|
|
Joined: Jan 2020
Posts: 11
New Member
|
OP
New Member
Joined: Jan 2020
Posts: 11 |
I have this in the Hunting Rifles forum but don't know if it belongs here instead.
I bought a stainless M70 25-06 a few years back, shot a couple things with it one season and found I wasn't very enamoured with the cartridge after all (the rifle is good, though). I'm getting rid of it now and am going to replace it with a .264 Win Mag. I've been holding off on the .264 until I found a Ruger No 1 chambered for it, but having yet to find one I've decided that Winchester's current offerings in the cartridge are more than sufficient.
Anyway, I'm just wondering what loadings you guys might suggest. I usually shoot heavy for caliber Accubonds, which would mean 140s in this case. That ought to be pretty sweet for antelope and deer out to 400 yards and a cow elk to 300. I've never been completely sold on lighter for caliber monolithics, however, I'm also intrigued by the ballistic potential of the 120 grain Nosler E-Tip. It has a higher BC than the than the 115-120 grain .257s I was slinging, and has near the same BC as the 140 grain accubond. It also has a flatter trajectory and bucks wind better than the 140 at any range I'll be shooting. Although, I know monolithic bullets have a way higher weight retention than even bonded lead cores, but still...I just don't like the idea of shooting elk with a 120 grain bullet. Or am I just not putting enough faith in modern bullet design. Anyway, what do you guys like?
For powder, I'll want to consult a recent Nosler reloading guide first, but I thought RL22, RL25 or Retumbo sounded like a good place to start. Again, what would you guys suggest?
Thank you
Last edited by Harmonious_Fulmination; 01/18/20.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 30,859
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 30,859 |
I'd use a heavy Accubond and a slow powder. ADI 2218 is Hodgdons 50 BMG. It's where I would start:
Cartridge : .264 Win. Mag.
Bullet : .264, 140, Nosler AccuBond 57873
Useable Case Capaci: 74.864 grain H2O = 4.861 cm³
Cartridge O.A.L. L6: 3.340 inch = 84.84 mm
Barrel Length : 26.0 inch = 660.4 mm
Powder : ADI AR 2218
Predicted data by increasing and decreasing the given charge,
incremented in steps of 0.649% of nominal charge.
CAUTION: Figures exceed maximum and minimum recommended loads !
Step Fill. Charge Vel. Energy Pmax Pmuz Prop.Burnt B_Time
% % Grains fps ft.lbs psi psi % ms
-06.5 98 72.00 3026 2847 48404 15353 96.4 1.396
-05.8 99 72.50 3053 2897 49612 15465 96.8 1.380
-05.2 99 73.00 3079 2948 50857 15573 97.2 1.363
-04.5 100 73.50 3106 2999 52139 15675 97.5 1.347
-03.9 101 74.00 3132 3050 53456 15772 97.8 1.331 ! Near Maximum !
-03.2 101 74.50 3159 3102 54814 15865 98.1 1.315 ! Near Maximum !
-02.6 102 75.00 3186 3155 56207 15951 98.4 1.300 ! Near Maximum !
-01.9 103 75.50 3212 3208 57648 16033 98.7 1.284 ! Near Maximum !
-01.3 103 76.00 3239 3261 59131 16109 98.9 1.269 ! Near Maximum !
-00.6 104 76.50 3265 3315 60659 16179 99.1 1.253 ! Near Maximum !
+00.0 105 77.00 3292 3369 62232 16243 99.3 1.239 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+00.6 105 77.50 3319 3424 63854 16302 99.5 1.224 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+01.3 106 78.00 3345 3479 65526 16355 99.6 1.209 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+01.9 107 78.50 3372 3534 67251 16401 99.7 1.194 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+02.6 107 79.00 3398 3590 69031 16441 99.8 1.180 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+03.2 108 79.50 3425 3646 70867 16475 99.9 1.166 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Results caused by ± 3% powder lot-to-lot burning rate variation using nominal charge
Data for burning rate increased by 3% relative to nominal value:
+Ba 105 77.00 3359 3508 66604 16102 99.9 1.202 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Data for burning rate decreased by 3% relative to nominal value:
-Ba 105 77.00 3217 3217 58105 16242 98.0 1.278 ! Near Maximum !
You didn't use logic or reason to get into this opinion, I cannot use logic or reason to get you out of it.
You cannot over estimate the unimportance of nearly everything. John Maxwell
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 25,804
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 25,804 |
Lots of previous threads on this subject available in this forum.
I shot 140 gr Sierra 140s with H1000 for many years in a Win 70 classic 26 inch.
Now the rifle wears a 27 inch Pac-Nor. It shoots the 130 AB at 3300 fps with Magnum.
You should be able to hit 3150 to 3200 fps with a 140 using Retumbo or Magnum.
People who choose to brew up their own storms bitch loudest about the rain.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 150,854
Campfire Savant
|
|
Campfire Savant
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 150,854 |
I like 140 grain Ballistic tips in my 264’s, but I’m thinking about trying 120 Barnes. The 120 Barnes work really well in 6.5 Creedmoor and 6.5-06’s
You might try 140 Berger’s. They are the most accurate 6.5 bullet I’ve tried!
Last edited by hanco; 01/20/20.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,267
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,267 |
I have had good luck with Ramshot magnum and the Barbes 120 gr ttsx.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 279
Campfire Member
|
|
Campfire Member
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 279 |
If this is your first .264 rodeo, familiarize yourself with the cartridge's origins regarding Winchester's "workaround" toward Weatherby's freebore concept. (Original Winchester factory loadings employed "dual-diameter" bullets: the forward portion of the body of the bullet was of slightly less diameter than the rear portion, creating "freebore" without it being incorporated into the chamber of the gun.)
This allowed Winchester to compete more favorably with Weatherby in the velocity arena, reducing pressures just as Weatherby's freebore does and thereby allowing for higher velocities than might otherwise be obtained.
For the modern-day newcomers to the cartridge, lacking this knowledge can produce a minor amount of frustration on the loading bench and behind the chronograph as one tries to duplicate velocities claimed by Winchester. (Dual-diameter bullets are not garden-variety items easily...if at all...available). My solution with my first try was to have the throat of the Ruger 77 Anniversary gun extended a bit by the same 'smith (a .264 fanatic) that enlightened me to Winchester's witchcraft. The racehorse was allowed to run. The cows came home.
My more recent rifle is a Remington 700 Classic. I have not taken it to the doctor, and therefore expected a bit less out of it from the start and therefore am not disappointed. After an entire summer toward load development I arrived here:
130gr Accubond
71.0gr Ramshot Magnum
Federal GM215M
W-W case
3220fps (Chrono)
As Jack O'Connor surmised, only slightly better than a .270 (apples to apples here regarding bullet weight) and not so much that any Mule Deer would notice. The four I have shot with it had no discernibly different look on their face.
"I have always disliked the words 'authority' and 'expert' when applied to those who write about guns, shooting,and hunting. I have never set myself up as either."
Jack O'Connor
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 6,822
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 6,822 |
Only slightly better than the 270’s potential with certain handloads. But clearly better than the 270 130gr factory loads that I have chrono’ed.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 279
Campfire Member
|
|
Campfire Member
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 279 |
Of course. But an apple is also not an orange.
My comparison was handload to handload.
3140fps (the old factory claim rarely if ever realized) is achievable with a handloaded .270 at the upper end of the books. (and 3150 is what I get out of a 700 24" barrel).
3220fps is what I found achievable in the .264. In a 700 24" barrel.
Both are shiny apples!
Last edited by Tahnka; 01/22/20.
"I have always disliked the words 'authority' and 'expert' when applied to those who write about guns, shooting,and hunting. I have never set myself up as either."
