Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Custom Rifles & Wildcats Improving 264 Win mag

Sorry if you guys are over this question. This caliber has no support in Australia. I have a standard Winchester XTR 264 Win mag thats has a 24inch barrel,floated and bedded also has a crapy 3*9-40 tasco scope. I want to make this a tack driver out to 500 yards.Barrell and throat are excellent,stock is very good.
I am not worried about loads yet,just want to modify rifle eg scope, heavy barrel with muzzle brake 26 or 28 inch? Any advive would be great. It shoots ok but could do better. Thanks!

On the right track with a precision made and longer barrel. Cartridges like this do better with at least 26" of barrel. The Lilja web site has the calculations on diameter to length to achieve equivalent rigidity for different barrel lengths.

Get a 1-9 or 1-8.5" twist for the heavier bullets.

Stock up on the slow powders like TB 870 and Reloader 25, Retumbo, Magnum etc.
Then your in business, would make a heck of a Roo Rifle.

If your thinking of an improved chamber I would skip the 264 Improved and do a 264 Thor or 6.5 STW but I think the standard is just fine as is.

The barrel is the main issue.. Get at least a #4 contour, finish at 26" and forget the brake.. Just not needed on the .264.. You'll have to have the throat lengthened a tad to allow for the heavier bullets if you decide to go that route, but the .264 really shines with 140 gr pills. Reloader 22 or 25 should work well, also IMR 4350.. For long ranges like you state the bullet selection will be critical.. You'll have to try a few designs and see where the best promise lies..

Then, lose the Tasco and obtain a good scope - one that will allow you to shoot well in that kind of range.. You have a great rifle there.. Best to you.

Tejano and Redneck, thank-you for your advice and will check it out to day. I will give the scope the flick. Thanks again for everyones support.

Best way to improve a .264 Win. is deep-six it and get a 7mm STW. Better bullets, better ballistic co-efficient, and better down range energy.

What killed the .264 was Remington's 7mm Mag. There is a reason for that... If the .264 had been better than the 7mm Mag, it'd still be with us... I rest my case...

GH

Ant264,

WELCOME to 24hrcf! I actually LIKE the 264 WinMag. Very high BC with many bullets. Keep working on it, bro.

Good scope is item number 1, as said before.

grasshopper, last time i looked, there were some very nice new Remington 700s in .264 on the shelf. and you say it was "killed"? i think not! and yea, i have both 7mm RM and .264 WM rifles. the 7mmRM is getting rebarreled to .264 soon. i have a Lilja barrel and reamer on the shelf. the fact that i have 5,000 rounds of once fired brass in .264 WM may have had something to do with that decision, but i can (and do)neck up the .264 brass to 7RM if i wished.

anyway ant264, get a good scope on your rifle, adjust the trigger and bed the action. see what happens. if you rebarrel, go with 1:8 or 1:8.5 twist but not too heavy or you'll dread carrying it. #5 ish is good. (i made the mistake of going too heavy on one of mine, and it is basically just a range toy now)

I checked some other sites like 6mm BR.com and most of the long range shooters are going with a 1-8 to 1-8.5 twist for their 6.5/284s. I don't know if the 200 extra fps of the .264 will compensate for a slower twist or not.

My experience is with factory barrels and hunting bullets only. If you want to shoot the 140 VLD's or anything heavier like the 160 Woodliegh I would go with the faster twist. The 142 SMK are said to be marginal with a 1-9 in the slower 6.5s.

As others said try a different scope and load tuning first and you might be surprised with the barrel you have.

Oh, and welcome, we need more gun loonies from Down Under. Typically they have lots of practical experience and a slightly different take on things that's refreshing.

Thanks guys,My little baby has the action bedded already, as far as I know my barrel twist is 1:10. If I go for the 1:8 or 1:8.5 can I still shoot 100grainers and upwards? Just because I do like to shoot feral cats with lighter bullets. But if I get to smash them with 120s That will do. Thanks again! I dont think I will be shootting anything heavier than 140grns.

Toad,

No offense! But whereever rifle looneys congregate, one can always find someone who likes a "dead" cartridge. i.e: .264 Win. Mag, .348 Win., .300 Sav..., etc... Not to say the .264 is intrinsically bad, but you have to admit, that the limited run rifles are the only ones available for the chambering. Got any idea what the ratio of sales is: .264 to 7mm Rem Mag? Me neither, but it's alot! Virtally ever rifle manufacturer in the world chambers the 7mm Mag. as opposed to how many make the .264? Now if that's not dead, you tell me what is? Even Winchester doesn't chamber it... What does that say?

