A couple of thoughts on the 204 Ruger after a couple of years.

[kjd]

Years ago when the 20cal pandemic hit the forums and everyone was raving about this little pill making out to be the second coming of the 243. I was somewhat skeptical but mostly annoyed at the fanboyism of the round, much like I was with the 243.

It is staggering to think this cartridge has been on the market now for 13 years. It took me 11 years before I bit the bullet and got a Tikka T3 lite in 204 as a walk around fox/Varmint gun.

One of the deciding factors of doing so was that I already had a 223 in a Varmint and I wanted a point and shoot gun and that is exactly what I got.

Now it is worth pointing out that I do believe if I had my time again I'd buy a 22-250 in place of the 204 but only for one reason.. I feel it would be more versatile if I was to come across larger game whilst on foot with it without giving up much in the way of flatness. But that is a realization I've come up with recently.

The 204 is such a great little cartridge and in combination with the Tikka that comes chambered in it it is such a no nonsense set up.
When I purchased the Tikka I didn't have a heap of money so I used an old Nikon Buckmasters 4.5-14x40mm BDC scope that was on the 17hmr I sold. Sorry Fenring, It was a fun gun but didn't serve my purpose for a fox gun due to not having the point and shoot qualities of a centrefire. Anyway, he scope was meant to stay on for a month or two until I could decide what scope I wanted to replace it with and save up some more dollars. Did I mention that I still use the rings that came with the Tikka?

At the time was the great ammo shortage that we all know about so finding brass was bloody hard, so I bought a hundred Hornady rounds loaded with 32gr vmax so I could get the brass.

Funny thing is that after 2.5 years or whatever it has been since I've owned it I have not changed this setup at all, I still have that same Nikon scope, I've even bought more of the ammo to save from having to develop a load because if it isn't broken, why would you fix it?

So my observations from shooting this set up a lot is that it just WORKS. I've not had to fiddle with it at all, I sighted it in once and have not put it on paper since.
On the weekend I took shots at 30m and over 240m without moving the point of aim at all. It truly is the easiest shooting rifle I've owned and I just love not having to fiddle with it at all.

One of the things I will say is it is brilliant for small game as it was designed but on bigger things I would definitely be less confident of a clean kill when compared to even a 223 using 50gr projectiles. Maybe this is just because I've stuck to the 32gr projectiles but still I think if I want an all purpose but mainly fox rifle where I shoot (southern tablelands) a 22-250 might be the better choice to be able to tackle the bigger critters.

Either way I love my current set up it is light, accurate and is no fuss and won't be selling it anytime soon.

[macca]

Pretty much sums up my thoughts on the 204 as well. I did work up a load but I honestly pull out the 22- 250AI more often.
Maybe i do need to build a 20 on the 6br case or the ppc. Hmmmm.
Cheers

[trevort]

Yep, 204 started me on the accuracy path but haven't owned one for a few years now. I used to be head fanboi but there are so many calibre sand cases to play with


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[mick_762]

Good reading Keith, always good to read an unbiased opinion on the various rifles/calibers that are around.


I personally haven't (yet......... touch wood) succumbed to the .20 cal fever.

Would a heavier projectile then make it not as flat shooting though and therefore just an "under done" .222 Magnum?

[Camel]

Good little story Keith, I agree with most of your stuff. If I hadn't been a weirdo and liked wildcats so much, I would have got myself a 204 Ruger, but I like weird.

[MISSED]

q

[Waldo]

To be honest the .204 is only a more modern version of a .17Rem The previous whiz bang point and shoot super fox rifle (and the .17 is a lot more skin friendly, not that it matters any more).

I thought about trading my .17Rem on a No. 1 varmint in 204 until my son told me not to be so f'ing stupid, he is a bright lad I raised him well

Gotta admit the Tikka's are a hard rifle to go past and in a light recoiling flat shooting round such as the .204 would be damn hard to go past.

