[bnorton325]

Hey everyone...just wanted to throw this out there and see what the opinions were. I already own a gorgeous 700 LSS in a 270 wsm...but I have a chance to get a 700 CDL fluted in a .264 at a great price. Other than it being a good deal (and the fact that you can never have enough guns), is there any reason to get the .264. Will it do anything my .270 wsm wont do? Are there any pros or cons I dont know about? I've read all the barrell burnout and throat erosion stories...but is that still a problem with the barrells used today? I look forward to hearing your imput!

[Magnumsrule]

From wht ive heard is that the stories of it being a barrel burner are false. It however does kick almost the same as the 7mm mag. The 264 would shoot flatter than ur 270 wsm but will not produce huge advantagous results over ur 270 wsm. I would buy it if its a good deal though, like u said cant have enough guns!

[270wsm]

According to my shooter's bible,the .270WSM shoots flatter than the .264WM.And also,averages about 200 fps faster and 200ft-lbs more energy.
However this does not mean the .270WSM is a better caliber.
Like I said according to my shooter's bible the .270WSM out performs the .264WM in every way.(of course we are talking a couple hundred fps and a couple hundred ft-lbs.)

[leroy]

you cant beat a good deal on a nice rifle. and with a gun like that i dnt think you would loose money if you dont like it an want to sell it

[270wsm]

Regardless of the advantages or disadvantages over/under your current rifle,that is a really good rifle in a really good caliber!
I would say "GO FOR IT" and make the purchase!

[Midas]

I would choose the .270 WSM, it's more common, and has better ballistics.

[samuel]

.270WSM:A couple hundred in either fps or ft lbs is a lot. And yes,the .270WSM does beat the .264win but the .264 is a great antelope gun and works well on deer at longer ranges.(300yds+). sam.

[bnorton325]

Thanks for the imput guys. I really like my 270 wsm. It shoots great, looks good and is proven (it put 2 deer in the freezer this year). The deal on the .264 came along and was a good one. So I'll add it to the collection and I'm sure it will come in handy with my upcoming move to OK later this spring. I just wanted to see what the "experts" had to say on the matter...ok im lying...I was just looking for someone to tell me to get it so that I felt like it was justified!!!

[270wsm]

Where you headed-Ft.Sill?or however it is spelled.

Sam,
again,according to Shooters bible the .264(with factory loads) drops 7" at 300yds,and 20" at 400yds.
Whereas the .270WSM drops 5.7" at 300yds and 16" at 400 yds.
Point being,there is nothing that you could do with the .264WM that you couldn't do with the .270WSM.
I would like to have the .264WM myself though!

[Magnumsrule]

I will repent my previous input that said the 264 was flatter shooting. According to the gun digest 2008 edition the 264 has 3030fps at the muzzle and -18inch at 400 yards. The 270wsm has 3125 at the muzzle and -16.1 at 400 yards. Not much difference but there u are.

[270wsm]

Magnumsrule,
Yeah,my shooters bible is a few years old now so,the info I gave may be a wee bit outdated.

was the info for the .264WM a 140 grain bullet?

[Magnumsrule]

Of course we could bring up how the 6.55 diameter would have a better sectional density. And the infor was a 264 and 270wsm 140 grain.