.204 ruger

[Mr_Logic 5]

Right then all the happy 204 Ruger owners...

 

I'm an unhappy 204 Ruger owner. Or I was, I sold it.

 

I bought it as a go-anywhere, do-anything rifle for fox, rabbit and winged vermin. I spent a very long time trying to make it shoot 40 grain bullets; it could just about cope with 40gr Noslers, but only just about. 40 gr V-max shot 6-inch groups, both handloads and factory stuff.

 

It did shoot the 32 grain stuff very accurately indeed, but unless you have a longer barrel, you lose a boat-load of velocity. I chronoed my 32-grain load, which was a max load, and got about 3800 out of it, when you consider it was a 22-inch barrel, that's about right from what I read.

 

Did I like it as a long range rabbit tool? Yep, it was brilliant - the instant expansion of the bullet was perfect - not a rabbit in the land getting up from that, and accurate a long way out too.

 

But...

 

It also regularly failed to punch a hole through a rabbit, leaving me wondering about its usefulness on fox. In the end, I gave up with the bloody thing before I got that far - I purposefully kept my trusty 223 in case it didn't work out, and went back to that.

 

That gives me comparable accuracy, noise and cost, but since it's a .22, every accessory for loading is standard, as are cleaning kits etc. I'm not saying for one minute that the 204 isn't a good calibre - with 40 grain stuff it's excellent in theory. If factory rifles were 1:11, not 1:12, they'd shoot the 40gr every time and that would dramatically improve my opinion. Ultimately, I took a punt wanting to shoot 40 grain bullets, and it didn't pay off. Cost me a bloody fortune in components trying to find something that fussy Howa actually liked. Got there in the end, but since it was a 32-grain load that hardly set the world alight, I didn't spend any more on it.

 

40-grain works well because it's comparable to 223 velocity but has a BC of something more 22-250-ish, making it great for small critters a long way away. IF your rifle shoots it...

[upperlane2 4]

i was told out to 200yards they will hit harder than .223 is this true

[RicW 67]

Right then all the happy 204 Ruger owners...

 

I'm an unhappy 204 Ruger owner. Or I was, I sold it.

 

I bought it as a go-anywhere, do-anything rifle for fox, rabbit and winged vermin. I spent a very long time trying to make it shoot 40 grain bullets; it could just about cope with 40gr Noslers, but only just about. 40 gr V-max shot 6-inch groups, both handloads and factory stuff.

 

It did shoot the 32 grain stuff very accurately indeed, but unless you have a longer barrel, you lose a boat-load of velocity. I chronoed my 32-grain load, which was a max load, and got about 3800 out of it, when you consider it was a 22-inch barrel, that's about right from what I read.

 

Did I like it as a long range rabbit tool? Yep, it was brilliant - the instant expansion of the bullet was perfect - not a rabbit in the land getting up from that, and accurate a long way out too.

 

But...

 

It also regularly failed to punch a hole through a rabbit, leaving me wondering about its usefulness on fox. In the end, I gave up with the bloody thing before I got that far - I purposefully kept my trusty 223 in case it didn't work out, and went back to that.

 

That gives me comparable accuracy, noise and cost, but since it's a .22, every accessory for loading is standard, as are cleaning kits etc. I'm not saying for one minute that the 204 isn't a good calibre - with 40 grain stuff it's excellent in theory. If factory rifles were 1:11, not 1:12, they'd shoot the 40gr every time and that would dramatically improve my opinion. Ultimately, I took a punt wanting to shoot 40 grain bullets, and it didn't pay off. Cost me a bloody fortune in components trying to find something that fussy Howa actually liked. Got there in the end, but since it was a 32-grain load that hardly set the world alight, I didn't spend any more on it.

 

40-grain works well because it's comparable to 223 velocity but has a BC of something more 22-250-ish, making it great for small critters a long way away. IF your rifle shoots it...

 

Mr Logic -

 

You interest me. As I have said, I am hoping to build a .204 as a long range varminter. As I read it, the standard 1:12 twist is good for 32 and 36 gr, great for 40gr and total crap for 48gr HP. On the other hand, 1:9 is great for 48gr but 32gr blow up in the barrel cos they spin too fast. I was thinking 1:10 should be the ideal compromise. You rate 1:11? This will be a Border barrel, 26" fluted, heavy profile. Sniper not a stalker!

 

RicW

[Mr_Logic 5]

They'll hit harder than a 223 in theory with a 40 grain bullet due to better BC. With the 40 grain, this is pretty much true, but I don't think there's a lot in it.

 

Of course, you can't shoot muntjac with a 204 either.

 

Ric, I remember seeing someone doing a 1:11 twist for a 204. Tbh 1:12 should be OK but the variances mean they don't all shoot the 40gr, and that is the ideal weight. Therefore, just a smidge faster and job done for me.

[jordang 0]

if you want to shoot heavier than 40gr then you may need a 1:10 but a 1:11 will shoot everything upto 40gr very well. 26" is a good length too

[RicW 67]

if you want to shoot heavier than 40gr then you may need a 1:10 but a 1:11 will shoot everything upto 40gr very well. 26" is a good length too

 

Great! Thanks guys. I want to ba able to shoot 40gr accurately for long range fox, so what you say is good news.

 

Ric

[blackfox 9]

Ive got one and i fookin love it, Cheaper bullets, very flat, quiet with a good Mod i use a PES T12. Although with a twist rate of 1 in 12 my remingtron 700 has a 26" barrel. DO NOT be tempted to cut down, ive read stuff where people say that they have lost sooo muct velocity/accuracy that they have pretty puch reuined their rifle. Its flatter than a .22-250, less kick (none) not that a .22-250 has any. Erm, max weight i would go is 40-42gr, bigger than that you will need a twist rate of 1in8 or so.

 

 

 

Cheers Sam

[Mr_Logic 5]

Definintely agree on the 26" barrel.

[RicW 67]

Definintely agree on the 26" barrel.

 

Thanks people. I don't want to hijack this thread so I'll keep it brief. 26" Border barrel, 1:11 twist, heavy profile, fluted. Ought to shoot 32gr V-max up to 40gr hollow point. Remi 700 blueprinted action, Jewell trigger, AICS stock. Zeiss 6-24 x 56? Or even go for an 8 x 32 to get the long range crows? I'm still counting chickens before they're hatched but at 62 I have a decent chance of getting a centrefire on my new ticket. Remember that I had a ticket way back and killed a lot of paper!

 

Ric

[upperlane2 4]

what distance max would u try to take fox with .204

[RicW 67]

what distance max would u try to take fox with .204

 

The ballistics imply that, at least in theory, the 40gr BT round will have more than enough kinetic energy at 500 yards - 400 ft.lbs! - to destroy the central nervous system of a fox with a single hit. I would be very leary about using fragmenting rounds at that range. The velocity has dropped to the level where, as Mr Logic has said, there is a real risk that the bullet will explode on impact. This would cause a major surface injury which would still allow the animal to run away, to die in great pain after days of suffering. IF (and it is still if) I get this gun, I would have no qualms about using semi-jacketed hollow point controlled expansion bullets up to 400 yards. I most certainly would NOT use the 32gr V-max Remington on fox at that distance. Crows yes. Fox no. If I were limited to factory ammo I would consider 300 yards to be maximum for a sure kill on fox.

 

Ric

[Mr_Logic 5]

Ric, I think your theory is wrong. From what I saw with my 204 and what I read of the Yanks, who use this calibre a lot more than we do, the bullet blows up if you hit the animal in close - at longer ranges, the expansion is less violent and thus the bullet penetrates more.

 

Therefore, I would be confident using 204 on a fox with 40gr ammunition at any range you can reliably hit him. In the real world, that's going to be 400-odd yards for the most part.

 

Thing is, as a dedicated fox tool, I wouldn't go with 204. I like it as a long range crow/rabbit evaporator with occasional fox - that's why I sold mine. There are better options for a fox round, 22-250 or 243 being the main ones.

[RicW 67]

Ric, I think your theory is wrong. From what I saw with my 204 and what I read of the Yanks, who use this calibre a lot more than we do, the bullet blows up if you hit the animal in close - at longer ranges, the expansion is less violent and thus the bullet penetrates more.

 

Therefore, I would be confident using 204 on a fox with 40gr ammunition at any range you can reliably hit him. In the real world, that's going to be 400-odd yards for the most part.

 

Thing is, as a dedicated fox tool, I wouldn't go with 204. I like it as a long range crow/rabbit evaporator with occasional fox - that's why I sold mine. There are better options for a fox round, 22-250 or 243 being the main ones.

 

Mr L - thanks! I am glad to learn from your experience. I would not be using it as a "dedicated fox round" so much as a "dedicated if it turns up inside 500 yards blow it away round" If I can build some good fast 40gr BTs that will give reliable kills on crows or foxes at long range then that will suit me fine. What I don't want to do is take shots that risk leaving an injured animal to crawl away and die in pain.

 

So good 40gr BTs should do the biz?

 

XLNT!

 

RicW

[Mr_Logic 5]

Yep, no worries. As will a 39gr blitzking if you can find them.

[upperlane2 4]

thanks for all ur replys the furthest ill be shooting is about 200-250 then i meet a hill but u never know. the last thing i want 2 do is injure a fox clean kill or nothing. last thing we need running about is a gangreen fox for some body to see