I concur that you have the right to like any cartridge that you wish... But If you are granted that right, then I should have the same right to dislike it. I have had three .264's in my shooting career. None of the three would shoot less than 2" at the proverbial 100 yds. The first one exihibited excessive pressure with book starting loads and IMR-4831. That didn't exite me, and it's been all downhill from there. In all honesty, I couldn't find anything I could kill with the .264 that I couldn't kill just as dead with a .270.

Actually, I looked at all the horns on my walls, and realized They'd all been taken with a different cartridge and lo' none of them were taken with a belted magnum... Thus, I have concluded that belted magnums just mean more powder, more bark but the end result is the same.

If hunting with a "whatever Loudenboomer" makes you feel better or more confidant, then go for it. But as for me, "How" I take a game animal is far more important than "if" I take one.

As we get older, most of us come up with some surprising, and unlikely conclusions.

Remington and Ruger are still selling rifles chambered in .264WinMag and not just limited run rifles either. Remington sells that limited 700 model and the Sendaro SF2. Ruger sells the Hawkeye chambered in the round. You may not like it and that's fine but with two major manufactors still selling new factory rifles chambered in the round it's a long way from dead.

I'm with you 100% on not needing a magnum though:^)

Terry

Grasshopper,
That was a very respectful and civil reply. I hope more of us will follow suit.

grasshopper, you are free do dislike the .264

my point is that the .264 is not dead. it is more popular now than it was 10 years ago. (and yea, the naysayers called it "dead" then, too)

the OP wanted info about improving his M70, not a sales pitch about .270, 7mm, ect... this is not a cartridge popularity contest, it is a thread titled "Improving 264 Win mag"

you can pick ANY cartridge out there and make a case against it, but why?

ant264, you will be able to shoot lightweight bullets with the 1-8" or 1-8.5" twist. i have used this cartridge with 1-9", 1-8.5" and 1-8" twist, and the 8" and 8.5" twist will do it all. my Sendero SFII (1-9") will not shoot 142 SMKs, but would shoot 140 SMKs into 3" to 500 meters. my customs will do a little better than that with 142s.

but you gotta like 20 moa to 1K...

That is exactly my point in my orginal post. I was responding to the title of the thread. Had the title of the thread been: "Improving my M-70", my answer would have been entirely different.

BTW, I didn't really say I dislike the .264, I just don't "like" it. I remember a few years ago Layne Simpson did an article on what he claimed were "dead" cartridges. And yes the .264 was among them.

How many ammo companys load the .264? And how many different loads do they offer?

My research lists 4, Rem 140, Win 140, Prvi Partisan 140, and Nosler custom 130gr. AB.

As an earlier poster pointed out Remington and Ruger both make rifles for it; now. But will they next year? In about 4 or 5 more months we'll know. But I wouldn't bet on it...

The 6mm Remington is certainly more popular than the .264 and that was another cartridge on Layne's "dead" list.

I am as big a 6.5 slut as anyone here. And if I told you how many rifles I have in the 6.5 bore you'd likely call me a liar. Likely some fine day I'll run across a Pre'64 M-70 so chambered and it will follow me home. I'd have one right now, but my buddy done me wrong, but that's another story for another time. But even If I did, I'd not likely hunt with it.

At one time Remington didn't make either the 6.5 Rem Mag, or the 264. They resurrected both, And the 6.5's aready gone. I'll bet you a beer that in 5 years or less, both Remington and Ruger will have dropped the chambering. And that's a bet I'd be happy to lose. In truth, "I" didn't proclaim it dead! The gunwriters did. I merely repeated their assessment.

A lot of great and respected chamberings have been dropped over the years, And almost always the reason is SALES. If it don't sell, they don't make it.

I tend to agree. My lifetime animal harvest has been with 2 standard cartridges, the 280 Remington & 308 Winchester. I have taken roughly 50 big game animals from Axis, Whitetails and lesser critters. At no time did I ever feel like I needed anything else. I have owned other shooters including some fire-breathing magnums but they were only wants not needs. Shooting critters across a canyon is not for me. I have shot some across arroyos but they were all under 400 yards.

in my opinion do a 4.5 to 14 powered leupold. Then actaully shoot the gun. You may not need anymore to shoot at 500 yards. I can hold 5 inches at 500 with a 2.5 to 10 weaver of a bipod and a rear sandbag. You should be able to do this with a .264 a 14 power scope and some good loads.

I think I better let you know abit about what I used to do. I used to work on cattle stations hunting feral pigs,cats,crows and kangaroos. I can if I wanted to take either a 222,243 or even a trusty 308 and shoot roos from the bonnet or my cruiser at a distance or up to 230metres away. Reason why I bought a 264mag is that the ballistics are ver very good. I have used a 7mm rem mag but from what I have read the 264 out performs the 7mm mag down range slightly. I just need some positive advice to get her up n running. The 264 has the protencial to out class alot of out calibers. Oh buy the way, those winchester short magnums are abit quite over here now.

79inpa mate I have been looking at the Leupold vx-11 6-18*40 AO or VX-3 4.5-14*50 LR. What do you think?

Walk closer!!!!

I have only fooled with two .264's, one a genuine original Model 70 Westerner. Both would safely attain 3200 fps or thereabouts with 140's using several newer powders (IMR4831 is too fast), and with the right bullet shot well under an inch. They would also get 125-130's up to close to 3400 fps, also with good accuracy.

I took my .264 out yesterday for it's first time. It has a Kreiger 1-8" twist 27 1/2" barrel and seemed to love the 129gr Hornady SST's with 67.5 grains of Ramshot Magnum powder.

I brought the Chrono with me but couldn't get it to read in the shade and was too tired from putting up deer stands all day to set it up again in a new location.

I won't venture a guess on the FPS but I bet they are zipping along pretty good.

Terry

i don't use that powder, but my computer thinks you are running about 3130 fps @ about 50k psi. seems mild.

Thanks Toad, that does sound tame. I couldn't find any load data for that powder in .264WinMag so I called Ramshot and they gave me a recipe 64gr starting and 67gr max. with the 129gr SST bullets. I ran it on my software which is a little primative and it said I was around 60K(PSI) pressure with my maximum load. I never saw any pressure signs, but I was 1/2 a grain over the maximum figure given to me by Ramshot so I figured they had to be moving pretty good. I'll be shooting it again before hunting season and will get some shots chronographed. The groups were pretty impressive considering it was a brand new barrel. Most groups were under an inch. I will probably leave the load alone reguardless of what the chrono say's.

Terry

i could be wrong. i am not a computer whiz and these things take accruate input to give meaningful results.

but, like you, i let the rifle tell me what it likes. the .264 is not very forgiving to load for.

Personally I don't think that you need an 18 power scope to get to 500 yards. I would go with a 4-12 or 4.5 to 14.

Re-barrel it to 300 Win or 338; biiiiiiiiig improvement.

MM

338 for sure. Why don't you like the 264?

Here is my 338 Wildcat



338 Gaillard is my long range beauty. 416 Rem Mag Parent case FF, 38 degree shoulder & 10 Thousandths case taper, 215F Match Primer, 91gr RL25, 250gr Sierra HPBT or GK, with a MV of 3070 FPS will put the hurt on anything.

Here is my new 264 Win Mag.



Still working on a good load.

Mantana-Man has given you some great advice! I played around with the .264 win mag years ago and we pushed it to the limits and beyond using a 26 inch Douglas premium barrel.

However, I went to the .300 win mag and never looked back as far as hunting big game afar with this combination using a REDFIELD (4 x 12) rifle scope back in the late 60's.

Now down the road, I missed that 6.5 bullet and put a new stainless barrel on a worn out model 70 30-06. It was a very nice rifle for general hunting needs.

Then I decided to take on a project of using the 300 Win mag case and necking down to the .264 bullet. This became a real long range rifle with an attitude. The .264/06 is more fun to shoot at the bench but the long range Boss is that .264/300 Win mag combination.

FWIW:

I get to 600 yards without a lot of trouble with a 308 and Leupold 3.5-10x40.

A precision barrel, a very good trigger, and a rigid high quality stock are necessary. Optics, are icing on the cake.

Heck, 300 meters, with a fixed 6x scope is pretty easy.

Remember, a 12x17 inch target with a 6x scope is like shooting a 72 x 102 inch target with a single power scope.

It ain't hard to see something that big (72 x 102 inc) at 500 yards.

Its quite hard to hold dead center on it though.

BMT

I have had 2 264's both with pretty beefy barrels, IMO they are the most temperamental round I have loaded for. I always dreamed of launching 140's at 3200 fps, however I can't get that speed out of either gun with any accuracy, ramshot mag is the best all around powder which IMO is still a tad fast to be ideal for it. If I had to do it all again I would do a 6.5-06 or 6.5-284.

Very Impressive.........that'll git 'er done.

As far as the 264 goes, they just generally aren't easy to work with........don't know if it's a combination of twist/velocity vs bullet weight/length or what, but life's to short to mess with it when there's lots of stuff available that just works better.

MM

Rebarrel to a 7 STW and shoot the 140's at 3550-3600 with a minimum SAAMI chamber with practically zero freebore. Our Pac Nor 3 grooves set up this way get more velocity than that, with bullets touching at 100 yds.

Friends-

I too am a .264 WinMag fan. I have a standard .264 WinMag, as well as, a .264 WSM.

Having read this thread, I do have a question.

Aren't the .264 STW and the .264 Thor, one in the same cartridge? I thought they were but, I could be mis-informed.

Thanks in advance.

P.S. TC1 (Terry) have you posted pictures of your .264 Win Mag and have I missed it?

wookie316, where & how do you take those pictures with the perfect white background? those are like studio photos.

Hi Mark, I've posted some pictures of it here before. There isn't anything about it that makes it memeroble though. It's a Ruger M77 MKII with a 27.5" 1-8 twist Kreiger stainless fluted #4 barrel. It has a Timney trigger set at 2 lbs that is soo sweet and it sits in a McMillan classic stock with a bad camo pattern. It has one of those Weaver Classic extreme 2.5-10X50 scopes on it they were giving away at Natchez shooting earlier this year. I wish I would have bought several more. They were a steal! John Farner did the work on this rifle.

This is my 4th Ruger M77 MKII rifle and the only one I've ever owned that would shoot! I've always been snake bite when it came to these. When I found one chambered in 7Mag in a pawnshop that looked like it had been used in WWII I figured there was something worth having about this gun even if the barrel was probably shot out. I bought it for a song and here are the finished results.



I'm amazed to hear so many people having trouble getting these rifles with this chambering to shoot. My experience with them is very limited but I had no trouble at all. If you saw my reloading bench, gear and techniques, probably the nicest thing you could say is "He's not very meticulous"

IMO, the .300 winmag and .338 mags aren't substitutes for this cartridge. The 300 winmag takes a 180 gr bullet to match the wind bucking ability of the .264winmag with 140gr bullets. Any of the .338's to get close to the ballistics of the .264 well, they become recoil monsters! That's the beauty and charm of this round for me. It makes a very long range rifle for medium size game and has very little recoil. A well mannered beanfield rifle you might say.


Something else I've read about this round is everybody states they don't make a powder slow enough for it. I wonder why this is never brought up when talking about other rounds of this nature like the 257WBY for instance? I'm just wondering out loud, there maybe a good answer for that.

I think the biggest valid complaint about the round is the extra powder you have to burn for the small gain in velocity over a 6.5-06. Well, that's the sad truth about all magnums and if you wanna go fast you gotta burn a little extra powder.

All in all, I think I'm going to really like mine.

Terry

Thanks for the advice but I dont want a 338mag, just want to get the 264 going.But I have narrowed my scope selection down to either a leupold 6-18*40 or a tactical weaver 4-20*50. I believe the 264 has great potential. I know a lot of people hate it but thats the way it is.

a couple of mine...

first the heavyweight



and the midweight

I bought an original Winchester 70 Westerner back in the early 1960's. It was extremely accurate right out of the box, in fact I used it for long range varmint hunting as a stunt! The original rifles had blackened stainless steel barrels to hold up better.

Thing to remember is that Winchester loaded the cartridge with a double diameter bullet that was slightly under bore diameter from the ogive to just above the canelure. Measuring an original factory cartridge will confirm this. This was done to reduce pressure of the heavier 140 grain bullet in the standard throat. The reduced diameter acted as a freebore of sorts. I found this out when handloading for it.

If building one today, I'd select a boat tail bullet around 140 grains that fit my needs and have it chambered for that particular bullet seated to conform to magazine limitations. A longer throat than necessary would act the same as freebore to reduce pressure if desired. Barrel would be stainless steel 26" minimum with a 1:8 twist. Some say that cryogenic barrel treatment improves barrel life with these over bore magnums. Powders available today offer far more flexibility and barrel life. Main thing is that the .264 Magnum is a very accurate cartridge when fired in a properly set up rifle, and kills out of proportion to its bullet diameter.

I use the Leupold 6-18x 40mm scope on a .220 Swift for varmint, it does everything my Bushnell Elite 4200's and Nikon Monarch's do with less bulk and weight. Good scope.

Welcome to 24hr Campfire,home of the 264WM cult.My 1in9 barrel works with 140 SSTs,but a faster twist would shoot the heavier Woodlieghs. My gunsmith opened the throat to a normal length on the barrel.I haven't had any of the spikeyness that I had with the orginal barrel.This would be very good thing if you use the ADI powder we call H-1000,in the stardard chambering,it can get ragged at +60,000psi. Hogdgson lists it max psi lower than H-4831,a give away.Retumbo has worked for some as well,just not me.

Mate lets get something straight"I am NOT A GUN LOONEY" I like to have something different. Gun laws are VERY STRICT over here. It takes up to six months to get a permit. I like opinions, but can see no reason to get upset over someones choices. I dont like alot of different rounds but dont comment and put people down.
Oh I used to hunt game professionally and have seen people use under powered bullets to shoot large game, now that is stupid.
Thanks!

A reference to being a Gun Looney is like saying welcome to the fraternal order of shooters. No offense intended.


My only experience was with a standard 1-9 barrel and it shot 120-140 grain hunting bullets well. My thought was a slower twist might work for all the range of bullets 100-160 but I didn't have any first hand experience on that and was hoping someone that did would offer their advice.

OOOOPS! Please accept my apologies!

No problem.

Just be careful with the "Mates" in this part of the country, people might think you were referring to making babies.

So were we still trying to help you improve your .264 Win Mag, or are we just showing off our own pets now? Oh good, I like showing mine off!
She started life as a $300 WalMart Rem 700 ADL synthetic in 7mm Mag, then I improved her a little.... blue printed, 27.5" Lilja #3 stainless steel barrel(chambered in .264), exhibition maple stock, custom stain blend based on Laurel Mountain Forge Honey Maple, a little sealer, a little Permalyn finish, glass bedded, throat lengthened, Pachmayr decelerator pad, teflon coated and she does 3200 with 140s, 3500 with 120s, 3700 with 100s.




And I do take her out for little armed nature walks...


And while I'm at it, a little "making of"...
[img:center]http://i392.photobucket.com/albums/pp5/richman_mark/prefilingandsanding.jpg[/img]
[img:center]http://i392.photobucket.com/albums/pp5/richman_mark/P1010772.jpg[/img]
[img:center]http://i392.photobucket.com/albums/pp5/richman_mark/leftwfinish.jpg[/img]
That's how I improve a 7mm Remington Magnum

Ok, I wont refer to anyone as "mate" eeeeek! Righto moving right along, thats a nice 264. Arr what kind of scope do you have on here?

That's a Nikon Buckmasters 4.5-14x40. Since I was building a pretty gun, I didn't want to go overboards with adjustable objectives or big objectives. Weighs 9lbs 2 ozs scoped and will put those little 100 grain Ballistic Tips into 1/3 inch.
So where you leaning on your project? Don't forget to check out Tom264s new toy, bad boy has a 30" Lilja , 1:8 twist 3 groove barrel.

Thanks, I am aliitle confused at the moment. I was going to buy a Leupold vx-11 6-18*40 but now have found a Leupold MK2 6-18*40 Tactical what is the difference? How do I see toms264? I am going to replace the scope first, then the barrel fo a 26inch heavy target with muzzle brake.
How far do you shoot with your 264?

Ant,
I don't know about all of the internal differences between the two, but the tactical scopes typically have different reticles, plus different internal gears and knobs and things that matter to tactical shooters, which I am not. I also believe it is a 30mm tube, not a 1 inch, but I don't know. Tom's gun is listed just below this thread as "carnivore".
I have yet to take a game animal with my gun beyond 100 yards. The two elk and 1 deer were a little too cooperative. As for target shooting, most I've ever experimented with was to 300 yards. I do most of my load development shooting at 100 yards and have only had the gun up and running since last September.
One other thing, I wouldn't recommend a muzzle brake, they just don't kick enough and if you are going with a heavy barrel, that should really kick the muzzle rise down. Might also consider some sort of heavy target stock if that's what you're after.

Ant heres a pic of mine..

I got a scope on it now but havent had the nicest weather to take pics of it yet.....aint even shot it yet too.

You guys have some great looking rifles there! I will see if I can take a photo of my boring (compared to yours) Winchester. Good work guys!

The recoil even on my slim barreled hunting rifle is mild enough,that I haven't even thought changing out the plastic FN butt plate.The stock is fast handling,no weatherby recoil tamer.I got a deer with it yesterday,maybe 100yards.

Geeez Tom that looks ruthless! That looks suppurb! If you can please tell me if thats your original bolt.

I have just loaded three batches of five using 120grn serrias using ADI 2209. First batch 54grns,2nd 55grns then 56grns with Winchester magnum primers. See how we go. I been asked to shoot some scrub turkeys, might use my 87grners for that. See how we go!

Yes it is the original bolt just had Karl flute it and put a different head on the shifter.

heres a closeup of the bolt.

Please excuse my lack of knowledge but what advantage do you get from that. Cause it has a high WOW factor!

Tom please give some stats of your "CARNIVOUR"! Thanks,

Some guys do it for weight savings and others for looks...thats what I did it for was the looks cause weight wasnt an issue with this rifle.

I've been so busy I aint had a chance to do any of that yet but I will be posting all that good info in the custom rifles and blueprints section.

I just brought this up on another forum. I have a M77 MkII .264 Win Mag, made in 2002. I'm not set back up for reloading and haven't shot it in 10 years (long story), but my pet load regularly printed 0.6"-0.8" groups at 100.

I used 67 grains of Retumbo behind a 129 Interbond, and the primer was Federal Gold Medal Match (I cant remember the numbers). I never ran it over a chrono, but it seems like Quickload called it 3100 fps (but it's been a min, dont quote me).

My thought was if you gave it a 30°-35° shoulder, it might make it a little more efficient. Same speeds, less powder, and better accuracy. Maybe I will get to try soon.

Do you suppose that he may have made a decision yet? The post you are replying to is 10 years old.

drover

Tom went creedmoor ...

In my opinion the very best improvement one can make to the 264 is to lengthen the throat so that one can seat conventional bullets to fit the magazine. The two diameter factory bullet was used so that the rifles couyld be throated to fit the 100 yet use a 140 which was seated long. With a Sierra bullet and the factory throat, the bullet has to be seated very deep. I always thought a 6.5 Weatherby, based on the 257 necked up, would have made a very good cartridge with it's longer neck. GD

Nope.

I have two 264’s Sakos. They are 1 in 9, both shot 140 VLD’s great. I shout 140 Ballistic tips in them now. I had a Westerner. It also shot 140 VLD’s well.

The Lazarus thread. I wish the OP would follow up. I have always thought the 264 would be the ideal kangaroo rifle. I wonder how his worked out?

I’m a 264 Win Mag fan. I love the caliber and own two rifles in that caliber.
I have found Retumbo powder to be one of the best for this caliber. Both of my rifles are 1:9 twist however both of my barrels are 26”.
Both of my rifles shoot the 140 Accubond or Partitions well. They however excel with 130 Accubond at 3250 FPS.
They also shoot the Barnes 120 TTSX at 3400 FPS.
On my Sako I have the Leupold VXIll 4.5x14x40
On my Sendero I have a Vortex 4x27x56 Razor
The Sako is my woods rifle loaded with the TTSX
The Sendero is my open field rifle loaded with the 130 Accubond.
If you need any further feel free to PM me.

Wow. 10 year old thread. The 264 I was shooting then is parked in the safe (factory 700 Classic). I improved on that one with a new version with a 26” 1/8 barrel throated correctly for 140 VLDs. Now days I’m using Re 33 and 156 Berger.

Old threads never die, they sleep, waiting to be discovered again.

If you rebarrel and are looking to test your long range ability you should really consider the 7mm Rem Mag. Nothing against 264 WM, but it is inferior at long range to the 7mm RM with 180-195 grain projectiles utilizing 1-8.5 or 1-8 twist barrels.

On another note the 257 Wby is a hoot to shoot, light recoil for a laser beam and kills like something much larger than it’s diminutive .257 bullet would suggest. Just another thought if you rebarrel.

Enjoy your 264 WM, or whatever you decide.

Tag. Good info here!

I've owned several 264 over the last 4 decades.....

Bought this new Winchester when they came out with the dark maple wood.

With a lit'l trigger work and load development it's a 1/2 minute rifle with my coyote loads.

It really likes the Hornady 95 gr V-Max along with the Speer 90gr TNT





.