Looking for suggestions

[TaylorS]

I have several sets of dies in the shop that my granddad gave to me when he quit reloading last year. Sadly he didn’t pass the guns along for me to load for and shoot. So I need some suggestions for some inexpensive shooters that are still chambered in these calibers:

222 rem
41 mag
264 win mag

I should add 243 win to the list but that’s a fairly common round made by just about every one who makes a bolt gun and its least interesting on my list of things to find.

Thanks for the help!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[richhodg66]

About the least expensive .222 I've seen have been old Savage 340s.

Never had a .264 or a .41. Don't seem to be real common.

[TaylorS]

No they don’t and most of the win model 70s on gun broker were 1200 and up so that one might wait a good while I think I might find a Rossi 92 in the 41 mag and I think S&W make revolvers in that caliber


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[rancher1913]

so let me see if I got this right, you were given some die sets so now you have to buy the guns to use them with. you really really fell down the rabbit hole didnt you

[TaylorS]

I dug the rabbit hole now it’s a mine


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bmortell]

seems like savage makes 222's and savage makes pretty accurate barrels + 222rem is a very accurate caliber = very accurate gun perhaps ?

[TNsailorman]

Rossi and Henry make rifles for the .41 magnum, S&W and Ruger makes revolvers for that caliber. You can find really nice used .222's in gun stores, the Remington 700, 788 and 722 are all great rifles and older ones can be bought at decent prices if you search around a little. There are still .264 magnums on the market both new and used but I think I would shy away from that one. It had a reputation as a barrel burner in the olden days. just my .02 anyway, james

[Three44s]

You might clue us in on what you currently load for to give us an idea about where you currently are at.

Just having dies for particular cartridges is not in of itself enough to compel me to take that cartridge up further. The cartridges you have listed dies for are certainly no slouches by any means but if you are already capable in a particular area then the importance of taking up something similar is not as useful. Basing a decision purely on pragmatism is not necessary about the dies you have acquired however.

Take the 222. The 223 has just about totally eclipsed it and by every metric save for one the latter beats the former, that criteria being accuracy. But even that measurement is pretty slim. I should talk however as I have two guns in 222 and several in 223.

The 41 Mag.

There are several guns made in 41 past and present. It is a great cartridge and I have two, a Smith & Wesson and a Dan Wesson, both revolvers. But where the rubber meets the road, I can live very happily with my 44s and without my 41s.

The 264 Mag.

I do not have any experience with this one but I do have a number of rifles chambered in the cartridge that beat it out ( the 7mm Rem Mag.). As far as barrel burning a lot of that is old news. Much more is understood about barrel life and a shooter of a 264 Win can expect good life with it given a modicum of care and using the cartridge as it was intended to.

Three44s

[country gent]

Remington rifle in .222 would be fitting since they developed the round originally. Years ago I had a savage 110 in 22 rem that was a very accurate rifle, one of the few that seemed to shoot every load good and close to the same poa poi. Not familiar with 264 win mag and rifles but one of the Model 70s would be a great rifle. I think Remington made a run of 700 classics in it also. Watch the used gun racks for this one. The 264 had 2 reputations 1) as a exceptional performer over longer ranges, and 2) a barrel burner it was supposedly hard on throats. 41 mag depends on if you want rifle or revolver as to firearms.
Another is to look for the H&R single shot rifles or the Henry single shots. Should be available in 222 and 41 mag

[TaylorS]

Three 44s if I looked at this objectively I would sell about half my collection because there either duplicate guns for a caliber or a obsolete caliber that I have something that works better for whatever I use it for, this just gives me the opportunity to buy more guns!

I’ll look into the H&R single shots for some of those calibers I’ve been kinda thinking about a set up in a single shot.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Texas by God]

There aren't any inexpensive shooters for the three cartridges you listed. You might find a Savage 340 in .222 for two hundred bucks, but then again you might not. The others start around $400 and go up from there. As far as I know, H&R never made a rifle for any of those cartridges.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[RugerFan]

Ruger Blackhawk in .41 mag may be the least expensive option. Henry makes a lever in that caliber.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[dverna]

The .41 Mag should have been more successful than it was/is. The other two calibers died for good reasons. An inexpensive .264 Win Mag is going to be a basket case.

BTW, my first CF rifle was. Remington 700 in .222. A great gun if you can find it.

Good luck.

[SvenLindquist]

I have been guilty of buying a rifle cause I have a lot of ammo. My recent buy of a TC Compass in 308 ($250.00) fits that as I have 1000s of rounds of beautiful DWM German mil-spec 7.62x51. BUT for a set of dies for 3 common chamberings ? Nope.

[Texas by God]

I have been guilty of buying a rifle cause I have a lot of ammo. My recent buy of a TC Compass in 308 ($250.00) fits that as I have 1000s of rounds of beautiful DWM German mil-spec 7.62x51. BUT for a set of dies for 3 common chamberings ? Nope.

This^^^

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[georgerkahn]

In my neck of the woods, this is indeed "gun show time / season", albeit due to the rural nature most require a drive up to 60 or so miles. However, I was -- sort of -- in a similar dilemma many years back when I was gifted dies, cases, and reloads in .44WCF. It took a few shows -- actually adding to the excitement of going to them -- before I stumbled on a Winchester 1866 clone in this caliber, reasonably priced, and "just what I'd been looking for". IF you're not in any great "jag", and exhibit a fair amount of patience -- you may get lucky finding a firearm at a show which complements your gifted dies. (I generally advise sellers that if I pay their asking price, my five little kids will have to walk to school in the snow barefoot, both ways up-hill, if I need pay their asking price, too... ).
Good luck!
geo

[TaylorS]

I might could find a savage or Remington barrel that would fit either the savage 7rem mag or the 700 in 300 win mag and either rebarrel or buy a low cost action to barrel. Sounds like the 264 is gonna be a project. The 222 and 41 don’t seem to bad to find for a fair price.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Drm50]

222 & 41mag are fairly common and shouldn't be hard to find. The 264mg is one I had no luck with. I wanted one bad in late 60s and got a pre 64 m70, didn't shoot worth a hoot. Got rid of it and got another one it wouldn't
shoot either. Later a buddy of mine got a import 98 in 264mg. I don't remember the make but it was low end gun. It didn't shoot either but he shot several deer at 100yd ranges with it and it did destroy a lot of meat. It
didn't shoot well enough as a groundhog gun to fool with. I think Rem made some 700s in 264mg in 80s but I
don't know how they shot. I think they did better later but the reputation they had killed them at Rem 7mm got
the prize in that dept.

[Norske]

Have you browsed pawn shops? Major gun makers often built store brand rifles on contract. JC Higgens (Sears) sold a bolt action rifle that was a Win Model 70 in disguise for example. They sell for far less than the pre-64 Winchesters.

[northmn]

264 was considered a barrel eater. It also needed a longer barrel to perform well.

Out of pure nostalgia I would not mind getting a 222 again. I had one in a 700 Remington and shot it a lot at jack rabbits and varmints. Most say the 223 is better because its more, but I liked the 222 and it worked well for about as far as I wanted to shoot at anything with the sporter. It had won a lot of bench rest matches in its day also. Some claim it is a scaled down 30-06.

DEP