Jack O'Connor
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2018
Posts: 2,052
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2018
Posts: 2,052 |
My 24" 270 will do 3219 with a Barnes 130gr TTSX & 59.5 grs of Rel 19, right out of the Barnes manual. . My 26" bbl Win 70 EW will do 3222 with the Nosler 140gr AB and a load of VV24N41 & has been doing so for years with the 140gr class bullet. Excellent case life. The Barnes 120gr TSX or Hammer 121 gr will do 3419 with Rel 33 & also excellent case with primer pockets staying tight through multiple loading's. Years ago used to use H-870. These velocities can also be easily had with Hodgon US 869 though it takes 4 to 5 grs more powder than VV24N41 because it is slower burning.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 739
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 739 |
Factory Winchester rifles have a 1/9 twist so that may exclude some of the longer bullets weighing 140 and up. My 9 twist 264 shoots 130 accubonds and 140 Sierra game kings very well. I couldn’t get 140 Berger VLDs to stabilize until I built one with a faster twist. For 130s try Magnum, H1000, or Retumbo. For 140s try Reloader 33 also.
Politicians and Diapers both need to be changed often, and for the same reason!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 6,822
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 6,822 |
I wonder if pressures are equal.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 7,147
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 7,147 |
I had a No 1 rebarreled to a .264. That is an option if you really want a .264.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 7,147
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 7,147 |
Factory Winchester rifles have a 1/9 twist so that may exclude some of the longer bullets weighing 140 and up. My 9 twist 264 shoots 130 accubonds and 140 Sierra game kings very well. I couldn’t get 140 Berger VLDs to stabilize until I built one with a faster twist. For 130s try Magnum, H1000, or Retumbo. For 140s try Reloader 33 also. Is a 1/9 twist the only reason it doesn't shoot 140 Bergers well. My .264 has a 1/9 twist also and shoots 140g Bergers VLDs great.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2018
Posts: 2,052
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2018
Posts: 2,052 |
I have both 1/9 factory & 1/8 custom 264 barrels. Shooting Sierra 140 GK, Hornady 140 or 143, Nosler 140 AB, makes no difference, excellent accuracy with all. I have other 6.5's both with 1/9 & 18 twist that shoot very accurately with all the 140 class bullets i use. Been shooting the 264 since 1964 with a great many Sierra 140's & accuracy has always been great.. Have not tried 156gr bullets & have no plan to try them.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 10,380
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 10,380 |
I bought my 264 in 1969. The best load was 140 grain partitions and H4831.
I keep trying accubonds and so far the only accubond that shoots ok is the 168 ABLR in my 7mm RM. I have at least a dozen boxes of different Accubonds. I'll never buy another box. But some people say that they can make them shoot. # MOA isn't good enough for me though.
I prefer classic.
Semper Fi
I used to run with the hare. Now I'm envious of the tortoise and I do my own stunts but rarely intentionally
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 279
Campfire Member
|
|
Campfire Member
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 279 |
Pretty much the same experience with Accubonds across the board (except for this 700 Classic .264). Struggling with them (and accumulating partial boxes), and nearly WITHOUT exception finding Ballistic Tips to be the always answer for accuracy, I scrutinized Nosler's promotions toward each bullet.
Accuracy is presented foremost toward Ballistic Tips.
Accubonds? Not so much.
Sometimes "reading between the lines" saves a lot of trouble.
I also noticed a small but measurable drop-off in accuracy when Nosler re-vamped the Ballistic Tips (big game application versions) toward thicker side walls, as a result of the original version receiving complaints about integrity.
I surmise that the Accubond was in response to continuing complaints about integrity with an accompanying compromise in the accuracy department. I never had any complaints about Ballistic Tips to start with. If I want unquestionable integrity from a Nosler bullet I reach for the original product.
The biggest elk I ever killed took a 150gr Ballistic Tip from my .270 in the BALL of the shoulder and that bullet still had enough integrity (or length) to allow at least a portion of that bullet to exit beyond the far shoulder blade. At a dead run at 175 yards, he nose-dived into 12 inches of Bob Marshall snow.
Last edited by Tahnka; 01/23/20.
"I have always disliked the words 'authority' and 'expert' when applied to those who write about guns, shooting,and hunting. I have never set myself up as either."
Jack O'Connor
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2018
Posts: 2,052
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2018
Posts: 2,052 |
Interesting.. My Win 70 EW 26" 1/9 twist shoots the Nosler 140 AB into consistent 3/4" groups. Smacks my 522yd target with authority with boring regularity. . For what it's worth took my elk this year with a 121gr Hammer . Complete penetration thru both front shoulders. Went nowhere. Just another perspective..Different rifles are different. Makes it interesting..
