I have been trying for awhile to get my new Win 70 Extreme Weather 264 to shoot the Barnes 127 gr ( BC .468 ) 6.5 LRX bullet. Using the ultra slow burners like VV 24N41, Rel 33, US 869, & Retumbo .They shoot C&C bullets accurately with good velocity , but not the Barnes 6.5 127gr LRX. I have in the past seen faster burning powders shoot the mono's better. Switching to IMR 7828 long cut was like flipping a switch. With a starting load of 60 grs I got a 1" group. Raising the load to a max of 62.5 & seating the bullet deeper to an OAL of 3.216" I got under 1/2". MV according to my chrono is 3354 with very small shot to shot variation. I use just two once fired Win brand cases with CCI mag primers. After firing both cases a total of six more times each I still had tight primer pockets & neck sized only thru the entire shoot, never needing the FL sizer. All loading was done by my decades old Pacific brand dies on my old first year production RCBS RockChucker press. After all 100yd shooting was done I went to my 522yd target. Elevation here at my place is 7630'. At 522yds I got about 24" of drop. Sea level drop tables show about 30" of drop at 500 yd. Elevation does make a difference. I have had total 100% success with the Barnes bullets on elk & wanted to stick with them.

Sweet! Just how "new" is this EW .264? Last I read, you had a .270...did you find another one? They seem to be accurate rifles. My old buddy down in East Tx still uses his 24" early '70s Mod 700 in .264WM. He has never used it on anything bigger than hogs, deer are his most popular hunt. He has shot a few close to 300yds but one of his boys shot a buck with it over 400yds, down a pipeline R.O.W. 140s is all he has ever shot out of his rifle too. He has always used factory or handloads that a friend of ours loaded for him. I loaded his some Speer 140HC in the mid 80's, but I don't remember the powder...I "want" to say it was H870.

I have actually been shooting the 264 since 1964. I have a Rem 700 in 264 I bought new back in 1964. Still shoots great & has taken to many deer to remember, Also a considerable amount of elk. No pigs around this country. I have four 264 mags. The Extreme Weather I mentioned in the post is my newest , acquired last fall. It shoots just about any C&C bullet from 100 gr to 140 gr great. I plan on using it for elk this coming season. That is why I wanted to get an accurate load with the Barnes mono.These 6.5 mono's have never failed me on elk. As I stated I finally hit upon an accurate load with good velocity. 3354 fps with the 127gr LRX. I mentioned the load in case other owners of this same EW 264 caL wanted to use this bullet. Thought it might help establish a starting point. The 270 I talked about before is also an excellent performer.. Driving the Barnes 129gr LRX to 3259 fps according to my chrono. Like the 264 EW this 270 also gives tiny groups . It has ( 270 ) displayed the ability to perform with excellent accuracy out to my 522 yd target. I bought the 270 because it was a CRF 24" bbl. stainless Win. Like new & stamped " Made in New Haven Conn. USA.

Got it. Does the EW .264 have a 26" barrel or also a 24"? So far, the only 6.5 I've really hunted with was the 24" 6.5/284 set up on a short action. I only wanted to use the lighter bullets as I saw this rifle as a combination predator/deer rifle. I only used the 120NBT and the 125 Partition. I got a solid 3200fps with both. It was a real killer on deer and antelope. My only gripe is the sharp shoulder made it very hard to feed right. The last round in the magazine would also fly out of the rifle! It ticked me off one too many times...I don't suffer unreliable rifles! At one time I gave considerable thought to a 6.5/280 AI or a 6.5 Sherman....then I ended up with this great shooting Mod 700 .270! I don't think I could tell any difference in the field between it and a good 6.5, at least at the ranges I hunt/shoot.

I have a 6.5-06 24" Bbl that feels the same in my hands as my Win 270 24" Bbl. The 6.5 drives the Barnes 120grb TSX @ 3277 fps. The 270 drives the Barnes 129gr LRX @ 3259. Both are a delight to shoot. My 522yd target doesn't stand a chance from either one. Only problem is you can only hunt with one rifle at a time. Then there are the other rifles that are also great. Have taken considerable game with all except for the newly acquired 270 & Win EW. My 264's are,,, well I could go on. An accurate rifle is wonderful. Love squeezing that trigger......

I have and use a model 70 EW 264 and it has a 26" barrel. Rifle was new in 2015. I have used the 127LRX and found the rifles best accuracy with Ramshot Magnum powder with a Federal 215M primer. I shot a cow elk in 2016 and the bullet didn't work to my expectations so I abandoned it for Swift Siroccos. I still find the best accuracy with Ramshot Magnum powder.

. I've always had outstanding success with the 6.5 Barnes .Have been using them since the original X bullet. Always complete penetration even thru bone even on acute angle shots, Has worked for me year after year. on elk. Never fail me yet. Have used them on elk with the 6.5x08 wildcat , 6.5x55 6.5-06 & 264.

That seems like a very hot load

I picked up a new Winchester M70 EW in .264WM over the Winter. I am in the middle of developing my first load for it. I am starting with Barnes TSX 120 gn bullets and Retumbo powder. Thanks for the head's-up on IMR 7828 working well with mono-bullets in the .264WM. I'll try that powder, next. There's not a lot of .264WM shooters, so hearing about someone's personal experience is very helpful.

"Switching to IMR 7828 long cut was like flipping a switch. " -- 7828 is available in three different cuts. Any particular reason to go specifically with the long cut? Would the SC or SSC cuts give similar results?

Regarding my own experience, so far, shooting a ladder with Retumbo/TSX 120 gn, there appears to be a node at 3475 fps with 68.5 gn, and another one at 3375 fps with 66.5. There are nodes at lower velocities, too, but who cares about those? There is some primer flow at these two loads (as discussed extensively in http://forum.accurateshooter.com/threads/pressure-signs-primer-flow.3981384/ ), but no pressure signs on the case itself, nor a sticky bolt.

I started with the Barnes recommended jump of 0.050", and will test other sitting depths, next. After finding the best COAL, I'll finally shoot my first group with the rifle to see what she'll do.

I used the Long Cut IMR 7828 because that is what I have in my inventory. SC should give the same velocity.
Hey "shinbone" would very much like to hear about your results with Retumbo & the Barnes 120gr TSX as I had poor accuracy results with that powder in my EW.. Like you said nice to hear about results from other 264 shooters. As a bit of information I have another 264 1/9 twist that shoots the Barnes mono's with the slower powders like Retumbo wit excellent accuracy.

"Hey "shinbone" would very much like to hear about your results with Retumbo & the Barnes 120gr TSX as I had poor accuracy results with that powder in my EW."

Since you asked . . .

This is a Excel graph of my results, so far. Load info is in the title. Two shots averaged for each data point. Thick line is the point-of-impact above point-of-aim for each powder charge, i.e., the basic ladder data. Thin line is the velocity measured with a Labradar. Ignore the squares, as they have little meaning since they are just two-shot "groups." This graph suggests a few good nodes, including one at 65.7 gn, another at 66.7 gn, and maybe one at 68.7 gn. I did not see pressure signs at the highest load, although I am a newbie at reading such things. Next step is to shoot different COALs at probably 66.7 gn.

Your velocity looks good which corresponds to my results with Retumbo & the 120gr TSX. Would like to see how your rifle groups with this load. Mine grouped poorly with this powder/bullet combo. With 7828 I got a similar velocity but with sub 1/2" groups. Different barrel vibrations???

Barring any interruptions/bad weather, I will shoot the seating depth test this Friday. The Chargemaster Lite is on right now, warming up to load the ammo for Friday's range session.

Sounds great shinbone. Will be looking forward to your results.. I realize every rifle can be different , even the same brand. . My son & me both have Ruger stainless Hawkeye rifles in 264 mag. His shoots the 120gr TSX Barnes great with Rel 33 @ about 3440 out of it's 24". Mine shoots terrible groups with Rel 33, but ting groups with IMR 7828. Go figure..I will be re sighting in my EW tomorrow as I am replacing the scope rings with "Quick Release " style . Have my own range. Wish you were closer . Think it would be enjoyable working together on this project

Yes, us .264WM shooters need to stick together in working with the forgotten "best magnum ever."

Ammo is all loaded and just waiting for Friday. Chosen powder load is 66.7 gn of Retumbo - seems like a good node right there. It will be 3 shots at each jump distance, with jump ranging from .030 to .070 in .005 steps. Starting with 3-shot groups is to minimize wear and tear on the barrel until I find a good load. If I find a good jump, then I will repeat at that jump distance, and the nearby jump distances, with 5-shot groups to verify accuracy and possibly further refine the jump distance.

I wish I lived in SW Colorado, too. Denver is now way too crowded for me. I am on the south side of town, and shoot at a range near Ft. Collins. Anything closer is private, or limited to 100 yards, or has poor facilities for serious load testing, or has been plowed under for townhomes, etc. Meaning I have to slog my way across town, usually through substantial traffic to shoot. When I retire in 5 years, "I am so out of here."

As promised, here is the jump test data. I am not sure how good it is. It was very windy, today, 20MPH, but relatively steady. The wind reduces my confidence in this data. These are 3-shot groups, shot at 100 yards. (the plan is, once I find a good jump distance, I will refine with 5-shot groups).

Two different jump distances each produced .75" groups. But, those were not consecutive jump distances. Is that normal? Does jump distance have nodes? I might have to reshoot, but I am out of Retumbo, with none to be found anywhere, so it will be awhile.




This is pretty far off the original topic, so i will start a new post.

Looks a lot like what I got with the same powder/bullet combo in my EW... IMR 7828 brought me considerable consistency with the 120TSX / 127LRX. . Fortunately I have 6+ lbs of my 8lb keg of Retumbo. Found it to deliver consistent sub 1/2" groups with the 140gr class C&C bullets, but the Barnes mono even though lighter gives consistent 100% penetration on elk.

I am a big fan of a light-for-caliber mono bullet, shot real fast for game.

Unless I get lucky and fall into a pile of Retumbo to finish the current load development, next range trip will be with IMR7828SSC.

With IMR7828SSC, I'll start with the TSX 120gn, and will try Hammer 117gn "Sledge Hammer" bullets with it, too. The Hammer bullets are monolithic bullet, reportedly of a softer copper alloy than what Barnes uses. Reputation is that they are easy to get to shoot well.

Hesp - Can you suggest a starting powder charge of 7828 for 120gn Barnes TSX bullets?

I have never tried the Hammer bullets because of their higher cost but would be interesting to hear if they were less finicky with regard to powders. You don't use that many hunting so cost is not that big of a deal if looked at that way. When Barnes made the "X" bullet many shooters complained they were to soft & left excessive copper behind. Wonder if Hammers are that way? Any way my EW 264 loves the 120TSX/127gr LRX & IMR 7828. Little tiny groups & I can smack my 522yd target every time . Talked to a Barnes tec advisor awhile back & he said they got outstanding accuracy in the 264 with Rel 22 . Trouble is velocity would be well below the capability of the 264. As an example in my 6.5-06 E.R. Shaw stainless 24" Bbl 1/8 twist using the Barnes 120gr TSX & IMR-4350 I get 3277fps & tiny groups consistently.

Have you shot the 127 gr LRX yet?

I will not use Hammer Bullets after a bad experience with their "...bad batch of bar stock..." on a spring trophy bear hunt.

Awesome. Have you tried the 127 gr. LRX by chance? Else, I will report back in early March. Thank you.

Think the Winchester is low on stability with the 127? They're 9 twists if I remember correctly.

Barnes says 1:8 twist or faster (scroll down the in the specs below)

https://www.barnesbullets.com/produ...p;attribute_pa_bullet-type=lrx-boat-tail

The 120 TTSX shoots okay on my 1:9 twist and I've not shot the 127 LRX based on the Barnes specs

Now that this thread has bubbled back to the top, I see I never posted my final load for my Winchester EW in .264WM. For reasons that I have forgotten, I stopped pursuing a load for the Barnes TSX 120, and switched over to Hammer Bullets. Below is what I finally landed on using a 117 gn Sledge Hammer at 3230 fps. I was able to go up to 3400 fps, but the accuracy wasn't there. The rifle has been skim-bedded, and has a Timney trigger, otherwise it is factory.

Awesome. My rifle has a custom Bartlein, 2B, finish will be at 26", 1:7 twist, and at 9000ft and with the 127Lrx, should stabilize great. I just won't use that bullet if I can't get at least 3200fps with great accuracy....so here's hoping! Possible?

You won't have much trouble getting 3200 from that bullet in a 264 Win. Any number of powders around 7828 or similar will likely get you into the 3300 range pretty easily.

That would be awesome. Most reloading manuals seems to show 3000-3150-ish- maybe they are underloading?

What powders are you wanting to use?

Here are a few runs to give you an idea of what different powders like.



Cartridge : .264 Win. Mag.
Bullet : .264, 127, Barnes 'LRX'BT 30228
Useable Case Capaci: 74.371 grain H2O = 4.829 cm³
Cartridge O.A.L. L6: 3.340 inch = 84.84 mm
Barrel Length : 26.0 inch = 660.4 mm
Powder : Hodgdon H4831 SC *T

Predicted data by increasing and decreasing the given charge,
incremented in steps of 0.769% 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

-07.7 87 60.00 2994 2527 48799 12127 97.6 1.351
-06.9 87 60.50 3018 2568 49996 12218 97.9 1.336
-06.2 88 61.00 3042 2609 51221 12307 98.1 1.321
-05.4 89 61.50 3066 2650 52476 12392 98.3 1.306
-04.6 89 62.00 3090 2692 53761 12476 98.6 1.292
-03.8 90 62.50 3114 2734 55078 12556 98.8 1.277
-03.1 91 63.00 3138 2776 56426 12633 98.9 1.263 ! Near Maximum !
-02.3 92 63.50 3161 2818 57807 12708 99.1 1.249 ! Near Maximum !
-01.5 92 64.00 3185 2861 59222 12780 99.3 1.235 ! Near Maximum !
-00.8 93 64.50 3209 2904 60672 12848 99.4 1.221 ! Near Maximum !
+00.0 94 65.00 3233 2947 62157 12913 99.5 1.208 ! Near Maximum !
+00.8 95 65.50 3256 2990 63679 12975 99.6 1.195 ! Near Maximum !
+01.5 95 66.00 3280 3033 65239 13034 99.7 1.182 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+02.3 96 66.50 3303 3077 66838 13090 99.8 1.169 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+03.1 97 67.00 3327 3121 68477 13142 99.9 1.156 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+03.8 97 67.50 3350 3165 70158 13191 99.9 1.143 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!

Results caused by ± 10% powder lot-to-lot burning rate variation using nominal charge
Data for burning rate increased by 10% relative to nominal value:
+Ba 94 65.00 3361 3184 73111 12535 100.0 1.125 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Data for burning rate decreased by 10% relative to nominal value:
-Ba 94 65.00 3053 2627 51313 12736 95.3 1.317



Cartridge : .264 Win. Mag.
Bullet : .264, 127, Barnes 'LRX'BT 30228
Useable Case Capaci: 74.371 grain H2O = 4.829 cm³
Cartridge O.A.L. L6: 3.340 inch = 84.84 mm
Barrel Length : 26.0 inch = 660.4 mm
Powder : Hodgdon H1000 *T

Predicted data by increasing and decreasing the given charge,
incremented in steps of 0.714% 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

-07.1 96 65.00 3030 2589 47401 12726 98.4 1.359
-06.4 97 65.50 3055 2632 48605 12805 98.6 1.343
-05.7 97 66.00 3080 2675 49843 12880 98.8 1.327
-05.0 98 66.50 3105 2718 51116 12951 99.0 1.312
-04.3 99 67.00 3130 2762 52425 13018 99.2 1.297
-03.6 100 67.50 3155 2806 53769 13081 99.4 1.281
-02.9 100 68.00 3179 2850 55153 13140 99.5 1.267
-02.1 101 68.50 3204 2895 56576 13195 99.7 1.252 ! Near Maximum !
-01.4 102 69.00 3229 2939 58040 13246 99.8 1.237 ! Near Maximum !
-00.7 102 69.50 3253 2984 59547 13292 99.9 1.223 ! Near Maximum !
+00.0 103 70.00 3278 3029 61094 13334 99.9 1.209 ! Near Maximum !
+00.7 104 70.50 3302 3075 62691 13371 100.0 1.195 ! Near Maximum !
+01.4 105 71.00 3327 3120 64335 13404 100.0 1.181 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+02.1 105 71.50 3351 3166 66027 13433 100.0 1.167 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+02.9 106 72.00 3375 3212 67769 13459 100.0 1.154 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+03.6 107 72.50 3399 3258 69564 13485 100.0 1.140 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!

Results caused by ± 10% powder lot-to-lot burning rate variation using nominal charge
Data for burning rate increased by 10% relative to nominal value:
+Ba 103 70.00 3422 3303 74736 12787 100.0 1.114 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Data for burning rate decreased by 10% relative to nominal value:
-Ba 103 70.00 3064 2648 49193 13294 95.7 1.332



Cartridge : .264 Win. Mag.
Bullet : .264, 127, Barnes 'LRX'BT 30228
Useable Case Capaci: 74.371 grain H2O = 4.829 cm³
Cartridge O.A.L. L6: 3.340 inch = 84.84 mm
Barrel Length : 26.0 inch = 660.4 mm
Powder : Hodgdon Retumbo

Predicted data by increasing and decreasing the given charge,
incremented in steps of 0.676% 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

-06.8 100 69.00 3128 2759 49259 13408 100.0 1.344
-06.1 101 69.50 3152 2801 50484 13444 100.0 1.329
-05.4 102 70.00 3175 2843 51742 13481 100.0 1.314
-04.7 102 70.50 3199 2885 53033 13516 100.0 1.299
-04.1 103 71.00 3222 2927 54362 13551 100.0 1.284
-03.4 104 71.50 3245 2970 55726 13586 100.0 1.270 ! Near Maximum !
-02.7 104 72.00 3268 3012 57128 13620 100.0 1.256 ! Near Maximum !
-02.0 105 72.50 3292 3055 58571 13653 100.0 1.241 ! Near Maximum !
-01.4 106 73.00 3315 3098 60055 13686 100.0 1.228 ! Near Maximum !
-00.7 107 73.50 3338 3141 61579 13718 100.0 1.214 ! Near Maximum !
+00.0 107 74.00 3360 3184 63150 13750 100.0 1.200 ! Near Maximum !
+00.7 108 74.50 3383 3228 64764 13781 100.0 1.187 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+01.4 109 75.00 3406 3271 66425 13812 100.0 1.173 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+02.0 110 75.50 3429 3315 68134 13842 100.0 1.160 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+02.7 110 76.00 3451 3359 69894 13871 100.0 1.147 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+03.4 111 76.50 3474 3403 71707 13900 100.0 1.134 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!

Results caused by ± 10% powder lot-to-lot burning rate variation using nominal charge
Data for burning rate increased by 10% relative to nominal value:
+Ba 107 74.00 3497 3449 78929 13228 100.0 1.100 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Data for burning rate decreased by 10% relative to nominal value:
-Ba 107 74.00 3147 2793 49781 14321 99.0 1.331



Cartridge : .264 Win. Mag.
Bullet : .264, 127, Barnes 'LRX'BT 30228
Useable Case Capaci: 74.371 grain H2O = 4.829 cm³
Cartridge O.A.L. L6: 3.340 inch = 84.84 mm
Barrel Length : 26.0 inch = 660.4 mm
Powder : Alliant Reloder-26 *C

Predicted data by increasing and decreasing the given charge,
incremented in steps of 0.735% 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

-07.4 85 63.00 3105 2718 49695 12941 100.0 1.368
-06.6 86 63.50 3128 2759 50971 12989 100.0 1.352
-05.9 87 64.00 3151 2800 52277 13036 100.0 1.336
-05.1 88 64.50 3174 2841 53615 13083 100.0 1.321
-04.4 88 65.00 3197 2883 54985 13129 100.0 1.306
-03.7 89 65.50 3220 2924 56389 13175 100.0 1.291 ! Near Maximum !
-02.9 90 66.00 3243 2965 57827 13220 100.0 1.276 ! Near Maximum !
-02.2 90 66.50 3266 3007 59300 13264 100.0 1.261 ! Near Maximum !
-01.5 91 67.00 3288 3049 60810 13309 100.0 1.247 ! Near Maximum !
-00.7 92 67.50 3311 3091 62356 13352 100.0 1.233 ! Near Maximum !
+00.0 92 68.00 3333 3133 63941 13395 100.0 1.219 ! Near Maximum !
+00.7 93 68.50 3356 3175 65565 13438 100.0 1.205 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+01.5 94 69.00 3378 3217 67229 13480 100.0 1.192 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+02.2 94 69.50 3400 3260 68935 13521 100.0 1.179 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+02.9 95 70.00 3422 3302 70684 13562 100.0 1.165 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+03.7 96 70.50 3444 3345 72477 13602 100.0 1.152 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!

Results caused by ± 10% powder lot-to-lot burning rate variation using nominal charge
Data for burning rate increased by 10% relative to nominal value:
+Ba 92 68.00 3453 3363 78300 12947 100.0 1.121 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Data for burning rate decreased by 10% relative to nominal value:
-Ba 92 68.00 3148 2795 49685 14022 99.8 1.354



Cartridge : .264 Win. Mag.
Bullet : .264, 127, Barnes 'LRX'BT 30228
Useable Case Capaci: 74.371 grain H2O = 4.829 cm³
Cartridge O.A.L. L6: 3.340 inch = 84.84 mm
Barrel Length : 26.0 inch = 660.4 mm
Powder : Alliant Reloder-33 *C

Predicted data by increasing and decreasing the given charge,
incremented in steps of 0.64% 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

-06.4 98 73.09 3108 2724 48356 14555 95.2 1.370
-05.8 99 73.59 3134 2770 49588 14664 95.6 1.354
-05.1 100 74.09 3160 2816 50857 14770 95.9 1.338
-04.5 100 74.59 3186 2863 52162 14872 96.3 1.322
-03.8 101 75.09 3213 2910 53507 14971 96.6 1.307
-03.2 102 75.59 3239 2958 54893 15066 97.0 1.291
-02.6 102 76.09 3265 3006 56320 15158 97.3 1.276 ! Near Maximum !
-01.9 103 76.59 3292 3055 57792 15245 97.6 1.261 ! Near Maximum !
-01.3 104 77.09 3318 3104 59304 15329 97.9 1.246 ! Near Maximum !
-00.6 104 77.59 3344 3153 60857 15409 98.1 1.232 ! Near Maximum !
+00.0 105 78.09 3370 3203 62451 15485 98.4 1.217 ! Near Maximum !
+00.6 106 78.59 3397 3254 64089 15556 98.6 1.203 ! Near Maximum !
+01.3 106 79.09 3423 3304 65774 15624 98.8 1.189 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+01.9 107 79.59 3449 3355 67508 15687 99.0 1.175 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+02.6 108 80.09 3476 3407 69294 15745 99.2 1.161 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+03.2 108 80.59 3502 3458 71131 15799 99.3 1.147 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!

Results caused by ± 10% powder lot-to-lot burning rate variation using nominal charge
Data for burning rate increased by 10% relative to nominal value:
+Ba 105 78.09 3571 3595 78612 15065 100.0 1.105 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Data for burning rate decreased by 10% relative to nominal value:
-Ba 105 78.09 3094 2700 48071 14781 90.7 1.364



Cartridge : .264 Win. Mag.
Bullet : .264, 127, Barnes 'LRX'BT 30228
Useable Case Capaci: 74.371 grain H2O = 4.829 cm³
Cartridge O.A.L. L6: 3.340 inch = 84.84 mm
Barrel Length : 26.0 inch = 660.4 mm
Powder : IMR 7828 SSC

Predicted data by increasing and decreasing the given charge,
incremented in steps of 0.758% 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

-07.6 87 61.00 3062 2644 48524 12983 98.3 1.349
-06.8 87 61.50 3087 2688 49757 13071 98.5 1.333
-06.1 88 62.00 3112 2732 51023 13156 98.7 1.318
-05.3 89 62.50 3137 2775 52323 13237 98.9 1.303
-04.5 89 63.00 3162 2820 53657 13315 99.1 1.287
-03.8 90 63.50 3187 2864 55027 13389 99.3 1.273
-03.0 91 64.00 3212 2909 56430 13459 99.4 1.258 ! Near Maximum !
-02.3 92 64.50 3236 2954 57864 13526 99.6 1.244 ! Near Maximum !
-01.5 92 65.00 3261 2999 59331 13588 99.7 1.230 ! Near Maximum !
-00.8 93 65.50 3286 3044 60831 13646 99.8 1.216 ! Near Maximum !
+00.0 94 66.00 3310 3089 62370 13701 99.9 1.202 ! Near Maximum !
+00.8 94 66.50 3334 3135 63948 13751 99.9 1.189 ! Near Maximum !
+01.5 95 67.00 3359 3181 65565 13797 100.0 1.175 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+02.3 96 67.50 3383 3227 67224 13839 100.0 1.162 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+03.0 97 68.00 3407 3273 68926 13877 100.0 1.149 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+03.8 97 68.50 3431 3319 70671 13912 100.0 1.136 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!

Results caused by ± 10% powder lot-to-lot burning rate variation using nominal charge
Data for burning rate increased by 10% relative to nominal value:
+Ba 94 66.00 3448 3352 74994 13180 100.0 1.112 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Data for burning rate decreased by 10% relative to nominal value:
-Ba 94 66.00 3109 2726 50253 13648 95.8 1.321


Cartridge : .264 Win. Mag.
Bullet : .264, 127, Barnes 'LRX'BT 30228
Useable Case Capaci: 74.371 grain H2O = 4.829 cm³
Cartridge O.A.L. L6: 3.340 inch = 84.84 mm
Barrel Length : 26.0 inch = 660.4 mm
Powder : Ramshot Magnum

Predicted data by increasing and decreasing the given charge,
incremented in steps of 0.704% 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

-07.0 88 66.00 3030 2589 48449 12441 99.6 1.369
-06.3 89 66.50 3054 2630 49723 12497 99.7 1.353
-05.6 90 67.00 3078 2672 51028 12549 99.8 1.337
-04.9 90 67.50 3102 2713 52370 12597 99.9 1.321
-04.2 91 68.00 3126 2755 53747 12640 99.9 1.305
-03.5 92 68.50 3150 2798 55163 12679 100.0 1.290
-02.8 92 69.00 3174 2840 56617 12714 100.0 1.275 ! Near Maximum !
-02.1 93 69.50 3197 2883 58112 12746 100.0 1.260 ! Near Maximum !
-01.4 94 70.00 3221 2926 59648 12776 100.0 1.245 ! Near Maximum !
-00.7 94 70.50 3245 2969 61228 12806 100.0 1.230 ! Near Maximum !
+00.0 95 71.00 3268 3012 62851 12836 100.0 1.216 ! Near Maximum !
+00.7 96 71.50 3292 3055 64521 12865 100.0 1.201 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+01.4 96 72.00 3315 3099 66239 12893 100.0 1.187 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+02.1 97 72.50 3338 3142 68005 12921 100.0 1.173 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+02.8 98 73.00 3361 3186 69823 12948 100.0 1.160 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+03.5 98 73.50 3385 3230 71693 12974 100.0 1.146 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!

Results caused by ± 10% powder lot-to-lot burning rate variation using nominal charge
Data for burning rate increased by 10% relative to nominal value:
+Ba 95 71.00 3401 3262 77117 12335 100.0 1.118 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Data for burning rate decreased by 10% relative to nominal value:
-Ba 95 71.00 3065 2649 49140 13144 97.8 1.348



Cartridge : .264 Win. Mag.
Bullet : .264, 127, Barnes 'LRX'BT 30228
Useable Case Capaci: 74.371 grain H2O = 4.829 cm³
Cartridge O.A.L. L6: 3.340 inch = 84.84 mm
Barrel Length : 26.0 inch = 660.4 mm
Powder : Vihtavuori N570 *C

Predicted data by increasing and decreasing the given charge,
incremented in steps of 0.667% 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

-06.7 97 70.00 3141 2782 49353 14779 95.0 1.354
-06.0 98 70.50 3168 2829 50609 14893 95.4 1.338
-05.3 98 71.00 3194 2877 51904 15004 95.8 1.322
-04.7 99 71.50 3221 2925 53233 15111 96.1 1.307
-04.0 100 72.00 3247 2973 54601 15215 96.5 1.292
-03.3 100 72.50 3273 3022 56005 15316 96.8 1.277 ! Near Maximum !
-02.7 101 73.00 3300 3071 57442 15413 97.1 1.262 ! Near Maximum !
-02.0 102 73.50 3326 3120 58915 15506 97.4 1.247 ! Near Maximum !
-01.3 102 74.00 3353 3170 60425 15595 97.7 1.233 ! Near Maximum !
-00.7 103 74.50 3379 3220 61976 15680 98.0 1.218 ! Near Maximum !
+00.0 104 75.00 3406 3271 63569 15762 98.2 1.204 ! Near Maximum !
+00.7 104 75.50 3432 3322 65206 15839 98.5 1.190 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+01.3 105 76.00 3459 3373 66888 15912 98.7 1.177 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+02.0 106 76.50 3485 3425 68616 15980 98.9 1.163 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+02.7 107 77.00 3511 3477 70392 16045 99.1 1.150 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+03.3 107 77.50 3538 3529 72217 16105 99.2 1.136 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!

Results caused by ± 10% powder lot-to-lot burning rate variation using nominal charge
Data for burning rate increased by 10% relative to nominal value:
+Ba 104 75.00 3602 3658 79231 15354 100.0 1.097 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Data for burning rate decreased by 10% relative to nominal value:
-Ba 104 75.00 3137 2775 49249 15076 90.7 1.346

Wondering why you were not running the 68gr charge, as that looked like the most promising in the other chart. I'd also start with a .020 or .025" jump to the lands first. Contrary to popular belief, sometimes these Barnes like to be a little closer to the lands. Not on the lands, but closer than .050" off... I realize this is an old post, but your results could be better, if using the proper charge weight, and going against the grain on seating depth trials.

BSA - That is a good question. That testing and those graphs were done 4 years ago, and I can't recall what my thinking was at the time. In the end, I went with a different bullet and different powder, so there was a lot more testing done than I reported at the time, so something came up which made me change directions, but I don't remember what. Due to a major construction project, I had to clean out my reloading room, which means my targets and notes from that time period were lost.

Excellent. Thank you
I was hoping to use Rl26 but trying to avoid paying $100/oz, LOL

There are so many normal powders that will work just as well I wouldn’t starve my kids to use it for that application if I didn’t have it sitting on my shelf

Sold! For the right price, I will even buy your shelf

Thanks again!

No problem. Let me know how you make out. I love the 264 Win. I have a Classic with the 26" barrel and a newer FN gun with the 24" barrel. Neither are slouches. I wished they were 8's but I'll make do I guess!