204 and 223 Ballistics


PDA






viking499
August 4, 2012, 01:36 PM
Does anyone have or know of where I can look at a ballistics chart comparing the 204 and 223?

If you enjoyed reading about "204 and 223 Ballistics" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
rcmodel
August 4, 2012, 01:52 PM
http://www.hornady.com/images/ballistics/ballistics_charts.pdf

http://www.remington.com/ballistics/default.aspx

rc

viking499
August 4, 2012, 05:28 PM
Thanks RC.

Out to 300 yards, is there any advantage other than speed of the 204 over the 223? Is the 223 a good varmint round? I always here more about the 204 and 22-250the being used for varmints.

Should I go with a 223 or 204?

firesky101
August 4, 2012, 05:53 PM
Do you handload? .204 is a great round, but is not available for cheap. Even comparing the same Manufacturers loaded with similar bullets (both v-max) the .204 is about 25% more expensive to shoot. If you are shooting in volume, like p-dogs, then I would stick with .223.

The_Armed_Therapist
August 4, 2012, 06:00 PM
The .204 is faster with a considerably better trajectory (-5 to -6 inches @ 300 yards w/ 150 yard zero vs. -9 to -10 inches for the .223). Both carry approximately the same energy at comparable distances while the .223 offers a larger diameter. Lastly, while the .204 is probably a better round overall, the cost of the .223 is impossible to beat, particularly for varmints considering you could shoot them all day if you wanted.

BrainOnSigs
August 5, 2012, 03:04 AM
As mentioned....the 1st question is do or will you reload?

I am a huge fan of .204 Ruger. I moved away from .223 five years ago.

All the Twenties burn way less powder than a 22-250 (a full third in most loads), and the smaller Twenties use less powder than a .223 Rem. This attribute actually has two advantages. First, it makes shooting 20-Caliber cartridges more economical (not that I reload to save money), but mostly it means less barrel heat. A typical varmint hunter may shoot several hundred rounds in one day, so barrel heat is an important issue. Less heat....longer barrel life.

An excellent article by my friend Ken Lunde: http://www.6mmbr.com/gunweek047.html

He convinced me to make the switch to .204 Ruger and a thousand+ prairie dogs later....I'm not going back.

Another excellent read on .20 cal: http://www.6mmbr.com/20Caliber.html

TexasPatriot.308
August 5, 2012, 03:11 AM
the .204 may work for small varmints, even coyotes, but from what I see it is a pretty useless against larger game, great fad round I got no use for .at 58 years of age, I see so many other rounds that work better. but if you got the money to piss off go for it, an old timer like me aint got no use for the .204, the .22-250 covers this round completely and on the lower end the .17hmr or the .17s remington will hand that aspect. yallls money, spend it

BrainOnSigs
August 5, 2012, 11:17 AM
the .204 may work for small varmints, even coyotes, but from what I see it is a pretty useless against larger game, great fad round I got no use for .at 58 years of age, I see so many other rounds that work better.

1) Not sure why you would even mention larger game and .204 Ruger in the same sentence. Why would you use any caliber on something it isn't intended for?

2) If you know any dedicated varminters, .204 is anything but a "fad". Almost every major rifle manufacturer now offers a rifle chambered in .204. Almost every major ammo manufacturer has a .204 Ruger offering.

3) I am getting 1,000+ rounds out of a .204 barrel vs a .22-250 barrel. The reason? My .204 load is a full 1/3 less powder than my .22-250 load. .204 is a very efficient round. It is money well spent.....

4) It is apparent that at 58 years old you have zero interest in trying something new. It is obvious that you haven't tried .204 Ruger so you aren't in the best position to discuss it's merits or short comings.

Craigman
August 5, 2012, 11:56 AM
^^^All good points.

and between .204 and .223. Speed Kills as Roy Weatherby once said.
Both will do the job but .204 is more fun.

viking499
August 6, 2012, 09:31 PM
Solved me problem today......walked into my lgs, and he had just traded for a CZ American in 204. Looked brand new. Left when I did.

The_Armed_Therapist
August 6, 2012, 09:34 PM
Sweet purchase!

mustanggt
August 6, 2012, 11:39 PM
204 is the way to go on small game. I like being able to see my shot hit and the animal flop. Makes follow up shots easier or determine if necessary at all. It won't be cheaper to shoot than a 223 but is easy on the powder and barrel life is way better than the 250. I have two Savage rifles chambered in 204 and like them alot.

If you enjoyed reading about "204 and 223 Ballistics" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!