264 Win Mag - Y would anyone want one?

[royinidaho]

Been working with my shootin' buddy's 264 Win Mag in 26" Mod 70

He bought it right out of high school in 1967.

He harvested many mule deer, 100s of chucks, a few coyotes and hit a bull elk in the boiler room @ 30 yards, then trailed it all day and didn't get it.

About 30 years ago he put it up and hasn't shot it since. Said that's when it went south. Has around 900 rounds through it.

He was interested in going to Townsend Mt on the 20th if he could get one of his 264s shootin'.

He gave up...

I volunteered to take the project over. What frustration.

First downer I learned is that reaching a solid 3000 FPS MV is major impractical. Wholly good squat!! my 270 Win shoots 0.75 MOA @ 3325 FPS MV w/140 Bergers. And well under 0.50 MOA @ 3200 FPS MV with the same bullet.

It would seem the 129 class 6.5mm offering would be the heaviest projectile with decent performance. (This rifle shoot 100 grain Sierras lights out. Meaning lots of chucks out to 400 yes.)

Second downer. Barrel life is notably short. Research says 900 rounds is a realistic expectation if loaded and shot wisely. Wholly good squat!. . . It took 950 rounds to shoot out a 270 AM barrel and that was pushed hard in velocity and pressure. Always kept it cool though. And that's shooting distances a 264 Win can only dream of.

Third downer. What's with that barrel screw. Who's dumb idea was that??? I can see the center action screw. A decent pillar and skim bed will take care of that. But the barrel screw? Seems unnatural.

He may well rebarrel both of these rifles in, guess what? 264 Win as he has dies, bullets and tons of brass. I wouldn't! But him being only a few years younger than me and with two, using only for taking coyotes and wolves he they may out live him.

All in all I can see no practical value in the 264 Win.

Those old Mod 70s sure are sweet to carry around an shoot. Pretty much the perfectly designed hunting rig.

 

[MTBULLET]

3000 fps is realativly easy with a little work, and I'd have a competent smith use a borescope on the bble before I gave up.

 

[benchracer]

To each, their own I suppose. I certainly won´t knock the good ole .270 Win. I have followed your thread regarding the performance you are getting from your rifle with great interest. However, representing the kind of performance you are getting as typical for a .270 seems to me to be questionable.

I have a recent production (South Carolina) Model 70 in .264WM. It has not been difficult to get to shoot well. For starters, I am concentrating on shorter range loads using Partitions to try to lessen the potential for meat damage at 400 yards and in. My next step will involve AMAX´s for greater reach.

I own 6.5´s ranging from the Swede, to the 6.5-284 Norma, to the .264WM. All of them are sweet shooters. Each one represents a distinct step up from the one below it. The .264WM, in particular, stands to benefit from the slower powders.

I am using H4831 in both the Swede and the 6.5-284 Norma and Retumbo in the .264WM. From what I have seen of the results obtained by some experienced people on this site, 3100ish with a 140g bullet from the .264WM seems to be a realistic expectation from a 26" barrel. Given the superiority in bc for off the shelf bullets in 6.5 vs those in .270, that makes for a pretty even playing field.

You can still make the argument that the .264WM is just taking the long way around to get .270 ballistics and I wouldn´t be inclined to argue with you too forcefully.

I like mine, though, and am very happy with it so far. I don´t think your friend is making a mistake by staying with the .264WM if he goes with quality barrels of adequate length. If he is going to shoot for pure pleasure, though, he will need something that can handle a higher round count as well. THAT is probably the greatest drawback to the cartridge.

 

[scoutm]

I'll take a stab at this and let you know why I had one built…

I have a wide range of rifles of various makes and models ranging from my grandfathers old .243 I inherited up to a .300 wby mag that I won at a DU banquet. I'm not recoil shy but given the choice I do prefer to shoot my lighter recoiling rifles. My go to rifles are chambered in .25-06 and my .270 win.

When I decided to do my first custom build, I wanted to build a rifle in a caliber and chambering I didn't already have so that narrowed it down to 6.5mm/.264, 7mm/.284 and .300+. Preferring the lighter recoiling rounds I eliminated the .300+ calibers and chamberings.

I then considered how, where and on what the new rifle would be used for. Living and hunting in the West that meant Coues Whitetail, Mule Deer, Antelope, hopefully a Bear and every now and then an elk in country that is wide open and prime for long range situations.

Given the range of game and the wide open country most would say the obvious choice would be a 7mm/.284 chambering of some kind and I would be hard pressed to argue with them. With outstanding bullet options available from 120 grains to 180 grains the 7mm does offer a greater degree of versatility. But, with the exception of Elk, I didn't really see a need for anything more than a 150 grain bullet (which also meets my preference for lighter recoil) and when comparing the 6.5 to the 7mm in like weight bullets under 150 grains the 6.5 won every time.

The caliber 6.5/.264 was my choice so, now to the chambering. There are many fine chambering for this 6.5/.264. I considered factory chamberings .260 Remington, 6.5 Remington Mag, 6.5x284 and the .264 Win Mag. I also considered the 6.5WSM but I already have a 270WSM so I took the WSM off the list.

I wasn't interested in a short action so I took the .260 Rem off the list. Between the three remaining I felt that the availability of quality brass fell in favor of the 6.5x284 and the .264 Win Mag (because of the quality 7mm Rem Mag brass thats available) so the 6.5 Rem Mag came off the list. So I carved it down to two choices. I think it would be fair to say the choice was narrowed to a new modern chambering and an old somewhat classic chambering that offered virtually no difference in measurable performance. When given this kind of choice, I always opt for the classic or in this case somewhat classic.

