Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Long Range Hunting 264 Win Mag and the Berger 140 gr VLD Hunting

Does anyone use this combo for hunting and what is the best load in your rifle for vel and accuracy ?

John Burns runs that combo....

He's killed a couple does with it, all inside 150 yards though....

71 grains ramshot magnum. WW case and WLRM primer. .010" off lands.

Thinking about starting with IMR 7828SSC and the Berger 140 gr VLD with either Fed 215 or WLRM Primers.

RL-33 with the 140 VLD has worked well for me. 77 grains

1000 yards





Works on elk as well as steel

will pick up a pound of Rel 33 and try it

I know you had some consistency issues with RE33 in your .300 Winny.... have you seen anything similar with it in the .264?

It definitely is temperature sensitive

My .264 is a dedicated hunting rifle. RL-33 is the only powder I could get the velocity I wanted. The rifle shoots about MOA. Pretty sure it's the barrel and not the components causing groups that big.

I had good results with both H1000 and Retumbo in mine

What kind of velocity are you getting with 33? I have a pound of it I need to try. I've had a hard time getting my 264 to shoot vlds well.

Bb

COAL may be the reason. Get the Berger VLD jump protocol on line and give it a try.

DF

Here it is. Saved you the trouble.


Getting the Best Precision and
Accuracy from VLD bullets in Your Rifle
Solution - The following has been verified by numerous shooters in many rifles using bullets of different calibers and weights. It is consistent for all VLD bullets. What has been discovered is that VLD bullets shoot best when loaded to a COAL that puts the bullet in a �sweet spot�. This sweet spot is a band .030 to .040 wide and is located {centered} anywhere between jamming the bullets into the lands and .150 jump off the lands.
Note: When discussing jam and jump I am referring to the distance from the area of the bearing surface that engages the rifling and the rifling itself. There are many products that allow you to measure these critical dimensions. Some are better than others. I won�t be going into the methods of measuring jam and jump. If you are not familiar with this aspect of reloading it is critically important that you understand this concept before you attempt this test.
Many reloaders feel (and I tend to agree) that meaningful COAL adjustments are .002 to .005. Every once in a while I might adjust the COAL by .010 but this seems like I am moving the bullet the length of a football field. The only way a shooter will be able to benefit from this situation is to let go of this opinion that more than .010 change is too much (me included).
Trying to find the COAL that puts you in the sweet spot by moving .002 to .010 will take so long the barrel may be worn out by the time you sort it out if you don�t give up first. Since the sweet spot is .030 to .040 wide we recommend that you conduct the following test to find your rifles VLD sweet spot.

Load 24 rounds at the following COAL if you are a target competition shooter who does not worry about jamming a bullet:

.010 into (touching) the lands (jam) 6 rounds
.040 off the lands (jump) 6 rounds
.080 off the lands (jump) 6 rounds
.120 off the lands (jump) 6 rounds

Load 24 rounds at the following COAL if you are a hunter (pulling a bullet out of the case with your rifling while in the field can be a hunt ending event which must be avoided) or a competition shooter who worries about pulling a bullet during a match:

.010 off the lands (jump) 6 rounds
.050 off the lands (jump) 6 rounds
.090 off the lands (jump) 6 rounds
.130 off the lands (jump) 6 rounds

Shoot 2 (separate) 3 shot groups in fair conditions to see how they group. The remarkable reality of this test is that one of these 4 COALs will outperform the other three by a considerable margin. Once you know which one of these 4 COAL shoots best then you can tweak the COAL towards or away from the lands .002 or .005. Taking the time to set this test up will pay off when you find that your rifle is capable of shooting the VLD bullets very well (even at 100 yards).

Regards,
Eric Stecker
Master Bulletsmith

3250

Find a load at long range with an Audette. Perform a seating test for accuracy with the load chosen from the Audette.

Be happy

BTW, just read Mule Deer's article on the 26 Nosler in Handloader.

The .264 can't be beaten.

If you push the 26 Nosler as hard as you're pushing the .264, you don't think you could exceed that performance with more case capacity?

DF

I think his article shows that a slower burning powder will do that. Also the VLD has less bearing surface than the 140 partition or Accubond. It can be pushed faster than either with less pressure.

What is a good load to start with using IMR 7828SSC

I run 65g of regular 7828 with 140's in my 264. It's more of a max load than a starting load though. It runs about 3200 with most bullets in my 264.

Bb

Mine loved the 140s .015 off over 66gr of 7828SSC. Using the OCW method I have yet to have any trouble getting the VLDs to shoot.

* After reading BB's post.... That was max load in mine as well, start lower of course.

I'm guessing 64 gr would be a good place to start

It's not being pushed that hard at 3250 if you're talking about pressure. Not one sign of over-pressure. In fact when I shot the Audette, I got well over 3300 fps with the last loads. No sticky bolt or extraction, no shiny ejector marks. The accuracy node wasn't there though.

With the new, slower powders, the .264 may no longer be the end game for the 6.5mm bore.

The jury is still out on the 26 Nosler.

Generally case capacity rules.

