204 or 22-250
 

Wow, can't make up my mind. I usually don't ask opionions like this but thought maybe somebody thought of something I didn't. I know I can do what I want to do with either. Long range killing any varmits I decide too.

After studying the Reloading data, it appears, I can reach 4K FPS with 29gr of powder with a 204ruger where with a22-250, it would take me near 40gr. I have alot more choice of bullets with a 22-250, but the claim is the more bearing surface and powder of the 22-250 limits the life of a barrel than the 204. I hate burning out barrels in just 2 years. But I am doing this on an encore, and if I do burn the barrel, its really not that big a deal to buy another.

I have shot both and seen both more than enought accurate.

I was kinda surprised to find the 204 brass being so reasonable around. About the same as 22-250. I got my brother a 204 and it was a tack driver with factory ammo.

Another down side of the 204 is I need new funnels, new cleaning rods and jags.

Did I forget anything?

RE: 204 or 22-250
 

[/align]This late 2004 Sturm, Ruger and Company joined with Hornady to announce a brand-new cartridge. This new .20-caliber round is based on the .222 Remington Magnum case and promises to offer high velocity with low recoil, sharing some common ground with the .22-250 hot rod, as well. The new .204 is currently offered in 32- and 40-grain loads from Hornady, and it looks like an interesting concept right off the bat.
A .20-caliber rifle is nothing new. Walt Berger has been offering bullets for quite some time, and while the caliber hasn't been a household word, I recall seeing a .20-caliber Cooper rifle for sale some time ago at the local Scheels store. The new .204 Ruger is essentially a .222 Magnum case necked down to hold a .204-inch bullet.
Case dimensions are a difficult thing to find so far, but Hodgdon information states that the .204 should be trimmed to 1.84 inches while RCBS says the .222 Magnum should be trimmed to 1.850 inches. Both use the same .378-inch rimless base. The .222 Mag uses a 23-degree shoulder while chamber specs call for a 30-degree angle on the .204. Hodgdon data says the .204 should be loaded with Federal 205M primers while the data for the .222 Mag is based on a Winchester standard rifle primer. Overall load length for the .204 is 2.26 inches while the .222 Magnum is set at 2.22 to 2.28 inches.

Although the .204 is based on a .222 Magnum case, it performs more like a .22-250, using considerably less powder to achieve this high performance. Hodgdon's latest reloading manual suggests that a .22-250 needs 39.5 grains of Varget powder to launch a 40-grain Nosler Ballistic Tip bullet at 4,135 fps while the .204 will launch its lightest bullet, a 32-grain VMAX, at 4,044 fps pushed by 28.3 grains of H335. Hornady's 32-grain .204 load is cataloged to leave a 26-inch barrel doing 4,225 fps while its 40-grain .22-250 VMAX load leaves a similar-length barrel doing 4,150 fps.
The downrange performance is similar as well. With a 200-yard zero both loads are .6 inch high at 100 while the .204 is 4.1 inches low at 300 and the .22-250 is 4.5 inches low. At 300 yards, the 32-grain .20-caliber bullet should be doing around 2,568 fps while the 40-grain .22-250 Hornady slug is doing 2,683 fps or so. The .204 is flatter than the .22-250 all the way out to 500 yards, and I'd suggest that both of 'em run out of steam past that distance, if not before in many applications.

RE: 204 or 22-250
 

If I could just nail down that claim that a 204 won't burn a barrel out near like a 22-250, I would have ordered by now.

RE: 204 or 22-250
 

Guns Magazine, Oct, 2004 by Holt Bodinson
[/align]
The .204 Ruger cartridge loaded with a 32-grain VMAX bullet at 4,225 fps exhibited four qualities that will endear it to varmint hunters. It shoots exceedingly flat, just like my beloved .220 Swifts. It's very accurate. In a moderate weight rifle, there is so little recoil you can actually watch the impact of your shot through the scope. And it accomplishes all this with a modest powder charge that will not burn out the throat of your barrel in quick time (Note: Hodgdon already has loading data available).

RE: 204 or 22-250
 

The only draw back for me between the two would be cleaning the barrel on the 204. I had a 17HRM and despised it when it came time to clean that barrel.[:-]

RE: 204 or 22-250
 

Why, just cause the tight bore?

RE: 204 or 22-250
 

Id pick the .243 over both. Clearly a superior varmint cartridge. handloaded with a 55 gr bullet you can acheive over 4000 fps easy. retains more velocity and energy out to 500 yds with less wind drift also, but I would opt for a little less velocity and go with the .243 in federals 85 gr. Not to much difference in trajectory but a lot less wind drift and a lot more retained energy.
Just do a comparo.
heres one from winchesters site.
http://www.winchester.com/products/catalog/comparerifle.aspx?symbol=SBST243&atype=1&c type=1&action=1

RE: 204 or 22-250
 

Not necessarily tight but small... There was just something about trying to use patches with the small jag and all. Nothing but a pain in the you know what.

RE: 204 or 22-250
 

I own both a Ruger .17 HMR and a ruger 204, and never had problems with cleaning. That is one of the fun things about owning a firearm, is the maintenance. Choosing a firearm on its dirty factor is just silly to me. There are the real factors out there in choosing a gun, and cleaning should not inhibit your choice.

RE: 204 or 22-250
 

Yea, thats kinda on my mind about reloading. Seems it would be easy to get bad runout out pressing in that tiny little pill with a big ole press and die set you use to load up 338's.

RE: 204 or 22-250
 

I don't know about the cost of components or how important the cost might be to you. For small varmits the 204 would do very well. I think it would have the best barrel life. The 243 and 22-250 would offer a little more versitility and wind bucking properties.

Since this is stuff that you already know, all I can add is that only you know what you want from this rifle and your shooting and cleaning habits. I do know that cleaning these little speed demons is very important to barrel life. Its its just for varmits and targets, I would try the 204. After all thats the only way you will ever know for sure.

I have to admit that Z has a good point there as well.;)

RE: 204 or 22-250
 

As a person who has probably owned more .243's than he, I would highly suggest seeing if you can get one that won't tumble the bullet or is accurate at 55gr. I know I couldn't.

RE: 204 or 22-250
 

I highly suggest you get yourself a decent ballistics program. Info from those sites are pretty well worthless.

RE: 204 or 22-250
 

What makes you think your balistic program is any better than theirs.Thats all they use, some balistic program, which is still not 100%accurate. Only a speed trap will tell you that. But they are close enought for comparos.

I dont know what happend to that link i posted it was a comparo.

RE: 204 or 22-250
 

Ive never even tried using them. I know I tried some 95 gr. balistic tips, and they wouldnt hold a pattern. Few other people I know have tried balistic tips in other calibers with the same results.
So why wont the 55's shoot good in the .243. Is it rate of twist or what ?

RE: 204 or 22-250
 

Bigcountry - I have built a bunch of .204's and 20 Tacticals for varmint hunters - many of which already own .22-250's or 220 Swifts. They seem to univerally like them for prairie dogs. And the barrel life is pretty good. One of the first .204's I built has come back to be rebarreled already - he got an estimated 4,000 rounds out of the Douglas XXX CM barrel.

Downside is that, even though the ballistics look pretty goodon paper - they don't put a big tough coyoteon the groundat long range like the big 22 CF's do. Great calling guns - for shots out to 300 yards or so. And minimal pelt damage.

PS - so far the 39 Sierra seems to get the nod as the best coyote/bobcat bullet.

RE: 204 or 22-250
 

Thats why I added small varmits. I no longer do a lot of varmit shooting but I keep in touch with my old friends that do. They are not impressed with 204 perfomance on coyotes at long range. However they are talking about 400 yards PLUS. so it may well depend on how far you shoot. They hunt on the plains and prairies where you can see a coyote a half mile away.

RE: 204 or 22-250
 

For long range i dont see how one could beat the performance of the .243.
Some of you dont like it for deer but it clearly is the better varmint cartridge.
Heres a 220 swift .243, 22-50 comparo.
Look at fps at muzzle then at 500 yds. look at wind drift at 500 yds and long range trajectory.
You also dont have to worry about wearing a barrell out either.

RE: 204 or 22-250
 

Bigcountry,just buy one of each!! problem solved. vangunsmith:eek:

RE: 204 or 22-250
 

What I have stated was my opinion on the 17 HMR. I never mentioned that I had problems but more that I didn’t care in cleaning this particular caliber. It would be silly for me to hang onto a rifle if I didn’t enjoy having it and cleaning is part of the fun. If you like the 17HMR and the 204, all the power to you, as for me I’ll go for something a little bigger.

RE: 204 or 22-250
 

All these little guys work. Personally, I own a .17 Remington for hides and a 220 Swift for justkilling things. All of these calibers work.....The 17 is a pain as you need extra reloading stuff like primer cleaners, patches, rods, jags,etc......but I make gobs of them so when set up, it's no big deal. I have heard good and lukewarm on the 204. It's a tweener that still requires special stuff. Pick one and go for it! Regards, Rick.

RE: 204 or 22-250
 

Zrex - if you like the ballistic charts, take a look at this one: 70 grain Sierra Blitzking going 4034 fps out of a 6MM-284 with a 27" Krieger barrel. OK - barrel life isn't real great . . . . . :) But, at this altitude,it canfly 900 yards before it falls below the 2,000 fps threshold.

RE: 204 or 22-250
 

I would love to own a 6m-284, I dont reload so it's out of the question for now.

RE: 204 or 22-250
 

Both will work for smaller varmints. But like others have said, the .204 is probably a little small for trying to put a big coyote on the ground. I like Hornady's 40 grain V-Max's in my .223, but bigger critters don't always drop like they do when a 50 grainer hits them.

RE: 204 or 22-250
 

Zerex, just about any reloader will tell you those charts are usually inflated to say the least. Reason they would say that, is most have chronos and do little more shooting than others. Listen, if you have any info on the 204 or the 22-250 I will welcome it. If you don't then sit back please. Just trying to get some info on them. Please respect that and I will try to do the same.

RE: 204 or 22-250
 

I would but this wedding planning is putting me in the poor house.

RE: 204 or 22-250
 

Thanks Roskoe, thats the info I was looking for.

RE: 204 or 22-250
 

Well, went ahead and ordered the 204 from midsouth for like 216 dollars. I hope its accurate.

RE: 204 or 22-250
 

Atta boy BC! another one for the old safe!:D:D:D:D

RE: 204 or 22-250
 

Hope mossy don't see this. But my safe is filled to capacity. I got to have a gun sale soon.

RE: 204 or 22-250
 

Now I know why you’ve been so quite...;)

RE: 204 or 22-250
 

BC I can solve all your problems ,just get a .220 switf and you will have the king of varmit rounds.Ruger m77 mkII target with a loupe LR scope One mean machine.

RE: 204 or 22-250
 

I agree Dan, but I am wanting the best of both worlds. Long barrel life, and pretty nice performance.

RE: 204 or 22-250
 

Congrats on the new purchase. I am looking forward to hearing some real world test results when it arrives!