Long Range Hunting Online Magazine


Go Back   Long Range Hunting Online Magazine > Hunting > Long Range Hunting & Shooting

Long Range Hunting & Shooting Nightforce Optics


Reply

204 Ruger

 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #8  
Old 10-28-2004, 06:40 PM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Long Island, New York
Posts: 2,143
Re: 204 Ruger

Jimno2506

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><HR> Please tell me why you feel this way. Besides possible wind deflection (which can be equally learned for all trajectories) I personally don't see the "hands down" win. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

When shooting tiny (light) projectiles over long range wind is a significant factor. Contrary to your claim, wind can not "be equally learned for all trajectories". Wind is not a constant force, as gravity is. Wind is rarely consistent in velocity or direction over range. Wind is always a bit of a guessing game and is always changing. Even a wind guage accompanied with a directional flag only tells you the conditions at the bench.

I am not too confident that the .204 has "plenty of energy" @ 400-500yds. Even the lowly groundhog takes a reasonable level of terminal energy to cause quick & humane death. Tiny pills need lots of velocity to promote lethal effect. In my experience anyway. I'm not saying that it can't be done, just that there are much better cartridges for that type of shooting.

Frankly, I don't see what the .204 can do that the millions and millions of .223 rifles can't do. My guess is that the .204 will have a short love affair with American shooters. Might just out-live the 7SUAM. [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img]

VH

[ 11-02-2004: Message edited by: Varmint Hunter ]
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 10-29-2004, 12:24 AM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 166
Please delete

Please delete

Last edited by Sheldon; 08-30-2009 at 03:35 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 10-29-2004, 08:53 AM
Bronze Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 41
Re: 204 Ruger

Yeah, I've been playing with the .204 for a couple weeks. In a nut shell, it's MOA, no better, no worse. My rifle is a 700 ADL synthetic converted to BDL in an HS Precision stock, Jewell HVR trigger, with a Leupold 6.5-20X in their dual dovetail b&r.

It's pretty consistently MOA with both weights of Hornady factory ammo at 100 and 200 yards, the 40 grain load holds that to 300, haven't had time to try the 32 grain load at 300.

Using once fired factory brass, I've loaded the 40 grain VMAX with H335 and H4895. Best loads so far are 26.5 gr H335 or 27.5 gr H4895. Again, MOA, not much better.

I've also built a box of 50 cases from Remington .222 magnum brass by necking 'em down, then loading 25 grains of H335 behind a 40 grain VMAX rammed into the rifling. No problems there, accuracy seems about the same.

The throat on my rifle is long and it's not possible to get as much bullet in the neck as I like without what I consider to be excessive jump.

So far I think it's a pretty cool cartridge. I've smacked a couple ground squirrels with the 40 grain load. It is not explosive but it sure flings them a ways. The BC on the 40 grain bullet is higher than a 60 grain .224, yet it launches over 3700 fps. This means they managed to come up with .22-250 trajectory and sub .223 recoil. Nifty. However, it bears remembering that while it shoots flatter, it doesn't hit as hard downrange.

I'm not sure ... good idea but it needs more accuracy to play on the same field with a good .223 or .22-250. I'm not sure I'd recommend it to anyone but a pretty dedicated gun nut. Not sure I'll stick with it real long. But so far it's interesting.
__________________
Flex is for people who don't have lockers.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 10-29-2004, 09:44 AM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Long Island, New York
Posts: 2,143
Re: 204 Ruger

Sheldon,
Sounds like you've got a few interesting guns there. I've always been impressed with both the 6mmBR and the 22BR. Hopefully the 20BR will share its accuracy.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><HR> What about a 1:9 twist .204 with 50 grain or heavier bullets? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nothing wrong with this combo except that it will not do anything the plain-jane .223 with a 50gr bullet can't do. In theory, the .204 50gr bullet would have a higher BC but a 50gr .224 bullet should be faster when fired from a case with similar capacity.

Tom,

[QUOTE]The BC on the 40 grain bullet is higher than a 60 grain .224, yet it launches over 3700 fps. This means they managed to come up with .22-250 trajectory and sub .223 recoil. Nifty.[QUOTE]

Not exactly. [img]images/icons/rolleyes.gif[/img]
According to the Nosler book, a 22-250 can fire a 40gr bullet @ 4,100ft/sec and the Swift can launch them out @ 4,200 ft/sec.
That's a 500ft/sec advantage for the bigger case. Much flatter and less air time for the wind to effect bullet path over the longer distances.

I have no problem with the new sexy .204, however, like many other new cartridges, it just doesn't seem to do anything special and its not better then a larger capacity cartridge when shooting over longer ranges.

Funny, but long before anyone thought of a factory rifle chambered in the .221FB cartridge, I had one built. It can't do anything that the accurate little .222 can't do but I built it anyway. It turned out to be one of the most accurate, fun shooting, addictive little cartridges available.

I was amazed when it eventually took the shooting public by storm. Chambering a factory rifle in a new cartridge seems to do that. Some last while others whither away. You can barely find a rifle chambered for the .222 despite the fact that is extremely accurate, fuel efficient and has low recoil.

Anyway, there is no need for a new cartridge to really fit into an unexplored nitch. It just has to peek up our interest enough so that we lay down some cash and go shooting.

[img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img]
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 10-29-2004, 10:30 AM
LB LB is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Upland, CA
Posts: 423
Re: 204 Ruger

I'm with the above writer and his astute observations. What we have is a "mature" market, where every potential customer already has more guns than they (actually) need.

I see no great ballistic advancement in the 204 Ruger, besides being a new toy........wait, my eyes are starting to glaze, I think I need one!

Maybe I should get a second opinion; from my wife? [img]images/icons/smile.gif[/img]

Good hunting. LB
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 11-02-2004, 09:40 AM
Bronze Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 41
Re: 204 Ruger

Tom,

[QUOTE]The BC on the 40 grain bullet is higher than a 60 grain .224, yet it launches over 3700 fps. This means they managed to come up with .22-250 trajectory and sub .223 recoil. Nifty.[QUOTE]

Not exactly.
According to the Nosler book, a 22-250 can fire a 40gr bullet @ 4,100ft/sec and the Swift can launch them out @ 4,200 ft/sec.
That's a 500ft/sec advantage for the bigger case. Much flatter and less air time for the wind to effect bullet path over the longer distances.

++++++++

No, you're misunderstanding / taking what I said out of context / resorting to an apples to oranges comparison. For a .22 to achieve the same BC as the 40 grain .204 bullet, you have to step up to a 60 grain boat tail. With that 60 grain bullet, your .22-250 or .220 Swift only reaches the same 3700 FPS ballpark the .204 does with the 40 grain bullet. If you're after sheer speed and using a 40 grain .22 bullet, then the 32 grain .204 is the closer comparison. Essentially the same 4200 FPS ceiling with a slight BC edge going to the .22. There's no 500 fps advantage to the Swift or .22-250 if you're looking at bullets with similar BCs.
__________________
Flex is for people who don't have lockers.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 11-02-2004, 10:11 AM
LB LB is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Upland, CA
Posts: 423
Re: 204 Ruger

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><HR>No, you're misunderstanding / taking what I said out of context / resorting to an apples to oranges comparison.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Unless this is an argument that only interests a ballistic junkie, I fail to see the point. Read my first post:

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><HR>This is one of those theoretical discusions, on paper. A 220 Swift and a 204 Ruger are so different that you cannot crunch those numbers and prove your point. There is nothing new, under the sun. In this case, bigger is better, in every measurable aspect of performance. Terminally speaking. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

A comparable B.C.? Why bother? This is not going to prove anything and it enters the realm of apples and oranges.

Let's keep our feet on the ground. Breathlessly necking a 223 to twenty caliber is not going to reverse the laws of Physics.

LB <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><HR>In this case, bigger is better, in every measurable aspect of performance. Terminally speaking.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

[img]images/icons/smile.gif[/img]
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads for: 204 Ruger
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
338/375 Ruger or 375 Ruger with high BC bullets? AZShooter Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics 14 09-13-2013 05:14 AM
New #1 Ruger Stainless varminter in 204 Ruger 450 marlin Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics 13 02-19-2013 08:33 PM
RUGER HAWKEYE AFRICAN in375 Ruger krummarine Guns For Sale 0 12-30-2007 09:16 AM
Ruger bedding pillars , for Ruger 77MK-II James Jones Equipment Discussions 1 11-26-2006 12:59 AM
Ruger KM77VT .204 Ruger jb204 Guns For Sale 3 04-24-2005 09:37 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:28 PM.


Powered by vBulletin ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Management Powered by vBadvanced CMPS
All content ©2010-2014 Long Range Hunting, LLC