# 204 ????? Please give your opinion



## stxhunter

I am planing on buying my first dedicated coyote gun, can't decide on the CZ american or the Savage predator hunter. Originally I was leaning towards 22-250, but now I am thinking about the 204. I really like the faster, flatter trajectory and of course the "new" feature. What is everyone's opinion on the round as far as performance on yotes??

I have read some of the other threads, such as will the 17 hmr work for yotes, 223 vs 204, etc., and have read some pretty funny and entertaining posts. Also, I'm not asking if the round will perform at 1000yards or something unrealistic. Most likely shots will be within 300 yards and less.


----------



## kdog

My hunting partner has one (.204) and it is the best performing coyote round he has ever used. He has been doing this for 25 years. I have ordered a .204 also, and can't wait to hunt/call with it. My 2 cents is that you would be very pleased with the .204. :sniper:


----------



## Kelly Hannan

the 204 should be fine. I would go with the Savage. The big question is will you be handloading or store bought shells? If store bought how available is 204 ammo where you live? The 22-250 is hard to beat, and so is the 223. With a 223 you can buy the cheaper ammo and still have a lot of fun with your new rifle. Just a couple things to think about.


----------



## ay tee

well as i have said in more threads before.. i love my savage... i think you would enjoy it...


----------



## Fallguy

Is that CZ the 527? Former Moderator here Brad T had one and he uses that on his predator control job. He loves the gun, and says it is the most underated gun around. Very light and a crisp trigger from what I have heard. It should make a nice calling gun. The Savage Predator hunter is nice too. Oversize bolt handle, pre-camoed, medium barrel, and it really doesn' feel all that heavy for it's barrel. I do not believe it has a floorplate though, if that is important to you and your style of hunting and transporting your firearms. Either gun I think would be good. Lot's of people like their 204s.


----------



## stxhunter

The CZ is the 527 and I have heard some pretty good things about it. The 24" barrel only weighs 7.2 lbs where as the savage 22" barrel weighs 7.25lbs. Again too many decisions to decide!

I have found it a bit difficult to find 204 ammo, the local academy currently has one loading. I have found it at two of our local gun stores though. My solution to this problem was to buy 204 bulk ammo from Cabela's.

I know Savage makes a great rifle, I currently own two. They are extreemly accurate and I really love that Accu-trigger. None of my local gun stores have either rifle. I will either have to wait for them to be stocked, order one, or go up to San Antonio.


----------



## Fallguy

stxhunter said:


> The CZ is the 527 and I have heard some pretty good things about it. The 24" barrel only weighs 7.2 lbs where as the savage 22" barrel weighs 7.25lbs. Again too many decisions to decide!


I doubt you will be able to tell the difference in .05 pounds anyway. For that reason I wouldn't worry about the weights of those two rifles and start looking at other features. Remember in regards to weight you are going to add a scope, sling, bipod maybe, shell holder, and other kinds of crap to your calling rifle. It going to weigh more than that!


----------



## stxhunter

The main reason I had mentioned that about the weight was because of the barrel length. The Savage is a 22" barrel and the CZ is 24", with both being about the same weight. Is a 24" barrel necessary for the 204 or is it just overkill?


----------



## kdog

The 24" barrell was recomended by the barrel maker when I ordered my .204.


----------



## iwantabuggy

If you are really after the flat trajectory you suggested you should see some gain with the longer barrel and it may be worth it. However, at 300 yards or less, it is pretty much a moot point. You won't see much difference until you get out to about 500 yards (and it is still less than 1 inch). A couple hundred fps doesn't do much for you at 300 yards. As for the difference between the 204 and 22-250, I think you won't notice a difference. I'd choose for choice of ammo, price of ammo, and availability of ammo (or components if you reload) over the difference in trajectory or accuracy. They are too close to call different IMO. The actual difference in trajectory at 300 yards as I have it calculated is .2 inches. And at 500 yards I am calculating .7 inch difference. Good luck with whatever you choose.


----------



## Fallguy

Also check the twist ratio in the rifles you are looking at. Some twist ratios handle a bigger bullet better. If I remember right a quicker twist ratio will stabalize a heavier bullet better than slow twist ratio. That may be important if you are a reloader and have a plan of what size bullet you want to shoot.


----------



## huntinhick

my sister has the cz 527 in 7.62x39 and the gun with a nice scope and fully loaded ways 5 pounds.


----------



## kdog

huntinhick said:


> my sister has the cz 527 in 7.62x39 and the gun with a nice scope and fully loaded ways 5 pounds.


Better check your numbers. You will find that the above does not add up to 5 lbs............


----------



## wmmichael20

I would give that savage a second look I fondeled one at the local gun shop and was verry impressed with it but chose a howa 1500 varmint supreme with a thumbhole stock in 223. I think you will be happy with anny of the three calibers available in the savage


----------



## barebackjack

You want a flat shooting rifle, which is handy when shooting longer ranges. But than your going to shoot a .204 which is a pretty wimpy for long range clean kills. Itd be a great fox gun, but to small for coyote work. Especially when you figure in other variables, such as less than ideal hits, its wind bucking ability, etc. IMO .223 is the smallest caliber for serious coyote work (and still a little small IMO). And you mentioned this new purchase would be a "coyote gun". Id look at a .223 or .22-250. Both of which are FAR better choices for a straight up coyote gun.

.204=to small.


----------



## varmit b gone

Fallguy said:


> Is that CZ the 527? Former Moderator here Brad T had one and he uses that on his predator control job. .


