My uncle used the 264 Win Mag to excellent effect in the late '50s and the '60s.
I think there were several factors, starting with anti-metric bias. The rifle also developed a reputation for being a barrel-burner like the .220 Swift.
Probably the biggest blow was the advent of inexpensive chronographs. Folks discovered that Winchester had rounded up the velocity to an uncomfortable degree. The resulting velocities were only slightly higher than the .270 Winchester for the same weight bullets. Tha coincidence coupled nicely with the anti-metric bias.
In truth, having the same muzzle velocity for the same same bullet weight makes the 6.5 superior to the 270. The cartridges with "270-like" game harvesting potential and trajectories are the 260 Remington and the 6.5 Creedmoor.
I think there were several factors, starting with anti-metric bias. The rifle also developed a reputation for being a barrel-burner like the .220 Swift.
Probably the biggest blow was the advent of inexpensive chronographs. Folks discovered that Winchester had rounded up the velocity to an uncomfortable degree. The resulting velocities were only slightly higher than the .270 Winchester for the same weight bullets. Tha coincidence coupled nicely with the anti-metric bias.
In truth, having the same muzzle velocity for the same same bullet weight makes the 6.5 superior to the 270. The cartridges with "270-like" game harvesting potential and trajectories are the 260 Remington and the 6.5 Creedmoor.
Comment