Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
Yeah or nay to the 264 win mag
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="fireroad" data-source="post: 298975" data-attributes="member: 17359"><p>You guys are killing me! By my count it's four for the 260 to three for the 264. I figued it would be a runaway contest. Here's what I've learned so far...</p><p> </p><p>260</p><p>Less kick, less powder, heats up slower, better choice for tactical comp but doesn't have the hunting range.</p><p> </p><p>264</p><p>Great choice for LR hunting, flatter trajectory than 7stw out to 5 hundred yards, heats up fast, loud and greater recoil, still a bbl burner.</p><p> </p><p>Sounds like Ineed to ddetermine if this is more a hunting rig or a LR tactical rig. I will hunt with it, and Iwillshoot non-competetive tactical with it so that doesn't help.</p><p> </p><p>2 more questions: Which one has a greater "fun" factor? With the same bullet and similiar powders, how much shorter is the effective hunting distance of the 260 vs the 264?</p><p> </p><p>Assuming the 130g Accubond and H4831sc, and a minimum kill velocity of 1600 fps and energy of 100o, both calibers should be effective out to 600yrds (260 1896 fps/1038lbs and 264 2097fps/1269lbs). At 600yds tyhe 364 has an impressive 210 more fps and 131 more lbs energy. I picked 600 yds because that is the max distance I paln to shoot at.</p><p> </p><p>What's really impressive is that the 264 will go out to almost 800 yds before it no loner meets the minimum!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="fireroad, post: 298975, member: 17359"] You guys are killing me! By my count it's four for the 260 to three for the 264. I figued it would be a runaway contest. Here's what I've learned so far... 260 Less kick, less powder, heats up slower, better choice for tactical comp but doesn't have the hunting range. 264 Great choice for LR hunting, flatter trajectory than 7stw out to 5 hundred yards, heats up fast, loud and greater recoil, still a bbl burner. Sounds like Ineed to ddetermine if this is more a hunting rig or a LR tactical rig. I will hunt with it, and Iwillshoot non-competetive tactical with it so that doesn't help. 2 more questions: Which one has a greater "fun" factor? With the same bullet and similiar powders, how much shorter is the effective hunting distance of the 260 vs the 264? Assuming the 130g Accubond and H4831sc, and a minimum kill velocity of 1600 fps and energy of 100o, both calibers should be effective out to 600yrds (260 1896 fps/1038lbs and 264 2097fps/1269lbs). At 600yds tyhe 364 has an impressive 210 more fps and 131 more lbs energy. I picked 600 yds because that is the max distance I paln to shoot at. What's really impressive is that the 264 will go out to almost 800 yds before it no loner meets the minimum! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
Yeah or nay to the 264 win mag
Top