Post by: hookr88 on March 16, 2010, 12:01:17 PM
Post by: bobcat on March 16, 2010, 12:03:50 PM
Only thing I didn't like was the recoil. I sold it several years ago and bought a 270.
Post by: Skyvalhunter on March 16, 2010, 12:09:07 PM
Post by: carpsniperg2 on March 16, 2010, 12:11:48 PM
Post by: Curly on March 16, 2010, 12:13:25 PM
I have this Sako Finnbear, pre Garcia, in .264 Win Mag. I am not real familiar with this caliber. Any thoughts out there on ther pro's and con's of this caliber and what type of game you would use it on? I.E. deer and/or elk? Thanks, Brian
Very bad cartridge........you should let me take it off your hands. ;)
Post by: Bigshooter on March 16, 2010, 12:15:54 PM
I've used the 264 Mag. on deer and elk. Great cartridge. Very similar to the 7mm Rem. Mag.
Only thing I didn't like was the recoil. I sold it several years ago and bought a 270.
I am pretty sure, but not 100% sure that the .264 is a 7mm necked down.
Post by: bobcat on March 16, 2010, 12:20:18 PM
Post by: Bigshooter on March 16, 2010, 12:21:41 PM
Well, yeah, the 264 Win. Mag, 7mm Rem. Mag, 300 Win. Mag, 338 Win. Mag, and 458 Win. Mag are all based off the same case. And maybe another I might have forgotten?
So are you saying the all of the cases you listed are similar to the 7mm?
Post by: bobcat on March 16, 2010, 12:25:58 PM
Post by: Woodchuck on March 16, 2010, 12:39:40 PM
Post by: bobcat on March 16, 2010, 12:40:37 PM
As curly stated, those things are horrible kicking mules, no knockdown energy, slow, innaccurate. I feel compelled to help. give me your address i will come give you 50 bucks and get it out of your hair
:chuckle:
Post by: bearpaw on March 16, 2010, 01:13:49 PM
I too would be willing to take that "no good" rifle off your hands.... :chuckle:
Bobcat, are you sure all those cartridges are based from the same one? I didn't look in my reloading book to see in what respect you are talking, but I am pretty sure case capacities and dimensions are different and I thought those catridges come from at least two different cases. :dunno:
Post by: Curly on March 16, 2010, 01:20:21 PM
Quote
The smallest caliber in Winchester's series of standard length belted magnums, which includes the .264, .300, .338, and .458 Winchester Magnums, the .264 Winchester Magnum (a 6.5mm to Europeans) was designed to be the ultimate ultra-long range big game cartridge. Winchester called it "The Westerner" in their early catalogs.
Post by: bearpaw on March 16, 2010, 01:33:14 PM
The 264 is a 338 necked down.
The 300 win mag was a newer designed case with the same belted base but the main body of the case is actually longer for more case capacity than the 7mm or the 264.
Post by: bobcat on March 16, 2010, 01:34:06 PM
Bobcat, are you sure all those cartridges are based from the same one? I didn't look in my reloading book to see in what respect you are talking, but I am pretty sure case capacities and dimensions are different and I thought those catridges come from at least two different cases. :dunno:
Yes they are all based on the 375 H&H case.
Quote
The cartridges that Roy Weatherby developed in the 1940's and 1950's set the standard for the development of most other magnum cartridges. All offered substantially increased performance compared to standard rifle cartridges of the same caliber.
Subsequent magnum rifle cartridges that followed the same basic principles were the 7x61mm S&H, .308 and .358 Norma Magnums, .264, .300, .338, and .458 Winchester Magnums, and the 7mm, 8mm, and .416 Remington Magnums. All of these are based on a blown out .375 H&H case. All but the 8mm and .416 Rem. Magnums are shortened to function in standard length rifle actions. They outperform previous standard cartridges such as the 6.5x55, .280 Remington, .30-06, 8x57, .33 Winchester, and .35 Whelen.
Post by: bearpaw on March 16, 2010, 01:47:31 PM
Post by: Jamieb on March 16, 2010, 04:02:41 PM
Post by: bearpaw on March 16, 2010, 04:54:32 PM
Post by: BigGoonTuna on March 16, 2010, 06:23:05 PM
my dad's only centerfire rifle is an old remington 700BDL. he bought it when he lived in lewiston ID about 30 years ago. said it was a pretty common caliber around there back in those days.
the biggest downside is the lack of factory ammo. the only easily available load is the 140gr remington cor-lokt...and they're around $40 a box!
