204 Ruger thoughts?

Squeeze

Squeeze

New member
OK, so I have a 204 Ruger factory Savage Model 16, and it shoots itty bitty groups...But I converted it to a 260 Rem. and now all of the 204 Ruger parts sit on the shelf until I need a .20 cal varmint rifle, and then I switch if from 260 Rem. to 204 Ruger. The problem is I don't want to be switching back and forth, so I have been playing with the idea of building a 204 Ruger upper, to pin to one of my many lowers, when I need a .20 cal varmint rifle.

The primary use for this project upper will be vaporizing rodents around the homestead, and the annual trip to WY, where we wait for antelope processing, by working on the WY P-dog population. So I am thinking this upper project will get a BHW 204 Ruger barrel, 20" rifle length gas, standard profile(.75" gas block/HBAR under handguard), and an 11 degree target crown. So anyone care to offer up changes to the plan? Also, I think I have asked this before, but does anyone feel limited by the AR-15 magazine limits to COL, for the 204 Ruger? I will probably stick with the 39 gr. Sierra bullets, that the Savage liked, just for the pretty decent wind performance I found with that bullet in WY.

Squeeze
 
I think it would be a nice upper for you but I would consider the 20 Practical. It does give a bit extra room for bullets although with the ASC STAINLESS 223 mags at 2.316 it is not quite the issue. I say PRAC because the brass is always available unlike the 204 that is rare at times.

I have one of each Prac, Tac and 204 in the AR and the Prac gets much more range time since I went up from the Tac. I see zero difference in downrange performance between all three BTW.

Talk to Ritch and he will get you a bargain on the barrel that will put a smile on your face no matter which way you go.

Greg
 
Originally Posted By: GLShooterI think it would be a nice upper for you but I would consider the 20 Practical. It does give a bit extra room for bullets although with the ASC STAINLESS 223 mags at 2.316 it is not quite the issue. I say PRAC because the brass is always available unlike the 204 that is rare at times.

I have one of each Prac, Tac and 204 in the AR and the Prac gets much more range time since I went up from the Tac. I see zero difference in downrange performance between all three BTW.

Talk to Ritch and he will get you a bargain on the barrel that will put a smile on your face no matter which way you go.

Greg

Greg, thanks for the comments. I did consider the Practical, but I have all of the 204 Ruger stuff now. I have plenty of brass(stocked up before brass went scarce), I have the dies, and even a bunch of loaded rounds for the Savage. I am praying that I win the lottery, and the rounds that shoot well in the Savage, give me decent accuracy in this new project...If not, I will be pulling bullets.

I do plan on calling BHW when I get ready to order.

I planned on ordering an ASC mag or two, but I will say I am not impressed with ASC mags, for my 6.8SPC/6mm WOA rifles. I MUCH prefer the PRI mags over the ASC mags, except for the price tag. I have not had reliable feeding, in several rifles, with the ASC mags, whereas the PRIs have been 100% reliable. And they seem to be kinder to my 6mm WOA formed and neck turned brass. If the ASC mags fed well, I would go through the effort to polish the feed lips, but they are stuck in the "failed" project pile for now.

Squeeze
 
With a plethora of 204 ammunition I can see your reasoning. Nothing wrong with that at all. Funny how some ASC's just run like trains and others not so much. I'm lucky all my dozen or so run well.

Greg
 
BDCD2468-A174-4E8F-99D9-570F4AA706A0_zpswzirk6ig.jpg


Long barrel is a 204Ruger in a 22" BHW barrel. Shoots sub-MOA, as do all of the BHW barrels I have built around so far. Stainless mags give me useable 2.260", which has treated me well, even with longer pills. Strap on an adjustable gas block.

Only thing I did wrong on this one, in my opinion at least, was to not have it threaded. The 204r is an ear splitter, it'd be nice if I could spin a can on the front. Or at least a linear comp...
 
Originally Posted By: VarminterrorOnly thing I did wrong on this one, in my opinion at least, was to not have it threaded. The 204r is an ear splitter, it'd be nice if I could spin a can on the front. Or at least a linear comp...

easy enough to fix that wrong. but you know that.
tongue_smilie.gif
 
Quote:The 204r is an ear splitterYou must be shooting without any ear protection to make that comment...I have no problem with the sound using electronic muffs and mine has a 22" barrel also...

If you go to a suppressor on the barrel, won't you need to load your rounds down to effectively quiet the noise??...If so, you will lose the major effectiveness of the .204...

I got lucky with my reload recipe, as it shoots the same in my AR as it does/did in my CZ and Savage, in the .3s at 100
 
there's no reason to adjust full house loads for suppressor use. [edit] unless an accuracy issue presents itself of course [/edit]


a can rated for (as an example) 30 DB of noise reduction will do so both super and subsonic. the result is just more dramatic with a subsonic loaded round.

you still get the sonic crack with supersonic loads, but the sound of the shot itself will be reduced, sometimes significantly.

I just got my 204 threaded so i haven't had a chance to run it suppressed yet, but my 20" 223 upper run through my 30 cal can was impressively quiet. Not enough that i'd want to shoot it without hearing protection all day, but if i were hunting and only going to be taking a shot here and there i sure wont be bringing the big muff's along anymore.

now that we can hunt with suppressors here in michigan and i have a centerfire rated can i doubt i'll be shooting unsuppressed much - if at all - anymore, even when i'm not playing with subsonic loads in my 300 blackout!
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: VarminterrorThe 204r is an ear splitter, it'd be nice if I could spin a can on the front. Or at least a linear comp...

My experience with linear comps have been mixed. I have tried it in three AR style rifles, two 6.8s, and one 308, and only one of the 6.8s didn't open up groups with the linear comp. The Savage has a 24" barrel, and I can't say I noticed any increase in muzzle blast, over my other varmint type rifles. Now my LR-308 and M1A Scout clearly set the bar in muzzle blast.

I will probably stick with the target crown, but I am tossing the idea around to go with the 22" barrel over the 20" barrel. I don't plan on humping this rifle far, so I may as well get a tad more velocity.

Squeeze
 
I had this idea a few years ago and built a 22" varmint contour upper in .204 ruger. It shot great! But at the end of the day I found that it was a pain in the a$$ to load enough .204 to keep it feed. I have a buddy with a progessive loader and can pump out .223 and they seem to be as accurate and kill just as well. I still have a .204 in a bolt gun, but for an AR, 5.56 is enough for me.
 
Originally Posted By: MPFDI had this idea a few years ago and built a 22" varmint contour upper in .204 ruger. It shot great! But at the end of the day I found that it was a pain in the a$$ to load enough .204 to keep it feed. I have a buddy with a progessive loader and can pump out .223 and they seem to be as accurate and kill just as well. I still have a .204 in a bolt gun, but for an AR, 5.56 is enough for me.

I have a 223 Wylde, and a 6mm WOA, for varmints, and both kill well.
wink.gif
But when I get on the WY P-Dog fields, said rifles get a little warm, so I am looking to add another one to the battery. In the past it has been either the Savage, in 204 Ruger, or a Howa Varminter, in 22-250 Rem...But bolt guns just aren't doing it for me anymore. The varmint cong just aren't dying fast enough with bolt guns, and walking in rounds, at longer distances, and in wind, is MUCH easier with an AR-15, than shucking a bolt. Besides, with all of this silly "assault weapons" ban talk, I need a project to vent my anxiety.
grin.gif


Squeeze

P.S. I have a progressive, so loading ammo isn't an issue. Also, in the long winter months, it gives me somthing to do besides plow snow.
 
Originally Posted By: bryan hI would run a Lancer mag they work flawlessly with the 204.

Bryan,

What is the max. COL, you can get in a Lancer mag?

Squeeze
 
Originally Posted By: SqueezeOK, so I have a 204 Ruger factory Savage Model 16, and it shoots itty bitty groups...But I converted it to a 260 Rem. and now all of the 204 Ruger parts sit on the shelf until I need a .20 cal varmint rifle, and then I switch if from 260 Rem. to 204 Ruger. The problem is I don't want to be switching back and forth, so I have been playing with the idea of building a 204 Ruger upper, to pin to one of my many lowers, when I need a .20 cal varmint rifle.

The primary use for this project upper will be vaporizing rodents around the homestead, and the annual trip to WY, where we wait for antelope processing, by working on the WY P-dog population. So I am thinking this upper project will get a BHW 204 Ruger barrel, 20" rifle length gas, standard profile(.75" gas block/HBAR under handguard), and an 11 degree target crown. So anyone care to offer up changes to the plan? Also, I think I have asked this before, but does anyone feel limited by the AR-15 magazine limits to COL, for the 204 Ruger? I will probably stick with the 39 gr. Sierra bullets, that the Savage liked, just for the pretty decent wind performance I found with that bullet in WY.

Squeeze

Is the BBL already chambered / drop in? If so what is the freebore? My problem with the original 204 design is depth at which the bullets have to be seated, which limits case capacity. There are reamers out there where you can seat the bullets out longer and they will still fit in AR mags. Talk to your BBL manufacturer or smith about this. Also, don't be afraid to jump the bullets. My buddy has a 204 AR and he jumps the bullet .120" and its a tack driver. You can also take an already chambered BBL along with a dummy round to a competent smith and have him run a throating reamer in it to fit your dummy round.
 
I have the Lancer mags too in 5 and 10 round capacity. They are both the same size,just the five round has a plug or stop in it. So if any body else is looking for a small round mag...get the 10rnd and just put 5 in it. Plus the 10rnd is cheaper!
 
Originally Posted By: gene10pntrI have the Lancer mags too in 5 and 10 round capacity. They are both the same size,just the five round has a plug or stop in it. So if any body else is looking for a small round mag...get the 10rnd and just put 5 in it. Plus the 10rnd is cheaper!

just make sure that its legal to have a magazine downloaded like that in your hunting area.

for example here in michigan

(an excerpt from page 18, michigan hunting and trapping digest)
ee958505b0ee434abf8f303a92b330dd.jpeg


so simply by being afield with a firearm that has the ability to exceed the capacity (using a 10 round mag with only 5 rounds in it) would put you afoul of our hunting regs. No matter if you only had 6 cartridges on you total, your firearm would still be illegal to hunt with.

you could use a 10 round (or other larger capacity) as long as it was plugged to only hold 5 rounds. I have two magazines i have modified this way with a piece of paint stirrer stick for my hi-point 9 in case i decide to take it out for critters since a 5 round mag isnt available for them commercially.
 
Back
Top