.204 Ruger

[rection47]

Is this a reliable round for rifles? Also is it increasing in popularity or not, ive been interested in getting a CZ 527 Kevlar in either .204 or .223 and think the .204 is more interesting but would only want it, if it will be around for a while.

 

[Jackal]

I may ruffle some feathers, but i think .204 is a flash in the pan. In about 10 years, reloading will probably be the only ammo option.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

I originally thought the .17 HMR would be a flash in the pan, but it seems well-established now. The .204 is cast in the same mold -- a smaller caliber with better ballistic coefficient than its larger parent. There is a lot good to be said for the .204, and I believe it's here to stay.

In any case, it's a varmit load -- and that means a handloading proposition from the git-go. The larger quantities of ammunition fired by varmit shooters, and their demands for top-notch accuracy mean most will handload.

If you want a .204, buy plenty of brass and don't worry. And remember, you can fire-form .223 cases to produce .204 cases if it becomes necessary.

 

[rection47]

Ya i guess id have to learn 2 handload then Anyway, im not sure if id want it anyway cause it is quite a bit more expensive to fire then .223 like 4 times as much or something like that.

 

[BrainOnSigs]

A very good read on the 20 caliber offerings versus .223 and .22-250.

http://www.6mmbr.com/20Caliber.html

Here is an excerpt:

"I'm often asked how a 20-Caliber gun compares with the ever-popular .223 Rem. Well, I tell people the Twenty is flatter-shooting, easier on barrels, and it is a better choice for small varmints, whether you want to "mist 'em" or save the pelt.

The Velocity Edge--A .204 Ruger drives a 40-grainer 600 fps faster than a .223 Rem can push the typical 22-Caliber 50gr bullet. This higher velocity produces a flatter trajectory. Additionally, grain for grain, 20-Caliber bullets have higher ballistic coefficients than .224 bullets. Combine this with the extra velocity of the 20-Caliber, and you get superior performance in the wind. Run the numbers and you'll see--a 40-grainer shot from a .204 Ruger has less drop AND less wind drift than a 40gr or 50gr bullet fired from a .223 Rem. You'll find the data in the chart below.

Component Economy and Barrel Life--All the Twenties burn way less powder than a 22-250, 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, 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.

Terminal Ballistics--For hunters seeking maximum explosive effect on a small varmint, Twenties deliver the goods. Because it passes through the rifling much more quickly, a 20-Caliber bullet will be turning much higher RPMs than a 22-caliber bullet launched from a barrel of similar twist rate. Experienced varminters will tell you that high spin rates create the most explosive impacts. On the other hand, if you shoot a non-fragmenting bullet, the Twenty can minimize hide/fur damage. If you plan to keep the fur, you want the smallest possible hole or damage to it."





From a personal experience, I have switched over from .223 to .204 for varmint hunting. I saw the light when P-dog shooting this past June with THR forum member Lunde. I saw him have a 92% hit rate at distances out to 338 yards. My .223 worked well but for pure explosiveness the .204 made the P-dogs absolutely erupt. It was as Lunde alluded to...it made a large WHAP sound when striking a P-dog. I didn't even have to watch his shots any longer to know if he had a hit.....I could just listen and tell. I thought on a breezy day that the 50 gr V-Max .223s that I was shooting would easily outperform the 32 gr BlitzKing .204s. That just wasn't the case.

Flat shooting, fast, explosive, less barrel wear and tear, proven in the field, more rifle companies offering this caliber......it isn't going away anytime soon..

My new Cooper Montana Varminter in .204:

 

[Buzztail]

It's not four times as much when your shooting quality ammo in each round.

 

[rection47]

Yea the four times was a bit of an exageration, but Thanks for that link brainonsigs, very helpful and alot of that information is good to know.

Im pretty sure that will be my first rifle bigger then .22, ive read its better to maximize your potential on the .22 before moving up so once my rifle cant get me any better then itll be time.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

If you buy that rifle, you'll want to shoot it -- not with cheap "blasting" ammo, but with quality, accurate ammo. And as as already been mentioned, the price differential goes away when you do that.

If you want both accuracy and volume, learn to reload -- it isn't rocket science. If I can do it, you can do it.

 

[rection47]

Good point with the accuracy thing, i definately agree, ima use a .22 lr for high volume plinking anyway just cause itd be most economical.

And also good point with the reloading, what one man can do another can do, im just to lazy :banghead:

 

[rection47]

double post erg!

 

[BrainOnSigs]

And also good point with the reloading, what one man can do another can do, im just to lazy

I have had good luck with .204 ammo from the Hunting Shack.

I have shot several 0.3" groups at 100 yards with the 32 gr and 39 gr offerings.

Hunting Shack

 

[Jackal]

The most accurate .223 ammo i have ever used is the Winchester white box 45gr hp's. 40 round box for $12.00. My 16" bushmaster always puts 5rds into 1/2"-3/4" when i do my part at 100yds.

 

[Rimmer]

I bought a Savage in .204 last year and love it. Flash.... don't think so. It's the most accurate shooting critter gun I have ever shot using factory ammo out to 400yds and then some.

I do shoot a lot. Over 4,000 rounds of Hornady in 10 months. All the stuff you hear about shooting out the barrel.... well all I can say is a borescope tells the tale and I am not seeing a problem. Maybe after I shoot 10-15K rounds I'll have some issues, don't know.

You can reload whatever you have including the 204 so no problem there, but why bother. The factory stuff is terrific. You can tell when something new is gonna be around for a while when every manufacturer has several on the market.

 

[kastiron]

I bought a Savage 12V in .204 and admit that I was not initially impressed with the performance in comparison to the .22-250 I already owned. What I have found is that the accuracy settled in after a couple hundred rounds. It may have been that I found the right handload for that particular rifle.

I don't think it will be going away anytime soon, but that doesn't stop me from buying brass and bullets every chance I get.

+1 on the seemingly endless barrel life.


I have not gotten out to Prairiedogville with it yet, but have noticed what it can do with a 20oz water bottle at 200yds. Not too shabby, and definitely comparable to the .22-250 in that respect.

 

[BrainOnSigs]

Not too shabby, and definitely comparable to the .22-250 in that respect.

This is the statment that makes the .204 Ruger a clear winner over .22-250 for a P-dog shoot when the targets are thick.

Component Economy and Barrel Life--All the Twenties burn way less powder than a 22-250, 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, 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.