.204

[roebuck243 2]

Not sure on long range target shooting but for vermin control 204 well what a cracking round I load my own 39gr SBK and shoot a hell of a lot of foxes with it. I've shot 11 so far this week all with the 204 . Would I use this calibre if I didn't shoot some built up areas im not sure. But what I do like is the bullet very rarely exits the fox which is great reasurement some times. It certainly knocks them down but and its a big but you have to be a little more shot placement critical as it's not always a case of banging cross hairs on fox and pulling trigger like a lot of YouTube clips otherwise you will have runners.

Don't get me wrong I love other things about it like no recoil or muzzle flip you can see the fox go down and very rarely a bullet exit, I shoot it at night 95% of time, sometimes close to houses so noise is also helpful . Tikka T3 had a lot of hammer up on top of truck and it shoots great.

If I lived in North Scotland would I use this calibre I'm not sure probably go slightly larger but for the minute it's great tool.

Edited January 3, 2015 by roebuck243

[ianm 2,594]

I got rid of my .223 and got two .204s instead and i can honestly say i haven't had a runner with .204 but i had plenty with the .223. Having said that i have seen runners with .22.250 and .243, i don't know what the chap in the clip is using but my homeloaded 32grn rounds drop them on the spot.

[charlie caller 3,654]

Look chaps its like this, it does not matter one jot what calibre you use, I have seen a fox run shot with a .308, not far but run all the same,if the bullet is not quite in the right place the animal will run a bit, sometimes it is in exactly the right place and it still runs, deer or fox, just buy a .222 for foxing and forget the rest apart from the .243 of course.

[Deker 3,450]

Look chaps its like this, it does not matter one jot what calibre you use, I have seen a fox run shot with a .308, not far but run all the same,if the bullet is not quite in the right place the animal will run a bit, sometimes it is in exactly the right place and it still runs, deer or fox, just buy a .222 for foxing and forget the rest apart from the .243 of course.

 

 

 

it does not matter one jot what calibre you use, if the bullet is not quite in the right place the animal will run a bit

 

Edited January 4, 2015 by Deker

[ianm 2,594]

Look chaps its like this, it does not matter one jot what calibre you use, I have seen a fox run shot with a .308, not far but run all the same,if the bullet is not quite in the right place the animal will run a bit, sometimes it is in exactly the right place and it still runs, deer or fox, just buy a .222 for foxing and forget the rest apart from the .243 of course.

 

 

You are quite right in what you say, all apart from the .222 bit

[charlie caller 3,654]

No Ian, .222 is the calibre the gods would choose.

[danw 1,748]

No Ian, .222 is the calibre the gods would choose.

Shortly after they had picked up a .25 lol

[ianm 2,594]

No Ian, .222 is the calibre the gods would choose.

Only if they where OLD gods wearing loden hats and smoking pipes.

[charlie caller 3,654]

Ah but of course the gods are very old, but I suppose you would have them using a .223 whilst wearing a tracksuit and hoody

[DeerhoundLurcherMan 997]

All hail the chav calibre!!!

[ianm 2,594]

Ah but of course the gods are very old, but I suppose you would have them using a .223 whilst wearing a tracksuit and hoody

I wouldn't give a .223 to someone i didn't like, they are like dog shit and range rovers, one on every street corner.

[Alsone 789]

There's an interesting opinion on the .204 from a shooting journalist who owns one personally here:

 

http://www.gunmart.net/accessories_review/hornady_204_ruger

 

The thing that would most put me off is the fact that he states that to achieve Hornady's official velocity figures you have to use a 26" barrel and that his experience has shown that even taking a couple of inches off, drops the performance significantly.

 

26" is a hell of a long gun before you get a mod on!!

[Deker 3,450]

There's an interesting opinion on the .204 from a shooting journalist who owns one personally here:

 

http://www.gunmart.net/accessories_review/hornady_204_ruger

 

The thing that would most put me off is the fact that he states that to achieve Hornady's official velocity figures you have to use a 26" barrel and that his experience has shown that even taking a couple of inches off, drops the performance significantly.

 

26" is a hell of a long gun before you get a mod on!!

 

I think it is quite well known that the .204 does indeed need a flagpole of a barrel to get .204 performance, start hacking that down to manageable lengths and the whole point of the .204 has been lost.

 

From my relatively limited experience of them, and their owners issues, they can also be particularly ammo fussy, more so than many calibres.

 

They suit/work for some, but I think it is a calibre to research well, and really define your use, before you put your hand in your pocket.

[ianm 2,594]

The whole barrel length thing is a bit of a myth as far as i am concerned. A friend of mine has a remmy 26" barrel and i own two, a 20" and a 24" and i can state quite catagorically the difference between the long and short version is 150fps.

 

How do i know? well i made the effort on three seperate occasions to go and test them with a chrono. The 26" and 24" barreled versions returned speeds of 4,250 using a 32grn home load, actually the 24" was marginally faster which isn't that surprising as 23" is the optimum length. The 20" version managed a pitifull 4,100 fps . The 150fps makes no odds at all in the real world. I have shot fox out to 350yds with the "short" one and they just drop on the spot.

 

My current set up is a n750 on the 20" supervarmint purely for night work and a minox on my 24" supervarmint for day shooting. I have developed another load using 26grn barnes varmint grenades mainly for long range crows etc, these are doing circa 4,400fps. I gave my mate some of these last winter to try and he shot over 40 foxes with them at ranges up to 320yds .

 

Why do i like the .204 over the .223 etc?. Well for me it's such a sweet shooting calibre. It's very flat, with a 1" high zero at 100yds i can still just put the scopes dot on a rabbit at 300yds and make a good kill. There is virtually no recoil at all so you never lose the sight picture. Contrary to what you may have read it isn't ammo fussy using the powder i do it makes no difference whether you load at the top or bottom.of the parameters they still virtually one hole group.Some rifles may not group with 40 grn ammo as the twist rate in the rifling is marginal for that weight of bullet hence why sierra do a 39grn blitzking. But for me 32grn tramping on at a sedate 4,000 fps+ is where it's at. Both my rifles group nicely with 40 grn but i never use them (no need). If i felt the need for a heavier bullet i would simply use my .243 with my 55grn homeloads which has a similar trajectory to the .204 but obviously carries more energy and isn't half as sweet to shoot.

[Deker 3,450]

I had not read the Gunmart article when I responded in #28 above, but having now scanned through it I am surprised at how much I can relate to the article/calibre.

 

I have also experienced a massive surface V-Max splash on a fox which merely stunned it (fortunately a quick follow up did the job). Virtually no penetration whatsoever, just pealed the skin back over a 75-100mm very shallow crater, he was most definitely getting up and about to run away.

 

If the calibre works for you and it does your intended job then fine, but as I say, consider it carefully before investing, this is not for everyone!

 

ATB!