DF

Rick,

All the available evidence shows that judging pressures by traditional signs such as ejector-hole marks or sticky bolt-lift normally results in around 70,000 psi, and often more. I can cite a bunch of examples if you want, but the basic fact is that you have no idea of the pressure of your .264 handloads.

Another basic fact is that a larger case can get more velocity with the same amount of pressure as a smaller case. The laws of physics always apply.

As soon as I get a day without wind I will have a report on he 160gr Woodleigh PPSN with 73gr H570. With 71gr H570 the 60gr PPSN 3 shot average is 3095fps.

I believe you and understand.

When you decide to go ".264 Winchester Magnum" and want to achieve its full velocity potential, you've just signed up to be your own Ballistician.

To achieve the velocity that the cartridge is actually capable of, it is necessary to use the newer, higher-technology, slower-burning powders for which there is little, if not non-existent, pressure data from a manufacturer. If I remember correctly in your Handloader article about loading for the .264 with the newer powders, you didn't supply any pressure numbers either? I don't believe any powder or bullet manufacturer has bothered to measure any since the cartridge is considered "obsolete". (Read that in Handloader as well).


So, as your own Ballistician with a .264 WM, a guy has to rely on traditional means of judging pressure, whether it be sticky bolt lift, ejector marks, PRE or CHE. If you have a better suggestion, I'm open to it.

I have never used the latter two and have confidence that if using the slowest-burning powders in the .264 such as RL-33, WC-872, it will be difficult to get enough powder in the case to have an unsafe load.

If an Audette is performed and loaded in small charge increments into the range of what an experienced handloader would believe over-pressure will be found even when working with new components, a guy can find the max load with for his rifle and work down.

Rick,

Yes, I am familiar with the lack of published data, as my two .264 Winchester Magnum articles for Handloader both state. But there�s a lot more pressure-tested data for the .264 now, and though there isn�t any for Reloder 33, there�s tested RL-33 for the 26 Nosler�along with Ramshot data for Magnum in the .264.

In the 26 Nosler several powders outperform RL-33 in velocity, including some powders that do very well in the .264. In fact Magnum gets as much or more velocity in the 26, with both 129/130 and 140-grain bullets, than RL-33, using pressure-tested data, so it�s highly unlikely RL-33 is any faster in the .264.

There are also better far ways of estimating pressure than the primitive methods most handloaders use. Miking case expansion works pretty well�but ONLY if you have something to compare it to, such as pressure-tested loads fired in the same make and lot of brass. This is what I did with my first .264 article, published about a decade ago, using powders there wasn�t any tested data for back then. The results were eventually were corroborated when the powder companies later tested them in the .264 . (This didn�t surprise me, as I�d already proven to my satisfaction the method works far better than �reading� bolt life and case appearance, due to testing it in a piezo laboratory.)

Despite the fact that there�s still not enough .264 data with what are probably great powders for the case, the method you used doesn�t prove anything about pressures except that the cases and rifle survived, and extra pressure produces extra velocity. Which is all any handloader does when he guesses pressures by old and disproven methods.

Thanks John.

My handloads extract normally, have no shiny ejector marks or swipes, primers in fully formed cases show no flattening (which I regard as the worst visual sign of pressure anyhow).

I've reached pressure signs during development with every rifle I've worked with on purpose and have found accurate loads beneath that level of charge which lack the traditional pressure signs. I consider them safe and they function well in the rifles.

The reason RL-33 gives more velocity is that it is manufactured with the same technology as RL-17, which is known to produce 100 to 150 fps more velocity than other powders of similar burn rate.

I tested 7 powders when I first started loading the .264 and I'm not sure if Magnum was in the group. I'll have to check.

Actually, RL-17 doesn't produce velocities 100-150 fps more than other powders. Some enthusiastic amateurs promoted that idea when it was new, but only after testing in cartridges where very few powders worked. But once actual pressure-tested data appeared from Alliant, it was apparent that wasn't true. Both 17 and 33 are very good double-based powders, but they're not magic technology.

And in reality primer appearance is an even less reliable pressure sign than cases. But if you're happy with the results, by all means stick with the load. However, it is still impossible for the .264 to match the 26 at the same pressures.

BS.

I have killed a lot more than a few does and some were even past 150yds.

Cow elk at 180yds. Notice exit at point of shoulder from 140gr VLD. I prefer no exit but VLDs are not perfect.



I also killed this trophy Wyoming Coues deer with the .264 Win Mag.



I get extra points for easy recovery.

Hmmmm....

Rick,

Yep, that's exactly the source of the "magic RL-17" myth. But once piezo pressure-testing was done, in real ballistic labs, nobody could find the extra zip. Oh, once in a while RL-17 turns out to be a very good powder for a certain bullet/case combo, getting at most 100 fps more. But other powders do the same thing for certain other combinations. 17 isn't a new paradigm in powder performance.

Check out the RL-17 data on Alliant's website if you don't believe me. Other ballistics labs have found the same thing.

I read that with its smooth pressure curve, once you actually SEE pressure signs with RL-17, you're WAY into hyper pressure.

