Hey guys, I ordered a new model 70 in 264 Win Mag for an everything rifle for my girlfriend in hopes it would recoil a little less than my 7mm with 150’s. Before everyone shoots down the 264 choice, I chose 264 for a few reasons. I wanted to use a 6.5 bullet as there alot more options for projectiles, so it came down to 4 calibers - 6.5x284, 6.5 prc, 264 wm and 26 Nosler. Of these calibers the easiest to find brass for was 264 as 7mm brass can easily be necked down and I have a ton of it. The rifle needed to be able shoot flat to 300-400 yds, and be able to take down moose, elk, black bear, and stop whitetail in its tracks. I plan to use the 129 gr accubond long range, my question is, has anyone used H4350 and had decent results in 264 with a 129gr accubond? I have H1000 as well which I will likely end up using, but before I waste my time with H4350 I was going to see if anyone has tried it with this caliber.
264 Win mag
- Thread starter Rem5r
- Start date
I can't respond from actual experience, but a few runs through QuickLoad indicate that H4350 may be just a little on the too-fast side, and H1000 on the too-slow side. They are pretty far apart on the burn rate charts. A powder midway between them, such as IMR7828, Norma MRP, or Vihtavuori N560, would seem to be more ideal. QuickLoad shows higher velocities at safe pressures for these latter three powders. Also worth considering would be Re22 and possibly the newer Re26, which is giving .270 Win. shooters higher velocities than previously obtainable.
For the heavier game animals you've noted (moose, elk), a tough, well-constructed 140-gr. .264 bullet would be my choice, with its higher sectional density. Something like the Nosler 140 Accubond, 140 Partition, or 140 Swift A-Frame would qualify, or possibly a monolithic.
For the heavier game animals you've noted (moose, elk), a tough, well-constructed 140-gr. .264 bullet would be my choice, with its higher sectional density. Something like the Nosler 140 Accubond, 140 Partition, or 140 Swift A-Frame would qualify, or possibly a monolithic.
Last edited:
Yea I had kinda planned on if she were to get drawn for rifle moose or elk we would work up a 140 gr load. In our area you would be lucky to get drawn every 5-6 years so we should have time to work a load around it. I will look around at our local shops and see if they have any of the three powders you listed, but we are pretty short on stock around here it seems. How does imr4831 stack up in your load program? Just looking at noslers load data it seems to be one of the higher velocities
Yes, either IMR4831 or, preferably H4831 (or H4831sc) which is a little slower, would be good choices.
Awesome, thanks. I will try to get my hands on some IMR7828 or H4831. I had suspected H4350 might be a bit fast, now I can sell what I have to my creedmore friends lol. I am not familiar with IMR powders as I have always stuck to the Hodgdon extreme powders. Is the 7828 pretty stable to temperature changes?
From what I've read, IMR7828 is not temperature insensitive (i.e., it is sensitive to temperature changes). The newer Hodgdon Extreme group of powders seem to be more temperature insensitive. So H4831 (or what is the same thing, H4831sc) should be more temperature insensitive.
I have played with the 264 for quite a few years.
Your M70 should have a 26" barrel. I have an EW M70. Beautiful guns. But loading for it can prove a challenge if you want top speed and accuracy.
Tried the 129 Accubonds. But I couldn't get them to shoot very good. The 140gr Accubond is a great bullet. I recommend the 140gr bullets as they are more versatile.
You want the slowest powders (US869, Retumbo, RL33). Mine prefers N570 get a 140gr over 3200fps.
Your M70 should have a 26" barrel. I have an EW M70. Beautiful guns. But loading for it can prove a challenge if you want top speed and accuracy.
Tried the 129 Accubonds. But I couldn't get them to shoot very good. The 140gr Accubond is a great bullet. I recommend the 140gr bullets as they are more versatile.
You want the slowest powders (US869, Retumbo, RL33). Mine prefers N570 get a 140gr over 3200fps.
That’s interesting to hear some real world numbers. That’s faster than I thought a guy could push the 140 at. I ended up ordering the featherlight stainless model, I believe it is a 24” barrel so I well loose a bit of velocity. Twist is also 1:9 which I’m not crazy about but there’s no other option besides a custom rifle. My plan was too push the 129 ABLR at around 3200-3300 but after hearing your experience I am fearing my concerns of marginal stability may be true with the 1:9 for that projectile.
Both of my 264's are 1-9. A Ruger Hawkeye and the M70. No problems with the 140's. I played a lot trying to find a powder that would work like the old H870.
75gr of US869 is the load for my Hawkeye (24"). 3050fps 140gr
The M70 (26") likes the N570. 69grs. 3200-3225.
Start a bit low and work up. The N570 likes to be loaded warm.
75gr of US869 is the load for my Hawkeye (24"). 3050fps 140gr
The M70 (26") likes the N570. 69grs. 3200-3225.
Start a bit low and work up. The N570 likes to be loaded warm.