 

[CogburnR]

Roy, you are getting about 300fps more velocity out of your 270 than average. Listed data doesn't break 3000 often. I have a 270 Sherman and with 130g bullet and 65g of RL-22 it gets 3100fps in a 22" barrel. It could easily go faster but not 3350 and not with a 140(maybe 3100- your 27" Lilja is worth 250fps over the 22" remmy). I have gotten 2950 with a 165g. I had a 270win that would push a 150g 3000fps once though(HOT).

I don't have a 264wm but I have some buddies that do and they shoot 150-200fps faster than my 6.5-284.

You can readily buy 264 ammo and guns. Even now. I was over to the local gun shop and they had several 264's and plenty of ammo on the shelf. So for a fast factory 264 the 264WM is it. Many people won't shoot a barrel out in their lifetime.

The model 70 is a better hunting gun than most though, I use them or a Kimber to hunt with.

 

[royinidaho]

Jim is a pleasure shooter thus round count is a factor.

If I were to have a 264 Win i'd treat it as I do the 270 AM and be kind to it and get a life time (mine) use out of it with great pleasure.

Regarding the 270 Velocities: The chrono used is a beta chrony set at whatever angle both L/R and U/D. Thus who knows what the velocity actually is. I use it for shot to shot consistency only. (Its not really even good for that. . .) Thinkin' of one of those electromagnetic thingers.

I have great faith, I hope not naively ) in Litz's bc values in Shooter and will wait for Shooter to tell me the velocity from drop testing.

The 270 AM is running 150 FPS slower than the chrony according to Shooter.

 

[lloydsmale]

royinidaho you have hands down the fastest shooting 270 in the world!!!!

 

[eddybo]

That is a fast .270 no doubt. I can squeeze 3120 out of a 26 inch kreiger, but not a foot per second more with any brass life.

Roy that 264 sounds about as slow as your 270 is fast

I can get 3200 with a 6.5 140 vld out of a 28 inch long throated 6.5WSM and I think that the 264 had a tad more volume depending on seating depth.

Good luck with them, sounds like they are being stubborn. Life is too short to spend too much time on stubborn guns, but it sure can be satisfying when you whoop em into line.

 

[Greyfox]

I wouldn't be so quick to write off the 264WM, particularly when the assessment is based on the old Winchester rifles. Much like the 6.5x284, chamber/throat dimensions, and twist rate can make a huge difference in exploiting the cartridge's potential. Using high BC VLD's with.appropriate throating and twist rate, the 264WM can be solid long range performer. I think Remington realized this when they chose to chamber this round in the Sendaro. As for barrel life, I haven't seen too many 1000 yard+ cartridges capable of taking game with it's efficiency and ballistic performance that do a whole lot better, some worse. IMO.

 

[lloydsmale]

Ill add this to greyfoxs post. If your truely loading that 270 up to the pressures it would take to get 3200 fps your barrel life isnt going to be a bit better then a 264

 

[Bounce]

I just inherited my Dad's .264 Win Mag in a 700 Remington. I'm guessing he bought it in the early 60's and probably had less than 100 rds through it. I've not shot it yet and have no idea of what this rifle is capable of. Should I expect it to range farther than my .223 Colt heavy barrel AR, my .243 Browning lever action or my .308 SCAR? I know it will out distance my 30-30, and likely my 30-06, which I've never taken out past 300 yards. I guess my question is, if properly tuned, and assuming good shooting technique, what's the longest accurate range I should anticipate from this gun? How much of an improvement should I see with an optimum load over factory ammo? And for that matter, what would be an optimum load for LR targets and/or hunting?
Skip

 

[royinidaho]

Run the exterior ballistics on the 6.5 Berger @ say 3000 FPS MV. You'll find it will reach out to your expectations.

You challenge will be get it shooting MOA or less. Which shouldn't be too much trouble.

Go here: JBM - Calculations - Trajectory

 

[rooster721]

I shoot the 140 Bergers through my 264win @ 3135.. 69g Retumbo

I'll tell you for a fact that-that load right there out-performs a 180grain Berger through a 7mm pipe @ 2900...

Buddy of mine shoots with me about everytime I go out.. his is the 7mm. Comparing impacts on my "mild steel" gongs, past 500 yards the 264 takes a lead.. noticably* At 650 that 180 barely dents the steel... while the 140 outta my 264 gouges an 1/8th-inch deep hole, 3/4 inches in diameter!!! (plate is 3/4"" thick.. heavy stuff)

...at 725, my 264 is still making a dent (& a much-meaner dent at 725 than the 7mm 180 makes at 650) At the same 725, that 7mm 180 is just burning the paint* (...comparable to what 264 140 does to the plate at 840!!!!) That's the difference there.

It's only one example, but plain proof (to me, and buddy) that 264 is a meaner calibre than many give it credit for.. velocity rules the long-range game in my honest opinion... & 264win was intended for the velocity that the 7mm's of same-casings couldn't (& can't) provide...

But... "Y would anyone want one" ???

 

[bigngreen]

Some of the old 264's were throated for a very specific bullet that had two diameters which makes them shoot awesome with a short conventional bullet but suck with any bullet that is interesting.