Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
204 Ruger
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Varmint Hunter" data-source="post: 12271" data-attributes="member: 313"><p>Jimno2506</p><p></p><p> <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></p><p></p><p>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.</p><p></p><p>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.</p><p></p><p>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 src="http://images/icons/grin.gif" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /> </p><p></p><p>VH</p><p></p><p>[ 11-02-2004: Message edited by: Varmint Hunter ]</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Varmint Hunter, post: 12271, member: 313"] 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 ] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
204 Ruger
Top