Part of the reason the 264 achieved the claimed velocites and they did come close was the original bullets were supposedly 2 diameter with the rear/base of the bullet at the correct size with the rest of the shank of the bullet somewhat smaller. But it made the round a bore burner and many did not shoot all that well. I have had 3 all pre 64s and the one that shot the best was an UGLY example restocked by an old fellow who lived near me. He lent it to me with some early ammo and it shot great. I killed my longest ranged head of game with that thing and it was a bang flop moment on a windless day up in Montana(a rarity for sure). It was farther...lots than I would shoot any game animal any more. My Leica range finder said 640 yards so it was probably pretty close to that. I bought the rifle after he passed and put an original Win stock back on it. Talking all this 1000 yard and mile shooting is great but it is all so specialized shooting you really can't hunt easily on foot with those rifles....and the average hunter can't shoot that well unfortunately. My old Kimber 06 is a 400 yard rifle these days and that is more than enough. If I need a deer any more I'll shoot it at 40 -50 ft out the back window here at home. Antelope a couple hundred yards. I have another Kimber or two but one is a 300 Win Mag and I haven't used it in 6 years