264 MAG

[okie2]

The ideal capacity for 264 or 6.5 caliber is 69.6 grains
the 264 mag is 80.7--------11.1 grs overbore
the 6.5-270wsm is 78.1-----8.5 grs overbore
the 6.5 rem mag is 69.3----.03 grs under ideal
I have all 3 of them and the 6.5 rem mag will match
or beat the 264 mag with most bullet weights
and with less powder.

[Live Oak]

The ideal capacity for 264 or 6.5 caliber is 69.6 grains
the 264 mag is 80.7--------11.1 grs overbore
the 6.5-270wsm is 78.1-----8.5 grs overbore
the 6.5 rem mag is 78.1----.03 grs under ideal
I have all 3 of them and the 6.5 rem mag will match
or beat the 264 mag with most bullet weights
and with less powder.


Please forgive the noobie question, but how is the ideal capacity of any particular cartridge derived? TIA.

[okie2]

for 264 caliber it is this
.264 X .264 X 1000 = 69.6
it works for any caliber
all the capacities I got from Amooguide.com

[Hammer]

.

Would the ideal case capacity depend on what one was wanting to do with it ?

.

[okie2]

No it is only the line where you will know if a cartrige is over or under bore.
If you choose a cartrige that has like 40 or 50 grains over bore then you will know that your barrel will not last very long compared to one that is 40 or 50 under bore

[Uncle Jack]

Don't factors like bullet weight and powder burning rate come into play?

uj

[okie2]

NO
THIS IS ONLY THE CASE MEASURED IN GRAINS OF WATER CAPACITY TO GIVE YOU THE SIZE OF YOUR IDEAL CASE SIZE IT IS NOT A POWDER MEASUREMENT
DO NOT USE THIS AS A POWDER MEASUREMENT WITH ANY BULLET SIZE LOAD

[dfrosch]

for 264 caliber it is this
.264 X .264 X 1000 = 69.6
it works for any caliber
all the capacities I got from Amooguide.com



So, is there any science behind this theory? Or, is 1000 just some arbitrary number that somebody picked out of their nose? ::)


Kinda sounds like the latter.

[Uncle Jack]

I'm with the previous poster. That's a nice equation, but where does it come from?

uj

[Hammer]

.


There are many rules of thumb equations in many different endeavors which are useful.

This may be a useful equation for scaling cartridge sizes for many uses.



In 6.5 mm caliber, I currently load cartridges based on

222 Rem Mag
Rem BR
250 Savage
308
6.5 x 55 Swede
'06
264 Win Mag
300 Weatherby Mag
378 Weatherby Mag

and a few others.

Have found excuses to use all of them.

(So far haven't loaded the full size 50 BMG to anything smaller than 7mm.)



.

[okie2]

OK think what you want I tried to help bye bye

[Live Oak]

The ideal capacity for 264 or 6.5 caliber is 69.6 grains
the 264 mag is 80.7--------11.1 grs overbore
the 6.5-270wsm is 78.1-----8.5 grs overbore
the 6.5 rem mag is 69.3----.03 grs under ideal
I have all 3 of them and the 6.5 rem mag will match
or beat the 264 mag with most bullet weights
and with less powder.



Thanks. I learned something new. Can you elaborate on just how this formula was arrived at in term of the physics involved? This would seem to apply well in the case of the 22-250 Ackley Improved. .224 x .224 x 1000 = 50.176 with the actual case capacity being approximately 51.4 gr. of water.

I have been considering this change to my Savage Model 12 Low Profile Varminter in 22-250 as I am wanting to be able to get out past 400 yards with a much heavier bullet in the 75 to 90 grain range. I can probably do with with the 75 grain bullets but not anything larger with the existing barrel and twist rate.

Not meaning to hijack the thread, I have yet another noobie question. What all would be involved in rechambering to 22-250 Ackley Improved? Would it be practical to reuse the Savage factory barrel since it is a 1 in 9 inch twist barrel or to buy an after market 7 or 8 inch twist barrel?

[Live Oak]

Well......it would appear this thread is shot anyway. I'll starte another thread and ask the above question since it is off topic to this thread.