Just a quick question looking for opinions, im talking strictly factory ammunition here fromm factory rifles, is the .204 worth the extra cost compared to the .223???
Also what cal would you look at as a fox/roo rifle with shots averaging between 200-400m? 25-06, 7-08 or something a little smaller?
Oh and what rifle im on a budget, again! Thinking howa varminter maybe or should i spend the extra dollars and look at tikka/rem? Oh and a rem sps varmint or a tikka t3 varmint? Oh so many choices lol
Does the .223 give to much away to the .204?
-
bushchook
- .223 Remington
- Posts: 420
- Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 11:23 pm
- Favourite Cartridge: .220 Swift
- Location: Wheatbelt W.A.
On the second question 200 - 400m fox and roo rifle . In a standard factory round and rifle my choice would be .243 or .25/06 . Lots of more exotic options in wildcats to Weatherbys .
I use a heavy barrelled .243 Ackley and it will certainly do the job at that range without being overkill on foxes . A bit more authority on the long shots than any of the .22's . Huge selection of quality projectiles in 6mm . 75 and 87gn V Max are very effective on the targets you mentioned .
I use a heavy barrelled .243 Ackley and it will certainly do the job at that range without being overkill on foxes . A bit more authority on the long shots than any of the .22's . Huge selection of quality projectiles in 6mm . 75 and 87gn V Max are very effective on the targets you mentioned .
-
trevort
- Spud Gun
- Posts: 12710
- Joined: Thu Sep 14, 2006 9:21 pm
- Favourite Cartridge: Tater
- Location: Melbourne
the 204 gives you close to 100m more distance without holdover than a 223. my 223 1 inch high at 100 is about inch and a half low at 200.
204 inch high at 100 is zeroing around 250.
The 204 has less wind drift but a good shot who can judge distances and holdover well who knows his 223 will outshoot a cowboy with a 204. over 300 with a 204 or 223 you are judging holdover and wind drift, some say its easier with a 204 due its better ballistics but i havent done much shooting at these distances to tell a difference ( a little with a 204 but none with a 223)
Do you need someone else to tell you that a 204 isnt legal for roos, because the regs havent been rewritten since the cartridge was released is the only reason IMHO
for 200 to 400 with roos on the list I agree with Bushchooks choices. I personally would go the 243 just since I have had one and I dont like the muzzle blast of a 25 06
204 inch high at 100 is zeroing around 250.
The 204 has less wind drift but a good shot who can judge distances and holdover well who knows his 223 will outshoot a cowboy with a 204. over 300 with a 204 or 223 you are judging holdover and wind drift, some say its easier with a 204 due its better ballistics but i havent done much shooting at these distances to tell a difference ( a little with a 204 but none with a 223)
Do you need someone else to tell you that a 204 isnt legal for roos, because the regs havent been rewritten since the cartridge was released is the only reason IMHO
for 200 to 400 with roos on the list I agree with Bushchooks choices. I personally would go the 243 just since I have had one and I dont like the muzzle blast of a 25 06
-
Rinso
- .338 Lapua Magnum
- Posts: 2055
- Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2006 11:09 pm
- Favourite Cartridge: 25.06
- Location: Hervey Bay Qld
dave,
If I am reading this right you want a 204 / 223 for small game and something larger for longer range and bigger critters ... thats right isnt it.
That being the case and based on factory ammo I would agree with knackers and go 223 for the smaller stuff. 204 will likely never be legal for roos same as the 17 rem wasn't so its limited to wabbits and such. A 223 is much cheaper to run on factory fodder and will do all you want it to do .. if your worried about missing shots at longer ranges with don't you wont miss any more than you would with the 20 cal IMHO (its more about learning your rifle)
For the bigger stuff, well I love the quarter bore and have found the ol 25.06 capable of anything in you will encounter either long range sniping or hitting hard on bigger critters .. I have knocked plenty of goats over at 250 plus with one across some bloody big gullies. The 243 is possibly cheaper to run on factory ammo than the 25, you should check that out. If its possible I would also look at the 6.5 x 55 as its a good mid range calibre again check cost of factory ammo. The 270 would be capable of what you want and has the bonus of being legal for deer if they are an option for you.
As far as what to buy .. what you are happy with is what matters .. I would not rule out 2nd hand as this can get you a good rifle at a bargain price .. check the used guns website for an idea of whats about.
I just read ll that and I dont know that I helped you all that much
cheers
Rinso
If I am reading this right you want a 204 / 223 for small game and something larger for longer range and bigger critters ... thats right isnt it.
That being the case and based on factory ammo I would agree with knackers and go 223 for the smaller stuff. 204 will likely never be legal for roos same as the 17 rem wasn't so its limited to wabbits and such. A 223 is much cheaper to run on factory fodder and will do all you want it to do .. if your worried about missing shots at longer ranges with don't you wont miss any more than you would with the 20 cal IMHO (its more about learning your rifle)
For the bigger stuff, well I love the quarter bore and have found the ol 25.06 capable of anything in you will encounter either long range sniping or hitting hard on bigger critters .. I have knocked plenty of goats over at 250 plus with one across some bloody big gullies. The 243 is possibly cheaper to run on factory ammo than the 25, you should check that out. If its possible I would also look at the 6.5 x 55 as its a good mid range calibre again check cost of factory ammo. The 270 would be capable of what you want and has the bonus of being legal for deer if they are an option for you.
As far as what to buy .. what you are happy with is what matters .. I would not rule out 2nd hand as this can get you a good rifle at a bargain price .. check the used guns website for an idea of whats about.
I just read ll that and I dont know that I helped you all that much
cheers
Rinso
-
trevort
- Spud Gun
- Posts: 12710
- Joined: Thu Sep 14, 2006 9:21 pm
- Favourite Cartridge: Tater
- Location: Melbourne
Rinso wrote:dave,
.. if your worried about missing shots at longer ranges with don't you wont miss any more than you would with the 20 cal IMHO (its more about learning your rifle)
Rinso, out to 250, 275 the 204 is point and shoot. No holdover. Therefore one less variable that a shooter doesnt have to worry about.
moot point as roos are on the menu
-
Ned Kelly
- .270 Winchester
- Posts: 1277
- Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 6:39 am
- Favourite Cartridge: 6PPC
- Location: Macedon Ranges Vic
G'Day All,
i'm with knackers, .223.
Why? well all the reasons stated by knackers plus how many people actually shoot past 250m? 95% of all my varmints have been under 200. and with a .222 to boot with mild loads.
So a good varminting bullet in a .223 driven fairly hard hits a lot harder than any 204. Even a good 40gn pill out od a .223 must be considered in the mix.
The 75 amax I use is pretty good as a varminter and has a lot less drift than most usual .224" varminting pills
Thats why I sold my semi auto .22lr and bought a bolt .22mag, it hits harder and meant a lot less wounded animals even if it cost more to run.
You just cannot beat kinetic energy..........
NOW there's a can of worms!
Cheerio Ned
BTW a 6PPC is a great varminter with 55-58gn pills, check it out (not bad with 67 match pills either)
i'm with knackers, .223.
Why? well all the reasons stated by knackers plus how many people actually shoot past 250m? 95% of all my varmints have been under 200. and with a .222 to boot with mild loads.
So a good varminting bullet in a .223 driven fairly hard hits a lot harder than any 204. Even a good 40gn pill out od a .223 must be considered in the mix.
The 75 amax I use is pretty good as a varminter and has a lot less drift than most usual .224" varminting pills
Thats why I sold my semi auto .22lr and bought a bolt .22mag, it hits harder and meant a lot less wounded animals even if it cost more to run.
You just cannot beat kinetic energy..........
NOW there's a can of worms!
Cheerio Ned
BTW a 6PPC is a great varminter with 55-58gn pills, check it out (not bad with 67 match pills either)
-
trevort
- Spud Gun
- Posts: 12710
- Joined: Thu Sep 14, 2006 9:21 pm
- Favourite Cartridge: Tater
- Location: Melbourne
No, actually Ned, it simply doesnt if you look up the figures. Thats why the roo regs are a laugh, the energy figures of a 40gn 204 are vastly superior to a 50gn out of a 222. Since head shots are only legal kill method then penetration is not an issue.Ned Kelly wrote:So a good varminting bullet in a .223 driven fairly hard hits a lot harder than any 204. Even a good 40gn pill out od a .223 must be considered in the mix.
:
The issue where a 223 has an advantage is bigger tougher pills like a 60gn so if you are shooting at bigger things then a 223 has the advantage of more penetration. I would assert that if you want to shoot bigger things then use a bigger calibre and the 204 is superior to the 223 as a varminter
my longest shot is a memory now, was it 348 or 328 paces on a crow? Well I aimed at the head level and wiped it out. If it had have been windy i would have missed 204 or 223. I would have had no chance with a 223 in the calm as there would have been too much guesswork on the holdover.
-
Rinso
- .338 Lapua Magnum
- Posts: 2055
- Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2006 11:09 pm
- Favourite Cartridge: 25.06
- Location: Hervey Bay Qld
trevort,
A 223 will handle most peoples shooting with ease ... I seem to recall having a 222 or 223 in my hands for a loooong time before the 204 came along I even recall a Kricko 22 Hnt that worked out to 200 plus an yes I can supply witnesses ... and as I said missing long shots is more about learning to shoot your rifle than the calibre.
As far as the point and shoot comment goes, I have missed rabbits at fifty paces that should have been point and shoot .. whats your point .. a flat trajectory does not make all bullets hit .. its more to do with the nut behind the bolt.
Either way I agree with Ned in that most folks never shoot beyond 200 enough to warrant the need for a super flat shooter .. if it was an absolute then wildcats would have developed differently, cos believe me there are plenty of big cases that will throw bullets flatter than a 204 had that been the case.
You have to consider two things mate;
1. Factory ammo costs
223 wins hands down
2. Second rifle in flat shooting mid range calibre
243/25.06/6.5x55 will all varmit well past 350 yds and have less drift than the 204
Horses for courses mate .. nobody is bagging the 204 (although I am still not convinced it is the wonder it is claimed to be) more I am giving my opinion in answer to enquiries from a forum member. He may take that opinion or disregard it, thats his choice ... I am however entitled to an opinion.
cheers
Rinso
A 223 will handle most peoples shooting with ease ... I seem to recall having a 222 or 223 in my hands for a loooong time before the 204 came along I even recall a Kricko 22 Hnt that worked out to 200 plus an yes I can supply witnesses ... and as I said missing long shots is more about learning to shoot your rifle than the calibre.
As far as the point and shoot comment goes, I have missed rabbits at fifty paces that should have been point and shoot .. whats your point .. a flat trajectory does not make all bullets hit .. its more to do with the nut behind the bolt.
Either way I agree with Ned in that most folks never shoot beyond 200 enough to warrant the need for a super flat shooter .. if it was an absolute then wildcats would have developed differently, cos believe me there are plenty of big cases that will throw bullets flatter than a 204 had that been the case.
You have to consider two things mate;
1. Factory ammo costs
223 wins hands down
2. Second rifle in flat shooting mid range calibre
243/25.06/6.5x55 will all varmit well past 350 yds and have less drift than the 204
Horses for courses mate .. nobody is bagging the 204 (although I am still not convinced it is the wonder it is claimed to be) more I am giving my opinion in answer to enquiries from a forum member. He may take that opinion or disregard it, thats his choice ... I am however entitled to an opinion.
cheers
Rinso