Where was this Brad guy located? The reason I ask is because I know a guy named Brad that works in predator control and shoots a 527 CZ in 204. It is probably just a coincedence but you never know.


----------



## Fallguy

varmit b gone said:


> Fallguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is that CZ the 527? Former Moderator here Brad T had one and he uses that on his predator control job. .
> 
> 
> 
> Where was this Brad guy located? The reason I ask is because I know a guy named Brad that works in predator control and shoots a 527 CZ in 204. It is probably just a coincedence but you never know.
Click to expand...

This is starting to look like a very small world. After seeing your location, it's probably the same Brad. The final test is this...tell him that taxidermists are a bunch of overcharging, artsy-fartsy types and see what he says. If that doesn't get a reaction, then spit in his Copenhagen. :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## varmit b gone

I'll do that.  Like you said, it just goes to show that it is a very small world.


----------



## harvy

My friend has killed 13 coyotes this season, all with the 204. Awesome round for coyotes. Very little to no pelt damange and really smacks them down.


----------



## Fallguy

varmint b gone

If you answer yes to the following questions, then we are on to something:

1. Are you near Newcastle, WY?

2. Did the guy's 204 have it's stock painted like the old style of Desert Storm camo?


----------



## varmit b gone

I'm 30 minutes from Newcastle and our family has a ranch south of Newcastle where the Brad I am speaking of hunts quite often. And yes, this Brad painted his stock with an old desert camo paint. I am 99.999999% positive it is the same guy. Dang, this is weird!


----------



## Fallguy

Yup, it's him. Well give him my regards!


----------



## Goose Bandit

i have shot a 204 and my hunting partner has shot a 204 also and we both get rid of them and went back to shooting ar's .223 and the old faithful 22-250's we had alot of coyotes that would take off running wounded and have to chase them down even at close range with good shots and i am talking 100yds or less. we hunt a few tournaments and chasing down a wounded coyote or coyotes is the last thing you want to do......... shoot a .223 or a 22-250 and it drops them in their tracks.. just my experience shootin the 204


----------



## varmit b gone

Fallguy, I'll make sure and do that.


----------



## DogCaller

I would have to disagree with the .204 being too small for coyotes. I shoot the V-Max 40 grain bullet. I have shot over 20 coyotes with it this year and none have been wounded and got away. With the right shot placement I think it is a great gun out to 350 yds.


----------



## kdog

Dog Caller,

Are you trying to say that your .204 is a viable coyote gun?! We all know that a .223 shooting a 40 gr bullet at 3500-3600 fps is WAY more effective on coyotes than the whimpy .204 shooting a 40 gr bullet at 3800-3900 fps.

Sorry, I couldn't help myself. I can hardly stand to read some of this "stuff". Thank God for people like you DC and Levi.................


----------



## JeffinPA

The .204 is the daddy. I've never enjoyed a new gun more than this. My boy and I fight over who gets to shoot it when we go. Great ballistics, tame recoil and not-so-obnoxious report. Here's a photo of my rig without the light installed. Its a Kimber 84m with a VX-L up top:


----------



## DogCaller

Kdog said,

*Dog Caller,

Are you trying to say that your .204 is a viable coyote gun?! We all know that a .223 shooting a 40 gr bullet at 3500-3600 fps is WAY more effective on coyotes than the whimpy .204 shooting a 40 gr bullet at 3800-3900 fps.

Sorry, I couldn't help myself. I can hardly stand to read some of this "stuff". Thank God for people like you DC and Levi*

Kdog, You need to do your homework before posting false informantion. Here are the .204 and the .223 ballistics out to 400 yds with a 40 grain V-Max.

.204
muzzle=3900 fps/ 1351 ft/lbs
300 yds=2755 fps/ 674 ft/lbs
Trajectory=200 (0) 300 (-4.3) 400 (-13.2)

.223
muzzle=3800 fps/1282 ft/lbs
300 yds=2324 fps/ 479 ft/lbs
Trajectory=200 (0) 300 (-5.5) 400 (-17.6)

This shows everyone right here that the .204 (shooting a 40 gr. V-Max) is quicker, harder hitting, and flatter shooting than the .223 (shooting a 40 gr. V Max)

I have shot many coyotes with my .204 and it is a very fun caliber to shoot. The .204 is more than a viable coyote gun!! Shot placement is key with all small calibers. I could take out a 300 ultra mag and hit a coyote in the leg and it would drop, but with these small calibers if you put one through the boiler room they won't go far and it will save some fur! I'm not putting down the .223, I am actually going to buy a .223 AR, but the .204 in this case with this bullet is a better caliber period...

Lets hear from DC and Levi.


----------



## Jaybic

Dogcaller,

I am not sure but I think Kdog is actually agreeing with you and is just being sarcastic in his previous post. I think DC is actually you he is giving credit to. :beer:

Jaybic


----------



## kdog

Jaybic,

Thanks for the post. Yes DogCaller, I was (and am) in 100% agreement with you. Didn't mean to embarass you. You were the DC I refered to in my post. I was being very sarcastic because many people post very strong opinions based on little experience and absent of factual data. This "stuff" that gets posted is then taken as gospel by a new coyote/fox caller who is looking for our input when spending their hard earned $$ on a new varmint rig.

