264 WM.

win39 · 02-08-2008, 05:43 AM

Just for the sake of starting a thread. I would like to hear every one's opinion and experiences on the 246 WM. I am thinking of making this my next project and would like to here Pr's & con's. I have always been drawn to what a lot of people call barrel burners. I have had 220 swift, 223 WSSM, 6MM improved (Nice). So I think the 264 WM is my next project.

samuel · 02-08-2008, 06:29 AM

Go for it.Great casing with a lot of powder capacity for slower burning powders in longer barrels. sam.

nathangdad · 02-08-2008, 08:51 AM

This cartridge did not start off very well. It developed a quick reputation for quickly wearing out (or burning out) the bore. If you check old articles about this cartridge you will find claims of barrel (accuracy) failure in as little as 900 rounds.

However, there are those who claim that with powders on today's market (not available for the cartridge's introduction) the .264 WM has become a viable cartridge.

I suggest you begin with a good handloading magazine to find those with current expertise, get some new handloading manuals that include the .264 WM, and perhaps consider contacting a few custom barrel makers. In this way you will move forward with confidence. This really might be a great project for you to pursue!

silvermallard · 02-08-2008, 09:14 AM

The 264 is a wonderful cartridge and greatly underappreciated. Very flat shooting and extremely accurate. Fully capable of taking pronghorn to elk and moose with the right bullets. And the best part is that it does all this without excessive recoil. I get 10 or more reloads out of each case. The one in 9 twist rate seems to work best with the heavier bullets. Barrel burning is a non issue. The only load I have not been able to get satisfactory results with is the 160grn Hornady round nose. Throws them all over the paper. I get one hole groups with 140 grn Remington core lokt, Nosler partition, and Hornady spire points. The 264 is probably the best kept secret out there. Have fun.

texnmidwest · 02-08-2008, 09:38 AM

The 264 is a great round. Build it up with a 26 inch barrel and it performs like a champ. Build it with a shorter barrel and you have a loud 270. What killed the 264 was the 7mm rem mag.

I had a doctor friend who shot a 264 win mag. in a pre 64 winchester model 70. I saw him hit a feral cat at well over 400 yards by just resting the rifle over the hood of his truck. There was stiff cross wind as well. And believe me when I say that was no accident. He picked his shots well and could hit anything he shot at. He definitely had a lot of confidence in that rifle and round.

win39 · 02-08-2008, 09:42 AM

This is great information, and added to what I have already acquired this definitely helps. Well I guess I have to make a trip to the pawn shop to see if I can find an old action to put this on. I will talk to my gunsmith to see what barrel he recommends. I can almost guarantee it will be a Hart stainless. Now I have been pondering weather to go with the 26" barrel or drop of to the 24". It will be a sport er style barrel because I have enough heavy varminters.

I seen an old Winchester 70 XTR 264 WM in the pawn shop the other day but he wanted to much for the gun.

Thanks for the information, I am now more hyped about this project then ever.

samuel · 02-08-2008, 09:53 AM

I would go with the 26" so I could get the most out of slower powders like IMR 4831 and reloader 22 and others. sam.

win39 · 02-08-2008, 12:26 PM

Sam: I think I will take your advice and use the 26" barrel with a 1-9" twist. I just came from the pawn shop, but they only had a Win. XTR. I want to use the CRF action. I am going to go with the hart or Krieger match grade barrel. I don't know when this project will start, but I can't wait. II've got one more pawn shop to check for an action.

ezearln · 02-08-2008, 01:05 PM

A point here if I may, one of the things that caused the early demise of the .220 Swift was what also caused concern about the .264WM. Extremely high velocities caused extreme bore erosion in early rifles chambered for both these cartridges. The metallurgy involved in todays firearm manufacter being significantly improved this has become a non issue. The .264 is by all accounts is a spiffy choice and obscenely accurate so as far as I can see just get newer manufacture rifle of assemblies to complete your rifle and you'll be a happy camper.

win39 · 02-08-2008, 01:40 PM

I know as soon as I build this rifle that a manufacture is going to start building this again or have limited run..

02-08-2008, 05:43 AM	#1
win39 Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 201	264 WM. Just for the sake of starting a thread. I would like to hear every one's opinion and experiences on the 246 WM. I am thinking of making this my next project and would like to here Pr's & con's. I have always been drawn to what a lot of people call barrel burners. I have had 220 swift, 223 WSSM, 6MM improved (Nice). So I think the 264 WM is my next project. __________________ Benny

02-08-2008, 08:51 AM	#3
nathangdad Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 2,925	It did not start off very well . . . . This cartridge did not start off very well. It developed a quick reputation for quickly wearing out (or burning out) the bore. If you check old articles about this cartridge you will find claims of barrel (accuracy) failure in as little as 900 rounds. However, there are those who claim that with powders on today's market (not available for the cartridge's introduction) the .264 WM has become a viable cartridge. I suggest you begin with a good handloading magazine to find those with current expertise, get some new handloading manuals that include the .264 WM, and perhaps consider contacting a few custom barrel makers. In this way you will move forward with confidence. This really might be a great project for you to pursue!

02-08-2008, 09:38 AM	#5
texnmidwest Where's that Coyote?! Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: South east Wisconsin Posts: 4,259	The 264 is a great round. Build it up with a 26 inch barrel and it performs like a champ. Build it with a shorter barrel and you have a loud 270. What killed the 264 was the 7mm rem mag. I had a doctor friend who shot a 264 win mag. in a pre 64 winchester model 70. I saw him hit a feral cat at well over 400 yards by just resting the rifle over the hood of his truck. There was stiff cross wind as well. And believe me when I say that was no accident. He picked his shots well and could hit anything he shot at. He definitely had a lot of confidence in that rifle and round. __________________ "Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati" (If all else fails play dead)

02-08-2008, 09:42 AM	#6
win39 Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 201	This is great information, and added to what I have already acquired this definitely helps. Well I guess I have to make a trip to the pawn shop to see if I can find an old action to put this on. I will talk to my gunsmith to see what barrel he recommends. I can almost guarantee it will be a Hart stainless. Now I have been pondering weather to go with the 26" barrel or drop of to the 24". It will be a sport er style barrel because I have enough heavy varminters. I seen an old Winchester 70 XTR 264 WM in the pawn shop the other day but he wanted to much for the gun. Thanks for the information, I am now more hyped about this project then ever. __________________ Benny

02-08-2008, 12:26 PM	#8
win39 Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 201	Sam: I think I will take your advice and use the 26" barrel with a 1-9" twist. I just came from the pawn shop, but they only had a Win. XTR. I want to use the CRF action. I am going to go with the hart or Krieger match grade barrel. I don't know when this project will start, but I can't wait. II've got one more pawn shop to check for an action. __________________ Benny

02-08-2008, 06:29 AM	#2
samuel Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 5,237	Go for it.Great casing with a lot of powder capacity for slower burning powders in longer barrels. sam.

02-08-2008, 09:14 AM	#4
silvermallard Registered User Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 4	The 264 is a wonderful cartridge and greatly underappreciated. Very flat shooting and extremely accurate. Fully capable of taking pronghorn to elk and moose with the right bullets. And the best part is that it does all this without excessive recoil. I get 10 or more reloads out of each case. The one in 9 twist rate seems to work best with the heavier bullets. Barrel burning is a non issue. The only load I have not been able to get satisfactory results with is the 160grn Hornady round nose. Throws them all over the paper. I get one hole groups with 140 grn Remington core lokt, Nosler partition, and Hornady spire points. The 264 is probably the best kept secret out there. Have fun.

02-08-2008, 09:53 AM	#7
samuel Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 5,237	I would go with the 26" so I could get the most out of slower powders like IMR 4831 and reloader 22 and others. sam.

02-08-2008, 01:05 PM	#9
ezearln Senior Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Texas Hill Country Posts: 3,175	A point here if I may, one of the things that caused the early demise of the .220 Swift was what also caused concern about the .264WM. Extremely high velocities caused extreme bore erosion in early rifles chambered for both these cartridges. The metallurgy involved in todays firearm manufacter being significantly improved this has become a non issue. The .264 is by all accounts is a spiffy choice and obscenely accurate so as far as I can see just get newer manufacture rifle of assemblies to complete your rifle and you'll be a happy camper. __________________ "You can have my Freedom when I'm done with it!"

02-08-2008, 01:40 PM	#10
win39 Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 201	I know as soon as I build this rifle that a manufacture is going to start building this again or have limited run.. __________________ Benny