.20 Caliber vs. .22 Caliber.

[284winner]

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.

 

[AWS]

When I was living on the northern tier of states my .224's(222, 223, 22-204, 5.6x50R Mag, 22-250) worked really well for pelt hunting. Now living on the southern tier the coyotes aren't near as heavy or heavily furred and there is a greater chance of bobcats, I'm switching over to the 20P. I put together a longer range rig, open country coyotes and varmints and just ordered and new 20" barrel to convert my Rem 600 from 6x45 to 20P for a short light calling rifle to ride on the MC.

Savage action, RB trigger(pic before trigger change), X-caliber barrel, Athlon 2-12x42 scope(top picture it still had a different scope on it)

Getting it done, nary a mark hard to find the bullet hole.

 

[justinp61]

Put all them old, outdated 22-250's in the back of the safes and start shooting .20's! It'll easier for me to find bullets for my dinosaur 22-250. LOL

 

[B23]

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.

For me, the 22-250 is at its best with bullets in the middle weights like the 53gr Vmax and other high BC 55's. I've personally never found the appeal of having all the horsepower/case capacity of the 22-250 or 220 Swift then shooting 40 grainers. I know many do and with great success but for me I think they're at their best with the middle weights like the much higher bc 53-55's.

Same goes for the heavies in a 20 cal. I don't see any point in shooting anything but the Berger 55's in my 20-250.

Now, if you want to compare the 20 cal Berger 55's to any of the 22 cal 53-55's in a 22-250 the ballistic missile looking high BC Berger 55's win all day.

 

[284winner]

Without a doubt, the 204 vs 224 bullet weight to bullet weight has the ballistic advantage. Like the 224 vs 243, 264 vs 284 and 308 vs 338. All the heavy for caliber (224, 264, 308) calibers vs equal weight larger (243, 284, 338) calibers have the same result. It's not until you increase the weight of the bigger caliber bullets (provided they are a high bc bullet) that you begin to see the ballistic separation. Kinda what makes it all so appealing.

 

[searcher]

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.

Yes -these two calibers really are apples and oranges when you speak of heavier bullets - but it sure is nice to be able to continue firing a .204 long after one is sizzling bacon on the .22/250 barrel. And unless one has a really good brake - the view of impacts through the scope is really diminished in the 22/250. Comparatively, a braked 10+ pound .204 is like shooting a pellet gun with the reach of a .223 and light bullets.