I'm having a Model 70 338 rebarreled to 264 Win Mag. I was thinking of having it 26" like the old Westerners - but my gunsmith recommends 24". He thinks it would be more accurate. It's a Kreiger barrel - so does length affect accuracy (harmonics?)

Wouldn't the loss in velocity make it like a loud 270? Ive already got a 24" 270W.

What's a good powder to start with for 140G TTSX?

Thanks,
Jeff

Not JB but I love the .264. I had one with a 24 inch barrel, my preference is 26. But longer barrels are my normal preference.

FWIW - a friend of mine built a 264 Win Mag a couple of years ago and went with 26” barrel. His gunsmith recommended it for that cartridge so opinions vary but he has been very pleased with that 26” barrel length in that cartridge.

You will see 25 fps or so adding or subtracting barrel length.
Charlie

Is that per inch Charlie?

I’ve had several 264’s. A Westerner and Sako’s. All had 26” barrels. I’d go with the 26. I load 140 grain ballistic tips with IMR 4350 powder. I’m thinking of trying the 120 Barnes. I use the 120’s in 6.5 Creeds and 6.5-06. They slice and dice pigs really well, very accurate also.

Yes, per inch.
Charlie

Ngrumba,

All I know is that I've owned and handloaded for two .264s. The first was a used pre-'64 Westerner that belonged to a local rancher friend for quite a while. The bore was in decent shape, and it would group three shots of some loads into around .8 inch at 100 yards. Muzzle velocities with 140s ran around 3220 using Ramshot Magnum and Reloder 25.

The second was a like-new Ruger Hawkeye stainless/synthetic with a 24-inch barrel and 1-8 rifling twist, rather than the 1-9 of the Westerner.
It grouped better, down to around .6 inch for three shots at 100. Muzzle velocities were 50-100 fps slower than with the 26" barrel with the same bullet weights, but I don't think that was due to barrel length as much as changes in methods of pressure-measurement during the years between owning the two rifles.

All the data when I owned the Westerner was CUP, meaning measured by lead-crusher machinery. The data when I owned the Ruger was PSI, meaning it was measured electronically, which is today generally considered more accurate.

Plus, they were different barrels. In my experience the only really valid way to measure velocity gain/loss is by chopping the SAME barrel an inch at at time and reshooting the same loads.

I've got a 264 WM in a Model 70 Westerner. I've got a thing for M70s, and all of their magnums (with the exception of the 375 H&H) used to have 26 inch barrels. The long barrels never caused me any concern. If you hunt the really thick stuff, then maybe a shorter barrel would be better, but if not, 26" is the way to go. I've recently had good success using H1000 powder with the 127grain Barnes LRX bullets.

Mine was a rebarrel on a FN Musketeer , it cane with a bad news 22" barrel . Greydog suggested a 26", I went with a handier 24 " . So I get 3150 into well under an inch, so what.

I have experience with only two .264s, both were Winchester pre-64's one had a 26" barrel the other had a 22" barrel. The 22" rifle was nothing more than an ear-splitting .270. It was quickly sent down the road. I was pleased with the other one. My thinking is that why not go with the 26" barrel, you'll get a little more velocity and that is what the .264 is all about anyway and the muzzle blast will be less as well.

26" is fine. The .264 shines out in the open where the extra length doesn't hinder. I have never wished my .264 was shorter.

I use 7828 and RL33 in mine with 130AB's. Good luck!

I had a couple .264 Winchesters one with 24" and one with 26" barrels, just a loud and heavy .270 IMHO. The Ruger #1 with 26" barrel was about 40 FPS faster with 140's, as I remember. Hate being a buzz kill, if 40 or 50 FPS matters go with the 26" barrel.

That's a good point. Tough to better a .270 unless you're hand loading and have that barrel. If not, what's the point?

Go with the 26" & Ramshot Magnum is the powder your looking for.

41

I seem to remember some gun writer publishing an article around 20 years ago suggesting the same thing....

Another vote for 26 inches. My 264 has a 26” Kreiger barrel. Shoots a 125gr Partitions at into bug holes at about 3350fps using 7828.. Quite a few deer over the last 10 to 15 years. None took even a step.

If in close quarters, I have other rifles.

MD, I do remember that article, maybe written by some Swede who lived in Montana.

I'm no gun writer.

The only advantage a 264 has over the 270 is at longer ranges which suggests open country which makes 2 more inches of barrel no problem.

Just an opinion.

Remington's 264's were all 24", I think. So that's what I had. If I were to build a rifle or have one built for me, it would have a 26" barrel. I sort of need a 264...

Not to hijack the thread, but did the 264 have the same issue with pressure deviations that the 7RM has?

I’ve tested 7 powders in the .264 with 140gr bullets.

Use the slowest burn rate powders available for top speeds.

Some of the replies are amusing

Having trouble deciding?

Go with a 25"???

It's pretty typical to get 3100 fps from a 22 inch 270 with 130 gr bullets.

Compared to a 264 which, with careful load development, will make 3200 fps with 140 gr bullets from a 26 inch barrel. Which is actually pretty comparable performance.

But I have never owned a 270, and do not plan on buying one. I have worn out one 264 barrel. That Winchester now has a 27 inch PacNor barrel in 264. It makes 3300 fps with a 130 gr Acccubond over 71 gr Magnum. That barrel is heavy profile, and not much for packing.

So, I am now in the process of rebarreling a Win 70 classic to 264 with a standard Magnum barrel profile. It will probably also be 27 inch.

But yes, five inches of barrel, an extra 10 grains of powder, one less round in the mag, to beat the 270 by 200 fps. According to Charlie's post, 125 fps is due just to the extra barrel length.

Was this stuff supposed to make any sense?

I recorded extreme pressure/velocity excursions with 140 gr partitions and the first lots of RL25. On three different occasions I recorded velocity increases of 250 to 300 fps difference between 1'st, 2'nd, and 3'rd shots in a string with a blown primer on the third on one occasion. The temp was over 100, I attributed the increasing pressure to increasing barrel temps with subsequent shots, combined with the long bearing surface of the 140 gr partition.

I was never able to safely load that bullet over 3000 fps with any of the powders available at that time.

I have never experienced any issues with boat tail bullets combined with a long ogive and short bearing surface. My rifle loved the 140 gr Sierra spitzer boat tail over H 1000.

Today, the choice is far better in powders and in bullets.

It does if you have any clue

A typical 130 gr, .277 cal bullet has a BC of around .400

A .264, 140 gr has a BC of .600

I would have to recommend at least a 24" if you cannot have one longer because that's a lot of powder to burn in a pretty slender tube.

I have a Belgian Browning Safari Grade (Mauser) .264 and cannot believe Browning put the 22" barrel on it. It's a family legacy gun, so not going anywhere. I doubt it's had more than ten boxes of ammo shot in it since new so I am hard-pressed to justify re-barreling with so little mileage on this one. And if I were to re-barrel it, it just might end up with a .284 bore anyway. It IS an exceptionally loud .270...but I can tell you the few 140 grain factory Power Point and Core-Lokt bullets we have ever managed to recover from game usually have long shanks behind the mushrooms, having penetrated the full body length of a whitetail deer.. With cup and core bullets, it kills the old-fashioned way, with sectional density and penetration. This is where it may have a slight edge on the .270 with 130 gr. bullets, which are much shorter proportionally and absolutely. With a similarly mushroomed front, the 130 gr. .270 bullet just won't have as much shank intact to continue penetration.

And it may not matter in practical terms, sort of like debating how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

I tried to handload for it once in the 70s with 140 gr. Sierra Spitzers, and they had to be seated painfully deep in the case to clear the throat. I used Hodgdon 4831 (the original recovered milsurp powder) thinking it might be slow enough to work in the .264. About half of the bullet was below the neck of the case and they made discouraging patterns, not groups. It was my grandfather's gun at the time and he didn't shoot it more than at a couple of deer a year, so he just stayed with factory ammo and I went back to having fun with my .243 and 30-06 handloads.

Someday when I am really bored, I may see what it will do with a different bullet shape, such as some 140 gr. Remingtons I have. They are .257 diameter forward of the cannelure and .264 behind the cannelure. They may resolve the seating depth issue.

Fugg all difference it makes inside 500 yds.

6.5 129 gr ab lr bc= .561
6.5 130 ab bc= .488
6.5 140 ab bc= .509
6.5 140 bt bc= .509
6.5 140 cust comp bc= .529
6.5 140 partition bc= .490
6.5 142 ab lr bc= .719
6.5 129 IB bc= .485
6.5 129 SST bc= .485
6.5 129 IL bc= .445
6.5 130 ELD bc= .554
6.5 140 bthp match bc= .580
6.5 140 A-max bc= .585
6.5 140 ELD match bc= .646
6.5 140 SST bc= .520
6.5 140 interlock SP bc= .465
6.5 143 ELD-X bc= .623
6.5 140 Speer HC bc= .498


270 130 Speer btsp bc= .412
270 130 Speer HC bc= .383
270 130 AB bc= .435
270 130 BT bc= .433
270 130 CT BT bc= .433
270 130 E-Tip bc= .459
270 130 Partition bc= .416
270 130 GMX bc= .460
270 130 IB bc= .460
270 130 SST bc= .460
270 130 Interlock bc= .409

As any shooter knows, there's a bit of difference. But not as pronounced with common hunting bullets as some might have one believe.

If you want to talk of specialized LR bullets, the Berger 270 caliber 170 grain EOL Elite Hunter is stated to have a BC over .700 above 3000 fps. Of course no 270 Win can push it that fast. And it takes an eight twist barrel.

I had that issue with RL-25, too in my 264WM . How ever in my 6.5-06 it behaved itself. My 6.5-06 is slow, max is 2850 where as my 264WM load is 3150. 140s

Have tried more than 7 powders in the .264, but that's going back around 20 years. At that time Magnum was new, and still haven't found a significantly better powder.

But also tried some other 6.5 rounds. Eventually came to the conclusion that for hunting, the 26 Nosler easily gets the "original" 3200 fps with 140s with excellent accuracy--or more if you want it. Of course, the accuracy depends on the rifle.

This makes me want to dig mine out, go shoot ‘em.

With the case capacity of the Nosler, it’s easier.

Buddy is using N-570 in it with 140’s and getting over 3400. I haven’t tried N-570 in the 264 WM but have a hunch it may be the ticket. RL-33 with the 139 Scenar was over 3200. I’m shooting the 147 ELD-M now in it at a tame 3100 with RL-33

Velocity trued at 3225







3100 and at 550 yards

My m700 Ltd classic has a 24" barrel like all the early 700 bdl's had. When Remington came out with the ss fluted sendero in 264 win mag they finally pulled their head out and put a 26" on it. Most all 264's had short saami spec throats because of the 2 diameter bullets that WW and RP made for them. Haven't checked any current production WW or RP factory ammo but I'd bet they are the same old 2 diameter bullets in them. Fact is Remington factory 6.5 Creedmoor uses the same bullet. Allways shot h870 and fed 215's in mine with the 140 npt to get just over 3000. Mb

When I had my 264WM rebarreled, the gunsmith throated the chamber "normal" . He said it took the qurikerness out of reolading the 264WM. He was right.

I got my .264 out to the range night before last, as a result of this thread. P64, 26" Stainless bbl with the iron coating. I put it in a McMillan, have a 4.5x14 Fullfield Burris on it, and despite being a .270 guy all the way to the bones, am just thrilled to own this rifle. Some guy here at the 'fire sold it to me, poor fella.

I'd been spending most of my rifle and reloading time pissing around with a .308 FW and a .270 FW since last year. Rounded up some .264 shells already loaded, and just went out to punch some paper. It was good to remind myself what amazing performance and tremendous accuracy that rifle gives. Might be the last rifle I'd give up. I'm a .270 guy to the core, but this rifle speaks to me. I never ever had the problems reloading that others have claimed, its not fussy at all, it just makes sub 1" groups repeatably.

Bk, I have a m700 classic in 264 have lots of ammo good to go you might say. Also have 200 new ww brass for it made back when it was top Quality brass.will sell
Send me a pm..mb

Thanks Bob, i'll keep it in mind!

Wish that offer had been made to me before I invested in a 7RM to have rebarreled to 264.

