The .264 Winchester Magnum would rise from dead only if ammunition manufacturers could see a profit to make from this resurection, then invest in advertising and in R&D, and manage to convince the big bulk of average hunters (the ones who they make money from) that the .264 is the new rage. This failing to happen, then this calibre should only be kept alive thanks to hand-loaders.

The .264 is an awesome cartridge that I briefly used ages ago, which probably fell in disgrace because ammunition makers flooded the market with new products that were presented as being the new panacea; then, as the cartridge didn’t sold as much, major rifle makers stopped chambering new rifles in this caliber, and the .264 started spiralling down. This is a well known scenario and an almost similar fate occurred to the European 6,5x68.

When the 6,5x68 was created in the late 30’s, it was a really innovative calibre with much better performances in terms of initial velocity and flat trajectory than most existing European calibers, out of which the 7x64. The 6,5x68 was then, and probably until the 70’s or 80’s one of the European mountain calibres of reference.

Let’s now refer to the 2018-2019 RWS catalog in order to see where the 6,5x68 currently stands in comparison to the European 7x64:

• 6,5x68 / Bullet: KS 8,2 grams - 127 grains/ MRD: 197 m – 215 y/ V0: 950 m/s – 3116 f/s/ E0: 3700 J/ Drop at 250 m: -8 cm - -3,15 in/ Price: Euro 110
• 7x64/ Bullet: KS 8 grams - 123 grains/ MRD: 195 m – 213 y/ V0: 965 m/s – 3166 f/s/ E0: 3725 J/ Drop at 250 m: -9,1 cm - -3,6 in/ Price: Euro 70

Over the last decades RWS has kept the 6,5x68 – a niche calibre, alive (only two choices of bullets) while they have invested a lot in R&D for their best sellers. As shown in the above table, the 7x64 performances (and choice of bullets, 9) are now on par with the 6,5x68 when using an almost similar bullet. Unless for the pride of shooting a 6,5x68 there is not anymore rationale for not using a 7x64 / 7x65 R for mountain hunting, which I personnally do; ammunition cost 50% to 70% less and rifle will be much lighter (because of the magnum profile of the 6,5x68 barrel) to carry during long mountain days.

Trends being now global it is not surprising to see that the situation is similar on the far side of the Atlantic Ocean and that the comparison 6,5x68 / 7x64 also applies to the .264 Winchester Magnum / .270 Winchester, should we rely on data provided by the Winchester Online Ballistics Calculator:

• .264 Win Mag/ Bullet: 140 grains/ V0: 3030 ft/s/ E0: 2851 ft-lbs/s/ Drop at 300 y: -11,4 in/ Price (Cabelas online): USD 50
• .270 Win/ Bullet: 130 grains/ V0: 3060 ft/s/ E0: 2700 ft-lbs/s/ Drop at 300 y: -11,2 in/ Price (Cabelas online): USD 23

Based on the above data, why should the average North American hunter that does not re-load priviledge the use of the .264 over the .270; performances are almost similar (at least on paper) and prices range from 1 to 2?

Please don’t shoot at the messenger. I only wanted to demonstrate that if the .264 Winchester Magnum is to rise from dead it will only happen because the largest ammunition manufacturers would see a profit to make from this and will then organise the resurection. If not, as mentioned on top of this paper, this awesome calibre will only be kept alive (as many awesome calibres not anymore financially profitable enough for large manufacturers) thanks to hand-loaders and to some small ammunition makers specialising on niche calibres.

Louis