Remington Model 700 - .264 win mag 

I'm with you, I bought my 264 in 1968 Rem 700 BDL, unfortunately that rifle was stolen 4 years ago, so I bought a 700 action and my nephew built me another 264 26 inch barrel. I love that caliber, if anyone doubts the 264 look up Ron Spomer"s 264 win mag article, the 264 out performs the 270,and the 7mm win mag hands down. Better BC and energy down range to 500 yds. I didn't get on the Creedmore train either, but I built a Grendel for happy times.

Great video! I have a .264 Win Mag in a Remington Model 700 Sondero. Antelope just hate that round, not safe at 600 yards. I never got on the Creedmore craze my self.

Bought a Remington 700 in 7mm about 10 years ago and just could’nt devolpe that relationship with the 7mm…tried twice. Took rifle to smith at Corlanes in BC and had it rechambered for 264 win mag with 1:8” rot. They tried hard to push the 26 Nosler but I went with the 264 and that thing is one of my favourites by far. Take elk, deer and coyotes with 140grain VLD. Happy to see someone put a descent video out…thanks!

Shoot 700 BDL 264 win mag for over 30 years, and my ole ss barrel loved the 140 nozzler factory rounds. Had some teloaded with same, but had a couple three grains added to all my factory brass I'd saved over the years. Shot just as true with those as it did with factory rounds. Picked it up from my uncle who bought it new in the mid 60's according to my dad. Him and my uncle his younger brother hunted Colorado western side of the rockies mule deer, and few elk back then. Had old 4 X fixed weaver on it when I got it. Was accurate, but i don't know how he was knocking them down from one mountain peak to the other with the darn thing, but he had the mounts to prove it. I hunted all over Texas with it, as long as i wasn't in thick cover, are if i was had a high enough stand to get one in a sendaro, or clearing it wasn't problem reaching aways out there to make clean neck shot. But littlest twig would send them into orbit, like skipping 22LR off the surface of a pond. The ole man passed away, and I just lost the desire to hunt seriously after that. Hunted with him and my uncle since I was small enough that i couldn't carry the ole man's 1903 Springfield 06 converted to monte carlo stock without dragging the but on the ground. Bout 5 or 6 is best I remember, and I was in my late 40's when he passed. So my nephew out S.C. has it now, but he says can't afford to shoot it. I been telling him that he's got plenty of factory brass that was supposed to have been with it when his dad carried it to him, and he needs to either learn to reload himself or find someone he trust that reloads his own and have him do it with his brass. But he says he's got his 243 and his grand dad's ole Springfield 06, and rounds are cheap for those. I tried explaining that those or nice, if you like loping over the moon, and ruffling the hair on ones back. But he doesn't know what a real long rifle is until he learns to shoot as well as the 264 is capable of doing. He thinks that I'm full of stuffing about how accurate at distance my ole head knocked is, and that he will have to put couple boxes of shells through it to understand that he's the weakest link in that guns limits. Rugar picked up the caliber in the late 80's early 90's I thought, they never made a go of it either. I know there was a bunch if talk about burning the barrels out after few hundred rounds back in the day, but i can't tell you how many hundreds of rounds i put through mine, because I use to make money off of fellas thought their 300's and 7 mags could out shoot me. Very few ever put as many in tight a group as me, and my stainless steel barrel looked as good as when I got it. But i took care of it too, and never let it just get fouled with burnt powder for who knows how long, and kept shooting it as i suspected those who claimed the barrels didn't last in them. I think the 300 mag and 7 mag came out about 8 years or so later, and everyone picked those up, and the 264 fell out of popularity cause if that myself.

Bought a .264 belted magnum in a Rem. 700 back in 1972. Got many “notches in the wood” from 50 to 250 yards. Any well placed shot is a guarantee with this very accurate tool. I shoot mostly head shots (saves more meat) when possible. Have made a few moving shots but also have had 3 “get away” AKA missed shots. Pilot error of course😖. I too wish there were up to date charts with proper powders and ballistics up to 400 yards.

I’ve been using my 264mag since the mid-90’s. The 140gr always worked but after wearing the barrel out, over 1000 rds, I rebarreled with a 1:8.5 twist. It still likes the 140’s and the 156’s. The 156gr is more accurate once I exceed 500yds.

Ill take one in a winchester model 70 in a pre64

I have a 264 wing mag mines a Mauser custom vey accurate I’m using 140 grn sst at the moment, I another 6.5 I have a 6.5x55 swed tikka t3 which also like both do the job if I do mine

6.5 prc FACTORY Federal 130 terminal ascent in my 24 inch Bergara Premier approach. Low 3060 high 3114...in a short action.

Anyway sport Id have a 264 than 6.5 crapmore anyday😅

Bring back the .264! or at least lower the price of the ammunition for christ sake

Ya gotta love a 700!