western living
Member
I want to develop a load for a fine 26", 1:9" .264 that has limited barrel life, so I am not afforded limitless experimentation. I'll be using Nosler brass.
I have TTSX in 100 and 120 grain, LRX in 127 grain, and Controlled Chaos in 110 grain and will use one of these for the 264 load.
I hunt mule deer and pronghorn in the Great Basin. I could someday hope to draw mountain goat, black bear, or bighorn tags. I have a better chance of drawing an elk tag. I've seen elk while mule deer hunting, and have built some points up, but haven't applied because I'm not prepared to backpack out an elk.
I've taken a few mule deer with the 115 grain TAC-X in a bolt-action Grendel, and the 127 grain LRX in 6.5 Creedmoor. They worked like I would expect a copper mono to. They penetrated fully. They resulted in expiration in a few seconds with one taking longer but not able to move and no game getting farther than 50 yards after being hit. I aim for heart and lungs and won't change that.
The 264 seems ideal for pronghorn. It would work for all the other game, but the rifle is a bit long and heavy for rough, steep terrain. If I made one load for every possible type of game, it would be with the 127 grain LRX because it's the only bullet of the four I'd use on elk or an unlikely large black bear (most of them here are under 300 pounds). I'd feel confident using any of the other bullets on any of the other game.
The 100 grain is the fastest and flattest shooting, but the heaviest LRX only drops an inch more at 300 yards. The 100 grain strikes with more velocity within hunting ranges typical for me (200 to 300 yards). The lower drag LRX doesn't preserve enough velocity to speed faster than the 100 grain until after 600 yards. The heavier bullets hit with more energy, but I don't see the 100 grain failing to fully penetrate a pronghorn or even a mule deer. The features of the Controlled Chaos could anchor game faster than an expanding mono, but I've not tried them yet.
Barnes recommends a 1:8" twist for the 127 grain LRX and the 264 is 1:9". However, if I use a JBM or Berger stability calculators, they indicate I would have enough stability. Consider that I am hunting from 4000 to 9000 feet. Pronghorn hunting is in September when the air is even thinner because it's hot. Mule deer hunting in October is often at 30 degrees, and can be as cold as 0 deg. F but is likely to be at 8000 to 9000 feet at those temps. In any event, JBG indicates an Sg of at least 1.4 in the worst conditions and Berger's, a little more pessimistic, still indicates a good Sg in the most likely conditions.
I'm skeptical whether the 127 grain LRX will do anything for me vs. the 100 grain TTSX on pronghorn even out to 400 yards. The main reason I'm considering it is that it would make the rifle more versatile for highly unlikely game. So my question is, whether the LRX would cost me anything on the most likely game, pronghorn and mule deer, compared to using the 100 grain TTSX or the 110 grain Controlled Chaos.
If I were to hunt elk, which I have some doubt I ever will, I'm not sure I'd want to do it with this rifle even with the 127. For mule deer, I think I'd rather have a shorter, lighter rifle in the mountains. This rifle is 9 lbs with a Leupold mounted, and it's 46" long. Even so, a Ruger American in 308 with a 20" barrel and a good scope is going to be fewer than 2 pounds less and only 5 inches shorter. This rifle has been in the back of closets and safes for 60 years (it's older than I am) and it's time to do something with it. Also, it is my only hunting rifle. The Grendel and Creedmoor I mentioned earlier are my sons'. I'd kind of like to make it the only one I'll ever need even if it took two loads for it.
So what do you think? Should I load the light 100 grain bullet or the Controlled Chaos and have the best performance on pronghorn? Or should I load the 127 grain LRX and be set for life even if I draw a rare tag?
I have TTSX in 100 and 120 grain, LRX in 127 grain, and Controlled Chaos in 110 grain and will use one of these for the 264 load.
I hunt mule deer and pronghorn in the Great Basin. I could someday hope to draw mountain goat, black bear, or bighorn tags. I have a better chance of drawing an elk tag. I've seen elk while mule deer hunting, and have built some points up, but haven't applied because I'm not prepared to backpack out an elk.
I've taken a few mule deer with the 115 grain TAC-X in a bolt-action Grendel, and the 127 grain LRX in 6.5 Creedmoor. They worked like I would expect a copper mono to. They penetrated fully. They resulted in expiration in a few seconds with one taking longer but not able to move and no game getting farther than 50 yards after being hit. I aim for heart and lungs and won't change that.
The 264 seems ideal for pronghorn. It would work for all the other game, but the rifle is a bit long and heavy for rough, steep terrain. If I made one load for every possible type of game, it would be with the 127 grain LRX because it's the only bullet of the four I'd use on elk or an unlikely large black bear (most of them here are under 300 pounds). I'd feel confident using any of the other bullets on any of the other game.
The 100 grain is the fastest and flattest shooting, but the heaviest LRX only drops an inch more at 300 yards. The 100 grain strikes with more velocity within hunting ranges typical for me (200 to 300 yards). The lower drag LRX doesn't preserve enough velocity to speed faster than the 100 grain until after 600 yards. The heavier bullets hit with more energy, but I don't see the 100 grain failing to fully penetrate a pronghorn or even a mule deer. The features of the Controlled Chaos could anchor game faster than an expanding mono, but I've not tried them yet.
Barnes recommends a 1:8" twist for the 127 grain LRX and the 264 is 1:9". However, if I use a JBM or Berger stability calculators, they indicate I would have enough stability. Consider that I am hunting from 4000 to 9000 feet. Pronghorn hunting is in September when the air is even thinner because it's hot. Mule deer hunting in October is often at 30 degrees, and can be as cold as 0 deg. F but is likely to be at 8000 to 9000 feet at those temps. In any event, JBG indicates an Sg of at least 1.4 in the worst conditions and Berger's, a little more pessimistic, still indicates a good Sg in the most likely conditions.
I'm skeptical whether the 127 grain LRX will do anything for me vs. the 100 grain TTSX on pronghorn even out to 400 yards. The main reason I'm considering it is that it would make the rifle more versatile for highly unlikely game. So my question is, whether the LRX would cost me anything on the most likely game, pronghorn and mule deer, compared to using the 100 grain TTSX or the 110 grain Controlled Chaos.
If I were to hunt elk, which I have some doubt I ever will, I'm not sure I'd want to do it with this rifle even with the 127. For mule deer, I think I'd rather have a shorter, lighter rifle in the mountains. This rifle is 9 lbs with a Leupold mounted, and it's 46" long. Even so, a Ruger American in 308 with a 20" barrel and a good scope is going to be fewer than 2 pounds less and only 5 inches shorter. This rifle has been in the back of closets and safes for 60 years (it's older than I am) and it's time to do something with it. Also, it is my only hunting rifle. The Grendel and Creedmoor I mentioned earlier are my sons'. I'd kind of like to make it the only one I'll ever need even if it took two loads for it.
So what do you think? Should I load the light 100 grain bullet or the Controlled Chaos and have the best performance on pronghorn? Or should I load the 127 grain LRX and be set for life even if I draw a rare tag?
Last edited:
