264 Win Mag or 270 WSM?

Charlie38

Charlie38

CGN Regular
Rating - 100%
69   0   0
Location
Northwest (Prince Rupert), BC
To start off I have ALWAYS wanted a 264.
I have had the following speedsters 257 WBY, 7mm Rem Mag, 300 H&H, 300 Win Mag, 300 WBY (current) in Mags and 25-06 Rem, 270 Win, 280 Rem for standards.
I only want to discuss the two cartridges, please keep in line with the thread...(we'll see how that goes LOL)

This will be mainly for deer and I want a stainless gun, lots to choose from in the 270WSM, only one (Win M70 Extreme SS) that I can find in 264.
What are your thoughts on the 264 or 270WSM for you that own them...
 
Without a doubt I would go with the .264 Win Mag. You have a really good choice of high BC bullets and it is a "classic". The newer slow powders should really help with performance too. I wonder if RL33 will be excellent....or too slow.
 
If I had a 264, I would try RL-33 for sure.

Cartridge : .264 Win. Mag.
Bullet : .264, 140, Nosler AccuBond
39457
Useable Case Capaci: 74.854 grain H2O = 4.860 cm³
Cartridge O.A.L.
L6: 3.340 inch = 84.84 mm
Barrel Length : 26.0 inch = 660.4 mm
Powder :
Alliant Reloder 33

Predicted data by increasing and decreasing the given
charge,
incremented in steps of 2.0% 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

-20.0 80 60.40 2477 1907 29019 11902 86.9 1.778
-18.0 82 61.91 2548
2019 31180 12357 88.6 1.732
-16.0 84 63.42 2620 2135 33526 12798 90.3
1.686
-14.0 86 64.93 2693 2255 36064 13222 91.8 1.642
-12.0 88 66.44 2766
2379 38816 13626 93.3 1.589
-10.0 90 67.95 2840 2507 41803 14008 94.6
1.533
-08.0 92 69.46 2914 2639 45048 14363 95.8 1.480
-06.0 94 70.97 2988
2775 48573 14691 96.8 1.429
-04.0 96 72.48 3062 2915 52358 14988 97.7
1.379
-02.0 98 73.99 3136 3058 56444 15251 98.5 1.332 ! Near Maximum !
+00.0 100 75.50 3210 3204 60865 15478 99.1 1.286 ! Near Maximum !
+02.0
102 77.01 3284 3353 65658 15667 99.6 1.242 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+04.0
104 78.52 3358 3505 70859 15816 99.9 1.199 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+06.0 106 80.03 3431 3660 76513 15922 100.0 1.158 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+08.0
108 81.54 3504 3817 82669 15992 100.0 1.118 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+10.0 110 83.05 3576 3976 89386 16053 100.0 1.080 !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 100 75.50 3388 3568 75929 14953 100.0 1.170 !DANGEROUS
LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Data for burning rate decreased by 10% relative to nominal
value:
-Ba 100 75.50 2960 2725 46844 14976 92.5 1.439


sorry about the format but we're looking at about 3200 fps with 140s with reasonable pressure.
 
Pathfinder - a high BC 140gr bullet at 3200fps. Sounds pretty good - good trajectory, manageable recoil and enough jam for the vast majority of big game out there.
 
I have hunted with a WIN. M 70 in .264 win. mag. for a lot of years and killed a lot of different game with it. Mule deer, whitetail, moose, elk, pronghorn, bighorn, black bear and coyotes.

I can only think of one shot I made with it where I really needed the long reach. (a coyote at 480 paces across a stubble field).

I reckon I would have done just as well with a standard .270 Win.
 
Disclaimer: 264 Win Mag is an unpopular but fantastic long range hunt cartridge and you should definitively buy one if that is what makes you happy.

The ugly truth: for a hunting point of view, anything that a 264 Win Mag can do, a 270 WSM can do better:
  • Bette accuracy
  • Wider/better choice of hunting bullets
  • More powerful
  • Even lower recoil for a given bullet weight! (because the cartridge is more efficient)

Last comment, 7 Rem Mag can do a couple of things that 270 WSM can't do (drive a 160 or 175 high BC bullet) but 270 WSM is much better hunting cartridge than 264 Win Mag anyway you look at it.

Alex
 
AlexF said:
The ugly truth: for a hunting point of view, anything that a 264 Win Mag can do, a 270 WSM can do better:
  • Better accuracy
  • Wider/better choice of hunting bullets
  • More powerful
  • Even lower recoil for a given bullet weight! (because the cartridge is more efficient)
Alex
Click to expand...

