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
.264 Win Mag vs. 7mm 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="Long Time Long Ranger" data-source="post: 492633" data-attributes="member: 505"><p>If a guy does not reload and shoots over the counter bullets only the 7mm remington is the best choice of these two. But if a guy reloads the 264 winchester will outperform the 7mm remington in a long range hunting situation considering quality hunting bullets currently offered. I have both, shoot both at long range and have killed animals with both. Here are the things to consider.</p><p> </p><p>First with Berger long range bullets which are primarily good for deer size game and smaller in these cartridges unless you stick to the perfect broadside high shoulder shot which doesn't happen as often as other shot opportunities. Fragile bullets that are known to fragment are not good choices to try and drive through large animals like elk, moose, bear, etc. with poor shot angles. Also do not consider energy figures based on ballistic programs with bullets that fragment because they are only accurate if your bullet stays together. Quality premium hunting bullets can be considered more for energy figures because they hold together better do drive that energy through tough muscle and bone of large big game animals. You can't just quote energy figures because they are not accurate in many hunting bullet applications.</p><p> </p><p>With Berger bullets that I shoot long range in both these rifles here are some figures based on JBM calculations at 5000 feet where I live with average accuracy loads for both cartridges. My 264 winchester with 140 bergers drops 30 inches less at 1000 yards and has 5.5" less wind drift than my 7mm remington shooting 168 Bergers. Both zeroed 2.5" high at 100 yards and based on a 10 mph wind. </p><p> </p><p>The 7mm remington shooting 180 bergers drops 40 inches more than my 264 winchester and drifts 4 inches further in a 10 mph wind. </p><p> </p><p>The improved 280 remington cartridges and the 7mm WSM shoot the same velocities about 100 fps shy of the 7mm remington and come up even further short of the 264 winchester.</p><p> </p><p>The previous loads are good for deer size animals and smaller unless you shoot the high shoulder shot where they will drop about anything that walks at that point. For large big game like large bull elk, moose, big bears, etc. these cartridges need to be loaded with premium quality hunting bullets that are known to hold together to get the maximum energy driving through big tough animals. This is where the 7mm begins falling off from other calibers at long range hunting. If you look at BC numbers with quality hunting bullets there isn't much out there. The 160 Accubond with a .531 BC is about the best out there. The Barnes bullets are excellent but the BC numbers posted are less than the accubond. For the 264 winchester I shoot the swift scirroco with a .571 BC that is probably the best premium lead core bullet on the market and capable of holding together and driving through an elk at many shot angles as is the 160 7mm acubond bullet.</p><p> </p><p>So considering the best bullets for large big game such as elk the 264 winchester shoots 48 inches flatter at 1000 yards with 11 inches less wind drift than the 7mm remington with a 160 grain accubond. Again the improved 280 cartridges and the 7mm WSM fall further behind the 7mm remington.</p><p> </p><p>That is why I said what I did earlier in this post.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Long Time Long Ranger, post: 492633, member: 505"] If a guy does not reload and shoots over the counter bullets only the 7mm remington is the best choice of these two. But if a guy reloads the 264 winchester will outperform the 7mm remington in a long range hunting situation considering quality hunting bullets currently offered. I have both, shoot both at long range and have killed animals with both. Here are the things to consider. First with Berger long range bullets which are primarily good for deer size game and smaller in these cartridges unless you stick to the perfect broadside high shoulder shot which doesn't happen as often as other shot opportunities. Fragile bullets that are known to fragment are not good choices to try and drive through large animals like elk, moose, bear, etc. with poor shot angles. Also do not consider energy figures based on ballistic programs with bullets that fragment because they are only accurate if your bullet stays together. Quality premium hunting bullets can be considered more for energy figures because they hold together better do drive that energy through tough muscle and bone of large big game animals. You can't just quote energy figures because they are not accurate in many hunting bullet applications. With Berger bullets that I shoot long range in both these rifles here are some figures based on JBM calculations at 5000 feet where I live with average accuracy loads for both cartridges. My 264 winchester with 140 bergers drops 30 inches less at 1000 yards and has 5.5" less wind drift than my 7mm remington shooting 168 Bergers. Both zeroed 2.5" high at 100 yards and based on a 10 mph wind. The 7mm remington shooting 180 bergers drops 40 inches more than my 264 winchester and drifts 4 inches further in a 10 mph wind. The improved 280 remington cartridges and the 7mm WSM shoot the same velocities about 100 fps shy of the 7mm remington and come up even further short of the 264 winchester. The previous loads are good for deer size animals and smaller unless you shoot the high shoulder shot where they will drop about anything that walks at that point. For large big game like large bull elk, moose, big bears, etc. these cartridges need to be loaded with premium quality hunting bullets that are known to hold together to get the maximum energy driving through big tough animals. This is where the 7mm begins falling off from other calibers at long range hunting. If you look at BC numbers with quality hunting bullets there isn't much out there. The 160 Accubond with a .531 BC is about the best out there. The Barnes bullets are excellent but the BC numbers posted are less than the accubond. For the 264 winchester I shoot the swift scirroco with a .571 BC that is probably the best premium lead core bullet on the market and capable of holding together and driving through an elk at many shot angles as is the 160 7mm acubond bullet. So considering the best bullets for large big game such as elk the 264 winchester shoots 48 inches flatter at 1000 yards with 11 inches less wind drift than the 7mm remington with a 160 grain accubond. Again the improved 280 cartridges and the 7mm WSM fall further behind the 7mm remington. That is why I said what I did earlier in this post. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
.264 Win Mag vs. 7mm Mag
Top