Once I thought if I wore my .17 out it would become a .204 but now have decided it'll stay a .17 just to be different

[kjd]

Good reading Keith, always good to read an unbiased opinion on the various rifles/calibers that are around.


I personally haven't (yet......... touch wood) succumbed to the .20 cal fever.

Would a heavier projectile then make it not as flat shooting though and therefore just an "under done" .222 Magnum?

I think you're right there Mick, The main benefit of the 204R is the flat trajectory and if you went heavier you'd lose that to a point which is why I think a 22-250 using a 50-55gr projectile would really be a great all round round.One that I'd happily take goats, pigs and even a fallow doe with whereas I would have to be very confident of a spine or a head shot with the 204 to do the same thing.

It's just caliber creep but still, as much as I love the 204 for its intended purpose and what I use it for 90% of the time there have been instances when I've thought a 22-250 would be better.

So I'm not going to do anything silly like selling it, as I love it and for blasting rabbits,hares and especially foxes it is awesome, I probably would consider versatility of the round more now than what I did the first time.

[bimbo]

One of the main drawbacks for me when it was released and the few years after and had a little more cash to spend on guns was the 204 wasnt roo legal in nsw and that constitutes alot of my shooting otherwise i would probably have one in the safe - i believe that the code may have been updated to include the 204 now?

[Camel]

One of the main drawbacks for me when it was released and the few years after and had a little more cash to spend on guns was the 204 wasnt roo legal in nsw and that constitutes alot of my shooting otherwise i would probably have one in the safe - i believe that the code may have been updated to include the 204 now?

204 calibre, min projectile weight 40 grains, but..............

[pavlovaw]

I ordered a Ruger No1 Varmint Laminate Stainless in 204 when they first came out. I switched to the 39 grain pills at 3950fps early on as I found the light pills greatly hamstrung the ability of the caliber when used on game bigger than foxes while still giving nothing away to the speed of the lighter pills.

[grmkc]

Funny this thread should pop up.

I just picked up my new Tikka T3 Hunter an hour ago. Traded in my Weatherby S2 223 and my little Diana 21 plus minimal change over. Same rationale as most of you guys. I just wanted a rifle that I could point and shoot.

Last week I swapped my redundant Darco compound bow with all its bits & pieces and a dozen Easton arrows for a Super Simplex press, 1000 primers & a RCBS powder thrower to start my journey down the reloading track. I figured that the press would be used more than the bow. Also picked up a set of dies off Fleabay. Happy days. Will be asking for reloading advise in the coming weeks.

It's not the state of the art reloading equipment but it will give me a start.

[Camel]

Nothing wrong with Super Simplex presses, as long as you got the correct dies for it. Only problem that may arrive is when you need to full length size, but then you could ask and maybe someone here would do them for you. RCBS powder throwers are good bits of gear as well. Just check that you got both the tumblers I have spares if you need another, either the small hole one or the big hole one.

[grmkc]

Cheers Camel. Tumbler as in the green plastic screw on bit on the bottom of the dispenser?

[trevort]

Good reading Keith, always good to read an unbiased opinion on the various rifles/calibers that are around.


I personally haven't (yet......... touch wood) succumbed to the .20 cal fever.

Would a heavier projectile then make it not as flat shooting though and therefore just an "under done" .222 Magnum?

Mick reading up looking for load data on the 20 Dasher has found some very interesting stuff. Quite a few huge fans of the 20 cal 55gn berger. Last post I found was discussing BC and drift and drop and comparing to a 40 launched from a 20 br at (iirc) around 4100 the 55 at 3700 is going faster by the time it reaches 500m with 7inch less drop, less wind drift and since its heavier, more hitting power.

Now the more I shoot the more I realize that translating numbers and tables into the real world is often theoretical only but if my dasher gets these to 3700 with accuracy I daresay it could become my most used rifle. First fireforming loads this weekend. But yes, speed and flat trajectory are what the point is for a 20 cal, if you lose the speed you lose the point.