DF

I loaded up a few yesterday with 64 gr IMR7828SSC and the Berger 140 gr VLD Hunting and Fed 215 . Will see how they do .

10-4 John. Thanks for the post

We talked on a prior occaision about the liter weight bullets and R-33. I am using the 127LRX. I did my testing in Ga at 1000asl. I went week before last to New Mex at 6400. The only change I saw and expected to see was the typical 1" high impact from my zero in Ga. My velocity was 3320 at home , I did not take my chronograh out there, but once I made my zero adjustment I was able to take my goat at 653 with the dope I had plugged in to the phone and the Ballistic AE program. It was spot on. I did not see any temp sensitive issues but my temps in New Mex were about 74F just like they were at home prior to leaving. R-33 has been consistent for me doing my load testing. MY barrel is a #3 contour Kreiger 8 twist.
Bill

Way to go Bill and NICE shooting!

You made a great shot too. I was alone trying to range, dope wind and get the goat to stand still and dial my elevation..He stood one second too long..fun dyi hunt, even if he had miniature horns..

The 140 gr Berger Hybrids are much easier to tune, 0.015 off the lands seems foolproof.

The information given in this video by the Alliant Technician and Propellent Designer seems to contradict your assertion. Watch the entire video. I'd like to hear your thoughts...

Thanks for posting that video, some good information there.
I'd like to try some 33 in my 338 RUM.

All in fun.

Rick,

Yeah, Alliant has been making those claims since RL-17 came out. I�ll get back to them shortly.

One interesting aspect of RL-17 is that Alliant released it BEFORE much pressure-tested loading data was widely available, so handloaders were working up loads without any data. As I�ve pointed out before, brass doesn�t show the standard �pressure signs� until pressures are around 70,000 psi, or even more.

When Alliant finally put a lot of pressure-tested data on their website, however, the super velocities disappeared�but RL-17 had already gotten the reputation for extra velocity, and it stuck with some shooters, especially those who believe published data is for wimps.

I did an article for Handloader in 2010 entitled �Designer Powders,� about various magic powders that have appeared over the years. In it I pointed out that Alliant�s TESTED data for RL-17 showed as much as 100 fps over other powders in only one or two instances�and that happens even with other powders, because some powders are particularly suited to a bullet/case combo. Overall, however, RL-17 didn�t produce extra velocity, and in fact in many instances other Alliant powders produced more velocity, including �old technology� powder like RL-19 and RL-22. And my search also showed powders from other companies often matched or beat 17 velocities.

Now let�s fast-forward to RL-33. I just did the same sort of data-search with it. Alliant�s website only lists RL-33 data for a handful of rounds, but that�s enough for our purposes.

7mm Rem. Magnum, highest velocity with 175-grain bullet: Alliant RL-33�2909 fps; other powders Ramshot Magnum 2950 fps, RL22 2970 fps.

7mm STW, highest velocity with 160/162-grain bullets: Alliant RL-33�3165 fps,; other powders Ramshot Magnum 3171 fps. Highest velocity with 175-grain bullet: RL-33�3033 fps; other powders�Ramshot Magnum 3052 fps, Retumbo 3026 fps.

.300 Wby, Magnum, highest velocity with 200-grain bullet: RL-33�2889 fps; other powders�Ramshot Magnum 3000 fps, H1000 3039 fps. Highest velocity with 220-grain bullet: RL-33�2865 fps; other powders�Ramshot Magnum 2840 fps, H4831SC 2840 fps.

.338 Lapua Magnum, highest velocity with 225-grain bullets: RL-33 3118 fps; other powders Accurate Magpro 3188 fps, Vihtavuori N170 3104 fps. Highest velocity with 250-grain bullets: RL-33 3001 fps; other powders Ramshot Magnum 3026 fps, Vihatvuori N570 3005 fps. Highest velocity with 300-grain bullets: RL-33 2748 fps; other powders Accurate Magpro 2737 fps, Hodgdon Retumbo 2732 fps.

This is with maybe 30 minutes of searching. I�m sure other examples could be found, but the super-velocities suggested by Alliant aren�t there. RL-33 didn�t produce higher velocities than other powders even in the .338 Lapua Magnum, the cartridge it was designed for.

I�ve known Dick Quesenberry for a number of years. He�s a good guy, knows his stuff, and but he�s also Alliant�s head of marketing. Both he and the powder guy talk about �penetrant coatings� as if they were something new and revolutionary, but penetrant coatings have been used in many powders for years, and for the same reason they�re used in RL-17 and RL-33: They slow the burn rate, extending the pressure curve down the barrel.

Smokeless powders have been around for over150 years. The first weren�t suitable for rifles because they burned too fast, but worked in shotguns. Within 20 years workable rifle powders appeared, and over the next half-century changes were relatively rapid. By World War II we had powders still used a lot today, in particular IMR4350, which actually did result in gains of 100+ fps in many rounds.

The advances since have been smaller, typical for any technology that�s been around for a while, but they�re still happening. Reloder 17 and 33 are very good modern powders, but they�re not a major jump in technology.