Room gets suddenly still
And when you'd almost bet
You could hear yourself sweat, he walks in
Eyes black as coal
And when he lifts his face
Every ear in the place is on him

Starting soft and slow
Like a small earthquake
And when he lets go
Half the valley shakes

It's Love, Love
Brother Love's Traveling Salvation Show...of the .204 Ruger variety

Pack up the babies
Grab the old ladies
Everyone goes
Everyone knows
Brother Varmintguy's show

Crap I wrote this once and then I zapped it, oh well here goes again.
---------------------
VG-this is what I've learned and observed over the years about yote hunters. There are 4 basic types of yote hunters.

#1=this is your "Average" guy. After the big game season is over he declares that he is gonna shoot some yotes this winter and make a few bucks off their pelts. Heck he maybe even ask what the pelt are going for (I've learned over the years if they gotta ask they are not too serious).

This fella is gonna take yotes with whatever rig available. Most likely it will be his standard weight 223,22/250 or 243. It may even be his 25/056 or his 7 mag or whatever. But it is pretty rare that this fella has a hvy tubed rifle let alone a dedicated yote rig.

He says that he cares about the pelts, but in truth he has zero clue as to how to handle the pelts. And also in truth he is not gonna be much of a threat to the yote populas. If he takes one to five dogs a year he thinks that life is good.

He will not be shooting "cats" as he is not much into shooting and is more of a good old boy that just enjoys to shoot. So a 240,or a 6 AI or a 6/06 is not gonna be in his truck.

#2=is the fella that is a dedicated pelt hunter. He knows when the pelts will be prime. And he knows what rig/head to use for them, and he has most likely made being kind to the pelts a bit of a science.

#3=this fella is a yote fanatic, he is gonna year in and year out have an interest in taking as many dogs as he can.

He also is a big game hunter (and usually very good) and will hunts yotes in the months other than Oct/Nov and he or may not hunt them in Sept depending on how hard core of a bow man he is. And depending on how much of a prima dona he is, I know of a very limited amount of people that will not shoot them during the Sept month (kind of strange but that does exist).

This fella knows that the pelts are gonna have a prime season of about 6 weeks after the elk season. He may or may not care depending on the year if he hunts that period for pelts or not. If he does he will no doubt have a kinder load and or a smaller rifle for the cause. And he will understand yote anantomy and know where to shoot and where not to in an effort to limit the damage. This to me, is very close to or better to know than what round or bullet to use.

But this fella is for the most part just out and out a yote hunter and killer. he does not care how he takes them (calling,drive by, stalking, baiting or whatever). He is just driven to take as many dogs as he can for the year.

He will take the shots as they come, far,close,running or whatever. And, he has done it enough to be able to understand what type of armament is effective in this endeavor.

He may even be of the mind to instead of seeing how small of a hole he is gonna have. He may try to find a load that will make a load big enough to pull a cat thru.

#4=this is the pro, the game control fellas. The rounds that these fellas used are designed to be used at any range and any shot. They are paid to put dogs on the turf and so there equipment echos that.

The two fellas that I know well use the following

Both a Beneli 3 1/2" for chooper work

One a Swift and a 257 Roy

The other uses a 25/06

One last note I am in group #3- I am all about dogs and have done enough of it to of formed very good opinions and know what it takes to make a very serious dog rig.

Rounds smaller than the big 6's do not cut it for what I want. And for the conditions on which I hunt.

Now if I were to modify my ways I know I could do quite well with eithr the Swift and the 204.

But I am what I am and I know what works and what does not.

Good hunting to ya and get after those yotes.

Hit a few between 400 and 600 and not with center punch hits with that 204 and then get back to me.

Mark D


On a side note when I do hunt for pelt in that 6 week window and use my 6/06 I use a 55 NBT driven as hard as I can. I try to take them as close as possible (usually sub 150) and by caling. I miss the 3 big major bones and I generally have very small holes to contend with. Unless, I hit one of the big bone by accident. I've also been using the 85 TX and to date have found it to very good at this as well.

Oops one last thing is that my 3 fav rounds (in my house) for the game of serious yote stomping is my 6/06 my 7 Mashburn Super and my 340.

Bushcook

It appears at least one of your mates down under is already using the 204 on 'roos to good effect . This was copied off rugerhunting.com ............FWIW from a guy out of Perth........

Quote........."Finally had a chance to take my Savage 12VLP out spotlighting for 'roos and foxes. I was using Remington Premier Accu-tip 32gr ammo as I don't have enough brass yet to do some reloading. The scope is a Tasco World Class 4-16x50. I had the rifle sighted in at 270 yards so a dead-on hold at anything out to 312 yards would hit to within 2 inches of point-of-aim.
Given the fragility of the 32 grain bullet, foxes at any distance I chose to shoot them at dropped like rocks- any not hit sweet didn't stumble around any more than 15-20 seconds before realising that death was the preferred option. Kangaroos I normally hit in the lungs, as shooting standing up from the back of a pick-up under a spotlight is not the place to try for bench-rest accuracy. I don't know if you do this in America but it is the most common, and fun, way of hunting in Australia. All 'roos shot did die, however as is typical of the lung shot, not before going for one last hop around of about 20 yards. No bullets exited any of the animals. I will be using Hornady 40 grainers with 28.5 grains of AR 2206 (BLC-2) at 3,888 f.p.s next trip and will let you know how they went"


Also FWIW to anyone , a couple days ago I drug out my 204 aand the chrono . Playing a little with IMR 4320 powder , I was able to get over 4000 fps out of the 40 gr V-Max.......pressure appeared OK , no flattend primer , no tuff bolt lift , etc.

