NEW 6.5 WIN. LONG RANGE MAGNUM!!!

The cartridge I'm talking about has actually been around since 1958. It's a 7mm rem mag case necked down to 6.5 caliber... Some older members might see where I'm going with this.

I'm just curious, with everybody on here talking 6.5's, how has the 264 win mag not come up in more threads?

I understand back in the 1950's it was built to be a flat shooting high performance round, and it was, and still is, but side by side with the popular cartridges of the time, 30-06, 270 win, and 4 years later the 7mm rem mag, it was considered to be a barrel burner. So it faded from memory and was eclipsed by other high performance cartridges that are easier on barrels.

Back to my original question. Today we have the 6.5 prc, 26 nosler, 6.5x300 weatherby, 6.5x300win, and more wildcats than I can list. People are excited when they shoot out a barrel! Now they can try a new brand: proof, bartlien, brux, krieger, and share their experience with all their buddies. So why is the 264 not back on the radar? Because it's not new and shiny?

I'm hoping some old timer has recently looked in the very back corner of their safe, pulled out the old winchester m70 264, whiped the dust off and compared the old trusty stead next to the new flat shooting 6.5's of 2018.

Badgerclaw said:

The cartridge I'm talking about has actually been around since 1958. It's a 7mm rem mag case necked down to 6.5 caliber... Some older members might see where I'm going with this.

I'm just curious, with everybody on here talking 6.5's, how has the 264 win mag not come up in more threads?

I understand back in the 1950's it was built to be a flat shooting high performance round, and it was, and still is, but side by side with the popular cartridges of the time, 30-06, 270 win, and 4 years later the 7mm rem mag, it was considered to be a barrel burner. So it faded from memory and was eclipsed by other high performance cartridges that are easier on barrels.

Back to my original question. Today we have the 6.5 prc, 26 nosler, 6.5x300 weatherby, 6.5x300win, and more wildcats than I can list. People are excited when they shoot out a barrel! Now they can try a new brand: proof, bartlien, brux, krieger, and share their experience with all their buddies. So why is the 264 not back on the radar? Because it's not new and shiny?

I'm hoping some old timer has recently looked in the very back corner of their safe, pulled out the old winchester m70 264, whiped the dust off and compared the old trusty stead next to the new flat shooting 6.5's of 2018.

Click to expand...

Pretty much nailed it right there... It's not "new and shiny" and doesn't have an MK Ultra hype-campaign being pushed behind it for today's instant gratification junkies with millisecond attention spans. Oh, and lets not forget this newfound dissonance about belted cartridges being somehow inherently bad. Can't tell you how many times I've both heard and read that lately...

I don't have a .264 WinMag, but I would own one before I'd own any of today's barrel-burner magnum 6.5's, or a 6.5CM or PRC. The only modern 6.5mm cartridges I could see myself owning (other than the 6.5 Grendel, that I've had for years) would be a 6.5 SS, 6.5 Sherman, .260 Rem, or .260 AI.

The 264 also burns a lot of powder, and some people don't like that but it is not as bad as the 26 Nosler or 6.5-300 Weatherby.

Peeeyouuuu a belted magnum....
No need for it go 6.5 PRC or 26 Nosler

Besides I love seeing Mudrunner2005 in a tizzy over something new that works better

problem with the old Winchester is barrel twist. build a modern 264 with proper freebore and you have one hell of a hammer.
I like my 264 it always held up its end as long as I did my job

Weatherby Fan said:

Peeeyouuuu a belted magnum....
No need for it go 6.5 PRC or 26 Nosler

Besides I love seeing Mudrunner2005 in a tizzy over something new that works better

Click to expand...

Works better? Hardly...

And I'm not "in a tizzy"... I just can't stand misinformation. There's already enough of it on the internet and everywhere else, we don't need it here, too.

don't worry Mud it has 6.5 in tread title it wont be long before all the internet experts and keyboard commandos will be here to drive you nuts

Weatherby Fan said:

over something new that works better

Click to expand...

How so?

Badgerclaw said:

I'm just curious, with everybody on here talking 6.5's, how has the 264 win mag not come up in more threads?

Click to expand...

I think it depends on where you read about rifles, cartridges and bullets. I've seen more mention of the .264 Win Mag in the last few years than the 20 years prior to this. Reason? From the beginning with the release of the .264 WM, there was the initial hype generated by Winchester and their advertising agency support. But, as with all new releases, we entered the field testing phase complete with field hunting reports which in some situations did not bode well for the cartridge. Imagine that!

Then the gun rag writers jumped in to castigate the cartridge because it was foretold that it might be a barrel burner. No testing just throw it out there and see if the poop sticks. There was no call for a better powder formulation or a slightly sharper shoulder or a slightly longer neck, just bad press over a supposition. But this is the technique used to sell magazines, controversy, even if it was created internally. This term 'barrel burner' has been applied to several cartridges just like the Scarlet letter used so long ago. Say it or write it in a public venue and it has to be true. Right? Not necessarily.

I've been producing several .264 WM rifles each year but for clients who understand ballistics and the art/science of reloading. The range of new powders has been a boon for nearly every reloader no matter the cartridge/bullet combination. But it has invigorated cartridges like the .264 WM because these powders defeat the term 'barrel burner' without compromising performance.

Bullets are currently enjoying a lot of promotional efforts through new developments not only in production but the math used to generate the designs. Put 2+2 together and you have new life breathed into an older, established cartridge. The interest is also enhanced by the increased relevance of longer range shooting and hunting.

The belt? Just another hurdle placed in the way of the advancement of a whole line of cartridge. Originally the design was to enhance positive headspace for cartridges which used longer sloping shoulders. The application of the term 'magnum' served to set the tone for naming any other cartridges featuring a belt even when the belt became superfluous. Personally, I have never had any reloading or shooting problems when making a choice to chamber a rifle for a belted magnum. But again, the writers had to have something to write about and the manufacturers of cartridge cases had to have something to use to promote the sale of the 'beltless magnum' cases.

The rest of the good news though is that there are other cartridges with the same or similar case capacity as the .264 WM and offered in the beltless format.

Time marches on and the public's knowledge base and the will to be deceived will continue to know no boundaries.

Im no old timer, but we have a A pre64 model 70 that was rebarreled from 300 H&h in the late 80's. As with most of the .264s I have been around, it is shooting 100-120 grain bullets over 60 some grains of h4831. 100 g bullets at 3400, 120's at 3200. That's great and all but it's no long range hunting rifle. Those bullets just don't have anything on the longer bullets requiring a fast twist, something all the modern 6.5's are taking advantage of.

We have a .264 winmag and it sits in the safe in favor of a 25-06 (easier to carry) and .300 Wm (900 yards instead of 600 max range)

adam32 said:

How so?

Click to expand...

All aspects of the new cases are better, steeper shoulder angle, longer case neck, more efficient case design

I don't see Rich using these old belted magnums for his cartridges and for good reason

I could be driving a 1950s designed truck but nope I like the new design truck, same thing with new more efficient designed cartridges, I like them.

I see this going, oh, I don't know....maybe 13 pages?

Without the fast twist, the .264 Is a Winchester wannabe .257 Weatherby. Had both and could not tell any difference whatsoever on game.

The Oregonian said:

I see this going, oh, I don't know....maybe 13 pages?

Click to expand...

At least 13.... possibly 20 !