Black Snowman
Member
I like high velocities but I'll be getting a .220 Swift first, barrel life be damned! 
New Rifle Cartridge -- .204 Ruger
- Thread starter Guntalk
- Start date
- Status
"I'm with whoever stated, ""Why have a dozen run-of-the-mill rifles in strange and wonderful calibers when for the same price you can have four top grade firearms?""
I think the problem here is that for some reason, some people seem to think their is some kind of limit. What if I own four top grade firearms AND a dozen run of the mill rifles ? What if I own six dozen top grade rifles ? Who decides what makes a run of the mill rifle ? What if a run of the mill rifle fits my needs exactly ? As things stand right now I can own whatever I want; I don't have to decide between this and that. I own numerous .22 LRs, I own a couple .22 WRMs, I own a number of .223s (two bolt guns and 13 AR15s) , I own a .22-250. If I want a .204 Ruger, then I will buy one of those also.
I have never understood the argument that because I own "X" I can't own "Y". Why can't I ?
I think the problem here is that for some reason, some people seem to think their is some kind of limit. What if I own four top grade firearms AND a dozen run of the mill rifles ? What if I own six dozen top grade rifles ? Who decides what makes a run of the mill rifle ? What if a run of the mill rifle fits my needs exactly ? As things stand right now I can own whatever I want; I don't have to decide between this and that. I own numerous .22 LRs, I own a couple .22 WRMs, I own a number of .223s (two bolt guns and 13 AR15s) , I own a .22-250. If I want a .204 Ruger, then I will buy one of those also.
I have never understood the argument that because I own "X" I can't own "Y". Why can't I ?
Black Snowman
Member
Well 444, in my case it's budget constraints
I'm with you though, although most of my best firearms were gifts. I buy what I want. I almost made the mistake of buying an "investment" gun when I came into some money and then realised that I don't sell my guns so an "investment" weapon is pointless. So, instead of picking up a "AWB" gun I got what I really wanted, a dead-on accurate high-power rifle. A good-ole new fangled bolt gun.
Now, given budget contraints having the choice of a dozen inexpensive rifles with calibers to suit every possible scenario and having a few rifles I hand-load to taste I'd agree with the previous posters that I'd rather sacrifice "perfect choice" balistics for a quality weapon.
Best instance I can think of for this what when I took way too much gun deer hunting. I had the choice of a few rifles at the time including some better suited calibers but I took a .340 Weatherby Magnum for my 1st deer hunt because I had absolute confidence in the rifle. I ended up destroying a lot of meat unnessisarily but I know that deer didn't suffer either.
Given the choice I went quality over "perfect match" cartridge and I'd do it again.
I'm with you though, although most of my best firearms were gifts. I buy what I want. I almost made the mistake of buying an "investment" gun when I came into some money and then realised that I don't sell my guns so an "investment" weapon is pointless. So, instead of picking up a "AWB" gun I got what I really wanted, a dead-on accurate high-power rifle. A good-ole new fangled bolt gun.
Now, given budget contraints having the choice of a dozen inexpensive rifles with calibers to suit every possible scenario and having a few rifles I hand-load to taste I'd agree with the previous posters that I'd rather sacrifice "perfect choice" balistics for a quality weapon.
Best instance I can think of for this what when I took way too much gun deer hunting. I had the choice of a few rifles at the time including some better suited calibers but I took a .340 Weatherby Magnum for my 1st deer hunt because I had absolute confidence in the rifle. I ended up destroying a lot of meat unnessisarily but I know that deer didn't suffer either.
Given the choice I went quality over "perfect match" cartridge and I'd do it again.
Mike Irwin
Member
"I like high velocities but I'll be getting a .220 Swift first, barrel life be damned!"
Don't firewall every round out of the Swift, trying to get that magical 4,100 fps., and your barrel will last a LONG time. At about 3,800 fps you have virtually the same reach, not much more trajectory, and as a bonus most Swifts that I've worked with a TURBO accurate with 45 and 50 grain bullets in that zone.
The Swift also benefits greatly from modern powder technology, and modern barrel steels.