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 30,859
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 30,859 |
Pretty much the same experience with Accubonds across the board (except for this 700 Classic .264). Struggling with them (and accumulating partial boxes), and nearly WITHOUT exception finding Ballistic Tips to be the always answer for accuracy, I scrutinized Nosler's promotions toward each bullet.
Accuracy is presented foremost toward Ballistic Tips.
Accubonds? Not so much.
Sometimes "reading between the lines" saves a lot of trouble.
I also noticed a small but measurable drop-off in accuracy when Nosler re-vamped the Ballistic Tips (big game application versions) toward thicker side walls, as a result of the original version receiving complaints about integrity.
I surmise that the Accubond was in response to continuing complaints about integrity with an accompanying compromise in the accuracy department. I never had any complaints about Ballistic Tips to start with. If I want unquestionable integrity from a Nosler bullet I reach for the original product.
The biggest elk I ever killed took a 150gr Ballistic Tip from my .270 in the BALL of the shoulder and that bullet still had enough integrity (or length) to allow at least a portion of that bullet to exit beyond the far shoulder blade. At a dead run at 175 yards, he nose-dived into 12 inches of Bob Marshall snow. There's a reason Nosler doesn't make a 150gr Accubond in .277. Your story demonstrates why that is the case.
You didn't use logic or reason to get into this opinion, I cannot use logic or reason to get you out of it.
You cannot over estimate the unimportance of nearly everything. John Maxwell
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 279
Campfire Member
|
|
Campfire Member
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 279 |
"There's a reason Nosler doesn't make a 150gr Accubond in .277. Your story demonstrates why that is the case."
That bullet's performance on that animal entirely floored me.
I was hunting with an outfit's owner that I had known since childhood. My father had guided for the business. I had spent summers as a teen in the Bob, building corrals, digging outhouses, constructing wall tent frames from lodgepole, etc.
She called me when she was 74 years old. Called me on the phone and said, "My last year! Wanna hunt with me?"
....and that's how that damned long-ass .270 bullet ended up penetrating completely on that animal.
"I have always disliked the words 'authority' and 'expert' when applied to those who write about guns, shooting,and hunting. I have never set myself up as either."
Jack O'Connor
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 13,911
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 13,911 |
If this is your first .264 rodeo, familiarize yourself with the cartridge's origins regarding Winchester's "workaround" toward Weatherby's freebore concept. (Original Winchester factory loadings employed "dual-diameter" bullets: the forward portion of the body of the bullet was of slightly less diameter than the rear portion, creating "freebore" without it being incorporated into the chamber of the gun.)
This allowed Winchester to compete more favorably with Weatherby in the velocity arena, reducing pressures just as Weatherby's freebore does and thereby allowing for higher velocities than might otherwise be obtained.
For the modern-day newcomers to the cartridge, lacking this knowledge can produce a minor amount of frustration on the loading bench and behind the chronograph as one tries to duplicate velocities claimed by Winchester. (Dual-diameter bullets are not garden-variety items easily...if at all...available). My solution with my first try was to have the throat of the Ruger 77 Anniversary gun extended a bit by the same 'smith (a .264 fanatic) that enlightened me to Winchester's witchcraft. The racehorse was allowed to run. The cows came home.
My more recent rifle is a Remington 700 Classic. I have not taken it to the doctor, and therefore expected a bit less out of it from the start and therefore am not disappointed. After an entire summer toward load development I arrived here:
130gr Accubond
71.0gr Ramshot Magnum
Federal GM215M
W-W case
3220fps (Chrono)
As Jack O'Connor surmised, only slightly better than a .270 (apples to apples here regarding bullet weight) and not so much that any Mule Deer would notice. The four I have shot with it had no discernibly different look on their face. I never knew this. Thank you for this post.
|
|
|
|
|
371 members (160user, 17CalFan, 12344mag, 10gaugemag, 10Glocks, 01Foreman400, 34 invisible),
1,582
guests, and
991
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,190,225
Posts18,447,665
Members73,899
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
