Should I get a .204 Ruger?

[Ledd Slinger]

Its a little off track, but I do have a 6mm Remington that I use with 75gr Sierra HP bullets. Run them around 3475 fps and they are absolutely vicious on any ground burrowing animal. But like the 22-250 it cannot be rapid fired for very long without overheating. So if a large rifle cartridge is a consideration, I would choose a fast 6mm cartridge like my 6mm Rem over a 22-250 any day. It outshines the 22-250 in every way.

 

[LipschitzWrath]

Yep, I have a 6mm rem too. And I was thinking the exact same thing...

Better double-duty deer rifle, too (IMHO).

Hogdonreloading.com has a 58-gr V-MAX load for 6mm Rem that comes out the barrel at 3,946! WHOA!

 

[Ledd Slinger]

Hogdonreloading.com has a 58-gr V-MAX load for 6mm Rem that comes out the barrel at 3,946! WHOA!

Ouch!

 

[th82457]

This whole discussion may lead you back to a 20 Vartarg - if you want to burn lot's of ammo in a dog town. I use 18.5 RL-7 behind a 32 V-Max and get fantastic accuracy, can see bullet impact and only give up about 350 fps to a 204. Recoil is definitely much less than my 204 or .223. Much closer to a 22 lr. Just my two cents, can never have too many fun guns ! Great topic with no one correct answer.

 

[snert]

the 22-250 fis really nice in a coyote gun (carry) or an eastern groundhog gun. For volumn shooting, go smaller.

I personally love my 22-250 but would never take it PD hunting

 

[LipschitzWrath]

Snert, what do you use your .22-250 for primarily then? Coyotes? Where I'm at on the 250 right now is that with all these other smaller, less-recoiling, more economical calibers at my fingertips, I feel like if I owned a 250 it would hardly ever get shot. I MUST be forgetting something here.

 

[drover]

The JBM calculator was used to achieve these figures and can be verified there or with any other good ballistic program. In order to do a fair comparison all velocities and powder charge information was taken from Nosler load manual #7. I used Nosler Balllistic Tip bullet for all comparisons and the velocity figures were the highest listed for each cartridge/bullet combo. Nothing was changed in the calculations except the caliber, velocity, etc. All calculations used the same scope height, zero range, etc.

Note that the velocities were achieved with a 26 inch barrel for the 204 and a 24 inch barrel for the 223 which means that the 223 gave up at least 50 fps due to the shorter barrel length.

The difference between the 204 and the 223 using 40 gr bullets is so slight as to be insignificant.


204 - 32 gr Nosler BT/ bc 206/ vel 4158/31 gr powder - 26" barrel
recoil 7.5# rifle - 5.3 ft/s

300 yd drop -6.3/ energy473 ft lbs
400 yd drop -16.6/ energy 330.9 ft lbs
500 yd drop -34.4/ energy 224.6 ft lbs


204 - 40 gr Nosler BT/bc 239/vel 3815/29.5 gr powder - 26" barrel
recoil 7.5# rifle - 5.5 ft/s

300 yd drop -7.3/ energy 567.0 ft lbs
400 yd drop -18.6/ energy 417.3 ft lbs
500 yd drop -37.2/ energy 300.8 ft lbs


223 - 40 gr Nosler BT/bc 221/vel 3907/28.5 gr powder - 24" barrel
recoil 7.5# rifle - 5.5 ft/s

300 yd drop -7.2/ energy 556.5 ft lbs
400 yd drop -18.4/ energy 398.5 ft lbs
500 yd drop -37.4/ energy 278.6 ft lbs

As can be seen the 32 gr bullet has the least drop but it also has the least energy at all 3 yardages.

The 40 gr bullets out of the 204 and 223 are near identical with a slight edge of 22 ft/lbs of energy for the 204 at 500 yds - hardly significant.
Both the 204 and 223 with 40 gr bullets have an edge of over 70 ft lbs more over the 32 gr bullet at both 400 and 500 yds

The more explosive effect of the 204 can be attributed to the thinner jacket of the 204 bullet, the same thing that makes them less than idea for coyotes.

Another thing to note is that for recoil using like weight rifles the 32 has 5.3 ft/s and both 40's have 5/5 ft/s, a difference of .2 - again hardly significant and there is no difference in recoil between the 204 and 223 when using the 40's.

All the above are squarely in line with what I have observed with having tried three 204's before realizing that they were nearly identical to a 223.
I am not taking anything away from the 204 or trying to make the 223 into more than it is, rather I am just pointing out that the difference is not as much as the gun-rags and gun-writers would have us believe. Physics do not lie, however gun-writers do not always tell the whole truth.

As mentioned above the 20 Vartarg is a better "bang for the buck" than the 204.

drover

This should get the fires burning!

 

[2dogs]

I got myself a Remington 700 204 Ruger. With my 26" factory barrel running 32 grain Hornady SuperPerformance ammo I sure aint seeing 4000+ fps. More like 3850, which was a bit disappointing. However, even with the factory trigger it has demonstrated pretty dang good accuracy. So, I will try some loads. But for me, the 223 AI 40 grain NBT @4000 remains the benchmark. I intend to find out for myself where the 204 fits in.

So, I say yes you should get one. Beats staying home and watching TV.

 

[Ledd Slinger]

I push the 39gr Sierra Blitzing bullets from a 26" barrel in my 204 Ruger at 4015 fps using RL15. Reloading manuals may say one thing, but the true ballistics potential of the 204 with handloading is a bit better. The Sierra BK has the highest BC (.287) of any 204 bullet 40gr and under. Even higher than the 40gr Berger which has a BC of only .221

So using that bullet at 4000+ fps (if possible in your rifle) makes the 204 a pretty mean little machine And that is where it's 'niche' is found.

My load produces a trajectory with about a 5" drop at 300 yards and a 500 yard drop of about 28" when zeroed at 100 yards. That's quite a bit better than the 223 for sure.

 

[mikeinct]

Yes to a 20 caliber...The distances you shoot at will determine which bullet you need to load for..32grs up close really fast shooting or for my style of ground hog hunting ..I love that 39 gr Sierra BK in my custom barreled Sako Varmint .I had it chambered in the older TAC 20 caliber...223 just necked down ..I use off the shelf Redding dies.. I use the seater die to step it down before using the sizing die on odd lots of 223 brass..Now Lapua makes Tac 20 brass..Even Better!!! Mine came w Dakota head stamps..Good lot of brass..I started out here in east [mid seventies]many years ago with a varmint weight barrel in 22-250...it Was Thee GH rifle caliber, back in the day..It is still my Fav in a walkaround type Lt Varmint rifle..But If you do a lot of shooting between 300M to 500M.. That 39 gr bullet in a 20 cal is a much better choice..Compared to old 55gr load in the 22-250...After distances beyond 500M I use the a standard 243 Win in a varmint weight barrel..I like the Berger 88Gr flat base bullet..But I've been using 100 gr bullets with better accuracy between say 600 to 800 Meters..Pick up a 20 caliber..Load it well & it will make you happy..Longer Barrel life, uses less powder..& The Higher BC of that 20 cal 39Gr bullet won't let you down up to 500M...Good Luck, mike in Ct..I hunt in Western PA...

 

[searcher]

As covered by DROVER, I agree with his assessment of how close the .223 and .204 are. I have both in several different rifles and rotate them, shooting all day at high volume targets around 30 days a year, mostly at ground squirrels and some coyotes. If all the ammo were handed to me, I'd take the .204 by a very slight margin. When reloading it myself, it becomes a draw because of the extra effort with the .204 Practical brass preparation and the additional brass expense of the .204 Ruger over that of the .223. I know the .204 Practical was not one of the calibers asked about, but since others are bringing it up, a word about the brass prep should at least be mentioned. Necking down is as simple as running through a die - but to get it to perform superbly - I needed to turn the necks to make them uniform. Could just be my brass or technique - but you don't have those issues with factory brass, either in .204 Ruger or .223. The .204 is also a higher pressure cartridge than the .223, requiring more brass maintenance and a lot less brass life if shot from a semi-auto. I favor 39 Blitz Kings in my .204 and 40 grn V-Maxes in the .223 and in actual field conditions, both shoot about as well as the other, while the V-Max cost less. The difference is usually how well one read the wind much more so than how the wind affected the bullet.

All said, if I had the time for all the brass prep (I do), I'd take the .204 Ruger or .204 Practical, with the nod to the Practical if you have a lot of .223 brass lying around. I'd just as easily be happy with the .223, so yes, I'd say adding a .204 would be redundant for sure. I'd also pass on the 22/250 unless your objectives turned more to longer range coyotes or something. To go beyond the 500 or so yards your .223 or .204 will easily cover, I'd use your 6mm. If your .223 is light in weight, add a brake. Even with the 40 grain bullets, you will experience a greatly reduced recoil for better follow-ups and hit viewing.

 

[LipschitzWrath]

I agree almost whole-heartedly with what you said. I looked long and hard at the .20 Practical since I have a lot of .223 guns and consequently, a lot of brass.

However...

There are some other things to consider.

The first one is cost. Some of you may have a spare bolt gun laying around that you are wanting to rebarrel. I do not, and so the discussion on cost-effectiveness ends there. If I have to buy a bolt gun to get a 20 caliber, why not just buy the .204? Okay, now lets assume I do have an old shot out bolt action .223 that I want to convert to .20 practical. Barrel + rechambering is $500-600 around my parts. Hell, I can get a Remington 700 SPS Varmint in .204 Ruger for $567 off gunbuyer.com. Some will argue that you don't need a new barrel if you rechamber a .204 or .20 Vartarg. Well if you have either of those, I doubt you're salivating to drop $175 to go to a different .20 caliber. You can save SOME money if you have a .17 barrel to bore and rechamber, but we're still talking $400 here.

In all the cases above, a true DIY're can probably save by renting the reamer and rechambering himself. Those on an AR platform cand get a new barrel from BHW for $350 and the gun is taken care of. But you're not done spending money.

Which brings me to my next point - brass. Well, actually, this is more about dies. It's a "Practical" cartridge because you take regular old .223 brass and neck it down to to .204 using a neck bushing type sizing die (possibly thru multiple steps). The two most popular brands of dies are Redding Type S ($150 for 2-die set) and RCBS Gold Medal ($130). Compare this to $35 for a regular old RCBS 2-Die FL sizing die set for a .204 Ruger. If you already have .223 bushing neck sizer die, this is moot. But I do not. So again, I would need to spend around $100 or more extra for the dies to make the .20 Practical brass.

.223 Brass is cheap and plentiful, no one can refute that. .204 Ruger brass is rare at the moment, but I have not had trouble finding loaded ammunition. Best price so far I have found is for Fiocchi, at $35/box of 50. May not be the best ammo, but it gives you some brass to reload.

Based on all this, it seems that there is a pretty steep initial investment to make use of cheap, plentiful brass in a .20 caliber with performance nearly identical with a factory .204 Ruger.

Plus there are other intangibles, like brass headstamped with the correct caliber (no longer an issue for the .20 Tactical folks).

For me, since I don't own a bolt action gun I'm willing to convert to a .20 Practical, I'm better off financially to buy a .204 Ruger and use the money saved on rechambering and dies to buy ammo/components. I would bet you are in the thousands of rounds (if not tens of thousands) before the .20 Practical pays on brass cost and powder efficiency.

I am NOT ragging on the Practical. It is a high-po round with some very redeeming virtues. I am merely saying that for someone in my situation, buying a plain jane .204 Ruger is the more cost-effective option. The even more cost-effective option is to shoot 40gr pills out of any one of the NUMEROUS .223 rifles I own.

I hope I didn't offend anyone, but these are just the observations I have made. I have tried to be objective about it all....

 

[th82457]

You are correct in your cost assessment regarding dies, brass & cost to re-barrel a gun. I have an AR .223, a CZ bolt .223, a CZ bolt .204 and a CZ bolt 20VT that started life as a .221 fireball. They all shoot very well. But of all the factory rounds - I prefer the .204. The VT is my favorite - but unfortunately the gun and ammunition makers have not discovered how popular this would be as a factory round. I have yet to see a factory 204 that shoots poorly. I like the CZ's for consistent accuracy and their set trigger. Butt ugly clip magazines, but quality guns. I have had very good brass life on two different CZ 204's, but I do not hot rod my loads. I have a very accurate load using IMR 8208 under a Sierra 39 BK or a Nosler 40 gr ballistic tip using both Winchester and Norma brass that seems very easy on the brass. I can not get the 40 gr Hornady V-Max to shoot in a 204, yet a 40 gr 224 V-Max in my 223 shots very well. Just my experience. Good Luck with whatever you decide on.

 

[DogBuster]

The 20 practical is worth a look as well.

+1.........brass is more common........

1-2 grs less powder per rd.....dies ??

223 Redding bushing neck die...Forster 204R BR seater...223 FL or

body die of your choice...Redding or Forster for me......

 

[LipschitzWrath]

... I can not get the 40 gr Hornady V-Max to shoot in a 204, yet a 40 gr 224 V-Max in my 223 shots very well...

I've heard the same. What I read is that the standard 1:14 twist on a .204 is marginal for 40gr pills. Seems some people are fine, others can't do it. Read further that most people that can't stabilize a 40gr VMAX have success stabilizing 39gr Sierra BK's. Sounds like you already figured that out!

 

[th82457]

Most 204's are 1:12 twist as is my CZ. Some guy's re-barrel to 1 in 11 twist. Not sure who makes one with a 1 in 14 twist But no matter, I have had no success with the 40 V-Max.

 

[LipschitzWrath]

The 20 practical is worth a look as well.

+1.........brass is more common........

1-2 grs less powder per rd.....dies ??

223 Redding bushing neck die...Forster 204R BR seater...223 FL or

body die of your choice...Redding or Forster for me......

Yep, see what I said two posts up. Brass is indeed more common. You can use this fact, coupled with the 1-2gr powder savings, to begin to do a cost justification to why it is wiser to chose a .20Prac over a .204R.

However, like I said, there is a heavy initial investment. Let's put some numbers to this to demonstrate. Lets say I can get 8lbs of H335 for $140. With a .20P, I save 2gr powder over a .204R. This means that per round, I am saving $140/(7000gr/lb * 8lb / 2gr/rnd) = 0.5 CENTS per round. Half a penny!

Let's forget the cost of the gun for now and only look at the cost of the dies. As I mentioned, a Redding Type S bushing neck size 2 die set is going for $150 or so at MidwayUSA right now. RCBS Gold Medal Bushing Sizer Die set is going for $130. You need one of these two to make the .20P. Let's say $135 to make the numbers even. Now, a standard RCBS 2-die set for a .204 Ruger is going for $35. So, the difference in cost of dies is $100.

At half a cent per round, JUST TO RECOVER THE COST OF THE DIES, you need to fire (100.00 / 0.005) = 20,000 rounds of .20P!

Now, I will grant you that this was an overly simple comparison because I didn't factor in brass. But I think the point I am making is evident now. For every $100 you spend making a .20 Practical and corresponding ammo, you have quite a few rounds through the bore before it pays. Not so bad when it might only be the dies, but if you drop $400-600 to rebarrle/rechamber, chances are you will shoot that barrel out before you ever get your money back.

Now money isn't everything and there are some factors here that can't be quantified. But I think it goes to show that although some of these small calibers may be more efficient in the powder usage dept, if you have to spend any kind of significant money to acquire them, you may be money ahead going with something more mainstream.

Of course, if you WANT a .20 Practical and have no other reason besides that, and don't really care if it costs you some money - well, that's all the justification you need!

 

[LipschitzWrath]

Most 204's are 1:12 twist as is my CZ. Some guy's re-barrel to 1 in 11 twist. Not sure who makes one with a 1 in 14 twist But no matter, I have had no success with the 40 V-Max.

You're right, I was thinking the .22-250. Remington is all 12" as well. For example,

http://remington.com/products/firearms/centerfire/model-700/model-700-sps-varmint.aspx

 

[DogBuster]

who builds a 204R 14 twist ? all you need for the 20 PT

Dies...http://www.midwayusa.com/product/676249/redding-type-s-bushing-full-length-sizer-die-223-remington?cm_vc=ProductFinding

add one $15 .227" bushing

one Forster 204R seater
http://www.midwayusa.com/product/990854/forster-bench-rest-seater-die-204-ruger?cm_vc=ProductFinding

 

[LipschitzWrath]

who builds a 204R 14 twist ? all you need for the 20 PT

Dies...http://www.midwayusa.com/product/676249/redding-type-s-bushing-full-length-sizer-die-223-remington?cm_vc=ProductFinding

add one $15 .227" bushing

one Forster 204R seater
http://www.midwayusa.com/product/990854/forster-bench-rest-seater-die-204-ruger?cm_vc=ProductFinding

Yeah that was my bad. I was thinking .22-250 for Remington. Rem's are 1:12 for .204R as well.

And yes. For dies, that's all you need. The only other thing you need is...

A .20 practical rifle. Which for someone like me mean that you need to rebarrel and rechamber a rifle. Which is $500 around here.

Like I said, for some it makes sense. If you were planning on rebarrel ing a rifle anyway as then the cost is nothing, since you will likely pay the same whether you go with a .223 or .20P.

But

If you are like me and don't have a rifle in line for a new barrel, then u have to buy a gun anyways. So best I can do is buy a used rifle for (at best) $400 and rebarrel it for $500. That's $900 when I can buy a brand new .204 for $567.

That's $330 for ammo and/or components. And from my cost analysis above, it will take probably in excess of 5000 rounds to make up. Cost of brass is only going to factor in every 8-10 reloads. This may widen the margin.

Based on my cost analysis (and remember this is ONLY from a cost standpoint), although the .20 Practical seems more economical from a reloading perspective due to the plentiful brass and better powder efficiency, those marginal improvements take a very long time to pay off a large investment.

Again, there are intangibles that can't be factored in to a cost analysis. The last several posts have been purely cost related.