Post by: ribka on March 16, 2010, 06:33:16 PM
(I only have 3 of them)
Was looking at one in .264 mag on Gunbroker
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on March 16, 2010, 06:40:56 PM
Post by: Jamieb on March 16, 2010, 07:24:29 PM
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on March 16, 2010, 08:15:04 PM
Post by: hookr88 on March 16, 2010, 08:45:51 PM
Post by: bearpaw on March 17, 2010, 01:47:23 AM
Post by: KillBilly on March 17, 2010, 04:53:04 AM
.264 Winchester Magnum
Place of origin United States
Designer Winchester
Designed 1959
Manufacturer Winchester
Specifications:
Bullet diameter .264 in (6.7 mm)
Neck diameter .299 in (7.6 mm)
Shoulder diameter .491 in (12.5 mm)
Base diameter .515 in (13.1 mm)
Rim diameter .532 in (13.5 mm)
Case length 2.5 in (64 mm)
Overall length 3.34 in (85 mm)
Rifling twist 1:9
Primer type Large rifle
Maximum pressure 64,000 psi (440 MPa)
Ballistic performance
Bullet weight/type Velocity Energy
100 gr (6.5 g) Nosler Ballistic Tip 3,510 ft/s (1,070 m/s) 2,735 ft·lbf (3,708 J)
125 gr (8.1 g) Nosler Partition 3,180 ft/s (970 m/s) 2,806 ft·lbf (3,804 J)
140 gr (9.1 g) BTSP 3,200 ft/s (980 m/s) 3,183 ft·lbf (4,316 J)
The .264 Winchester Magnum is one of a series of short-cased (2.5in.) belted magnum cartridges developed by Winchester, and officially introduced to the public by them in 1959.
Ballistically, it is almost identical to the 6.5 x 68 (also incorrectly known as the 6.5 x 68 RWS, 6.5 x 68 Schüler or the 6.5 x 68 Von Hofe Express) and the 6.5 x 63 Messner Magnum.
The .264 Win. Mag. is an excellent, potentially accurate, very flat-shooting cartridge capable of taking any game in the lower 48 US states, and one of the most powerful of all .264in (6.5 mm) cartridges. When loaded with 140 grain bullets at a muzzle velocity of 3,100 ft/s (949 m/s) it is an adequate round for deer out to 500 yards (457 m).
Background:
The .264 Win. Mag., like many magnum rounds, can wear out barrels more quickly than other rounds.[2] This was particularly true in the 1950s to early 1960s, with the chrome-moly steels then almost universally used for barrels. But recent advances with stainless steel barrels, especially when cryogenically treated, have extended barrel life considerably, with the .264 Win. Mag. and many other cartridges.
While very few production line riflemakers currently offer the .264 Win. Mag. as a factory chambering, the caliber remains popular with some enthusiasts using custom built rifles and handloading their own ammunition.
The introduction of Remington's 7 mm Magnum in 1962 almost immediately eclipsed the .264 Win. Mag., and it never fully recovered from the competition of the slightly larger-bore cartridge
In Europe, two of the .264 Win. Mag.'s champions were George Swenson of John Wilkes gunmakers, London, and David Lloyd of Northampton, England. Lloyd built a number of his deluxe Lloyd rifles in .264 Win. Mag. calibre, mainly for sportsmen seeking a calibre that would give high velocity performance with bullets heavier than the 100 grains fired by the .244 H&H Magnum.
When loaded with 129 grain bullets, the 264 Win. Mag. has moderate recoil, but with 140 grain bullets, recoil increases significantly.
Post by: Intruder on March 17, 2010, 07:56:15 AM
Post by: hookr88 on March 17, 2010, 07:31:27 PM
Post by: high country on March 18, 2010, 10:35:45 PM
Post by: rbros on March 22, 2010, 08:39:41 AM
Post by: bearpaw on March 22, 2010, 08:43:15 AM
Post by: rbros on March 22, 2010, 08:45:08 AM
I had a friend refer me to this site. I will be contributing more.
Post by: fremont on March 22, 2010, 09:14:32 PM
Real nice gun and a good caliber. Only meaningful downside is that your bullet weight is pretty muched maxed at about 140.... as such not considered "ideal" for elk and the big bears.You've got the 156 Norma Oryx (good bullet) and the 160 Sierra semi-spitzer may have been a candidate, too.