I've heard many reviews of the 204 vs the 22-250 in a comparison. Most or many at least saying they dropped their 22-250s for the 204 Ruger. The 204 pushing 40s nearly 4000 vs the 22-250 pushing the same weight bullet roughly equal. BC of the .204 being much higher. I get that perspective but I'm a realist and after owning my .204 and running it for a couple years with everything from 40-55 grain Berger's, I do not find it more appealing than a .204. Sure there may be a niche for the .204 but for me the 22-250 is much more versatile and personally I compare the 53 VMAX in a .22-250 to the 40 VMAX in .204. Much more of a fair comparison due to the caliber increase of the .224. At that point the .204 isn't in the same class and shouldn't be. I love all calibers and cartridges but let's face it, it's just not easy comparing apples to oranges. Compare 204 to 204. Case capacity will make the difference. The 224 offers a much larger variety of bullet weights. Makes it a pretty versatile caliber. I'm keeping my 204 as it fills the niche for a very low recoil Lazer in a lightweight gun, especially suppressed. It can't replace my 22-250 with 53s or 75s. It's a cartridge in its own class for sure.