To all you newer callers out there who are looking for advice, I would suggest that you simply check the facts when you read through the threads on this (or any) forum. As DC pointed out, all this chatter about .223 vs .204, etc. is kind of a waste of time. The facts are that when comparing a 40 gr .204 round to a 40 gr .223 round, the .204 is faster, harder hitting, and flatter shooting.

Thanks again Jaybic for the corrective post. Thanks to you DogCaller for your informative, factual post. :sniper:


----------



## DogCaller

Kdog, I read some of your other posts and realized after I posted that you were just messing around with me. I apologize for the confusion. It's nice chatting with guys that know the facts and do the homework to recommend certain products to people new to the sport.


----------



## stxhunter

Thanks for all the input. From what I have read here and on other sites it looks like the 204 will do the job. My largest problem seems to be the availability of ammo. but that can always be solved. The only other thing that concerns me a bit would be the longevity of this round. Does anyone think the popularity of this round will eventually go the way of the DO Do bird?


----------



## kdog

stxhunter,

Everything in this world is supply and demand. The .204 is now offered by all the major (and most non-major) rifle makers, who apparently believe that it is here to stay. With all these rifles being offered in .204, and with the present demand for them, the supply of available ammunition will follow. Not only will the ammo be available, but the load choices will expand as well. :beer:


----------



## JeffinPA

Here's an interesting comparison of the .204 vs perhaps the most highly acclaimed long range varmint gun, the .220 Swift.

Below is the ballistics table of a factory .204 40gr Vmax Hornady bullet courtesy of RCBS.Load. Pretty impressive. Maximum point blank range is 299.9 yards with no more than 2" up or down out of the barrel. Still maintains 654 foot pounds of energy at 300 yards and is still flying at 2713 fps.










Below this, is the same data for the .220 Swift with the same Hornady 40gr vmax bullet (other than the slightly larger diameter and the Swift version is Moly Coated). Maximum point blank range is slightly lower at 298.8 yards. Only 575.8 ft pounds of energy at 300 yards and flying at 2546 fps IN SPITE of starting out of the barrel at 300fps faster than the .204 Ruger.










The .22-250 comparisons favor the .204 even more heavily. .223 isnt even in the same zip code.


----------



## kdog

JeffinPA,

Thanks for more supportive data! As you point out, the .223 isn't even in the same zip code. :sniper:


----------



## dynarider68

well I have no experience with the .204 but some guys have said that the .204 is a little light in windy conditions...All I know is you cant go wrong with a .22-250..


----------



## JeffinPA

The 40 grain .204 vmax has a higher ballistic coefficient than the 40 grain .22-250 vmax because the .204 is longer. This improved ballistic coefficient, coupled with increased speed, would actually result in LESS wind drift in the .204.

If you have two bullets of the same weight, the one of the smaller caliber, by definition, must be longer because it is more skinny. This results in superior contact with the rifling, better rotation out of the barrel, and superior ballistics.

If you want to argue that a 100gr bullet is a better choice than a 40gr for fox or coyote thats a whole 'nuther thread. Does that make the 7mm STW ideal for varminting, though?


----------



## stxhunter

wow, that is some very interesting data right there!!!!


----------



## kdog

dynarider68 said:


> well I have no experience with the .204 but some guys have said that the .204 is a little light in windy conditions...All I know is you cant go wrong with a .22-250..


Those "some guys" just don't know the facts - as usual :roll:

Thanks again jeffinPA!


----------



## varmit b gone

All I know is that I am getting a 204 instead of a 223! Thanks for the flight charts JeffinPA, that was the detirmining factor for me! :beer:


----------



## stxhunter

So let me get this right, if a 223 is enough for a yote, the 204 should be plenty as wel? I didn't realize the ftlbs of energy for the 204 were actually higher than the 223 and it carries that energy over distance much better!!


----------



## Jaybic

Hey guys,

I have a theory.

I am going to go out on a limb here but I will bet the guy that shoots alot of the less expensive-easier to find .223 ammo will kill more coyotes on those longer shots even if his bullet is slower and has a little more arch to it that the guy with the super-flat .204 that takes more spendy ammo.

1. .223=cheap ammo(Black Hills, American Eagle, Military surplus type stuff)

2.Cheap ammo= more trigger time and more practice

3. More practice= more dead coyotes when it counts.

I will admit that I am a 22-250/.223 guy(I own two of each) and the charts show that the .204 is certainly ballistically superior to the .223 and even though the .220 and the .22-250 give up a tiny bit to the .204, it is really just splitting hairs. We all tend to believe that what we are using is the best but it might not be for some one else and we tend to forget that I think.

They will all do pretty much the same job out the the OPs stated max range of 300 yards.

Any advantage in shooting flat is pretty much lost in the natural woble in field shooting anyway. What good is the most flat shooting, fastest rifle in the world if you cant make the shot because you dont shoot enough?

My .02 is to buy what you can afford to shoot most often and you will ultimately kill more coyotes(Which is what the rifle is for anyway) and will lose less to poor hits.

I have lost coyotes to both my .223(40 gr Vmax) and my .22-250(55gr NBT) and my buddy has a .204(40 gr Vmax) and lost 2 to it, so all the facts and figures we post, while helpful, do not tell the whole story all the time.

When it comes to trigger time and putting in the homework to do it right, many calibers are great but the .223 is undisputed heavy weight champion in the "cheap to shoot so I can practice alot" arena.

I dont think IMHO new shooters to the coyote hunting/long-range shooting sports should be to quick to shoot the .223 down as a choice.

Just another thought for you guys!

Jaybic


----------



## stxhunter

Good post jabbic. I am not new to shooting or to calling yotes, but I am looking for a dedicated coyote rifle. I have centerfire rifles from 243 to the 7mag. The next smaller rifle that I have from the 243 is the 22mag and I feel like there is a significant gap in my arsenal, which I am currently trying to fill. I can fully understand how someone new to the sport would benefit from both the availability and cost of 223 ammo.


----------



## Jaybic

stxhunter,

I think your right. You do have a pretty good gap in calibers there. I did not mean to insinuate you being new either. That is my fault for assuming that so I do apologize about that. :beer:

I would be looking to add a .204, .223, .22-250, .220 or even .17 centerfire to my arsenal too.

Best of luck in your search. I am sure you will find success with any of them.

Jaybic


----------



## fish2win

Jaybic I agree with you that bulk .223 ammo is much cheaper to shoot, however the vast majority of the bulk ammo is fmj stuff that is not acceptable as use for shooting anything but paper. Good factory .223 rounds with proper bullets are pretty much the same price as factory .204. Shooting bulk fmj ammo in the same grain as you plan to hunt with will replicate your "hunting" rounds to some extent but there are a lot of variables in velocity and the b.c.'s of the different bullets.

JeffinPa I have hunted with both the .204 and the .22-250 and am pro .204 because of the reduced recoil and fur frienldlyness of it. But youre ballistic charts comparing 40 grain bullets is completely unfair to the swift. The b.c of a .224 40 grain vmax is really low comapred to that of a .204 40 vmax. Run that comaprison with a .224 55 grain vmax and it will be much more fair. The swift was never intended to shot 40 grain bullets.

Finally about wind drift. How many people call when the wind is really blowing? Not me. When I'm out calling the wind isn't blowing hard enough to matter much with long shots.


----------



## kdog

Nice to hear from you Jaybic - as usual. I guess I may have come across as anti-.223, but that is not the case. I own a .223 as well, and have had good success with it.

My posts were more or less to defend the .204 against inaccurate statements - such as how poor it is in the wind compared to a .223, and how it may not have the energy to put down a coyote. I do reload, and the .204 costs the same to me as a .223 from that standpoint. Someone who is buying factory may have a different take.

I just like to keep the facts straight for new people, then they are able to make a more informed decision when they make their purchase.

For me, it is a never ending quest to "tweek" my equipment, and that means researching ballistics in an effort to achieve the maximum advantage. The .204 is simply the best that I have seen.


----------



## Mylabsdad

Get out the chronograph and make sure those 40 grainers are blazing at 3900 FPS, I personally would have to witness that. I have witnessed 52 grain JLK low drag bullets measured with chronograph at over 3900 FPS when fired from a 220 Swift. The aforementioned LD bullet has a B.C. of .309, the Swift still wears the crown...sorry...Ballistics=Great Fun, I really doubt you will see any Swift guys running out and purchasing a shiny new .204 Ruger any time soon.


----------



## kdog

I just happen to be a "swift guy", and have shot many coyotes with the swift. I am however switching to the .204 because it is superior with a 32, 35, 39 or 40 gr bullet. I have experienced far less pelt damage any time I have used the lighter bullets (under 40 gr) in my swift, my .223 and my .17 centerfire. My hunting partner has the .204 and shoots 39 gr bullets that do chrono over 3900 fps.

I really don't give a rip what a swift will do with a 52 gr bullet. Hell, I don't care if the swift is crowned king of kings. I am comparing a 40 gr bullet to a 40 gr bullet - get it?

JeffinPA gets it, but I think it kind of stops there. I only hope that my posts have possibly helped a newer caller with some answers, otherwise I am just wasting my time.................


----------



## varmit b gone

All of your comments have helped. Kdog, thanks for all your input in on this issue. And I totally understand what you are comparing and why. Hope to get a 204 this weekend at a gunshow. Thanks Again.


----------



## Mylabsdad

Kdog,

If you go back to stxhunter's original querie, he mentioned that faster and flatter were being used in making his decision on a dedicated coyote rifle. Pelt damage was brought into the mix by you, if I am not mistaken. Making the case for the (Swift and the 22-250) utilizing bullets heavier than 40 grains relevant. There are several bullets out in 224 bore that are pretty decent on fur. I own a couple of 17 Remington centerfire rifles, and then make the jump up to the .224 calibers, some may like what the .204 has to offer. For me personally the .17 does everything I need it to do out to 250 yards. stxhunter owns a .243 already, so why not go with a .17, most people, myself included love the .17 for many of the same reasons you are so fond of the .204 your hunting buddy owns.


----------



## Jaybic

Judging by the pictures that mylabsdad has up on the "pictures sticky", I am going to take a stab and say he knows what he is talking about. I have also decided to buy 3 of everything he shoots and take his word as gospel, second only to the bible. :beer:

It also appears he didnt lose very many either!

Its my guess that he must practice alot with a rifle he can afford to shoot alot and know it quite well cause it dont look like he missed very much.

I dont care who ya are, thats a nice pile coyotes right there!( tip of the hat to Larry the Cable Guy)

Jaybic


----------



## kdog

Varmint b gone,

Have fun shopping at the gun show! Let us know what you come up with. :sniper:


----------



## stxhunter

Honestly I could care less about the fur! I will most likely only be buying one predator rifle within the next 5 yrs or so and I want to get it right the first time.

