The .264 Win Mag - An Old Idea Worth Re-Visiting

[CoalTrain49]

There once was a time when anything less than a magnum was marginal for whitetail according to the magazines, a 6.5 cm is higher than only the Grendel in the 6.5 family. Elk have been taken with .243s, .30-30s with 150 gr loads, and other likewise "marginal cartridges" by actual hunters, the 6.5 Swede has killed more elk class game than could begin to be tallied. If we're quoting people, Ron Spomer says to pick your best deer cartridge, put the best bullets in the case that you can, and put those bullets on your target as accurately as you can to kill elk, and don't stop shooting till they're down. Whether you're woofing a .35 whelen or a .243, the bullet selection will make so much more difference. Should a person expect a .264 wm to get a knockdown shot with a 100 gr ballistic tip? Pfffttt no. But considering that the .30-06 launches THE elk hammering 180 gr bullets at 2800 fps with a sectional density of .271 and is THE most versatile cartridge for American game, we'll compare that to either the 130 bonded s.d. of .266 at 3100 fps or a 140 gr with an SD of .287 or 142 s.d. .291 at 2980 fps.....frontal diameter is not as big of an issue if you stay within the bullet's velocity operating window... this does not even cover the monometals which more than compensate for a lack of s.d. in terms of penetration... the 6.5s all offer this lethality with equal or less recoil than the 06, which of course has it's own obvious benefits. I'm not saying to trade in ye olde 06 for a hot 6.5 but to call the .264 marginal, is too funny. I don't mean to disrespect anyone, but sources that get paid for advertising are suspect.

I'm not quoting sources that get paid for advertising, I'm quoting writers that hunt elk.

Lets see what Ron Spomer uses.

https://ronspomeroutdoors.com/blog/elk-rifle-performance/

https://ronspomeroutdoors.com/blog/bull-elk-bullets-rifles-part-2/

https://ronspomeroutdoors.com/blog/bull-elk-bullets-rifles-part-3/

https://ronspomeroutdoors.com/blog/bull-elk-bullets-rifles-part-4/

If Ron Spomer is so enthralled with shooting bull elk with something less than a 7mm mag why doesn't he use one? Note in part 3 he was hunting deer with a 270, not elk.

I've never read any of his blog so thanks for getting me onto his writing. Good stuff.

 

[RPRNY]

The 160 grs RN from the considerably slower 6.5x55 has long been a reliable killer of moose in Sweden, Norway, and Finland, although 7.62x54R has a big following in the latter. Nordic moose are smaller than NA moose; they are elk sized. How one could imagine that a .284" bullet traveling slightly slower than a . 264" bullet would be " one of the best" and the other "not suitable" is impossible to comprehend.

I am of the 180 grs and .308" school of thought myself but would not doubt the 264 WinMag capable for elk, especially when the younger generation seem to imagine that the .223 is a deer cartridge!

 

[horsey300]

I'm not quoting sources that get paid for advertising, I'm quoting writers that hunt elk.

Lets see what Ron Spomer uses.

https://ronspomeroutdoors.com/blog/elk-rifle-performance/

https://ronspomeroutdoors.com/blog/bull-elk-bullets-rifles-part-2/

https://ronspomeroutdoors.com/blog/bull-elk-bullets-rifles-part-3/

https://ronspomeroutdoors.com/blog/bull-elk-bullets-rifles-part-4/

If Ron Spomer is so enthralled with shooting bull elk with something less than a 7mm mag why doesn't he use one? Note in part 3 he was hunting deer with a 270, not elk.

I've never read any of his blog so thanks for getting me onto his writing. Good stuff.

Thanks for catching that, Spomer advocates both 7 and 6.5 mm over the 30 equivalents, but yes he does leave the 6.5s relegated as long range deer cartridges. I believe Randy Newberg was the one advocating shooting what you can shoot well, he's a sponsored hunter that put out quite a few helpful videos, I can link a few if you'd like, I give him more credit than the general video public as he's not to proud to show his misses either. He harps much more on bonded than diameter.
Wayne van Zwoll too, has championed the .264 cartridges, including taking elk with the .260, the 6.5x284, and 6.5 cm.
I believe if we were to discuss marginal for large game, the .22-250 would be bottom of the barrel followed by others of course, but modern bullet construction has effected a redirection in the definition of the term "marginal".

 

[dickydalton]

I've never hunted elk (darn) but I don't think an elk will stop a 140 grain Partition launched at 3200 FPS. Even when I missed my aim point once on a large deer and hit the left front shoulder first and went through the boiler room and ruined the right rear quarter on the way out. It pretty much de-boned that one.

 

[zb338]

I had a .264 Win. Mag. used it mostly for Groundhog hunting. Made a few really long shots with it.
Took it big game and it fell short with light bullets and wouldn't shoot the heavier bullets accurately
so I sold it. The guy that bought it has shot all sorts of big game and loves it.
Zeke

 

[Gtscotty]

I would use a .264 on elk with the right bullet, In fact I'm planning on shooting a cow or two (if bow season proves unproductive) with my 6.5 CM this year. The only elk I've killed was with a 140gr Accubond out of my .270, and that worked fine. I suspect the similarly constructed higher SD .264 bullet won't let me down on the penetration side. I have every weekend, for three months to pick a good shot though, if I were stuck with a week guided trip or something like that, I'd probably opt for my .270, or '06. While I don't think that they would penetrate any better, I would expect a somewhat larger diameter wound cavity.

 

[cdb1]

What cartridge do you elk hunt with CoalTrain49? Do you think John Barsness was making it up when he stated locals tend to hunt elk with the same cartridges they deer hunt with?

What I find somewhat amusing is the cartridges that were considered excellent on elk 50 years ago that are considered marginal today.

Of course there are exceptions but IME the guys who suffer from magnumitis tend to be the worst shots.

 

[sage5907]

I have no need for a 264 Winchester so I will never own one. I did have a 270 Weatherby so I have a good feel for the cartridge. Even though I will never own a 264 Winchester I am a mule deer hunter and I think the 264 Winchester may be a lucky cartridge. Back in the 1960's a hunter from Texas named Doug Burris shot the largest typical mule deer on record with a 264 Winchester and I was lucky enough to see the mount on the wall in a Cabela's store. If I remember right it was in Sidney, Nebraska. A great looking deer,wide and tall. The buck came from the area between Delores and Norwood, Colorado and I hunted that area several times. I took several deer on Disappointment Creek and I learned where it got it's name!

 

[CoalTrain49]

What cartridge do you elk hunt with CoalTrain49? Do you think John Barsness was making it up when he stated locals tend to hunt elk with the same cartridges they deer hunt with?

What I find somewhat amusing is the cartridges that were considered excellent on elk 50 years ago that are considered marginal today.

Of course there are exceptions but IME the guys who suffer from magnumitis tend to be the worst shots.

I don't hunt anymore. I bought a 7 mm mag in 1970 (AZ) to hunt with. Never shot an elk but shot some mule deer with it. That cartridge can zip a 160 gr bullet along without a lot of drop. Probably why it became so popular.

No, I don't think he's making it up. People use whatever they have to hunt with. When I started hunting in the 60's nobody I knew hunted with a magnum anything. My brother lived and hunted in WY for years in the 70's and never used a mag until I gave him mine. A lot of 270's and 06's were used for both deer and elk in those days. I also saw some surplus Enfields and Mausers in use because they were cheap. Some very nice rifles were built using 7x57 Mauser actions and barrels.

I'm not sure where you got the idea that I'm a fan of magnums. Maybe that wasn't directed at me, I don't know. I'm a fan of using 30 something for anything larger than a mule deer, whether that's a mag or not. Given the fact that most elk are shot under 150 yards I would say a 308 is plenty. If I were buying a large game rifle today it would probably be a 308. There is no law that says you have to take a 300> yd. shot.

Still not a fan of light fast bullets and small holes (264). Too much hype by ammo companies these days about bullet design. Most people don't shoot enough large game to know if those bullets actually work. I'll go with what I know and leave the ballistics calculations to the rocket scientists here.

 

[cdb1]

"Magnumitis" was not aimed at you CoalTrain. I also believe .270, .264 WinMag, 7x57, .280 Rem and 7MM-08 are good elk cartridges. I also believe there is trend that's going back to sub-30 caliber cartridges for elk and moose.

 

[cdb1]

Duplicate post.

 

[cdb1]

Duplicate post.

 

[Gtscotty]

Just to add scale to the discussion, here are some of the bullets we are taking about lined up.


Accubonds, L to R: 140gr .264, 140gr .277, 180gr .308

Certainly a display of minor differences, do we really expect the bullets above to perform radically differently at similar speeds? Perhaps a bit deeper penetration here, a bit wider wound channel there, but...


Edit to add token picture of some other 6.5 bullet options:



L to R: 127gr LRX, 130gr Accubond, 140gr Accubond, 140gr Custom Competition, 143gr ELDx.

 

[Llama Bob]

Elk and moose, Seriously?

Absolutely. The .264 160gr loads have a hundred years of history on moose and elk/red deer. With modern bullets like the Weldcore the situation has only improved. I'm quite confident of pass through performance from any direction - certainly more likely than with the 150-180gr .308s.

 

[CoalTrain49]

Absolutely. The .264 160gr loads have a hundred years of history on moose and elk/red deer. With modern bullets like the Weldcore the situation has only improved. I'm quite confident of pass through performance from any direction - certainly more likely than with the 150-180gr .308s.

I'm not finding any 160 gr factory hunting loads for any 6.5 mm cartridges.

308 factory hunting loads start at 140 gr and go up to 180 gr. All fairly common.

6.5 mm isn't even in the same league as 7 mm and especially 7.62 mm for large game.

Shoot it if you want, it's a free country.

 

[LoonWulf]

http://www.doubletapammo.net/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=544

Ive shot 800-1000lb cows, which are the largest game im likely to find here in hawaii, with 162, and 175grn cup and core bullets, from my 7mm Rem, and 7mm stw. Id be comfortable shooting them with the .264 launching any of the good 140-160s

But your right, every ones free to use what ever they like, and ill never say anything bad about some one using the largest caliber/cartridge they are comfortable with.

 

[Gtscotty]

6.5 mm isn't even in the same league as 7 mm and especially 7.62 mm for large game.

You must have shot a lot of large game with all three to have developed such a strongly held conviction.... Do tell.

I make a concerted effort not throw around broad absolute statements on topics that I don't really have any experience with. There is definitely no shortage of folks on the internet willing to tell you exactly how and how not to do something they've never done... It is what it is I guess.

 

[Llama Bob]

http://www.doubletapammo.net/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=544

That's a good find. I was planning to load that bullet myself, but I'll probably see how the factory ammo shoots too.

Most of the heavy 6.5 caliber loads are European and often times have non-round grain weights being that they have the metric system over there... For example, Norma sells 156gr Oryx loads in both 6.5x55 and 6.5x284.

Having some sort of debate on the effectiveness of 6.5mm on large thin skinned game is a waste of time. Every year tens of thousands of moose are shot in Sweden with the 6.5x55, mostly with the 160 or 156gr but some 140gr. It works. We knew it worked a million moose ago. There is simply no doubt.

 

[CoalTrain49]

You must have shot a lot of large game with all three to have developed such a strongly held conviction.... Do tell.

I make a concerted effort not throw around broad absolute statements on topics that I don't really have any experience with. There is definitely no shortage of folks on the internet willing to tell you exactly how and how not to do something they've never done... It is what it is I guess.

I'm not telling anyone not to use a 6.5 to hunt elk. The OP said the 264 WM would be an acceptable elk cartridge. I just disagree. So do lots of other people.

Like I said, use any 6.5 mm you desire to shoot a 700 pound bull. You will certainly be in a very small minority.

There is plenty of good advice from people who know what it takes to anchor a bull elk if you care to read up on it. Or better yet, call a few people who guide and get their opinion. Here's a few to get you started. Let me know if anyone recommends anything smaller than 7 mm. I'll back up if you do.

My favorite gun is a 338 mag with 225 nosler partition bullets

http://jmbaroutfitters.com/elk-hunts/

Elk are extremely tough animals. We recommend that our hunters shoot a Bolt Action rifle equipped with a quality scope. The Winchester "Short Magnums" in .270, 7mm, & .300 are all excellent choices as well as other magnum calibers (270 and larger). Choose bullets constructed for large, thick-skinned game.

http://www.chappellguideservice.com/hunt_preparation

No need to get personal about it. Do some research. Or maybe you recommend a 6.5 for elk because you happen to live in WY and have shot lots of them with a 6.5. WTH knows?

 

[Llama Bob]

I've shot my fair share of elk, and while .270 may be the practical minimum of common US calibers, .264 EASILY outperforms it - heavier weights and MUCH higher SDs, which is the single most important thing as animals get bigger.

 

[RPRNY]

I'm not finding any 160 gr factory hunting loads for any 6.5 mm cartridges.

308 factory hunting loads start at 140 gr and go up to 180 gr. All fairly common.

6.5 mm isn't even in the same league as 7 mm and especially 7.62 mm for large game.

Shoot it if you want, it's a free country.

160 grs at 2800 from the 264 WinMag. . 264"

http://www.hodgdonreloading.com/data/rifle

160 grs at 2900 from the 7mm Mag . 284"

http://www.hodgdonreloading.com/data/rifle

I prefer 180grs at 2800 from the 30-06 for elk, but there is no question the WinMag will put elk down just as well. That "the 6.5 mm isn't even in the same league" is however very questionable.

 

[Llama Bob]

160 grs at 2800 from the 264 WinMag. . 264"

http://www.hodgdonreloading.com/data/rifle

160 grs at 2900 from the 7mm Mag . 284"

http://www.hodgdonreloading.com/data/rifle

The Hodgdon data is very conservative for both. Fastest SAAMI legal load is probably 150 ft/s faster. Retumbo or 7828ssc for single base powders in .264.

 

[mshootnit]

I had a friend that shot all sizes of deer with a 7mn Mag. He said at times it almost seemed like too much.

 

[CoalTrain49]

160 grs at 2800 from the 264 WinMag. . 264"

http://www.hodgdonreloading.com/data/rifle

160 grs at 2900 from the 7mm Mag . 284"

http://www.hodgdonreloading.com/data/rifle

I prefer 180grs at 2800 from the 30-06 for elk, but there is no question the WinMag will put elk down just as well. That "the 6.5 mm isn't even in the same league" is however very questionable.

If we are comparing a 7 mm mag to a 264 mag lets go to the heaviest bullet either can use.

Can a 264 move a 175 grn bullet at 2800 fps? I'm not seeing any loading data that would suggest that.

In all respects the 7 mm mag is equal to a 30-06.

I guess it's a matter of semantics.

 

[CoalTrain49]

I had a friend that shot all sizes of deer with a 7mn Mag. He said at times it almost seemed like too much.

It is too much. Shot a few myself.