Printable View
Against my better judgement, I am getting the hots to build a 264MG.
I want a long range cartridge for South Texas deer hunting. What I have read in the literature the last 40 years has been mixed. Some say it is the best thing since "sliced bread". Other have written that it is notorious barrel burner that will almost burn a barrel even before you find a good load.
What do you guys think about a 26inch 264 Mag. GOOD ROUND OR A BAD CHOICE?
Look forward to hearing what you think?
Centex Bill
Bill --- I had a Sendero II in 264 mag and could never get what I felt was good target accuracy. Acceptable for hunting, but not great. Ending up selling it. Must admit that I was spoiled by my 260's, especially this Savage: [img width=244 height=450]http://i840.photobucket.com/albums/zz326/TitandriverRR/IMG_0334.jpg[/img]
Never got a 264 Mag to group like that!
Rich
A 264 Win Mag with a 26" barrel was the first LH Savage 110 I bought back in the 60's. I never had to shoot any animal twice and I never had to track one. (WW case, CCI250, 140grn Speer, 56.5grn H4831) I know of no better long range open ground cartridge. I wasn't into paper punching back then, but sub MOA groups were more than I needed for mule deer.
uj
The .264 WM can be a little picky to load for but once you find the right combination it is IMHO a superb mid-long range hunting cartridge for medium game. I would stick with a 26" or longer barrel and the 140 grain bullets. When the throat is toasted in my 6.5-.284 in will become another .264 WM. A barrel burner it can be but it depends on how you treat it, I would say that a good barrel should maintain hunting accuracy up to near the 1K round mark given proper care.
Bob
I have to agree completely. If you plan on putting a large number of rounds through it then go to a 7mm.Quote:
Originally Posted by BobT
Come on guys how many people do you know that shot out the throat in a 264???
the 7 mag has the very same brass case so the heat and pressure is about the same as the 264
so how can one be so bad and the other fine.
I have 2 Remington 264's and neirher of them are picky either about what I shoot in them.
one is an older BDL 24" barrel I have been shooting it for 20 years it is still fine
the other is the sendro 26" stainless
You that never found a good load didn't look long enough.
My best load that I use in both of them is 100gr ballistic tips with 68grs. RL 22 3680 fps.
good long range deer and antalope round always have been DRT shots for me.
The next best thing I have to my 264's is my 25-06 AI 87gr at 3920 fps also good long range round.
Never had a problem with a load for the 264 Mag...
My uncle is on his third barrel in his (pre-64) 264 Mag and all he has ever shot was factory ammo until the last 10 years. My latest custom was going to be a 6.5 WSM but my gun smith talked me out of it as he indicated the number of re-barrels he has done for 264's in the past.
".......My uncle is on his third barrel in his (pre-64) 264 Mag"
Chrome/Moly or Stainless?
uj
My uncle is on his third barrel in his (pre-64) 264 Mag
how many years did it take him to do that or how many thousand rounds did he shoot
Maybe he don't know not to get a barrel over heated and just keep shooting it.
I have been shooting my 264 for 27 years and it is still in good shape with 1 barrel.
I guess I'm supposed to knuckle to the masses...
6.5's never burn barrels....
Reeducation complete...
Assuming that as a shooter and reloader, "This ain't your first rodeo", most of us with an IQ higher than the humidity realizes that large, overbore, high performance cartridges are hard on barrels. To single out any one of them (220Swift, 6-06, 25-06, 264Win, 270Weatherby, 30-378, etc. etc.) is a futile exercise in mental masturbation. If you want to drive a Maserati Quattroporte , you are going to pay the price, in more ways than one. If driven as it was meant to be, I guarantee that you will not get 100,000 miles between engine rebuilds. Driven with some common sense, it will probably last as long as a Honda Civic. The problem is that if you choose and pay for that kind of performance, you want to use it, so quit *****ing and just go for it.
"If you want to run with the big dogs, you have to..............."
uj
Amen- if you want to play, u gotta pay! I am doing a 6mmRem Ackley now w/ 1:8 twist. Yeah, I know its gonna burn barrels w/ the 105Gr. Berger VLD's- but boy those 1000 or so shots are going to be awsome! Then, getta new one. So
.
Have played with the 264 Win Mag and its virtual twin the 257 Weatherby quite a bit.
With 160-grain bonded partition bullets, the 264 is good for bull prairie dogs out past 50 yards.
Have seen it with my own eyes.
.
Hammer (50 YARDS)
You must have gone to the same place
my brother goes to try out new loads in his
BENNIE FLIP
I have studied building a .264 Win Mag for some time now using a Savage 110 action and a Shilen barrel. Definately 26" length to maximize performance. Don't believe everything bad you've heard about this round. I'm sure they're no worse than any other high velocity, high powder consumption round yet this one still takes a beating on this subject. I'm in agreement with the post comment about the same case as the 7mm Rem Mag.
Beings the 264 was on the market first
I'm thinking the bad rap as a barrel burner may
have come from Remington just to help their sales
on the 7 mag.
My brother in law has been using a .264 WM for years, and when I was back home in Western Maryland for Christmas he told me he shot a deer just recently at a measured 575 yards. He hit it right behind the front shoulder. Went right down with out a step, as they evidently all do with that gun. I think he may be using reloads of 140 grainers. He swears by it.
If you are referring to my post you need to re-read it. I have nothing but praise for the .264 Winchester Magnum! There were no criticisms intended and if I gave that impression I apologize. I require performance from my rifles and if it is a hotrod I run it wide open, if it doesn't perform like it should it goes away quickly. I have seen two .264 WMs with the throats toasted from factory ammunition, both of them were M70 Westerners from the early '60s and I have no idea how many rounds were fired from either of them but I know that at least one of them made a few trips to the dog towns. I have also seen a few more that were supposedly "shot out" that simply needed a good scrubbing to remove the fouling.Quote:
Originally Posted by okie2
Bob
Most high performance cartridges perform better when used in a SS barrel. This is a lesson that Winchester has learned a couple of times starting more than a half a century ago with the 220 Swift.
uj
.
The most important part of any barrel is to have two or three replacements in the pipeline at all times.
And to tip the UPS man well at Christmas.
.
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.
Please forgive the noobie question, but how is the ideal capacity of any particular cartridge derived? TIA.Quote:
Originally Posted by 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
.
Would the ideal case capacity depend on what one was wanting to do with it ?
.
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
Don't factors like bullet weight and powder burning rate come into play?
uj
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
Quote:
Originally Posted by okie2
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.
I'm with the previous poster. That's a nice equation, but where does it come from?
uj
.
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.)
.
OK think what you want I tried to help bye bye
Quote:
Originally Posted by okie2
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?
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.