204 yah or nay?

R

Rotaxpower

New member
Well I found a good deal on a remington 700 ADL in 204 ruger. I will be useing it for all of my field hunting, my question would I be better with a 22-250? is the 204 a barrel burner? how many shots could a guy get out of one? thanks? which one is better? I do reload as well.
 
I have both and I have to say that if the 204 had the bullet selection of the 22-250, I would trade off my 22-250. I may yet as I expect more manufactures to come on line with non-varmint bullets. I shot 9 red fox last year with my 204 and had great results. I did not get the chance to shoot a yote with it last year /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/mad.gif but will try again this year. I'm loading some 35 gr Bergers for that.

For all the praise of the 204 that I have, I still love my 22-250. It is a Savage 12BVSS. It is a little heavy as a carry rifle, but with .3" groups at 100yds. I'll manage. Who knows, I may have a very hard decision in the future. But then I could just keep them both couldn't I. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif
 
The .204 is one of the best cartridges that I have ever shot. Friend has one that I took to the range and zeroed for him. Man, it's GOOD. Ruger M77T platform and it is one of the best shooters that I have ever had in my hands. As far as barrel burnout, I read an article in a shooting magazine a while back that said we have nothing to worry about unless we're burning 1,000 or more a week.

But......it will NEVER replace the .22-250. Both are awesome rounds. Glad I don't have to choose between the two. If I did, I think I'd have to go with the .204.
 
Definitely a yay.......flat as a 22-250, uses less powder and recoil like my .221 FB. I haven't seen one yet that was n't very very accurate.
 
rotaxpower, i started out with the 22-250 rem 700 v about 30 years ago and love it. i added,in the last two years,17m4,221fb and 204 all in cooper 21 classic. so far the 204 has been my favorite and i should set it aside and give the 17m4 and 221fb more use. i use mine for woodchucks out to 300 yards hits hard and shoots very flat. i am using factory hornaday 32 gr v max, i now have enough brass now to start reloading. my main reason to put the 22-250 aside is the development around the few farms i can hunt and reducing the noise level. in saskatchewan you must not have that problem. i have also killed coyote and fox with the 204 as well. i would go for it and reload for your best results and not worry about barrel burning. i bought a digital camera last year. now i buy memory sticks,printer ink,print paper,an hp photosmart,and a dell flat screen to look at all the pictures my wife took in colorado to use the digital. so burning out a barrel does not phase me go for it. bob kudile
 
I just bought a .204 this year. I didn't really think I would be all that impressed. However, after 108 groundhogs and 2 yotes this year, I wouldn't buy anything else for a varmint/predator gun. I have shot in 30mph winds and the bullet works better than anyother caliber I own. I have killed a yote at 400yds and a groundhog at 525yds. I can't say enough about this new caliber. Hornady and Ruger did their homework on this one!
 
I'm glad to see a factory 20 caliber cartridge on the shelf, but in IMHO, Todd Kindler got it a lot more right in 1998 with his Tactical 20 than Hornady/Ruger did with the 204 Ruger cartridge.

Just my opinion from having a couple of rifles chambered in both cartridges.

- BCB
 
Quote:
I'm glad to see a factory 20 caliber cartridge on the shelf, but in IMHO, Todd Kindler got it a lot more right in 1998 with his Tactical 20 than Hornady/Ruger did with the 204 Ruger cartridge.

Just my opinion from having a couple of rifles chambered in both cartridges.

- BCB

Amen to that. Not many want to give Todd credit for the 20cal.
 
BCB & roper...AMEN to your assessment of the TACTIACL 20 as a great cartridge when compared to the 204 Ruger, and praise be to Todd Kindler for his unwavering efforts to bring renewed interest to the 20 cal bullet in general. We all have him to thank for that. While the 204 Ruger is unquestionably a great cartridge in its own right, the TAC20 is quite possibly the OPTIMUM case for the 20 caliber bullet. In other words...more efficient with less powder, and almost equal performance to the 204 Ruger. My current TAC20 load is 40gr Hornady V_Max bullets over 24.0gr of Alliant 10X in fireformed Lapua .223 cases with CCI BR4 primers. 5 shots chronographed at 3840 FPS average bullet speed, and this load is a tack driver right on out past 500 meters (547 yards). It will also knock a Ram sized silhouettes off its stands IF it the Ram is shot to hit the horns. My TAC20 is a Cooper Model 21 Varminter and it NEVER ceases to amaze everyone around with what it can do. As a good friend of mine put it after firing 3 shots at a 6" x 7" rock on the berm behind the 500 meter stands (560+ yds), "If you had told me about these shots without my having done them myself, I would never have believed you". Until then he had never fired this gun. Needless to say we are all rapidly becoming believers. Nuff said, and thanks again to Todd.
 
