223 vs 204

[bessemerbob]

Looking for a range gun, most shooting will be done at 300yrds. I have been planning on a 223, but have been reading about how the 204 can out perform the 223. So I am still leaning towards the Remington 700, 223 Rem. SPS but I am looking for any info or reason to consider a 204rug. Cost of shooting is a large factor!

 

[gvnwst]

Well, for cost and <300yd shooting, i would go with the .223 anytime. It will pack slightly more punch and be just as accurate as the .204 R.

 

[jaybr]

I've got both, and while I love my .204 there is really no "range" ammo available for it. Given this, ammo is roughly $1.00 per round, while you can get .223 for less than 1/2 that. Reloading may equalize that cost some, but I haven't checked into it.

 

[bessemerbob]

Cost is the big factor and in western PA safely shooting over 300yrds is almost impossible so if the 223 will hit better then the 204 at 300yrds then I am sold.

 

[gvnwst]

Well, hit better i dunno about, just pack more energy. The .204 reaches some crazy velocitys, and when it hits the target, the bullet might as well be made of some impact explosive. With the correct bullets though, the .223 does almost the same thing.
Really, anything you hit well with either at 300yd is going down, the .223 will just be cheaper while you are at it.

 

[bessemerbob]

So really paper target, and bowling pins at 300 will be no match for the 223. And half the cost, that speaks for its self

 

[dat2]

and bullets are a lot easier to find on the shelf

 

[bessemerbob]

So the bullet drop at 300yrds on the 223 vs 204 are sim as well?


Oh yeah thanks to Barry Obama the snake oil sales man I buy any 38 or 357 in stock these days. Last time I went to walmart they got 2 boxes of 38 in so me and my friend got 1 each......

 

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

What gvnwst said, +1.

 

[Art Eatman]

bb, if you're punching paper at known distances, bullet drop isn't all that important. Approximately, for a 200-yard zero, at 300 yards the .223 will drop right at six inches and the .204 probably between four and five inches. Ballpark, anyway. It's only important on such as prairie dogs at "about" distances when you left your laser rangefinder at home.

But you can figure less wind drift with the heavier bullets which can be used in the .223.

 

[bessemerbob]

Thanks group, all very good points that are backing up my choice in the 223.... Now I have been looking at the Rem 700 SPS for the gun. I like the 700 because of all the ugrades avail. That and I do not have the $900 to start out with a finished higher end range gun.


Note I said higher end, I know you could spend alot more then that...

 

[jaybr]

Have you looked at Tikka or CZ?

 

[gvnwst]

Well, for a super acurate gun, savage is my pick. If i have a budget higher than it (they aren't known for being expensive), i just use that to get better glass

 

[bessemerbob]

You know for the longest time I have been a savage fan, last time I was to the shop and by looking on line it seems they have past remington in cost. I currently have a savage 270WSM that I am going to trade on the 223... Very nice gun but for somebody who dosent hunt with riffle its tooooooo much gun to kill paper with.

 

[gvnwst]

Here is a cheaper savage:http://www.savagearms.com/11fl.htm
I haven't used it personally, but it is a savage.....

 

[alemonkey]

I highly recommend the Savage. A month or so ago I picked up a Savage 12FV. It cost $550 and does this:

http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=433807

 

[bessemerbob]

I really like the 12FV, I think I would get one if I could get it for around $550.

 

[docsleepy]

Savage 12FV -- got one secondhand at a gunshop nearby, quite a step up from the 22's I had. I'm on a budget but with some Remington match 68 gr ammunition, got a 4 shot group a hair over 5/8" center-center....quite a relief after putting hard earned money into a used gun... I think I paid about $470 for the gun. I put a Swift 8-32x 678m scope on it for about $250. I like the accutrigger. The synthetic stock seems out of place with the massive barrel (my teenagers were amazed at its heft). This is pretty cheap accuracy for a newbie like me.

 

[redneck2]

As for caliber, I have a .204 and .223's. While guys want to get into fist fights in the alley over their pet caliber, at 300 there just isn't enough difference (for what you want) to worry about it

.204 has zero recoil and lets you see your hits. Great for the PD thing Art referred to. No big deal for target. .223 will be considerably cheaper to shoot for the non-loader. If you really want to shoot much and want target type accuracy, you'll need to consider loading. A decent set up would pay for itself in a few hundred rounds.

Just a thought....I know you were talking turn bolts, but if you can swing the $$$, you might consider a match/varminter AR. My Bushie is the most accurate gun I own.