I have recently gained access to a 10,000 acre game managed ranch and the last thing I want to have are a bunch of wounded coyotes running around. Maybe I should go with the 22-250 over the 204?? In all honesty I don't know what to make of this new caliber, I have posted on various sites and have gotten mixed reviews. Some love it and some hate it!


----------



## JeffinPA

OK, here is the data on the .220 Swift with a 60gr Vmax at 3600fps (per Hornady's website). At 300 yards the Swift has significantly more energy (and of course recoil) @ 798 ft/lbs vs. the .204 40gr Vmax which has only 654 ft/lbs.

At 300 yards, the Swift is still cooking along at 2447 ft/sec and using an ordinate which doesn't allow the bullet to travel more than 2" high anywhere along its flight path the Swift drops 3.46" at 300 yards and has 2.15" of drift due to the 10mph cross wind.










The .204 in the same environment as above is still traveling at 2713 fps, and the bullet NEVER travels more than 2" above or below the flight path in 300 yards. Let me repeat that-- the bullet NEVER travels more than 2" above or below the flight path in 300 yards. At 300 yards, the .204 the bullet falls only 1.94" and only experiences 1.24" of drift due to the 10mph cross wind.










This comparison shows, in my opinion that the .204 Ruger, even with its "whimpy" 40gr Vmax outperforms the Swift in every area but one. The .204 Ruger has less bullet drop, less wind drift, SIGNIFICANTLY less recoil, and less report. The only area in which the Swift outperforms is in energy at 300 yards, an obvious result of increasing bullet weight by 50%.

So I guess, the only thing left to debate, is whether the Swift's extra 144 ft/lbs of energy will make a coyote or fox any more dead? In fact, one could argue that the extra energy, coupled with the violence of the Vmax on impact, actually damages more fur?


----------



## Mylabsdad

Jeffinpa,

Sorry but the Swift can push a heavier bullet with a higher B.C. at a higher speed. The .204 maybe could be considered the Swifts baby brother.


----------



## JeffinPA

Mylabsdad said:


> Jeffinpa,
> 
> Sorry but the Swift can push a heavier bullet with a higher B.C. at a higher speed. The .204 maybe could be considered the Swifts baby brother.


I've been comparing factory ammo only. I assume you are referring to a reload? Which bullet are you speaking of specifically?

Post the data, and lets compare.


----------



## Mylabsdad

Bullet Weight 52 grains, Velocity 3900 (Which is moderate) and a B.C. of .309

Bullet is the 52 LD bullet produced by JLK
A Swift will push 50 grain Nosler B.T. or 50 grain V-Max'x at 4000 plus F.P.S they both have B.C.'s in the .250 range.


----------



## JeffinPA

Mylabsdad said:


> Bullet Weight 52 grains, Velocity 3900 (Which is moderate) and a B.C. of .309
> 
> Bullet is the 52 LD bullet produced by JLK
> A Swift will push 50 grain Nosler B.T. or 50 grain V-Max'x at 4000 plus F.P.S they both have B.C.'s in the .250 range.


According to Hornady's Reloading 7th edition (the most current volume), they list the 50gr vmax at a BC of .242 and a max velocity of 3900fps with your choice of 5 different powders. JLK does not list load data on their website, however, I am suspicious when a reloaded bullet that is 2 grains heavier is called "moderate" at 3900fps

If you're going to load above the manufacturers recommendations, I don't believe we can debate this fairly.

Just for giggles, however, I ran your numbers at 3800fps for your 52g JLK VD. Other than the improvement in retained energy at 300 yards, I don't see any meaningful difference over the .204 ballistics. At least not enough to justify the significant increase in recoil and report. Not to mention your bullets cost 23 cents a piece versus mine which only cost fifteen cents. I use less powder, too. Case and barrel life are also likely an issue for you at those pressures.

You have 873 ft/lbs of energy at 300 yards (which I grant is impressive but maybe overkill on a fox/yote), 2.01" of drop at 300 yards (more than the .204, by the way), and 1.15" of drift (you beat the .204 by nine-hundreths of an inch here). You're also 37fps faster @2750.

"Baby Brother" seems a little unfair when you look at the numbers.


----------



## Mylabsdad

Jeff

Overkill, that is rediclulous. Underkill, now that is a problem, that is your critter that you dedicated your day to harvesting running off never to be seen again. The experienced reloaders that I know, several reload for the .220 Swift, and believe me 3900 FPS with a 50 to 52 grain bullet is no big deal. C'mon Swift guys help me out here. I only know of 2 reloaders that are .204 owners, both were unable to meet the velocities that the manuals claimed. They did get close with some factory ammo though. (The 32 grain loads)

And Jeff think about your 32 grain to 40 grain jump in bullet weight 25%, with only an 8.2% drop in velocity 4250 to 3900. Do you work for Ruger or Hornady? And your questioning a 4% jump in bullet weight?

I cannot believe that the gun magazines have this large an impact on impressionable minds. I may buy a .204, because it does have its place, and seems like a usefull caliber to have around. But I will keep it in a separate gun case so the Swifts don't pick on it too much.


----------



## Jaybic

Lots of good points here on both sides but I dont think anyone can really play the recoil/report card in this discussion. There is no .22 caliber centerfire with any recoil that could be called "significant". "increased" perhaps but not significant.

3 1/2 in turkey loads thru an over/under=significant recoil. 
.300rem ultramag= significant recoil.
.220 Swift. No way.

Recoil would only be considered harsh MAYBE by women(no offense) or perhaps younger kids. My girlfriends 9yr old boy(small kid too) shoots my .22-250s quite a bit in the summer and he shoots both my rem hb(no kick) and my Abolt micro(very lite)with near max loads and he has no issues with it at all.

Yes it will recoil off target where the .204 might not but in no way can you make it appear or imply that compared to the .204 that the .220 or any of the .22 centerfires are "shoulder-ripper-offers" simple to make the .204 appear to be the only good choice.

As for report, that is also weak compared to the 12 ga any of us will pick up and shoot all day at doves and clay pidgeons so I dont know If that really carries any weight either and for range shooting, you should have "ears" on and who ever hears the shot when they are bearing down on a critter anyway?

I admire any one who will back up their argument with concrete data but trying to win this little squable with a bit of disinformation is not helping any of the newcomers and we do not get to use facts only when they support our position and forget them when convenient. This is not politics.

The .204 certainly has its place but no one ever was called an unethical hunter because they use too much gun so that overkill thing is not really relevant. Kill quick, clean and humane and then worry about fur. The OP said he doenst care anyway.

It it a great discussion and have learned alot about the .204 and I wish no offense to anyone.

Thanks,

Jaybic


----------



## stxhunter

Ok, I just got access to a game managed ranch and the last thing I want are wounded coyotes running around. I am a pretty decent shot but I want to make sure I get this decision right the first time. I get so many conflicting reports about the 204 that I really dont know what to make of it. Should I just go with the 22-250 and be done with it?!


----------



## stxhunter

But again, the 204 has about the same if not a tad more energy than the 223. It seems like quite a few people use the 223 well for coyotes, so I would imagine that a round with around the same energy should do fine. Ahh I'm so confused!! Decisions Decisions!


----------



## ndm

220 Swift: The Shooting Times Book of Winchester re-published an article from 1965 listing the 50 grain 220 swift factory load at 4110 fps. Shooting Times goes on to say there is still some loading data being published with velocities over 4000 fps. The 1990 Gun Digest also showed the 50 grain load at 4110. The Federal 2008 factory load and most others show it has been backed off to 3870 fps. Any one who shot the swift back in the eighties knows 3900 is not very difficult to accomplish.

I liked the 55 grain .223 bullets best for coyotes so the 40 grain argument to me seems kind of silly. Caliber is pretty much insignificant when it comes to coyotes. Shot placement and bullet construction are much more important.

I'm sure the .204 with the 40 grain load performs just fine. I know from personal experience the .222, .223, .22-250 and the Swifts work well too, but I've probably taken more with the .243 than any other cartridge.


----------



## jason_n

why the heck is it so hard for people to accept the 204? holy crap, and as for buying ammo that is such a lame cheap shot. these are varmint guns not fricken hippo rigs. the cost between a 204 and 223 is only a couple pennys diffrence, i own both calibers, i know but for an extra penny or two you get a lot more, but i guess ignorance is bliss


----------



## JeffinPA

No, I don't work for Ruger on any other gun related company. I actually work in wealth management for the world's largest financial institution.

If I ran the numbers at 3900fps they won't be wildly different than 3800fps, so please don't let that confuse anyone. You are correct to say your 23 cent bullet with 30% added weight has significantly more energy at 300 yards than my 15 cent bullet.

Also, for the record, I did not say the swift had significant recoil, and I agree with you. 3 1/2" turkey loads or deer slugs or even a 7mag has significant recoil with heavy bullets at high velocity. What I did say was that the recoil was significantly higher in your swift than in my .204. Watching the bullet hit the target through my scope is a nice little perk for me that is impossible with your load.

I compared vs the .220 swift for a reason, as the swift is widely accepted as the king of long range predator rounds. For good reason, I might add. What I attempted to do, however, (and I think I did quite well actually) was to show that the .204 can definitely hold its own, even with the big boys like the swift. I doubt many people realize just how capable this gun is. Of course I am prejudiced because I own a Kimber 84 in .204

I do not subscribe to any gun magazine and my opinions are not based upon the writings of anyone. Just my own logical research, based on the physics of ballistics and my own 25 years worth of experience with guns, hunting and reloading.

I figured I would rile a few people up with my comparisons, because most ballistic opinions are not based upon fact. The .204 is a deadly and accurate round.

Obviously, there are many guns which will kill a fox/yote at 300 yards effectively. I'm not suggesting that anyone sell their swifts to race out and buy a .204, but if you're in the market for a new gun/caliber you definitely should not overlook the .204


----------



## Mylabsdad

Jeff,

Thanks, for your insight. I also am only stating facts, anyone on this forum with a ballistics program, or a calculator, the correct data, and an understanding of physics can come to their own conclusions. Not everyone that checks into these discussions pays as close attention to the facts as they should.

I was not bashing your .204 Ruger, it is in fact a fine cartridge. The .204 currently is one of the few that I have not owned, or currently own. I have to assume that a 250 yard shot with a finely tuned varmint rifle is a chip shot for most on this forum. That 250 to 500 yard shot that so often presents itself in the areas that I hunt are where the Swift and similar cartridges start to shine. A dime per reload is a small price to pay (for me) to know that I am doing everything that I can do ballistically to assure that I will be dragging something back to the truck. When you have thousands invested in your firearm & optics the last concern should be the pennies saved by using cheaper or inferior loading components. That is my attitude whether it be a 500 round day, or a 5 round day. My time spent in the field pursuing game or on the bench is priceless. When I leave for a hunt in the morning with my hunting partner we quite often are packing up to six firearms. 2 .17 Remington rifles, one of several Swifts, 22-250's, 22-250 AI's, and the always reliable 12 gauge shotguns. I would consider leaving a .17 at home and packing a .204, but the .204 Ruger will not duplicate what the large capacity .224 bore will deliver.