While I would defend your right to your viewpoint, Alex, I disagree with your consensus.
Just for the record, I have owned both chamberings.

"Better Accuracy" How so? I got equal accuracy out of my 264 Win Mags as I did the 270 WSMs
Accuracy is more a matter of individual firearms than it is of chambering.

"Wider/better choice of hunting bullets" This is a toss-up. Both have plenty of variety for any hunting situation.

"More powerful" ?? A 130 grain bullet at 3350 is a 130 grain at 3350, regardless of the case pushing it.
Likewise a 140 at 3200+.
The 264 will show a superiority at longer ranges because of the higher BC of similar weight/profile bullets.

"Even lower recoil for a given bullet weight" The WSM cartridge is not more efficient. This has been bebunked by
extensive tests, comparing the 300 H&H with the 300 WSM, cases with practically identical capacities.

Bottom line?? These two are so close to the same that no game animal [nor hunter] would ever be able to tell the difference in the field.

Personally, I like the 264 for nostalgic reasons, not for any magical powers attributed to it.

Regards, Eagleye.
 
I acquired a salvage grade Browning Safari in .264. Remains of a very nice rifle. WGP had original Browning barrels in the white. .264 and 7mmRM. Seeing as it started as .264, I opted for that caliber, rather than the 7mm. The only bullet which shot really well, sub minute, was an 85 gr. hollow point. Every big game bullet I tried grouped in the 3" range. Based on this experience,I would not do another .264.
 
On our last pronghorn hunt in Wyoming I took a 264 Win Mag and my buddy had a 270 WSM, the antelope couldn't tell the difference. I did notice his rifle didn't feed very well but I think that's more a factor of the rifle than the cartridge, people talk about WSM's not feeding well but I think good design can overcome it. On some rifles the 264 will hold one more in the mag than the WSM and a 6.5 140gr at 3200 fps is a wonderful thing. Myself I like the 264 Win Mag.
 
tiriaq said:
I acquired a salvage grade Browning Safari in .264. Remains of a very nice rifle. WGP had original Browning barrels in the white. .264 and 7mmRM. Seeing as it started as .264, I opted for that caliber, rather than the 7mm. The only bullet which shot really well, sub minute, was an 85 gr. hollow point. Every big game bullet I tried grouped in the 3" range. Based on this experience,I would not do another .264.
Click to expand...

I know things like that can sure be a sour experience but it isn't really a cartridge issue, more of a barrel issue.
 
I have a pair of 264 win mags and won`t be parting with them. One is a custom built rig on a p14 that Al Peterson built for my dad back in the late 60`s, the other is a Sako l61r i bought as a barreled action and stocked in english walnut. Still kicking my ass i didn`t buy more of those barreled actions at the time. The next 6.5 i build will likely be based on the 06 case though.
 
I have never owned either so I can't comment from experience. I have however always wanted a .264 mag. I came close to getting one from Lorne a few years back, but couldn't get a deal together. What barrel length do you guys reccomend? Would a "22 work ok? I know the "26 is optimum, but how much efficiency would you lose with the shorter barrel? Didn't mean to hijack the thread!

Dave.
 
The 264 is a fine cartridge, I've had a couple and they gave fine accuracy with any bullet weight tried.
Regretably, because of health reasons I will probably put my last one on the EE in the next day or so.
 
I've got a .264 in a CDL SF.

Had plans to use it on a mule deer this year but ended up using a .257 Wby.

Not a big fan of the WSM's but I think a 270 WSM would be a solid choice.
 
triton said:
I have never owned either so I can't comment from experience. I have however always wanted a .264 mag. I came close to getting one from Lorne a few years back, but couldn't get a deal together. What barrel length do you guys reccomend? Would a "22 work ok? I know the "26 is optimum, but how much efficiency would you lose with the shorter barrel? Didn't mean to hijack the thread!

Dave.
Click to expand...

the only reason for the 264 is more speed so no point having one with barrel shorter that 24". For an open country rifle I would go 26".

The one I had had a 24" pipe and 140's going 3150fps was no big trick.
 
I was just guiding a wolf hunter who carried a 6.5 -270wsm. Pretty cool wildcat, simple to make brass and a real speed demon. If you're into that kinda stuff, it was a pretty ###y little round... killed wolves just fine too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom