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
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
264 Win Mag - Y would anyone want one?
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="benchracer" data-source="post: 792584" data-attributes="member: 22069"><p>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.</p><p> </p><p>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.</p><p> </p><p>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. </p><p> </p><p>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.</p><p> </p><p>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. </p><p> </p><p>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.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="benchracer, post: 792584, member: 22069"] 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. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
264 Win Mag - Y would anyone want one?
Top