Ignore 264wm data, most of it is based around powder choices from 1965. I'd suggest looking at 6.5PRC data, you will be able to start at PRC max loads and go up from there with the 264wm (264 is 20% larger in case capacity). You'll find that the modern powders will give much better performance, look at RL26, RL33, H4831sc, H1000, Retumbo, IMR 7828, IMR 7977, IMR 8133, Viht N560, Viht N565, Viht N570, Magpro
Expect approx 150 fps more velocity than 6.5 PRC or 6.5-284 with same components, at same PSI
A 129gr ABLR should be around 3250 fps from a 26" 264wm. I've shot the 129ABLR from a 9t 260 Rem with good results
Expect approx 150 fps more velocity than 6.5 PRC or 6.5-284 with same components, at same PSI
A 129gr ABLR should be around 3250 fps from a 26" 264wm. I've shot the 129ABLR from a 9t 260 Rem with good results
Both the 129 Nosler ABLR and 140 Nosler AB will stabilize just fine in your 1:9 twist at velocities you'll achieve with them.
I use H4831 and obsolete H870 in my 264 win mags. Both work well with 120 to 140 bullets. I have a good supply of H870 and only use it for the 264 so it will last me a long time. No velocities as i haven't got around to running this caliber over the Labradar.
I considered almost every caliber in .264 diameter class. It is undeniable the .264 wm has a very generous speed advantage over the 6.5x55, 6.5 creed and 260 rem. After using my 7mm last fall on a whitetail at 150 yards she was impressed with how fast her buck hit the ground compared to the 243 she had been using. I’m not wanting to stir the pot here on shot placement and how cousin ed has used a 223 to hunt deer for 25 years. We are both primarily bow hunters and know all to well about shot placement and humane shots. My opinions on the matter are that this rifle will do all she will ask of it for the foreseeable future, whether that be filling a deer tag because she passed too many up in archery, or hunting Elk or Muley’s out west. Thanks to everyone who gave me some insight on loading for this thing so far, after reading through comments i think will work up a second load with 140gr as well as the 129gr.
Last edited:
I ran the 140 Partition out of my 26" barrelled 264 Win Mag at just North of 3200 fps.
My pet load was 75.0 grains of [now obsolete] H5010 With that combo, I whacked
deer from 80 yards right out past 400, and one moose at 45 yards, and another at 375.
I also shot 2 cow elk with it, both were around 220-230 yards.
Everything I shot with that 264 was dead very quickly, and I believe I never sent a
second shot at any animal with it. A friend now owns that rifle, and is quite pleased
with it. As mentioned modern powders include: Vihtavuori N570, 565, 560, 170, IMR 7828,
7797, 4831, H4831, Alliant RL22, 23, 25, 26, possibly even 33. AA 8700...
Plenty of choices for bullets from 125 - 140 grains. Use a good bullet. At 264 velocities
some "hunting" bullets act more like "Varmint" bullets. Enjoy that 264!! Dave.
My pet load was 75.0 grains of [now obsolete] H5010 With that combo, I whacked
deer from 80 yards right out past 400, and one moose at 45 yards, and another at 375.
I also shot 2 cow elk with it, both were around 220-230 yards.
Everything I shot with that 264 was dead very quickly, and I believe I never sent a
second shot at any animal with it. A friend now owns that rifle, and is quite pleased
with it. As mentioned modern powders include: Vihtavuori N570, 565, 560, 170, IMR 7828,
7797, 4831, H4831, Alliant RL22, 23, 25, 26, possibly even 33. AA 8700...
Plenty of choices for bullets from 125 - 140 grains. Use a good bullet. At 264 velocities
some "hunting" bullets act more like "Varmint" bullets. Enjoy that 264!! Dave.
If recoil is a consideration, heavy loads of the very-slowest of powders will produce more recoil than will the medium-slow powders. As an example, I ran H870, H4831, and IMR4350 through QuickLOAD with loads that produced close-to-top velocities for a Nosler 129 ABLR through a 24-in. barrel, at top, but safe, pressures.
With a top load of H870 at safe pressures, the recoil in an 8 lb. rifle would be about 22 ft.-lbs., which is getting up there, and is more than many shooters can tolerate. With IMR7828, a top load giving approximately the same velocity as the H870 load will produce about 19 ft.-lbs. of recoil, and with IMR4350, a top load (albeit yielding about 100 fps lower velocity) will generate about 17 ft.-lbs. of recoil. The loss of 100 fps with IMR4350 will make very little difference in the field (maybe one inch more drop at 400 yards), but the 5 ft.-lbs. less recoil might make a difference to the shooter’s concentration. So, if recoil is of concern, I'd stay away from the super-slow powders (anything slower than IMR7828) and focus on the powders in the IMR4350 to IMR7828 burning-rate range.
With a top load of H870 at safe pressures, the recoil in an 8 lb. rifle would be about 22 ft.-lbs., which is getting up there, and is more than many shooters can tolerate. With IMR7828, a top load giving approximately the same velocity as the H870 load will produce about 19 ft.-lbs. of recoil, and with IMR4350, a top load (albeit yielding about 100 fps lower velocity) will generate about 17 ft.-lbs. of recoil. The loss of 100 fps with IMR4350 will make very little difference in the field (maybe one inch more drop at 400 yards), but the 5 ft.-lbs. less recoil might make a difference to the shooter’s concentration. So, if recoil is of concern, I'd stay away from the super-slow powders (anything slower than IMR7828) and focus on the powders in the IMR4350 to IMR7828 burning-rate range.
Last edited:
