,love them,I have killed 2 bull elk and several deer with the 140 gr Nosler AB is second.