Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Long Range Hunting 264 Win vs 6.5X284 vs 7mm Rem mag

Of course, a 338 edge is just a 338-300 RUM improved and flies neck and neck with the lapua and is easy on the pocket book.

smokepole was there a big accuracy difference at the higher velocity?

I don't think there is a nickels worth of difference performance-wise between any of those list. We are high-jacking his thread though...

Can't really tell yet, still messing around with forming the brass, all groups were shot with unfired brass and it was a little crooked. Went from around an inch at 3075 to an inch-and-a-half or more at 3200.

I'm the OP

My apologies for the hijack. I still think the 7 will be the best 'compliment'.

IMHO,

The .264WM will have the flattest trajectory but will have somewhat the shortest barrel life of the three.

The 7mmRM will make a slightly bigger hole and offer better retained energy at long range, but not as flat a shooter.

The 6.5-.284 will possibly, depending on the rifle, be the most accurate of the three. It will also have the longest barrel life, but is a bit deficient in terms of flat trajectory and retained energy.

Which is most important to you?

Of the three, I would pick the 7mm for elk, the .264 for pronghorn through caribou sized game, and the 6.5-284 for lots of practice.

I have a hard time believing that a x284 tube would last longer than a 7RM tube.

Why's that Tanner?

Well, I suppose that's pretty situational. Seems like you hear about a lot more guys setting back or replacing barrels on the 6.5s... But it makes sense because not many guys are shooting 7Remmies in matches.

Think the barrels would last about the same with hunting level accuracy?

The only time you will have barrel issues with any of them is if you are pounding lead through them like there is no tomorrow. The average hunter could care less with todays barrels.

Figure out the powder volume-to-bore diameter ratio, and you'll have a fair idea of how barrel life compares between the two, all else being equal.

Well, I'll admit I've never shot out a 7RM or 6.5-284 barrel, most likely because I've never owned one of either. But looking at the case capacity/pressures generated, if I was betting I'd bet on the 6.5-284 lasting longer, all other things being equal, 140's in the 6.5 and 160s in the 7.

Maybe you hear about barrel replacement and set-backs more from 6.5 shooters because 6.5 shooters tend to be rifle loonies and that's what rifle loonies do. And talk about. I'd bet the "average" 6.5-284 shooter would be more likely to be into competitive shooting, or at least long-range steel banging than the "average" 7RM shooter, so more likely to be into setting back and re-barreling.

I'd be interested to hear what the 6.5-284 shooters have to say about it.

That figure is also known as "Relative Capacity". It tells you how many inches of barrel length it takes to make a volume equal to the case volume. And, of course, it gives a relative measure of "overboreness".

For the 6.5-.284 it comes out to 3.98 with a typical 140gr spitzer seated out to maximum COAL. The number will change a bit with different bullets and seating depths because they change the amount of bullet intruding into the powder volume.

For the 7mmRM with a 160gr spitzer, the relative capacity is 4.89. The number for the .264WM with the 140gr spitzer is 5.62.

I suspect the reason that the 6.5-.284 is popular among long range target shooters is that it is one of the least overbore cartridges that can keep a sufficiently high BC bullet above the transonic region to 1000 yards. Serious target shooters replace or refresh their barrels often because they can easily burn up 3000 rounds in a season of load development, practice, and competition.

Has anyone tried the 160 gr .509 BC Woodleigh PPSN? in the 264WM?
It looks like a interesting bullet and should fly better than the Hornady 160gr round nose which has loads at 2860 fps. It might be faster in a long barrel.

"That figure is also known as "Relative Capacity". It tells you how many inches of barrel length it takes to make a volume equal to the case volume. And, of course, it gives a relative measure of "overboreness"."

I should clarify that Relative Capacity is calculated by dividing the case volume by the CROSS-SECTIONAL AREA of the bore.

Is there a range of "good" relative capacity numbers?

I take it from the discussion above less is better?

I think 30338 shoots 'em in his 6.5-06, you might want to ask him.

Only if pie are square.

NO - pie are round; cornbread are square..

Pi R square