My .2 cents, the 22-250 still has the edge.

The .204 is a great round however but, closer to the 17 Rem. The 250 shooting 55 grains(I use) has more kill power and less wind drift than the 32 grain .204 Also factory ammo is a little cheaper and easier to find.

The .204 is here to stay and will change things but, for all around varmint and predator rather than specific the 22-250 fills the role complete.
 
Any time a comparison is done, everyone wants to compare the 32 grain bullets in the 204 Ruger, etc. to show how some other round compares and is better.

Folks who have shot 20 calibers for years know that the true magic of the 20 calibers for predator type hunting purposes isn't found in the high initial muzzle velocity of the light bullets, but with heavier, high BC bullets. They naturally start slower, but with the great BC's in the heavier bullets, the 20 calibers really shine at long distances.

I chuckled when Hornady and Ruger unveiled their new round a couple of years ago and touted its velocity only, when in fact what makes it and other 20 caliber rounds so good is the heavier bullets.

Below - Courtesy of Silverfox - is a ballistic program comparison of the 22-250 (55 grain bullet) with the 204 Ruger (40 grain bullet). They're really not that far apart - even in energy - and the 204 Ruger with the 40 grain bullet actually has better drop and wind drift numbers.

Once a manufacturer produces a good high BC 20 caliber bullet designed for hunting purposes and not for the varmint crowd only, folks will really be surprised at what the 20 calibers will do. I have been hand swaging my own 20 caliber bullets for several years, and it is fairly easy to make a lead tipped 20 caliber bullet with a jacket sturdy enough to effectively and reliably get inside a coyote and do major damage without fear of blowing up on the outside like some of the light jacketed varmint bullets do, even in .224" diameter bullets.

I have long been a fan of the 22-250 and have never been without at least one for the past 30 years, but the 20 calibers are no slouch in the "hard hitting department" with the right bullets. And, as I said earlier, I don't feel that the 204 Ruger is even the best of the 20 caliber cartridges currently in use. - BCB

 
Bayou city boy,

"Below - Courtesy of Silverfox - is a ballistic program comparison of the 22-250 (55 grain bullet) with the 204 Ruger (40 grain bullet). They're really not that far apart - even in energy - and the 204 Ruger with the 40 grain bullet actually has better drop and wind drift numbers."

I to have looked at the ballistics of both. A couple things come to mind. First most of the factory .204's with a 1-12 twist are not shooting the 40 grains as accurate as the 32 grains. So you gain drift but, lose accuracy. Reloaders are using bullets somewhere in-between. Most .204 shooters are using the 32 grain because of this. The .32 grain does not have as effeciant a BC as the 55 grain 250 does which is the most common 22-250 round. Energy..........ditto.
Also "foot pounds of energy" does not factor in momentum which favors the heavier bullet and is real.

I think the .204's with a 1-12 twist are limeted to the mid 30's grain range. Again closer to the mid 20's of a 17 Rem. than the mid 50's of a 22-250. Walt Berger has stated a 1-12 / .204 will not shoot a 50 grain and Berger Bullets list a faster twist for such.

To each there own and it's certainly interesting stuff. But for myself anyways it's hard to beat grains at a distance for drift..........as you also stated. Also there are better math formula's for true killing power than the foot pounds of energy standard, that account for momentum. Here again the heavier grains have the edge.

If my shot was not placed idealy at 400 yards on a predator or larger varmint I would feel more confidant in a 55 grain 22-250. Also penetration versus splat because of twist rate come to mine.

For what we hunt this would it may not make a great differance but at 400 yards I need all the help I can get (grin)

Interesting either way, I feel the death ray varmint calibers will be narowed to two now. The .204 on the lighter end and the 22-250 on the heavy. Personally, besides the 250 I would take the .223 and 50 something grains even at a distance.

I feel more comfortable with the wall'up factor............today at least(grin).
 
bill1227:

Good comments.

As I stated, I am a fan of the 22-250 also, but hate to see the "New" 20 Calibers get short changed. I mentioned the energy only because many times you see the 20's being hung with the "low bullet energy" tag, and its not a valid criticism.

I am also a long time 17 caliber shooter - and love them - and truly believe that the 20's hit a lot harder than the 17's do - from experience - , and that the 20's are much much closer to the .224's" in that department.