----------



## COYOTEKILLER2004

just buy a .50 cal BMG anything with in 1 1/2 miles is cooked,just my .2 cents


----------



## sonic

*Jeffinpa * What type of groups are you getting with that Rig anyway??

I'm looking to Add some more fire power to the collection. Do they make that in 22-250??


----------



## varmit b gone

kdog said:


> Varmint b gone,
> 
> Have fun shopping at the gun show! Let us know what you come up with. :sniper:


Got a great deal on this Ruger M77 MKII in 204. Traded off a muzzle loader and the guy had a good price anyway.








Haven't got to shoot it yet, but love the feel.


----------



## Jaybic

JeffinPa, MLD....

I have to say, the discusssion on both sides has been really interestling. Please dont ge the idea that I am anti-,204 either and your research makes me want to go get one(funniest thing huh?) but I already have 5 coyote rifles and cant justify another one. I think maybe it started to feel like some folks were getting a .204 rammed down our throat and our favorite and time tested calibers ran thru the wood chipper. I have been a handloader for about as long as your have been and I am not a Swift guy either but a .22-250/.223/.243 guy and I am always looking for faster loads and smaller groups.

In reading these posts and listening in on the debate, It kinda came to me that we were talking alot about speed/energy/flat...ect and made little mention of accuracy which is ultimately what all that other stuff is supposed to accomplish. Your posted research matched everything that my Sierra Infinity program said and I pretty much tried everything to find holes in your game and I do have to waive the white flag on it in defense of my .223 and .22-250. MLD also made great sense in saying dont skimp on the bullets. I hunt about 20-30 days a year on ND and I do have to agree with him about 250-500yd shots popping up way more that I would like. I also shoot mostly 50 or 55 gr bullets. I used to use 40 gr V-max bullets and they killed a fair number of coyotes very dead and my buddy used them in his .204 also.

Anyway, I am just thinking that while any of the .204 or .22 centerfires and .243/25.06 stuff will do a great job and some are certainly ballistically superior to others, at the end of the day, its really how accurate you can shoot it, so what ever a person chooses, practice alot and even if your bullet arches a little more or less or takes a little longer to get there, the coyote is still just as dead.

Maybe is the answer to the orginal question is simply to buy what ever you like based on your own research and gut feeling and then practice with it until your shoulder falls off and everything you point it at falls over dead. Hell, I dont know. :beer:

Jaybic

P.s. Anybody ever try to put a .204 bullet on a Swfit case? Best of both worlds? :beer:


----------



## kdog

Varmint b gone,

Congratulations on the new weapon! :beer: I know you will have a great time with it.

The ballistic facts that we have seen courtesy of JeffinPA should make you feel good about your choice of calibers.  I'm envious, as it looks like I'll be waiting a while for my .204!! :roll:


----------



## campp

i have both a .204 and a22.250 to use to hunt coyotes neither one is hard to find ammo for. and either will work on coyotes out to 300 yards. the 22.250 would probably go to 400 yards. but i rarley have that much open
country to shoot in.the .204 is a little flater shooting imho also is a little faster. if standing shots are taken i see no problem with the .204.
maybe just a little advantage to the 22.250 on over 300yrd.shots. am not sure you will notice the difference. just my 2cents.
campp.


----------



## JeffinPA

I sure have enjoyed this thread, too. I had the same discussion over on another forum which isnt as frequently travelled as this and you wouldn't believe some of the replies I got, hehehehe. There is definitely a danger with these internet forums and some of the advice I read.

If a shot past 300 yards is likely to present itself, the .204 is probably not the solution. Within 300, however, I couldn't be more pleased, and personally prefer no other caliber for game coyote sized and smaller.

As for the groups out of the Kimber, I think it would be better to respond with "The gun shoots far better than I do". I get 3/4" groups out of it routinely. In optimal conditions, I've had 5 shots touching. My seven year old prints 1" groups and if you're a fox inside of 200 yards you should be very scared once he finds you in the scope. He's never failed to retrieve a fox he's fired upon, and we have a pretty fair sized collection from this season. Kimber might seem like a pricey rifle, but to me its a great value. IMO, its a $2k custom rifle for about half the price. I can say enough about the factory trigger, either. Breaks like a crisp glass rod. The wood is gorgeous. The action is tight and smooth. Accuracy like I would expect from one of the premium barrels.

Like all the other posters have said, the best thing to do with any purchase is to do your own research. Look in reloading books and see what kind of velocities you can expect and energies AT THE DISTANCES YOU PLAN TO SHOOT. After you come up with a top three list, go to your local gun club or shooting range and buddy up with some of the guys. If you approached us at the range and inquired about our .204 we would be more than happy to let you have a few rounds through it. After that, and only after that, begin to solicit opinions first from people you know personally with first hand knowledge of the various gun manufacturers, reloads and field experience. Don't overlook your local gun shops. There's always a gruff old timer on the payroll, who, once you develop some report (I realize this can be difficult, lol) will share some of his knowledge with ya. Lastly, cruise around forums like this. Avoid opinions which are not backed up with supportive data and evidence. There isn't always a positive correlation between high post counts and sage wisdom. In fact, in many cases the two are inversely correlated.