Don't firewall every round out of the Swift, trying to get that magical 4,100 fps., and your barrel will last a LONG time. At about 3,800 fps you have virtually the same reach, not much more trajectory, and as a bonus most Swifts that I've worked with a TURBO accurate with 45 and 50 grain bullets in that zone.
The Swift also benefits greatly from modern powder technology, and modern barrel steels.
I still go back to the .17 Remington, and a bud who hunted fur with one. He thought it would be ideal for minimizing pelt damage. He sold it after having to shoot a bobcat 4 times with it, all 4 times at less than 100 yards. If those little bullets expand, they work, if not, they don't. He went back to his Swift.
I have a couple really good .22's, a Hornet, and a couple .22-250's. I will at some point get a Bolt Action .223, though I keep threatening to buy one of those Remington Classic Fireballs
I have a couple really good .22's, a Hornet, and a couple .22-250's. I will at some point get a Bolt Action .223, though I keep threatening to buy one of those Remington Classic Fireballs
That wasn't my point. You can own as many rifles as you want. The constant hype of new cartridges seems to attempt to convince folks that what they have isn't good enough and the latest whiz bang is what they really, really need. Instead of having a dozen rifles in whatever brainchild the factories come up with next I'd rather have 4 rifles of premium quality in .223, 6.5x55, 30-06 and .375. It's a personal choice and with one exception the new cartridges haven't convinced me of the wisdom of buying more rifles in pursuit of an " improvement" that is largely imaginary when it comes to field use.
We need a bigger shamed-faced icon!! [ducking head in shame]
How did I read "Sectional Density" into "B.C."?!? Lord knows, I know the difference well enough.
I will say, though, that the Balistic Coefficient of the new .204 bullet is still as good as the 40g Hornet bullet (at 3kfps+).
Note that BC's sometimes are unpredictable at hypersonic velocities.
[ducking head in shame]How did I read "Sectional Density" into "B.C."?!? Lord knows, I know the difference well enough.
I will say, though, that the Balistic Coefficient of the new .204 bullet is still as good as the 40g Hornet bullet (at 3kfps+).
Note that BC's sometimes are unpredictable at hypersonic velocities.
Art Eatman
Moderator In Memoriam
.20 cleaning rods are scarce? Nah. The welding-supply shops are full of them.
, Art
, Artmacavada
Member
I guess Ruger must be doing something right. Look at all the interest they're generating here. Most positive receptions wont be documented. Only those that want to criticize Ruger for "selling out" on the assault weapons ban. I'm not saying that William Ruger was correct in saying that people shouldn't need any more than 10 rounds. But Ruger does support pro second amendment legislation. We need all the help we can get. Even though some of the larger manufacturers make dumb compromises once in a while, for political reasons, by and large, they are the backbone that supports pro second amendment rights. Do you think some of the small mom and pop custom manufacturers are driving second amendment lobbying? Of course not. It is the big manufacturers that move volume that have the most PAC money.
Besides, with all the hype about with the .17 HRM, why shouldn't Ruger jump on the bandwaggon. They'd be dumb not to. All these gun manufacturers are watching each other's business moves and copying eachother all the time... my little rant.
Maybe I had too much wine tonight.
Besides, with all the hype about with the .17 HRM, why shouldn't Ruger jump on the bandwaggon. They'd be dumb not to. All these gun manufacturers are watching each other's business moves and copying eachother all the time... my little rant.
Maybe I had too much wine tonight.
My rule for buying new guns is, "will it meet a need not already met by something else I already have?"
Of course, I liberally interpet said rules, after all, I can always justify another Colt 10mm as it will give me a brace of them
The .22's I have, both rim and centerfire, are neat guns - the #1 in .22-250 is a dream that shoots as good as it looks. My Browning Lo-wall .22 Hornet is nice, but I would like to find a bolt action mid-size .22. Call it a no excuses rifle that can be shot a lot, without frying the barrel or breaking the budget. When I shoot..."no excuses"...if I miss, I know it's me, not the gun or ammo.
I think the right calibers for this would be a Fireball or a .223, partly because the ammo and rifles are readily avalable, and reasonably priced. They are considerably different in function than anything else I own, so it's a fair addition to the collection.
This new Ruger might be a fast stepper, but unless Ruger puts a really smooth bore on it, it's going to foul like crazy. Long barrel life is good, but having to clean the bore every 20 shots ain't much fun.
Will the .204 reach out further than my .22-250? Well, maybe I guess, but I expect a 50 grain bullet launching at 3800 fps is going to be awfully close to the same results at 400 yards. I can load the same 50 grain bullet in the fireball, or in the .223, or in a Swift, for that matter.
So all that said, if I didn't already have a .22-250, or a Swift, I might consider this .204 as my long range varmiteer. Since I (and a lot of other folks) already own something close to it in performance, I can't see any reason to add this caliber. Mind you, if six months from now I stumble on a slightly used, .204 Ruger in a 40xb with a Exhibition Turkish walnut stock, at a reasonable price, I will probably flex my rules and strongly desire a .204
Of course, I liberally interpet said rules, after all, I can always justify another Colt 10mm as it will give me a brace of them
The .22's I have, both rim and centerfire, are neat guns - the #1 in .22-250 is a dream that shoots as good as it looks. My Browning Lo-wall .22 Hornet is nice, but I would like to find a bolt action mid-size .22. Call it a no excuses rifle that can be shot a lot, without frying the barrel or breaking the budget. When I shoot..."no excuses"...if I miss, I know it's me, not the gun or ammo.
I think the right calibers for this would be a Fireball or a .223, partly because the ammo and rifles are readily avalable, and reasonably priced. They are considerably different in function than anything else I own, so it's a fair addition to the collection.
This new Ruger might be a fast stepper, but unless Ruger puts a really smooth bore on it, it's going to foul like crazy. Long barrel life is good, but having to clean the bore every 20 shots ain't much fun.
Will the .204 reach out further than my .22-250? Well, maybe I guess, but I expect a 50 grain bullet launching at 3800 fps is going to be awfully close to the same results at 400 yards. I can load the same 50 grain bullet in the fireball, or in the .223, or in a Swift, for that matter.
So all that said, if I didn't already have a .22-250, or a Swift, I might consider this .204 as my long range varmiteer. Since I (and a lot of other folks) already own something close to it in performance, I can't see any reason to add this caliber. Mind you, if six months from now I stumble on a slightly used, .204 Ruger in a 40xb with a Exhibition Turkish walnut stock, at a reasonable price, I will probably flex my rules and strongly desire a .204
kentucky bucky
Member
It reminds me of when tobacco companies flood the retail market with new "brands" of cigs. For some reason it stimulates sales for a while, but nothing new is at hand except on the labels.
seeker_two
Member
Guntalk:
You still haven't answered my question....
You still haven't answered my question....
Most of the early replies here compare this to the 17HMR and such.
- No such comparison! It is spec'd at 4200fps. Not 2200 or 2600fps.
The 22-250 and swift use too much powder to accomplish what they do.
The 223 is a bit slow.
I saw a pic of a fox shot with a 17-Mach-IV that blew a huge hole it it's side. They do seem to work. I think the velocity there is about 4000fps.
* I just shot a prairie dog at 548 yards with a 223 and 55grn psp. It was too far for that cartridge. I would have loved to have been using a 40grn and a lot more velocity. Anything over about 300 yards were pretty hard to hit and the drop climed quickly.
- No such comparison! It is spec'd at 4200fps. Not 2200 or 2600fps.
The 22-250 and swift use too much powder to accomplish what they do.
The 223 is a bit slow.
I saw a pic of a fox shot with a 17-Mach-IV that blew a huge hole it it's side. They do seem to work. I think the velocity there is about 4000fps.
* I just shot a prairie dog at 548 yards with a 223 and 55grn psp. It was too far for that cartridge. I would have loved to have been using a 40grn and a lot more velocity. Anything over about 300 yards were pretty hard to hit and the drop climed quickly.
- Status
