I know this is a constant subject but its one of those things that you just look at if your not in the market. at least for me. I am looking at geting a gun that is dedicated to yotes,gound hogs and fox. i just wanted some input. right now i use for the most part .17 hmr or a mini 14 in .223. but i dont have that one gun just for this and im looking at one. and i am having a hard time deciding on the .204 , .223 , or 22-250 any imput.

For me there are two ways to go but all in 223. Either a AR-15 Varmit gun or a Encore in 223. Surplus 223 works great on any varmit.

i don't think you can go wrong with a .223. they just about give the shells away. right now i have three .223's and with a little trial and error with shellsthey all shoot good. i believe the next one i buy will be a savage .223 with the accu-trigger. i have heard nothing but good about the savages.

If you are concerned with the furs than the only viable option is the .204. I know that this will start arguments, but the smaller bullet is more fur friendly and you will have to do less sewing. I love mine and 4000 fps will kill any coyote on the planet instantly.

I have to agree with psyckmonky: the .204 is your best option. the ammo will be more $ for now but give it time and it will come down, also the ballistics of the .204 is really all over the .223. just read some write ups on comparison of the two and you will see. better for the furs also. less report, and just a ball to shoot!!! good luck

you don't say where your from or what sort of ranges you plan on shooting... if your concerned about noise, and ranges are limited to 250 yards or less, consider the venerable old 22 Hornet... 80% of my shooting is with a Hornet, for groundhog, fox, raccoon and coyote... if I go to the high country where there's possibility of bear coming to the call, I'll go to a 22-250 or a 243... I do my own loading so I can custom tailor ammo to what I want itto do, but even if you stick to factory stuff there is still enough variety available to cover anything you need...

anytime you go to the high velocity rounds your looking at tearing up fur irregardless of caliber... another thing to consider is ammo availability, you can find 223 or 22-250 anywhere... the 204 being new still has not shown up in some of the more remote places yet... that being said my choice for a larger case goes to the 22-250... haven't been without at least one in over 30 years...

I suppose this is each man or woman's opinion. Last year I done extensive research. To make a long story short I purchased a Remington 700 bolt action in 223 and placed a Nikon 4.5 x 14 atop it. I would do the same thing again.

It is funny how many people say how little hide damage the caliber dose and than state how fast the bullet is.Speed makes expantion. Expantion makes damage.In turn fast bullets= big holes.

It allso makes a big deal how much you shoot.I hunt a ton with my 223.If you want all the pelts as I do.Shoot a 60+ grain soft point.

I would go to a 22 hornet. Or a 223 bolt action.

If you want to save the pelts I use a .223 OR if you've got a little exoticitis like me, I'd look at the 17 remington shoots little 25gr bullets well past 4000fps and there's practically no damage...cause the bullets simply don't leave the body. (At least that's what I hear, and I would find it hard to believe a 25gr expanding bullet would leave anything at 3000+fps) It has about the same capacity as the .223 just going off of case dimensions and berger makes a slew of bullets for it. If pelts are no matter I'd get a .223 anyways and call it done. The 22-250 and swift are fine calibers but the extra $$ isn't justified for factory ammo and they use up more powder and are harder on barrels for the handloader. In a nutshell: You'll be cool with a .223 and you'll be pimpin' with a 17 remington!

I like the remington .204 I recently picked up but then I already have a .223 I've been using for years.