Dobrenski's forgotten more about yote killing than most will ever know (me included)... with a few exceptions, this ridiculous thread could be thrown away apart from what my friend Mark "Dog" Dobrenski has written... he didn't get the name "dog" for naught either I can assure you.

Varmint guy:

You win! Enough of this BS, I am moving on.

Jerry

quote:

Originally posted by hughjass:
The 204 is not a magical cartridge. The .22-250 is just as flat shooting, the .220 is flatter. The wind performance is very good, but it is not due to the cartridge, it is due to the Balistic Coefficient. THe BC of the 40 gr vmax in .204 is .275. The BC of a comparable sectional density bullet in .224 is .242 (50 gr vmax. If the ballistic coefficients were comparable, the 220 would walk all over the 204. Still, the 220 with a 55 Nosler BTip is within 1 inch at 500 yds in drop AND windage, and carries 30% more energy.

Here are my numbers
I used .204 factory numbers because I haven't seen reloading data that can match it, let alone exceed it.

204 ruger
32 vmax 4225 fps
Max point blank range 351yds
500 yds: drop 29.4 windage (10mph) 32.4 energy 248

40 vmax 3900 fps
Max point blank range 348yds
500 yds: drop 28.4 windage (10mph) 24.9 energy 394.7

.22-250 rem
40 Bal tip 4200 fps
Max point blank range 354yds
500 yds: drop 28.5 windage (10mph) 30.4 energy 336

220 Swift
40 Bal tip 4477 fps
Max point blank range 372yds
500 yds: drop 24.5 windage (10mph) 28.0 energy 443

220 Swift
55 Bal tip 3896 fps
Max point blank range 345yds
500 yds: drop 29.1 windage (10mph) 25.9 energy 519

My source for the velocities are Accurate powder co website, Hodgdon website. Ballistic coefficients came from Nosler and Hornady. By the way, I have nothing against the 204 ruger. I think the greatest thing about it is zero recoil. I don't have a 204 or a 220 swift. I have a .22-250 and a 223, so while I would like a 204 I can't justify it at the moment.

ok here is the problem with this analogy, first off, to get a higher BC bullet you must go up in weight, correct?? so with that said if you shoot 69 or 75 grain bullets from the swift, yeah they are pretty sleek, but the drop trajectory #'s will suffer big time!! to me the 220 and 204 are varminting cartridges which means you are looking for performance from 0-400yards, if you want performance after that switch to a 6.5-284 or something, the fact of the matter is the swift cannot outperform the 204 from 0-400yards, yes it can use heavyier bullets and have better wind #'s but trajectory will suffer, switch to light bullets and the opposite will happen. the 204 simply performs better at typical varminting distances

Y'all need to find another horse to flog, this one is about beat to death.

Time to step into this conversation. I shoot several centerfire varmint calibers:

17 Mach IV, 17 Rem, 204 Ruger, 22 Hornet, 223, 22-250, 220 Swift, 6mmBR, 243, 257 Roberts, 257 Bob AI, 25.06, 260 Remington, etc....

I have vast experience with the 220 Swift and a little now with the 204.

My 204 is a CZ 527 American sporter, Very nice little rifle and quite accurate now that it has been bedded and the barrel channel enlarged. I am impressed with the ballistics of factory ammo and my handloads. Tragectory and wind cheating are very good. Terminal performance on the rabbits, pdogs and chucks I have shot (no coyotes to date) are below my expectations and not much better than my 223 shooting vmax, btips, blitzkings etc.

My 220 swift definately hits harder at ranges beyond 250 yards. My sift is a Savage 112FV-S with 26" barrel. I shoot several bullets in this rifle but by far the load it likes best is the 40 grain ballistic tip with CCI 200 primers, winchester powder and 44 grains of H380 (Nosler #5 book max). The load shoots 4250 fps out of my savage.

I have pushed the 50's to 4100 fps and the 55's to 4000 fps with no pressure signs but accuracy was poor.

As noted above I shoot many calibers and shoot 100's to 1000's of varmints each year.

The 204 is a fine varmint cartridge and I have really enjoyed shooting it thus far.

For bigger air time, more damage and better long range performance I will stick to my Swift.

Mike.

storm-I kind of have a thing for dusting chucks as well.

My best year to date was 457, not too bad when you consider the short window of time to shoot them.

The first year or so we would take them at any range. The big problem here wasn't so much the long as the short. Unless you work at it it is of no challenge to dust a chuck out to 300. We got to the point that any chuck within 150 had to be offhand and to 300 we could use sitting. After 300 any position was fair game.

For the most part we've gravitated to moving back to 450 b4 commencing.

Now you get out there in range a bit and there is a big time difference between how a chuck gets tossed around with the smaller cal's and the bigger ones.

I got to the point that unless a fella wanted to bring a big 6 or bigger then I would not take them. Hey my ball my court my rules right...grins

For me for the most part the shooting of a chuck with something smaller at long range is about as exciting as kissing your grandmother.
I mean you could hit them for sure but they will just go to sleep and there is no fun in that. I kind of like the chucks that get tossed about 100' off a cliff or the ones that levitate about 6' off the ground.

My fav chuck rounds is the 6/06,25/06,270,7 Mashburn Super,300 Wby and lastly my 340.

So for me I could see using the 204 for pds and gophers and for the occaisional other drive by. But I want a lot more horses for other work.

Mark D

I am a bit of an air freak myself with chucks. Love to catch them on a flat rock in what I call Launch Mode! I shoot most of my chucks with the 220 swift, 243, 260 and when they get way out there the 7mmSTW.

The 140 Amax out of my custom 260 has become a personal favorite as it really makes a mess out of them and I can see all my hits.

The 120 grain Vmax out of the 7mmSTW at 3700 FPS sure makes a mess out of a mature chuck!

Sounds like we could have a lot of fun chuck hunting together. I have some prime private land in Idaho I hunt every year.

