Which 204 Ruger

[pisces 0]

Hi,

 

I've just had a talk with my FEO and it's been agreed that a 204 Ruger will best match my hunting requirements.

 

Any recommendations ?

[Deker 3,478]

Hi,

 

I've just had a talk with my FEO and it's been agreed that a 204 Ruger will best match my hunting requirements.

 

Any recommendations ?

 

 

What is your hunting requirement??

 

The .204 still remains a bit of an unknown quantity, they are not easy to find and neither is the ammo, and it isn't cheap!

 

I looked at these a lot about a year ago and decided I didn't have a place for them in my cabinet. They have a very limited area of use IMHO.

 

If you insist, think about the Ruger, but I suggest you forget it.

 

Just my opinion!

[pisces 0]

... What is your hunting requirement?? ....

 

Vermin out to 300 yards and the occasional fox.

 

The FEO also mentioned a 22-250 as an alternative.

[SportingShooter 0]

If I were you I would seek a more popular calibre than the .204.

Some swear by them but others have had a bad experience with them, especially with factory ammo, some find that homeloading is the only way to achieve a decent result.

 

The .22-250 is a good weapon, as is the .223, the former having a slight edge where range is concerned. The ammo for the .22-250 is more expensive than the .223.

 

If you are purely into fox shooting then perhaps look at the .17 Rem Mag.

 

When you say the FEO and yourself agreed on the .204, did he persuade you or was this what you wanted all along?

 

Regards

SS

[Deker 3,478]

... What is your hunting requirement?? ....

 

Vermin out to 300 yards and the occasional fox.

 

The FEO also mentioned a 22-250 as an alternative.

 

 

Both these are fast & flat (22-250 is f*****g noisy as well).

 

Both are very good at what they do but this comes at a price.

 

If you are shooting mainly at longer distances certainly consider these but if you are mainly shooting a bit shorter then.....

a .223 will be easier on the pocket, much wider choice of ammo and guns, happily deal with 300 yards (I've used it at 600 on the range) AND give you much more versatility!

[pisces 0]

..... When you say the FEO and yourself agreed on the .204, did he persuade you or was this what you wanted all along? ...

 

I might have initially suggested it ...

 

 

... a .223 will be easier on the pocket, much wider choice of ammo and guns, happily deal with 300 yards (I've used it at 600 on the range) AND give you much more versatility!

 

Oh, I thought that a .223 would be dropping quickly at 300 yards.

Edited June 3, 2008 by pisces

[Tikka T3 0]

hi mate

ive tried a remmy 700 in .204 leave well alone very expensive on rounds and not many factory rounds around for it .i never tried home loads , i changed to 22.250 and would never change no comparison much harder hitting

same range ,dont listen to 22.250 is noisey load of bollocks i got my 22.250 moderated with t8 and its no louder than my 222 with t4 on

go 22.250 or 222 223

 

 

good luck with your choice

 

t3

[garyw 0]

get yourself a cooper in 20tactical based on the 223 case necked down to 20cal.iv got a custom 20 that out shoots all the 22 c/f.you wont be sorry.

[Mr_Logic 5]

The keyword is vermin.

 

Do you want to spend a quid a bang on a bunny rabbit? If you don't forget everything other than 223 if you don't reload.

 

If you do, 223 is still cheaper - stick a 40gr vmax tip on the end, will do 300 yards easy-peasy and stop fox/vermin very happily when it gets there. It may not be the flashiest calibre around, but the ammo is readily available and it will be with us for a long time. 22-250 is good, but 243 costs the same and hits harder. 204 is new, and meant to be pretty good, but it's very expensive and the ammo is rare.

 

So 223 then

[Guest HARE]

http://www.thehuntinglife.com/forums/index...hl=.204+caliber

[jamie g 17]

i would get the 22/250 use factory ammo save the brass then get a reloading kit and reload for it.

you can have a load of different loads for it. lower fps and higher fps. 52/53 grain amax and varget powder at 34.7 grains 3600fps looks good but work up to the loads and see which is best in your rifle. im going to and im glad ive picked the 22/250 even before ive shot it.

 

done alot of reading upon it and thats the one for me yes ammo is more to buy then 223 but how much do you plan on using it ?

Edited June 4, 2008 by jamie g

[pisces 0]

Thanks for all the very informative replies and, after considering the cost and availablity, maybe a 223 would be more practical.

 

So, as I like Sako and carbines, does anyone know whether it is possible to buy a 223 Sako 85, Stainless, Varmint with a 20" barrel in UK ?

 

Also, if it is possible, has anyone bought one and had good/bad experiences ?

[Tikka T3 0]

hi mate

 

loads of different views

but there was a poll on here a few months back 22.250 won

piss all over 223 range wise ,go on spoil yourself dont cut your self short plenty of ammo around and as said by jamie

home loads work out really cheap if you keep your brass .the 22.250 is flat shooting and in the lamp you will not be aiming off the fox shooting this calibre has to be done to believe it

just awesome

there is a 10% difference between .222 and .223 and i have a .222 i have shot various .223 and there is very little between the two .but use a 22.250 and there a hell of a difference

 

why have a robin reliant when you can have a forula one

 

 

t3

[Deker 3,478]

..... When you say the FEO and yourself agreed on the .204, did he persuade you or was this what you wanted all along? ...

 

I might have initially suggested it ...

 

 

... a .223 will be easier on the pocket, much wider choice of ammo and guns, happily deal with 300 yards (I've used it at 600 on the range) AND give you much more versatility!

 

Oh, I thought that a .223 would be dropping quickly at 300 yards.

 

 

Like for like a .223 will be dropping more than a 22-250 at 300 yards but a light .223 will perform very nearly the same...also ask yourself the question...are they all at 300??? If you are only concerned about the drop and are only shooting at 300 then zero at 300 on a .223 and it goes in the same place every time!

 

Everyone has their own requirements, a 22-250 is excellent at what it does but it is costly in guns and ammo and is nowhere near as versatile as .223, and there is nowhere near the choice of ammo on a .22-250 as there is on a .223. Don't take my word for it, check the web...there is plenty of .223 FACTORY ammo between 14p, FMJ Barnaul etc, and 18p, HP Wolf, see what choice and prices you can find for 22-250?

 

At 300 yards 22-250 will typically be delivering between 560-650 ft lb, and drop 5.25-6.5 inch from a 200yard zero.

 

At 300 yards a .223 will typically be delivering 480-580 ft lb, and drop between 7-9 inches from a 200yard zero....way more than enough to knock down any vermin or fox.

 

Get what you want but get a balanced view before you charge in!

[Brummy 9]

The .204 is a bloody fantastic round mate and if you plan to load bullets it's even better. Personally when I had mine I only used factory Remington 32 grainers and they were bang on.

 

Rob Reynolds has my .204 now and he rates it as well. i think Baldie still has one and rates it highly.

 

Don't believe everything you hear. The .204 is a serious vermin round.

 

Have a look here:

 

Ruger204

 

and here:

 

UK Varminting