----------



## JeffinPA

PS---VBG, congrats on the new addition! Cigars for everyone!


----------



## ndm

Congats, very nice wood on that Ruger. Now the fun part, get out and see what she likes for ammo. Sometimes MK77's can be a little picky but I'm sure you'll find a good load for her.


----------



## JeffinPA

YOU'RE A MORON IF YOU SHOOT ANYTHING OTHER THAN 40GR VMAXs AT 3900FPS!

^The above is the kind of post you should avoid, LOL^


----------



## varmit b gone

Took out my 204 this evening to sight it in / see how I like it. To say it short and sweet *I LOVE THIS GUN* When I first shot it, like first three, I pulled it a little. But after I sighted it in I fired 2 more (would have shot more but it was gettin' dark) and I couldn't believe my eyes at the 2 shot group.Those 2 you see is besides the group is when I was sighting and I cranked it way too far to the left. 








This is after I quit flinching. 34 grain Win. hollow points.Seems to like them real well. Looking for a good scope for it, is Barska or NcStar any good? See alot of them and they are very reasonably priced.


----------



## ring41

new to rifles. Want a gun for a youth. Want to shoot deer and coyotes. Is a 22-250 enough gun


----------



## JeffinPA

I'd say .243 at minimum for deer. Most states have caliber minimums for deer, too. Check your local regs.


----------



## JeffinPA

Here's some 100 yard groups I shot today with the .204 40gr factory Hornady VMAX. Pretty breezy.

3 shots:









3 shots, two in the same hole:









5 shots with one bad pull:


----------



## varmit b gone

I loved my 204 before, but after putting it to use on some p-dogs, I can't believe the speed and accuracy. It was deffinatley the right choice. Thanks to all those who posted and helped me choose the 204. JeffinPA, thanks for the ballistics info! This is probablly my new favorite caliber. Anyone who is thinking of getting a 204, it is a great choice. :beer:


----------



## JeffinPA

I love that gun, too and its my favorite gun too.

I would like to add a swift, though, for my trip out west in September.

Just because I can hehehehehe

If anyone sees a high profile swift that is still pretty young, drop me a line.


----------



## JeffinPA

Here's a photo of the aftermath of a ****, quite literally, "taking one on the chin" courtesy of my Kimber .204.



















Here's another red. No exit wound at 150 yards with the 40gr vmax. Dropped her right in her tracks. Talk about pelt friendly.


----------



## I_AM_LEGEND

I plan on getting a DPMS AR in 204... Flat shooters with lots of zip that drops yotes in their tracks...


----------



## JeffinPA

I've read the DPMS AR in .204 is obnoxiously barrel heavy. I haven't ever held one in my hands though. Please post up after you get a chance to play with one and let us know how it feels, handles, and shoots.

Then send it to me for extensive further testing 

Enjoy your new toy.


----------



## Jaybic

JeffinPA

I dont know if this will help but I have a 20in DPMS in .223 and it was very barrel heavy. It has a Douglas match barrel(I ordered it that way) but is was very "nose heavy". I have to assume that a .204 would be just a hair worse because outside barrel diameter being the same and the bore being just a bit smaller would add weight although its prolly not noticeable.

I took mine in and had the barrel turned by my gunsmith here and it was crazy, the difference. Much more balance and did not affect accuracy one bit. Cost me 125.00 to do it and had I known then what I know now, I would never have order it with that big barrel but that was when I thought  a bigger barrel diameter meant a gun was more accurate.

Now I am smarter than that, least I hope so!

Jaybic


----------



## JeffinPA

Jaybic,

That is the same sort of stuff I've read. Im not familiar with the lightening process. Who did it for you? Local gunsmith?

Since it's lightened would you describe it now as "well balanced", or just "less nose heavy"?

Thanks for the input.


----------



## Jaybic

Much more well balanced.

All that was done was my local gunsmith(very good smith!) took the barrel off and put it in a lathe and took off just over 1lb. When he told me that, I didnt think it sounded like alot until I shouldered the gun and was shocked. Originally, it felt like I had a 5lb dumbell tied to the front site and afterwards, it was gone and the balance point had shifted to just in front of the magazine well. Huge difference and much more balanced to me any way.

It was either live with it, do what I did, or replace a perfectly good match-grade barrel that shot great with a skinnier one what shot just as well at a much higher cost. I figured why not just turn down and recontour the one I had and worst case I am out 125.00. He just did a cold blue(included in cost) on it to prevent rust. It didnt have to be fancy bluing because its hidden under the handguard anyway.

Hope this helps. :beer:

jaybic


----------



## JeffinPA

Thanks for that input. Sounds like one heckuva gunsmith and a very reasonable price.

Gunsmiths like that are few and far between.

All the best,
Jeff


----------



## fish2win

I_AM_LEGEND be aware that if buy a dpms they come with a 1:12 twist barrel that many people can't get to stabilize 40gr. bullets. So unless you handload and can load 35gr. bergers, you will be limited to 32gr. factory ammo which doesn't seem to be a great "predator" bullet.


----------



## stxhunter

Quick question, I contacted HSM and they said they only sell a 40 grain bergers?? I had heard there was a 35 gr version, did they discontinue it?


----------



## kdog

Berger still makes/sells a 35 gr. .204 hollow point. Go to Berger.com


----------