Mike.

Storm- I got to the point where I have quite a few good areas and some very good areas.

I only shoot them once or twice a year and I do not bother them until they pup out. Shooting chucks b4 they pup, ouch talk about bringing bad karma on one self!!!

Mark D

quote:

Originally posted by VarmintGuy:

If you want to throw in a bunch of outlandish F.P.S. numbers then you have only that - an outlandish comparison!

I sourced my velocities. Accurate powder and Hodgdon.

Better accuracy? Doubtfull
Better trajectory? Shown to be false, (see point blank ranges)
Better wind bucking? Not due to cartridge, due to bullet.
Cooler barrel? Granted
Less recoil? Granted, in my opinion, the best feature of the 204
Splendid lethality in the fields! Dead is dead, but bigger gun makes them dead quicker.
Bigger performance with a lot smaller powder charges? Whatever, The tactical .20 supposedly equals the .204 with less powder yet.

[quote from Varmintguy]Bushchook: Let me repeat my questions of you after you made your "hit and run" attempt at slandering the "Magical 204" cartridge! Apparently you MISSED my direct questions of you in my previous posting!
Have you shot any 65 to 150 pound Kangaroos with the 40 grain 204 Ruger projectiles?
Do you think a 65 to 150 pound Kangaroo would NOT die if I shot him with a 40 grain 204 Ruger projectile "at 300 to 350 yards"?
I think it would![/quote]

Varmintguy , This is my last post on this subject as I don't want it to degenerate into a slanging match .
A)At no time have I criticised the .204 . As I said in my original post I quite like the cartridge and may at some point buy one .
B)Yes I have used a .204 but only fired a few shots .
C)Culling kangaroos is generally done at night from a vehicle . At times the shooting can be quite fast and furious and the animals become pumped with adrenaline .In this situation (as opposed to professional meat shooting) the goal is to reduce numbers quickly and efficiently . There is no time to be waiting for perfect side on or front on chest shots . Head and neck shots (as used by pro shooters) take longer due to reduced target size . Consequently more animals escape .
Many times you need a bullet with good penetration to get into the heart / lungs from a difficult angle .Recently whilst using the 55gn Nosler BT from my .243 Ackley at 4030 FPS I noted that a couple blew up without adequate penetration . Have seen the same from the .22/250 and .220 Swift when the wrong projectiles are used . It doesn't happen with heavier bullets like the .243 87gn V Max .
On undisturbed kangaroos and where shot placement can be perfect I have no doubt that a .204 would work at 350 yards . In my experience though , when conditions are less than perfect even the muzzle energy of a .220 Swift is somewhat marginal for large kangaroos at this and longer range . Some are likely to escape into the bush and may die a lingering death . Unlike some , I find this totally unacceptable .
A .204 is about 25 - 30% behind the Swift in muzzle energy and logically therefore the .204 would need to be confined to shorter ranges when hunting heavier animals where energy is important .With currently available .204 projectiles , shots would also best be confined to situations where deep penetration is not required .
To answer your question ,no I haven't used the .204 on kangaroos but as far as I am aware it does not possess any properties that allow it to defy the laws of physics or terminal bullet performance . We've heard arguements before where shooters claim that their favourite cartridge performs out of proportion to it's size or muzzle energy .I'm sure you won't insult us with that one .
As I've said before numerous times there is a place for more powerful varmint cartridges than the .204 . This is not criticism of the .204 as it was never designed for use on kangaroo - sized varmints .
IMHO to say that the ".204 beats 220 Swift proven fact" is a gross oversimplification and bound to stimulate arguments and offense . Whether the .204 is better or worse depends entirely upon what you're trying to hunt with it . For PD's , rabbits and foxes it sounds better , for kangaroos or feral dog / coyote sized varmints (unless chasing pelts), at long range I'd choose a Swift any day .

quote:

17 Mach IV, 17 Rem, 204 Ruger, 22 Hornet, 223, 22-250, 220 Swift, 6mmBR, 243, 257 Roberts, 257 Bob AI, 25.06, 260 Remington, etc...

My kinda of guy! My gun cabinet is jealous of yours!

cheers
seafire

Jerry Eden: Don't move on, at least not until you answer the few, simple and direct questions I posed of you!
Or MAYBE you can't?
MAYBE the BS that IS being slung is being slung by folks with LITTLE or NO experience with the 204?
I certainly know for sure that my experiences with the 204 are not BS! I own several Swifts and several 22-250's and three 204's!
And I own a chronograph!
And I know how to use ballistics computers and I know how to read trajectory tables and wind drift tables!
If you think something I have said is BS then stand up like a man and dispute it with your proof and/or your experiences - please.
Or, move on!
Long live the 204 Ruger!
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

Digital Dan: Nope on the thread being dropped - this subject is not quite understood as yet by a couple of "doubting 204 Thomas's"!
Long live the 204 Ruger!
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

Well, I still think they are cute!!

My manure pile is 225 yds down wind from my back porch. There are about 20 deer remains on top of the pile and the buzzards and crows are there every morning. I have shot about 50 crows there in the last month with the .204 with only 2 misses. The best part is I saw them all explode in the scope!! I'm not gunna sell my big .22's but I'm sure having fun with the .204!!

Stormbringer: Are you saying "in your experience" that the 204 Ruger cartridge does not somehow kill Varmints dead enough for you?
Or are you saying that the 204 Ruger cartridge does not blow Varmints as high into the air as your "other" Varmint cartridges?
Well in my book Stormbringer, hitting a Varmint and killing it cleanly is where its at! And dead is dead no matter how large the pool of blood or pile of guts left over.
I have cleanly, humanely and emphatically rendered dead, Varmints of virtually all sizes with my various 204's!
These dead Varmints include Badgers, Coyotes, Cotton-tail Rabbits, Rock Chucks, Porcupines, Jack Rabbits, Prairie Dogs, Skunks, Snowshoe Hares, feral cats, Ground Squirrels and several species of flying Varmints! I recall having to shoot any of them twice only on exceptionally rare occassion!
The 204 Ruger is VERY lethal on Varmints and small game!
So I guess I am asking in this regard, what more in the way of terminal performance with the 204, are you seeking or are you dissatisfied with?
Dead is dead!
Maybe you should go to the 257 Weatherby Magnum for all your "Prairie Dog, Rabbit and Rock Chuckin" if pool of blood size is of the utmost importance to you?
And don't forget the other attributes of the 204 in addition to its superior wind bucking and superior trajectory (which allows one to make more first shot hits!) like its lack of recoil (see your shots! - does that interest you?), less barrel heat and increased accuracy!
These things make more Varmints dead, right?
Again, I state, its about a no brainer unless one is gonna shoot a Kangaroo at 600 yards maybe that the 204 Ruger truly excells?
Then for the very long range Kangaroos - maybe the 220 Swift with 69 grain bullets and a good drop chart, rangefinder and a good spotter that would "outperform" the 204 Ruger!
But, again, HOW MANY of us shoot Kangaroos at 600 yards?
I hazard to suggest to you Stormbringer to back off on those "over book loads" or you will perhaps one day suffer the agony my good friend Jay did (see my above post for details here in case you missed them). Hot loads cause problems with guns and with brass that are not only unsafe but expensive to correct.
I have been using Swifts and 22-250's for 40 years now! I am more impressed with this new 204 Ruger cartridge and its accuracy, lethality and all its other attributes than I was when both the 220 Swift and the 22-250 were new to me!
And that is saying something!
I would say I also have "vast experience" with the 220 Swift as well as the 22-250! In addition to all the calibers you have mentioned I also own and shoot quite a few other "small caliber" Rifles, including 221 Remington Fireballs, 222 Remingtons, 222 Remington Magnum, 6x47, 224 Weatherby, 6mm PPC, 22 Remington Bench Rests, 6mm Ackley Improved, 6mm Remington and etc!
So I am fairly to quite familiar with Rifle cartridges and how they perform over normal and typical Rifle distances!
I find the 204 Ruger lacking in no regard - indeed its superiority in so many ways does make it a superior or a "Magic Cartridge"!
Long live the 204 Ruger!
Doubting 204 Thomas's - bite your tongues til you at least have some experience or have proof!
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

I am not a computer wiss but I do know this, the 204 is throwing a 32gr. pill and the 220 is throwing a 50gr. pill so why not load the 204 with a 50gr. pill and see how it compaires then? I shoot 308 at stupid ranges and the computer ballistics software while a good baseline it is far from gospel! why does the real world POI not match the computer? I plugged in all the variables and it is still almost 15" different. I used to use the 22-250 for yotes but went to a 17 Rem. and will never turn back! will I use the 17 rem. for deer though? hell no! it all boils down to the apples to apples and while both rounds will make applesauce a compairison of the two saying one is better is BS! Now put a 40gr. pill in them both and figure that out, if you really look at it if you could get a pill small enough in .224dia in a 223 could you get the same results? what about in a 22-250 or a Swift what is the data saying now? Later,

Ksmirk

maybe someone that doesn't think he's the smartest man on the planet should chime in here. since I fit the bill I will. Simple physics bigger bullet moving at "almost" the same speed will penetrate farther. Bigger bullets traveling almost the same speed will travel father. bigger bullets will buck more wind at longer ranges. simple fact the 220 swift packs more punch. I have never owned a 204 and never will but I do own a 22-250 and I don't claim its better than a 220 swift because its not. and it shoots the same bullet. this is like saying that the 17 hmr is better than a 22 mag. it may travel faster but it doesn't pack as much punch. we're talking a 17 grain bullet compared to a 40. now if all you hunt is prarie rats than you will never see the difference between the two but nobody here can say that its as effective on coyotes. thats like sayin a 243 is as effective as a 300win on moose. its just not true. as for more accurate thats just stupid. everyone knows that a 22-250 or 220 swift will shoot a ragged hole at 100 yrds as will I am sure the 204. its all in the load the gun and the shooter. simple fact you found a caliber that suites you and thats great but don't try and put down tried an true cartidges just because you can hit stuff with it.

Bushchook: Don't pull a Jerry Eden on us and throw mud and run off!
I want you to stay and try to defend yourself!
And besides its so much fun to put the barbs to you "doubting 204 Thomas's"!
So, YOU ARE CONCEDING that yes, the 204 Ruger with 40 grain bullets versus the Kangaroo would render the Kangaroo dead?
I thought so!
Thank you.
I NEVER take a "bad or difficult" shot on non rodent Varmints or animals!
That is bad form in my book!
So your contentions regarding difficult angles and such does not enter my deliberations.
If you or your mates want to shoot at Kangaroos under difficult conditions or shot angles that is your business and your decision. I have never seen a Kangaroo in the wild and don't need to for my decision making regarding shot angles and difficulties. If its a bad shot I wouldn't try it.
The larger game and Varmints should be killed as humanely, surely and quickly as possible.
As for rodent type Varmints I have been known to take a shot at them that I am somewhat less sure of than for the larger Varmints and Game.
Indeed year before last I was tasked with having to shoot over 4,000 rounds of ammo at Ground Squirrels (memeber of the rodent family) alone!
These Varmints are so prolific and overpopulated in some of the areas I Hunt them that they turn cultivated fields to dust!
I simply prefer not to take "iffy" shots on larger creatures than rodents - like the scenarios you posed. I simply wait for conditions or game posture to be more conducive to quick kills or I don't shoot!
The 204's I have shot Varmints and small game at the longer ranges (as far out there as I care to shoot at them!) have been pleasingly and quickly lethal on the intended targets.
Yes, you are right, somewhere out there, WAY out there the Swift does kill equal size game better!
That goes without saying.
BUT the 204 is lethal on Varmints to ranges that you non-experienced and "doubting 204 Thomas's" are not giving it credit for.
That is a no-no!
If like Mark Dobrenski says - SOMEDAY I am gonna wish I could kill a Coyote at 600 yards with my 204's, like he does with his 6mm/06 - my retort would be - no thanks!
I don't shoot at Coyotes at 600 yards with ANY Rifle I have!
Period.
No need to - sneak up a couple hundred yards or call them in closer - or DON'T SHOOT at them til next time!
Coyote tags are not a once in a lifetime deal here in the Rockies!
Oh, Bushchook, you could not be more wrong with your contention that the 204 Ruger does not perform out of proportion to its size!
YES, INDEED MAN, IT DOES!
Sheesh!
I am loading 26.0 grs. of powder in one of my 204's and I load 44.0 grs of powder in one of my Swifts! And the 204 outperforms the 220 Swift in many regards!
Yeah - DUH!
Thats the point of this new magic cartridge, the 204 Ruger, EXACTLY, it performs way out of proportion to its size!
Am I talking to a brick wall here?
Sheesh! And double sheesh - sheesh!!
If you care to be "insulted" by that fact Bushchook, thats your choice - don't blame anyone but yorself for that!
Lets do, Bushchook - make things simple!
The 204 Ruger outperforms the 22-250 and the 220 Swift in so many ways!
Accept it or don't - its your shortcoming if you don't!
Long live the new Magic Cartridge" the 204 Ruger!
Hold into the wind
VamrintGuy

ill put my 7mm stw up against your 204 any day of the weak buddy. it might use more powder but it WILL out perform that stupid little cartridge in every way. I figured since we are getting so out of hand with this topic I might as well blow it out of the water. and if all you take is 100yrd shots at broad side prarie rats why not just use an air rifle. what do you need all that performance for if you NEVER EVER take a less than perfect shot.

Dartfreak8: In your opinion of yourself ("NOT THE SMARTEST MAN IN THE WORLD") do you think you could have overlooked some "simple facts" regarding the cartridge you have never shot "and never will"? The 204.
Do you think the 204 is less accurate than the 220 Swift or the 22-250, IN YOUR EXPERIENCE?
Accurate rounds hit targets more often than less accurate ones! I contend the 204 Ruger cartridge is indeed inherently more accurate than either the 22-250 or the 220 Swift!
Or is that answer to be found in any of your physics books?
Bullets that fly flatter hit more targets than bullets that don't fly as flat! Or is that also not in any of your physics books?
And no, dartfreak8, being more accurate and more likely to hit ones target is not STUPID - its the objective!
Dartfreak8 are you saying that the only factor in lethality of a bullet is its "penetration"? If that is your contention then you have a lot more time to put in out in the field with powder and ball!!!
Speed of projectile, placement of projectile (accuracy!), rotational energy, frangibilty and many other factors help determine lethality of a bullet not just penetration!
If penetration is what you want then stick with FMJ bullets!
Sheesh!
Last I checked dartfreak8 the 17 HMR and the 22 WMR shot different bullets - vastly different!
And, yeah, indeed I have been Hunting Coyotes with the 22 Magnum for more decades than I care to remember and the 17 HMR is at least as lethal on Coyotes as the 22 WMR is - if not more so!
A number of folks that I know and trust their opinions DO contend the 17 HMR is more lethal on Coyotes than the 22 WMR is and they prefer them! My 22 Magnum has not been out of the gun vault and into the game fields for 2 years.
Part of the reason is the speed of the 17 HMR's projectile, its better accuracy and other attributes the 17 HMR has that the 22 WMR doesn't.
I am not putting down tried and true cartridges dartfreak8 I am defending a new and sensational cartrdige with my facts and figures and experiences!
No one is asking you to think less of your beloved 22-250, but also, don't make the mistake of claiming it outperforms the 204 Ruger - because, it doesn't!
And again in case you missed it I have been shooting and Hunting with 22-250's for 40 years now!
Are you saying the BIGGER bullets of the 22-250 "buck the wind better" than the 204?
I could care less if "bigger bullets travel farther" - I don't know what your point is there - maybe you simply mis-spoke?
I know what the 22-250 can do and after a year and a half of shooting and Hunting with my three 204 Rifles I know what the 204's are capable of - both at the range and in the game fields!
Long live the "Magical 204"!
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

Ksmirk: I would love to respond more specifically to your posting or at least to understand it more fully!
Are you saying that you can only compare the trajectories of two different cartridges (calibers?) only if the bullets of these different calibers weigh exactly the same?
That is a bogus contention.
The object of and the search for flatter trajectories is to achieve flattness of flight in ones projectiles and to therefore hit more targets!
It does not matter how much the bullet weighs!
If you have flatter trajectory then you hit more targets (you win the match, you have more fun, your hobby is more satisfying, you cleanly kill more game or Varmints etc!).
And to achieve flatter trajectory it is perfectly honorable and legal to use bullets of lesser (or MORE) weight!
Again maybe I am not interpreting your post correctly.
By the way the vast majority of the people I know and shoot with use 55 grain bullets in their 220 Swifts! As do I in four of five of my Swift Rifles. In my other Swift Rifle I shoot 52 grain bullets.
I don't think they make 50 grain bullets in 20 caliber as yet.
I am not denying for one minute - never have - that a person needs to shoot their Rifle at a particular distance to know for sure what its trajectory really is. I have never had a 15" error over the ranges I shoot though.
Long live the "Magical 204"!
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

were in any physics book does it say that the flatter somthing flys the more accurate it is? I am pretty sure that it is the ability to mimic the first shot that defines accuracy. not trajectory. It doesn't seem liek you could read a physics book to begin with because I didn't say being accurate is stupid I said that thinking the 204 is more accurate than the 220 or 22-250 is stupid. penetration is not the only factor in lethality but it is by far the biggest factor in the bullets performance. set aside a well placed shot because that doesn't always happen penetration can mean the difference between a wounded animal and a dead one. I feel sorry for you that in your 40 years of shooting great cartirdges liek the 22-250 that you became a know it all. I have only been shooting it for 10 years and I have a better grasp on ballistics. just so you know rotational energy,frangibility and all those other big words you rattled off determine penetration that then determines lethality. I don't understand why you think that trajectory is so important in a bullets design. anyone can learn any trajectory and can out shoot someone with the flatest shooting rifle there is. just because the bullet shoots flat doesn't mean your a sharpshooter right out of the gate. oh and by the way just because I said I wasn't the smartest man, that doesn't mean I am the dumbest either. I think in your 40 years of shooting you should of gathered more info on ballistics. Just because you know how to spell those big words doesn't mean you grasp the meaning. keep pluggin away though, sooner or later your bound to change every law in those physics books just because YOU SAY its better.

Dear VarmintGuy. I thank you for your advice and worry over my "over book" loads. I can assure you all of the handloads I produce never exceed listed book maximum. I do find that most loads for my varmint calibers are at or withing 2 grains of maximum but all are under the listed maximums. I too agree that it is never a good idea to exceed maximum (while some folks think they can). In my load development I try to find a bullet/powder combmination that gives me the best accuray and velocity. I shoot several calibers for varmints because I am fortunate enough to own them and feel each is best suited to specific tasks.

I will put my flame suit on and explain what I mean.

17 Remington: Mostly used for Coyotes shooting 30 grain bullets. Great for saving pelts. Good for rabbits, pdogs, squirrels and chucks. Very fun low recoiling accurate caliber. Very miss understood and meligned like the 220 swift. My rifle is a custom sporter and I use it mostly for coyotes when I am calling them, rabbits, pdogs on occasion.

204 Ruger: Everything as stated about the 17 Remington with additional energy and less wind drift. Quite possibly the best "All Around" commercial varmint cartridge. I base that statement on the low recoil, high velocity, good energy, affordability of factory ammo, fun factor and terminal performance when measured against the 17 Mach IV up to the 223 WSM.

22 hornet: Ground squirrels, rabbits, pdogs, chucks, fox and coyote. Limit range to 200 and less with rodents and 125 or so on coyotes. Best thing about the Hornet is very low recoil and noise. Accuracy with the case design can be spotty but my Anschutz 1730 was very accurate.

22-250, 22 BR and 220 Swift. All very close ballistically. Some may argue the 22-250 is still the best all around commercial varmint cartridge. I will not dispute this. Unlike you, I think everyone is entiteled to an opinion. All three are great rounds and will handle all our North American varmints at longer range than the above mentioned calibers (including the 204 im my opinion). The 22BR is a sweet little round and very efficient. The 22-250 is a better case design than the Swift and in my experience has less case stretching when shooting maxmimum or near maximum loads.

I do enjoy watching the rodent and rabbit species get vaporized when hit. That is why I feel the energy level of the swift is better than the 204. This is especially true on chucks when the range exceeds 350 yards. Once you get past 500 I usually put my Swift away and start shooting a heavier caliber.

I love the 204. I also love all the other calibers. I will continue to debate the 220 swift as being a better mid-long range (350-500) yard varmint cartrige than the 204. This is my opinion based on my experience.

Mike.

I think you are trolling, and you must have a lot of time on your hands. I gave you some ballistic data which I had worked up over the last 32 years of Swift shooting, and you disrespected the information. Other shooters have posted velocities of over 4100fps with the 50 grain bullet, and over 4000fps with the 55's, you discount that as well. At this point, I must assume you are, as I said trolling, or trying to convince yourself you have the MAGIC! Like Bushchook, I have never demeaned the 204, I have defended the Swift. I don't know, or care for that matter, how many coyotes you shoot a year, but in a good year I will shoot 30-35. I don't like seeing an animal run after it has been well hit, and the little "POP" guns just don't have enough energy to do the job under all conditions. Also, remember the 22-250 running a 50 grain bullet at 4000fps? That's fact as well, you didn't like that one either.
Another thing, it is not uncommon for one rifle to shoot the same load 100 or even 200fps faster, or slower than published data. Until YOU shoot that rifle over a cronograph, with strain gauges you have no idea what its doing.

Mark:

My grandson, will beat up yours! LOL! He's 5 years old and already weighs 68 Lbs. So be carefull he might come up to Oregon and get you, the next time we are in Springfield!! I am not sure my 6mm-06 will beat yours though!

Happy New Year

Jerry

quote:

Originally posted by Jerry Eden:
I think you are trolling, and you must have a lot of time on your hands. I gave you some ballistic data which I had worked up over the last 32 years of Swift shooting, and you disrespected the information. Other shooters have posted velocities of over 4100fps with the 50 grain bullet, and over 4000fps with the 55's, you discount that as well. At this point, I must assume you are, as I said trolling, or trying to convince yourself you have the MAGIC! Like Bushchook, I have never demeaned the 204, I have defended the Swift. I don't know, or care for that matter, how many coyotes you shoot a year, but in a good year I will shoot 30-35. I don't like seeing an animal run after it has been well hit, and the little "POP" guns just don't have enough energy to do the job under all conditions. Also, remember the 22-250 running a 50 grain bullet at 4000fps? That's fact as well, you didn't like that one either.
Another thing, it is not uncommon for one rifle to shoot the same load 100 or even 200fps faster, or slower than published data. Until YOU shoot that rifle over a cronograph, with strain gauges you have no idea what its doing.

Mark:

My grandson, will beat up yours! LOL! He's 5 years old and already weighs 68 Lbs. So be carefull he might come up to Oregon and get you, the next time we are in Springfield!! I am not sure my 6mm-06 will beat yours though!

Happy New Year

Jerry

Oh Yes in total agreement here
Hodgdon manual lists max load of H414 at 44 grains with a velocity of 3826 fps in a 26" tube.My average velocity across my chronograph has been 4046 fps with my low number being 4025 and my high number being 4089. Not too bad numbers wise and accuracy is pretty good too considering I am not known as a very precise shooter. I have 50 rounds loaded right now and I am out of 414 and after buying my next jug I am going to have to start over working up again and I am hoping to get similar results with the next jug. So I am getting 220 fps ave higher than the manual lists all components being equal to the manual. I though am getting lower numbers using the nosler manual for the 60 partition by about 150 fps or there abouts( can't find my notes damn it) but the load shows promice for accuracy with some tweeking.

Happy New Beer er I mean Year

quote:

Long live the "Magical 204"!

Roll up, roll up for the mystery tour.
Roll up, roll up for the mystery tour.
Roll up AND THAT'S AN INVITATION, roll up for the mystery tour.
Roll up TO MAKE A RESERVATION, roll up for the mystery tour.
The magical mystery tour is coming to take you away,
Coming to take you away.
The magical mystery tour is dying to take you away,
Dying to take you away, take you away.

Hipster: You are a hip dude! Here's another example of the crazyness of published data and different rifles. I have a Model 700 V in 223, with a factory 24" heavy barrel. My friend Jeff has the EXACT same rifle. My rifle shoots my hand loads @ 3150fps+ -, and his shoots the same ammo at 3350fps. Take his reloads and fire them in my rifle, and they are still 200fps slower than his. Go figure! That's why, I refer to the manuals as a "guide". Check this out, I recently purchased a Model 53 S&W revolver in 22 Remington Jet. The first data I looked at had the bullet going at 2250fps. The next manual had the same load going 1700fps. Thats a huge difference. Load um, shoot um over a cronograph, and then you will know. The variance in data does not cause me any stress, it just gives me a chuckle.

Jerry

Goo-goo-ga-jube.

Ol' Ed Huebel and company are at it again..in the big bore or wildcat forum...the 12FH...around 3000 fps it should dodge wind pretty well. 300 grains of powder will burn down an acre of prairie from the muzzle flash I suppose, but that's a small price to pay. Don't think you can see the bullet strike with it though.

Better yet dan, there launching 328gr (3/4 oz) sabboted slugs at 4000fps .
Now if we can work out the material and design to launch the 300gr 338smk out of it at that speed...300yd zero, +/- 2" out to 350yd and only 12.5" low and 7000+ft/lb at 500yd....bet that could flip a chuck, ya think?

yeah, I think. The next step in the game Ed & Cie. are playin' is to smooth bore it with a .20 cal dart of about 125-150 grains in an aluminum sabot. You're lookin' at some serious smoke with that rig. I figure about 5000 fps +/-. Keep the fins small, the nose pointy...kinda like an Abrams. Need to work on the FDC though.

varmint guy, what I was saying is that while it was stated that the 204 is better and could make the swift obsolete ballistically I have to raise the BS flag! you talk about flater, faster, being able to hit you perspective target, what ever happened to being a rifleman and a good shot or has everyone just got lazy and figure that a fast, flat shooting rifle will make up for poor marksmanship? if I wanted to get crazy I could state the 17 Remington to be better than the 22-250! My big deal is that while one is faster and flatter DOES not make it better! it that were the fact why would the Marine Snipers still carry that rainbow arch 308 and daily take out targets to 800-1000 yards? hell I would rather have the 6.5-300WSM! but then I would not be considered a precision marksman? What I am saying is that while we have some new rounds and cartriges most of us don't take the hipe and jump on the bandwaggon as soon as others do, but if one is to say the 204 is better than the Swift it better be on a level field and while the 204 DOES seem to be a good round (20 Tact is better) it WILL never be better than the Swift in all shooting situations! just like I said I went with the 17 Remington for coyotes, do I think it to be better than the 22-250? yes will it make the 22-250 ballistically obsolete? NO! all these cartriges out there have their place and while a computer says it is better does not mean that everyone should sell off their Swifts and purchase the 204. It's like the 17HMR being stated as a wonderful yote round! hell I feel that if you shoot yote with a 17HMR you are not thinking about the game but some advertisment that was made to sell a new cartrige, will it not work on the yotes? I have only personnaly seen 3 shot with the round and while the first one dropped like it was struck by lightening the other 2 I'm glad I had the 22-250 due to the fact that little fast, flat shooting bullet did nothing but blow a patch of fur off about the size of a baseball.

This is what I am getting at through all the BS from above, there is NO caliber or cartrige that is BETTER than one or the other! for your purpose it might be better but that does not make it better for me. I feel that the 223 is one of the best pasture maggot rounds out there! but it does not make it better than the 22-250 or for the fact of argument the 280 Remington? different strokes for different folks! Hell I feel the 6.5x55 is better than the 270! talk about getting a discussion going Later fella's it's BBQ time! Later,

Kirk

Hey varmintguy:

You didn't have the handel of 2506 Remington, on another site did you?

The above flame is just like he used to post, until he got run off the site.

Pleasant Dreams

Jerry

Ksmirk:

The 6.5X55 better than the 270? Pshaw, nothings better than the 270!!! LOL!

Varmintguy:

You didn't happen to have the handel of 2506 Remington on another web site, or was it 700 Remington, did you? Seems that guy used to flame, just like the above thread. That is until the guys on that site ran him off!

Pleasant Dreams

Jerry

Stormbringer: I HEARTILY agree with your point regarding the 204 possibly (PROBABLY!) being the best ALL AROUND Varmint cartridge of all time!
I have as yet to find something that I want done Varmint wise that the 204 Ruger CAN'T DO!
Unlike you though Stormbringer, I think EVERYONE is entitled to an opinion BUT NO ONE is entitled to pass off opinion (OR RUMOR or conjecture!) as fact!
Theres a lot of that going on around here these days. So be that - conjecture and opinion are not facts! Nor are the proof of anything.
I suspected you were a redmist groupy!
I been there.
Mike you were doing pretty well right up to the end when you mistakenly professed the Swift to be one up somehow on the 204 Ruger.
Well you were close!
The Swift is a splendid Varminter out to 500 yards I agrre with that - its just not the equal ballistically of the 204 Ruger!
The 204 Ruger performs all out of proportion to its size!
An amazing cartridge!
Long live the 204 Ruger!
The Magic Cartridge!
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

Jerry Eden: Negative also on this attempt of yours at besmirchment of me!
I have proudly used this screen name exclusively, for 10+ years.
You certainly have run out of argument haven't you Jerry!
You refuse (STILL!) to answer my few and simple questions and you now begin to try to impune me with snideness and immature comments.
Good luck, chump! You are gonna need it!
I expected that of you to tell the truth!
You may call it flaming I call it refuting specious (without merit) and ambiguous slanders with facts, figures and real life experiences!
Can't take the heat Jerry don't burp up unsubstantiated half truths and baseless slanders!
Speaking of dreams Jerry - you need some sleep to clear your head and when you wake up put on a new personality - one that will be a little more mature and man like.
Any chance you are gonna answer my questions or admit you can't?
Or are we gonna get more snideness and immaturity from you?
I think I know which path you will take!
He-he!
Oh and Jerry thanks for stickin around but please come up with something that is merit or reality based for our discussion.
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

Ksmirk: Thank you for your reply and the information you brought into the thread. If I may interject some of it is not germaine to this specific thread but I am not completely adverse to getting off on a tangent!
For instance your contention of how fine a Prairie Dog cartridge the 223 is! And I agree with that it is a fine cartridge for Prairie Dogs andmany other kinds of Varmints and small game. The 22-250 is (I agree) a better Prairie Dog Rifle in many instances and in many ways. But the 223 heats up barrels much slower than a 22-250 does.
The recoil of the 223 is noticeably and appreciably lower than the 22-250 and this is important to me in Colony Varmint situations!
The 223 is more economical and this is also important to me!
Now I, am gonna go off on a tangent here a bit and declare that all things being equal in two Rifles (one being a 223 and the other a 22-250) that the 223 will be slightly (but noticeably and appreciably!) more accurate! I have proven this to myself on many occassions over the years!
These things are important!
Now lets get after the 204 vs. the 22-250 and the advantages in the Colony Varmint fields clearly goes to the 204 Ruger! Including the inherent accuracy benefits of the 204!
I know because I use them both extensively, and I can read ballistic and trajectory charts!
The 204 Ruger performs all out of proportion to its size! Amen again to that.
Yeah I would rather use a 204 Ruger in a Prairie Dog Town for a multitude of reasons, many I have listed in this and previous posts.
My preference here is without bias nor does this preference for the 204 profit me in any way.
Its just a better cartridge plain and simple!
Yeah the 204 Ruger is relatively new but I have been shooting mine for more than 18 months now! And others have been shooting it longer than this.
It has taken that long to impress me so much, and then impress me some more, AND THEN, impress me some more!
No, not me, nor any computer I have seen has asked you, me or the other guy to sell off their 223's, 22-250's or 220 Swifts!
But I do know one thing - folks with open minds and folks with the ability to observe and comprehend things they see and read are in fact buying a lot of 204's!
And yes, there are those that will sell off other Rifles! I think I previously posted about my friend Jack from Yelm, Washington who is a long time Varminter (50 years+). He bought a Ruger 204 about 20 months ago and promptly sold off several other Varmint Rifles in different calibers that he had owned for some time!
I have seen Jack shoot all manner of Varmints with his 204 Ruger and I have as yet to hear him say anything like - "gee I wish this 204 could just do a little more... ANYTHING"!
Bullet placement with the 17 HMR is critical on Coyotes - I suggest head shots or heart/lung shots exclusively! No shoulders! Even though one of the other posters here on the AR Forum did recently drive a 17 HMR projectile through both shoulders of a Coyote at 60 yards if I recall correctly.
I don't think that ballistic superiority has anything to do with "human laziness". I think the search for ballistic superiority is a positive human trait more closely linked to INTELLIGENCE!
Long live the Magical 204 Ruger!
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

Jerry Eden: Yes I agree with you totally here that the chronograph has settled a lot of arguments and defined a lot of load data and factory "declarations" as usually being overly optimistic!
Now to your Remington Rifle that is shooting slower than your pardners. I assume these are older heavy barrel Remingtons as they are nowadays mostly 26" heavy barrels in 223 or (22" or 20").
Does your Rifle have significantly more ammo having been fired in it? I am puzzled by this 6% or 7% difference in velocity between the two similar Remington Rifles.
I was thinking if your Rifles barrel has more wear in it at the throat or on the riflings maybe that would account for the difference in velocities?
Well I hope your Remington makes up in accuracy what it has obvioulsy lost in velocity (flatness of trajectory!).
Long live Remington!
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy