40-year-AZ-hunter Report post Posted January 4, 2011 I have a pre-64 Winchester model 70 Westerner .264 magnum that I've owned for 35 years and rarely shot. Recently, I got to thinking that I should see if I could equip it for shooting 400-500 yards. Trouble is, I have not found a load that seems to work well in it. Most of the loads I've tried have been with components I've had on the shelf for many years. Sierra and Hornady 120-140 gr spitzer bullets, IMR 4350 and 4831 powder. Most of the loads I've tried have grouped in the 2-3 moa range. The best shooting load is Remington 140gr Core-Lokt factory loads at just over 1 moa. I know bullets and powders have been improved over the years and am thinking that I need to try some "modern" bullets. Do any of you have suggestions for a brand/type that is particularly accurate, especially in 6.5mm? At this point, I'm not really interested in the likely performance on game, but rather in working up an accurate load. I'll worry about whether it's a bullet suitable for game later. The rifle would be used for both deer species in AZ and antelope (if I ever get that lucky). If you happen to shoot a .264 mag and have a specific load that has worked well for you and would share the info, that would be wonderful too. Thanks for any suggestions. Bruce Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
yotebuster Report post Posted January 4, 2011 It's not worth the effort, just sell it to me!!!!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jeffro Report post Posted January 4, 2011 I would look at the 140 berger, 140 Amaxs, and the 140 SMK bullets. These bullets will also work well on game. These bullets also have higher BCs than most bullets. As for powder, both 4350 and 4831 will work. You can use IMR or Hodgen. If your rifle is shooting 2-3 MOA there may be a problem with it, and maybe not so much the load you are using. I would look at your bedding first. Good trigger. Crown. Scope bolts. Even if I have a load that the rifle doesnt like it wont shoot 2-3 MOA. Bad loads shoot around 1.5 or so. Hope this is a start. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Red Rabbit Report post Posted January 4, 2011 I had a 264 for a while. Try the slower powders like H1000, Retumbo, Ramshot Magnum. 130 grain Swift Scirocco II , Berger or Accubond would be bullets I would try. Don't know what twist you have. John Barsness had an article in the Feb 2005 Handloader magazine about reloading the 264 with modern powders. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
308Nut Report post Posted January 4, 2011 jeffro has some great advice. I too would be looking at bedding it, making sure the barrel is free floating, scope mounts etc.... and a big +1 on the 140 Amax. 2-3 MOA seems pretty bad even with loads she does not like. It likely is something other than the load. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
40-year-AZ-hunter Report post Posted January 4, 2011 Thanks Jeffro. I have found over the years that older rifles (and this rifle was made 50 years ago) seem to be more sensitive to load development and are probably not as inherently accurate as new rifles. Old rifles had wood stocks which as you point out are more problematic bedding. The triggers (factory) were not as crisp and the advancement in making barrels all tend to argue against the older factory rifles. Since this rifle is worth more in original condition, I dont want to modify it. If I cant fing a load I'm satisfied with, I'll just put it back in the safe. I will be very happy with a load that will consistently shoot 1 MOA. I'm hoping that the stock rifle is capable of that since it will shoot Remington factory loads at just a little worse than 1 MOA. I've also got a pre-64 featherweight .264 that I bought 20 years ago. I only shot it one session and IT shot 3-4 moa. The pre-64 .264s never caught on and I think one reason was the inherent inaccuracy of the loads available back then. I'm hoping that with some better bullets I can improve it enough to feel comfortable taking it hunting. I'm hoping that the improvements that have been made in components, especially bullets, will let me achieve my goal. I have to believe modern bullets are more consistent than 35 year vintage Sierras and Hornadys. Someone told me that 6.5mm bullets were kind of a second class stepchild back in the day. heck, part of the problem is probably that I'm not as steady as I was 35 years ago either! Thanks for the names of some brands to look at. A 140 gr would be great. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
roninflag Report post Posted January 5, 2011 reloadersnest and longrangehunting are other sources. my brother uses re-25 and h-1000 in his .264 . older guns- my sakos from 1966 are unbelieveable. the triggers , barrels/accuracy, wood to metal fit. 46 years and they do not make factory rifles like that. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NYAZHunter Report post Posted January 5, 2011 I have a pre-64 Winchester model 70 Westerner .264 magnum that I've owned for 35 years and rarely shot. Recently, I got to thinking that I should see if I could equip it for shooting 400-500 yards. Trouble is, I have not found a load that seems to work well in it. Most of the loads I've tried have been with components I've had on the shelf for many years. Sierra and Hornady 120-140 gr spitzer bullets, IMR 4350 and 4831 powder. Most of the loads I've tried have grouped in the 2-3 moa range. The best shooting load is Remington 140gr Core-Lokt factory loads at just over 1 moa. I know bullets and powders have been improved over the years and am thinking that I need to try some "modern" bullets. Do any of you have suggestions for a brand/type that is particularly accurate, especially in 6.5mm? At this point, I'm not really interested in the likely performance on game, but rather in working up an accurate load. I'll worry about whether it's a bullet suitable for game later. The rifle would be used for both deer species in AZ and antelope (if I ever get that lucky). If you happen to shoot a .264 mag and have a specific load that has worked well for you and would share the info, that would be wonderful too. Thanks for any suggestions. Bruce I own one of these beasts as well , heavy rifle to carry . It resides in N.Y and when i fire it the guys say I am just clearing brush with it. It surely will wake you up. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MattMan Report post Posted January 5, 2011 The king of 6.5s... Fed 215 Primers, WW Brass is pretty consistent, and is a seasonal item. Accurate MagPro for 120s, RamShot Magnum for 140s... being ball powder, both meter like WATER. Find that issue of Handloader and work up from there. I'm able to very accurately knock on 3100 with 140s coated in moly and have tight primer pockets. Bergers give a little more than reliable expansion at 264 velocity inside 300 or so. GREAT in a 260, but in the 264 I'd stick to Accubonds or similar. If you want a pretty frangible bullet, the 123/140 AMAX trump Berger IMHO. As for the accuracy of your rifle, give it one heck of a cleaning with some witch's brew or jb bore paste till you're to bare metal, and take a look at the throat and how far you have to chase to find lands. Bore/throat might be toast if some guy was practicing like he should to hit at 500... if you've got a keeper, load it up and practice, practice, practice. You're gonna get bored waiting for that 264 tube to cool down, so I'd take more than one to practice with at a time. Might want to try shooting some steel at 300 or so, and see what it does. 1 moa is roughly a 5" circle @500, btw. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
40-year-AZ-hunter Report post Posted January 6, 2011 Hey Matt, Thanks for the info! I've got a couple questions if you dont mind. I've reloaded for 40+ years but never tried for nats-butt groups, therefore, I've always worried more about the bullet and powder to use than the particular brand of cases or primers. Do you have any thoughts on how much difference it really makes to use Federal 215s versus other primers like Remington or CCI? The same question for cases, ie SuperX versus Remington? I have cleaned the gun well with Sweets and Hoppes. The bore looks perfect to me. The lands are sharp right to the front of the chamber. Another question (sorry, but as I mentioned, all my stuff and experience is with decades old components) regards "moly coated" that you mentioned. How do I know whether a particular brand of bullet is so coated? Thanks again!!!! Bruce Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jeffro Report post Posted January 6, 2011 Coated bullets will look dark grey. You can use different primers, they can change a load a bit. Just try out some different ones and see what the load likes. As far as your cases make sure they are all on the same # of firings. IE: fired 3 times. And that they are all the same headstamp/lot # if you can. This will help control your neck tension which is very critical for longrange accuracy, and your ESs. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MattMan Report post Posted January 6, 2011 I use Federal Gold Medal primers almost exclusively... and buy a BUNCH from the same lot# at one time... have had nothing less than stellar results with them. GM 215s have been pretty scarce for a while, but they seem to be coming back online and availability is improving. Had good luck with CCI them too.... never used a Rem primer other than 209s in a shotgun or muzzleloader. I'd not swap primers without backing off and starting development over. Winchester 264 brass is produced in small lots and is VERY consistent. I've never tried R-P brass in a 264. I moly coat my own bullets in case tumbler. Bare bullets are copper colored. Moly bullets, silver/gray, and some winchester bullets are black (lubalox methinks). Moly requires a grain or two more powder to produce like velocity, cause it's slick. It also may allow slightly higher velocity, again, cause it's slick. Not enough extra FPS to be worth it. Only reason to use it is it allows a guy to shoot different bullets to the same POI, instead of cleaning and re-sighting. So a guy can shoot AMAX for routine practice, and accubonds for game, for instance, without having to re-verify zero when swapping back and forth. Just verify dope for the accubond separately and go hunt. I use moly in everything. The new powders really do change the game, as they're slow enough to make the 264 come alive, especially in that 26" tube... if you can run Sweet's and it comes out clean, it's clean. Witches brew is great if you can find some. Two passes and clean, no ammonia. Smells like pine-sol. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
yotebuster Report post Posted January 6, 2011 be careful with moly bullets! I had a 70's vintage Mod 700 in .17 rem that I was in love with growing up. It shot wayyy sub MOA and knocked off more then it's share of ND jackrabbits, yotes and even a few deer. Anyhow, I decided to try moly bullets in it and they began to keyhole. I did a little research and found out that it was because they were so slick they were missing the rifling (probably almost washed out anyhow) well after extensive cleaning and switching back to non moly bullets, it never shot again (with that barrel). It would keyhole every shot from there on out. I will never shoot a moly bullet again. Perhaps there is research/experience out there that might say different, but I would never use them in an awesome vintage gun like yours. It's not worth risking the barrel IMO. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MattMan Report post Posted January 6, 2011 If moly ruined your barrel, it was ruined already... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
yotebuster Report post Posted January 6, 2011 If moly ruined your barrel, it was ruined already... It shot right up until I started using them. Not saying that it wasn't close, just warning the guy not to use them in a gun that may be in the same state as my barrel was. I have no reservations about rebarreling a 700, but if it was a pre-64 model 70, it'd be a different story. If there were any real benefit to using them (I know all of the "benefits" of moly, I'm talking boots on the ground, real benefits worth potentially wrecking your rifle over) then it would be worth it. I would just shy away from them in this case as there are so many other awesome options out there for it. My $0.02 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