I currently own 4 20 caliber rilfes with 12" twists, and they all shoot 39 & 40 grain factory bullets very accurately as well as a fairly short 45 grain HP bullet that I hand swage. The bullet I use most often in my 20's is a hand swaged 38 grain HP that works well for both PD's, etc., and for larger animals.

Some folks indeed have had problems with the 40's shooting as good as the 32's in 12" twist barrels, but others have found just the opposite. I think part of the issue there is many of the new 204 Ruger fans are stuck on the velocity issue and haven't realized the true strength of the 20 caliber, so don't try as hard when they re-load to get the 40's to shoot well when the 32's are what got their attention originally.

As for a 20 caliber versus a 223 Remington round, I would not be afraid to take any shot with a 20 caliber that I would take with the 223 or 223 AI - under any circumstances. I own some of those, too, so I'm not just saying that based on no practical experience with them.

Plus, I know this winter when I get up north to do some coyote hunting, I'll probably take a 17, at least one 20, and a 22-250, but I won't feel undergunned with the 20's under any circumstances.

As for a true death ray, its hard to beat the 220 Swift if a death ray is what you want. But, it hasn't caused me to permanently put down my 17's, or 20's, or my other 224's either.

Take Care - BCB
 
bill1227-- I'm going to take one run at this topic and then I'm going to be quiet on the subject for a while. I just have a hard time keeping quiet after reading your statements that the .204 Ruger can't get the job done, drifts too much, can't keep up with the .223 and 22-250.

I'm not sure you caught on to exactly what Bayou City Boy was trying to get across in his first post, so I'll repeat it and hope I don't offend you. I think what BCB was saying is that you have to look at the BC numbers and that when you use the BC of the 39 gr. and 40 gr. .204 caliber bullets, then the heavier .224 bullets really don't have any big advantage over the 39 gr. and 40 gr. .204 bullets as far as wind deflection and flatness of trajectory.

I have nothing against the 22-250 or .223 (I personally shoot a 22-250 in Tikka Master Sporter), I have to say that the 39 gr. Sierra BlitzKing is about as accurate as any hunting bullet I have shot in any rifle. When I want to "touch a varmint" at long distances, I will choose a heavier projectile than the 32 gr. .204 caliber bullets--my personal choice for that long-range "touching" is the 39 gr. Sierra BlitzKing. You seem bent on comparing the lighter 32 gr. bullet in the .204 Ruger with the heavier 55 gr. bullet for the 22-250, and you need to compare the heavier projectiles in each caliber rather than a light bullet for the .204 and a heavy bullet for the 22-250. You try to justify that comparison by saying:

"the 1 in 12 inch twist of the factory .204 Ruger barrels is limited to bullets in the mid 30's range,"

I wonder how much "actual" trigger time you have spent shooting the .204 Ruger or any .204 caliber rifle with projectiles of the 32 gr., 35 gr., 39 gr., and 40 gr. weight classes????? Maybe you are reporting what you "heard" someone say or what you "read" on the Internet. I don't have as much trigger time behind a .204 caliber rifle as Bayou City Boy, but I have put a fair number of .204 caliber bullets down the barrel of my Savage 12VLP and have practical experience at hitting small and large live targets and paper targets at a myriad of distances and conditions.

You state the you are going to select the .223 and use 50 gr. bullets or maybe even the 22-250 over the .204 Ruger because the .204 Ruger can't shoot a bullet in the 39 gr. or 40 gr. weight class accurately. You are very sadly mistaken about the accuracy capabilities of not only the .204 Ruger, but probably all .204 caliber rifles in general.

My Savage 12VLP (a rock-stock out-of-the-box factory rifle) shoots the 39 gr. Sierras very accurately (and also shoots the 32 gr. V-Max, 32 gr. Sierra, 35 gr. Berger FB HP, and 40 gr. Berger LTB accurately as well). Does the target pictured below look like the .204 caliber rifle can't shoot the 39 gr. Sierra bullets accurately??? The BC for that bullet is .283!!! After looking at the target below, please read the paragraph below this target and then check the numbers in the chart I put together below that paragraph for some wind deflection and drop numbers. (I was shooting the faster load with the 39 gr. Sierra using H4895, but switched to Rel 10X and a slightly slower muzzle velocity because the Rel 10X is giving me lower ES and SD numbers and slightly smaller groups.)

Rel_10X_24-8_6-12-2005--small.jpg


Another quote from you: Quote:
I to have looked at the ballistics of both. A couple things come to mind. First most of the factory .204's with a 1-12 twist are not shooting the 40 grains as accurate as the 32 grains. So you gain drift but, lose accuracy. Reloaders are using bullets somewhere in-between. Most .204 shooters are using the 32 grain because of this.



I know that I have read where some .204 shooters can't get the 40 gr. bullets to shoot accurately, but I have also read plenty of reports that stated some .204 shooters get better accuracy from the 40 gr. bullets than from the 32 gr. bullets. Have you come across some research study that verifies your statement in the quote above? If so, let's have the link to the information so we can read the report. I will have to add here, that I got the 40 gr. Berger LTB to shoot very accurately at high velocities, but couldn't get the 40 gr. V-Max to shoot accurately at high velocities. It shot fine below 3,800 fps, however, would give your 55 gr. bullets lots of competition in the wind deflection and accuracy department.

You also state: Quote:
The .32 grain does not have as effeciant a BC as the 55 grain 250 does which is the most common 22-250 round. Energy..........ditto.
Also "foot pounds of energy" does not factor in momentum which favors the heavier bullet and is real.




While I agree that the lighter 32 gr. .204 caliber projectiles do not have as high a BC as the 55 gr. .224 caliber bullets, once again, let's compare the heavier 55 gr. in the .224 to a heavier 39 gr. bullet in the .204 to make the comparison more more realistic. You state wind deflection is less with the 55 gr. projectile in the 22-250. Here are numbers generated by a ballistics program that prove that the 39 gr. Sierra has better, not by a big bunch, but better wind deflection numbers than your vaunted 55 gr. and 50 gr. bullets in the 22-250. Please note that I selected 55 and 50 gr. bullets with about the highest BC I could find for the .224 caliber. If you shoot 55 gr. Hornadys, then your BC will be waaaay lower and your wind deflection and drop numbers will suffer a great deal.

22-250_55grBK_50grBK_204_39grBK--small.jpg


Well, I have wasted enough time on this topic. Those who want to learn will read and take note and those who don't want to be confused by the facts will stick to their guns. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grinning-smiley-006.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grinning-smiley-006.gif As for me, I am more apt to grab for the .204 Ruger than the 22-250. One thing behind that selection is that I like the fact that I can see my hits in the scope with the .204 and that usually isn't possible with the 22-250.
 
BC rules.
A 22-250 shooting the 80 or 90 grain VLD bullets will certainly have better ballistics. No way in whatever that will happen with a factory 14" twist barrel.

The factory offerings in 22-250 condemn it to a short range caliber.

BC rules. The longer the range the more it rules.

Jack
 
Dead is dead.............who really cares ? I don't.

I like more grains some like more speed, I like heavy rifles some like light, some like ham some bacon. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused1.gif

Enjoy the outdoors
Bill
 
I just pulled up Sierra's web page on the 204 Ruger using 39gr bullets sure differs from what has been said here on velocity there data was done using a factory Savage rifle. They only listed 3 powder that gave velocity over 3700fps one powder max out at 3400fps two powders max out at 3500fps and eight powders came in at 3600fps and no loads where listed about 3800fps. I checked Hodgson and there data was about the same as was IMR. Hornady list there factory ammo velocity at 3900fps and a drop of 28.1 at 500yds. I don't own a 204 ruger and have no axe to grind.
I think most shooters understand how BC comes into play but first you have to have the correct velocity.
 
Silverfox has shot his 204 Ruger over a chronograph more times in the past year than most folks will ever shoot theirs in a lifetime. And, everyone who has spent any time here at PM and numerous other web sites knows how he has been more than willing to provide the data and information for all to see and use.

If he states a given velocity from his Savage, I'm not going to jump up and challenge his data just because I haven't found it published on a web site or because some gun scribe hasn't written about it. And I can't understand why anyone with "no axe to grind" would either.

His data - and more importantly his word - has been good in the past. Others have used his information and load data and have found similar results. Thus, there's no reason to start a left-handed inquisition at this point.

If you look at the BC of the Hornady and the Sierra bullets, just there you'll find a significant difference that translates into downrange performance.

Its understandable that some folks will defend their favorite cartridge to the end as the "biggest and baddest". However, when they do it with words such as "I think" and "I feel" and then state "facts", its pretty obvious that about all they really know can be attributed to the Doctorate Degree in Gun Magazines (DDGM) that they proudly have. I sprinkled the word experience through one of my responses to try to gently counter that approach, but I would venture to guess it flew over the head about like a frisbbe at the bottom of Carlsbad Caverns with the lights out.

Silverfox received his degree - and his credibility - through experience, not by reading about the 204 Ruger. If you doubt his word, get a chronograph and start gathering the real facts so we can all be enlightened.

- BCB

Edited for spelling and verbage. - BCB
 
Last edited:
DDGM /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif
 
Back
Top