buckhunter14

Anyone like their .204? I am looking into purchasing a small caliber rifle other than a .22 I know the .22 is cheap and durable, but I wan't some more distance and different caliber. I also could look into a .17 I suppose, but I am pushing towards a .204 for some reason. I would like some input and maybe if anyone has anyone they have up for sale?
Thnaks in advance, BH14

ShatoDavis

OH SMALL CALIBERS!

Beware its a forbidden love on this site. Magnumitis is running rampant!
But, (in hushed tones) if a small caliber triste is what you desire, I may have just the lady for you. Big green (Remington) is supposed to be introducing a new caliber in '07. Though it is hardly new to those of us long stricken small bore lovers. The 17 Remington Fireball is a real darling. Its the legitimate version of the 17 Mach IV that varminters have drooled over for years. Its a 221 necked down to 17 cal with an improved shoulder. It provides Benchrest accuracy and really splatters varmints. Look into it. Be warned though, a taste is free but once you're addicted It will really cost you!

BrutalAttack

.220 and .22-250 are more common and better performers than the .204.

buckhunter14

In the laws of Michgan, it says a .22 caliber or smaller can be used for predators. Would a .22-250 be eligible for this or too big?

ShatoDavis

BORING!

22-250, 220 Swift, 223 rem, 221, 222, 222 rem mag, 218 bee, 22 hornet, etc. all shoot 22 cal bullets so they would all be "legal". check out the 17 Rem FB, or the 204 is a nice weapon as well.

will79

Find a remington 700 classic that was chambered for 221 fireball. I'm not sure what year they made that one. Or maybe an XP-100 in 221. Haven't handloaded for my XP-100 yet but I took it to the range one very windy day and was getting 1"-11/4" five shot groups at 100yds with rem factory loads. Pretty good for a handgun.

bigcountry

I have a 204, and love it. I kinda wish I got the 22-250 instead but I can always get one of those too. I got the 204, because I want to see if the hype is true that it will have better barrel life than a 22-250, more like the 223. Well see. Also, with the 204, I shoot a 32gr bullet with a better bullistic coef than a 50gr 22 bullet. So when I hear people say a 22-250 will perform better, not sure where they get thier information.

BrutalAttack

Ok I guess I have to spell it out for you like everything else.

.204

36 grains, 3640 fps, 1154 ft/lbs, BC: .267

Trajectory with 200 yard zero

300: -5.0 400: -15.1 500: -31.8

.22-250

55 grains, 3680 fps, 1654 ft/lbs BC: .257

Trajectory with 200 yard zero

300:-5.0 400: -15.4 500: -32.8


Go head and let me know when you figure out why you'd want a .204.




*Data from the Federal catalog*

buckhunter14

I'm leaning towards the .17. I got some info on the, the ammo seems reasonable, and the price of the guns are decent. Still a rimfire as well.

I learned for the law in Michigan, it has to be a rimfire, so that answers my question.

bigcountry

Federal? Who shoots federal ammo. Man we roll our own around here. This is the guns forum.

Well, I have a 204 encore with a 26" barrel that kicks out a 32gr V-maxbullet at 4150fps and seen some that does it up to 4300fps with less than 29gr of powder. That has the same BC as a 22-250 40gr. You do the math. The best I ever seen anyone put a 22-250 40gr bullet is 4000fps and that took 12 more grains powder.

See there's a huge difference between you and I. I actually shoot and own these rifles. You keep reading about what we are shooting and believing factory ammo box's. So again spell it out forme? Even your own data shows a larger drop. You can't just go thru the internet and pick and choose the data that suits your arguments. You actually have to go out and shoot guns.