My first Classic in 264 had as nice a Walnut stock as I have seen on a production rifle. Until my 12 year old son let it get between his 4-H pony and a tree. It still wears Rutland pepper plywood 30 years later.

Love my Remington 264 Win Mag Classic.
One of my favorite hunting rifles.
It loves both 120 gr ballistic tips and 125 gr Partitions.
It’s accounted for many whitetails and antelopes and few Mule Deers too.

Awesome. What velocities are you getting and how accurate? I will have a switch barrel installed/crafted onto an awesome rifle sometime in late November and was thinking of using the 127Gr LRX as the bullet of choice. It will have a Bartlein 2B, "27" finish", 7" twist.

I don't have access to my data right now, but will check tonight and get back to you.

Awesome. Thank you.

Am I the only one who read the OP's post?

He asked "DOES LENGTH AFFECT ACCURACY?"

I can say it DOES affect popularity with the ladies.

.264 WM: Come for the velocity. Stay for the BC.

This is true to some degree. You only benefit from the modern "slippery" bullets if you twist 1:8 or faster. I found out the hard way when I had PacNor put on a 1:9 (kinda the old standard). I doesn't work too well with anything over 140 gr.

My .264 Win Mag is still a .338 Win Mag but it’s sending a 160TSX at 3300 from a 26” or 3150 from a 20” .338wm…

I ordered a 1:7 twist Bartlein 2B stainless 5R at 26" finished. Looking forward to seeing it perform

good answer with a 8 twist

I doubt you'll be disappointed

In the late 60’s I was offered a 264 or a 7mm RM both 700’s as a gift. I took the 264. I still had 4831 that was the cheap stuff - government surplus. I think that was the only powder that I used. I didn’t have a chronograph, I had to rely on the reloading manuals as to the velocity might have been getting. I remember two bullets that I used, 120 grain hollow points (manufacturer??) and 140 grain partitions made on a screw machine. Both bullets were pretty accurate. I shot a lot of crows and jack rabbits with the rifle. I shot a lot more 120 grain hollow points than those spendy partitions.
A friend bought it from me. He used it on pronghorns and prairie dogs - mostly prairie dogs. If I were to get another 6.5, it would be a 264.

With the same contour barrel, 2 inches in extra length will result in a barrel slightly more whippier whether free floated or not. ( loses rigidity with length ) Dropping a down a contour has a similar effect .

Whether or not that 2” is perceptible to the average shooter….. probably not.

I pure dee Love Commercial FN Mausers and the old Browning Safari models. I Used to drool over Browning's catalog as a teen! Even then I questioned WHY Browning put a 22" barrel on their .264? I finally saw on GunsInternational a Browning with a 24 inch 264. Only one in 60 yrs!

I used to work with a HS friend and he had been given a Mod 700 BDL with a 24" barrel, of course. I would jokingly tell him that I would give him a $150 for the rig (3x9 Redfield) one day he said OK, (fight with wife) except I had 3 yr old very ex[pensive twin girls and a Classy wife with good taste in clothes! ha But a young friend of mine ( 4 yrs younger) was looking for a good deer rifle. He grew up shooting an old Eyetalian 6.5. He bought it and has used nothing else since! I and another friend loaded ammo for him. My friend loaded 140 Partitions pretty hot. I loaded the Speer 140 HC about 3000fps ( I didn't tell him that was 270 country, ha) he and later his 3 boys have killed a dump truck full of deer and hogs! About 15yrs ago, he finally had a gunsmith clean the bore (which he "never" does!) It came right back to less than an inch!

I moved off to Bible College in '87 and our older handloader friend ( he taught me how to use/set up the Rock-Chucker press/dies I still use!) just up and died around 10yrs ago. My 264 Buddy just uses 140 Corlokts now. He did tell me awhile back that he hunts near the Big Bend of West Texas now and then. My point being that 24" seems sensible to me, but I too would want a 26" just for grins. Biggest 6.5 I ever owned is the short time I spent with the 6.5/284 and the 6.5 PRC, I have used a handful of smaller 6.5s. I hunted with an Outfitter that personally used a 6.5x300 Wby. Now that is a big one, but I would take a plain 264 WM factory or a 6.5/280AI Wildcat over the big Weatherby, just me.