Jump to content
UKV - The Place for Precision Rifle Enthusiasts
Elliott

Rebarrel from 223 to 204

Recommended Posts

44 minutes ago, GT3_richy said:

How much N130 is he using? I have no idea how he's seeing 3900 with 39sbk's and a 24" tube.

The Sierra load data gives a highest velocity of around 3700 (10x/Varget) from a 26" barrel, Hornadys 40gr loads arent much more. QL guesses closer to 3600. I think the factory Superformance 40gr's which no one seems to be able to replicate the velocity of have 3900 on the box?

My 20" T3X manages around 3450-3500 measured with Magnetospeed and Labradar, I'd be genuinely interested to hear what charge weight it is.

FPS and BC-'issues' aside, I get why 20cals arent popular as demonstrated in this thread - but I still love mine, its so nice to shoot - I'm sure you will have a blast, dont expect much change from bunnies though ;p

25.2gr of Vhit 130 and no pressure signs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 24/02/2018 at 4:53 PM, Elliott said:

Yeah no problem. In terms of the 60gr V-Max, I think the BC isn't as good as the 53gr version. 

My pal has a 204 Ruger in a Howa Varmint model using a 24" barrel. Using Vhit 130, he's comfortably managing over 3,900 fps using 39gr Blitz with five shot group of around 0.25"

Higher velocity seems to make more of available BC and I'm not sure I'm getting the best out of my 223 with my 53gr V-Max at a pedestrian speed of 3,100fps. A longer barrel would be better, but theres certainly an advantage of having a flatter, possibly more frangable bullet for varminting

O.K.

I tested various loads of 60gr V-max today and the zippiest load that I was happy firing showed no pressure signs on the brass.  A load of 24.6gr N133 under the 60V-max at a coal of 2.250 produced an average velocity of 3250fps in my rifle.  The accuracy node was exactly 24gr N133 at a MV of 3180fps and a group size of 0.26" @ 100 yds with a vertical dispersion of 0.22". I'll take that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My .204,with a 24" barrel is averaging around 2575 with 39gr Blitzkings. I'm using 27.2 gr of N140 in a 1:10 Sassen barrel.

3900 does sound mighty quick even with a realatively fast powder,what twist barrel does your friend have and what does your new rifle have?

Im interested as I have a load of N130,but was advised it was probably too fast for the 39s, especially with a 1:10 twist. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a 1/12 twist Howa Varmint 24" barrel. There's no doubt about the chrono'd speed using Vhit 130. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Elliot now you’ve had your 204 for a while and developed and good load for it, have you noticed any significant performance difference from your 223? In your experience is one better for foxing and field use than the other?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 15/04/2018 at 2:35 PM, Guesty said:

Hi Elliot now you’ve had your 204 for a while and developed and good load for it, have you noticed any significant performance difference from your 223? In your experience is one better for foxing and field use than the other?

Haven't shot a fox with the 204 yet, but as far as varminting goes, the 204 seems to have the edge.

Fast, flat and very explosive. I'm getting 3,720fps with excellent accuracy using 39gr Blitz. 

If I could get 3,400fps + from the 53gr M-Max with my 223 there would be less competition, but I can't. The lighter bullet has the additional safety factor, too. 

As much as I enjoyed my 223, I've made the decision to sell it after using the 204. It just seems so much easier to shoot. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it seems to me after reading this long long long thread that barrel length has made the difference.

not so much the cal.

I guess the extra 5 inchs have made all the difference.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/10/2018 at 8:19 PM, varmintexpress said:

it seems to me after reading this long long long thread that barrel length has made the difference.

not so much the cal.

I guess the extra 5 inchs have made all the difference.  

That seems about the size of it. I can get close on .204 velocities with 40 to 50grn bullets in my .223 (up to 3500fps) but use a slightly longer barrel than the modern norm. I prefer using heaver higher BC bullets. If you limit your shooting to 300 yards, there really doesn't seem to be a lot of difference or advantage of one cal over the other, the .223 retaining greater versatility imho. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, VarmLR said:

That seems about the size of it. I can get close on .204 velocities with 40 to 50grn bullets in my .223 (up to 3500fps) but use a slightly longer barrel than the modern norm. I prefer using heaver higher BC bullets. If you limit your shooting to 300 yards, there really doesn't seem to be a lot of difference or advantage of one cal over the other, the .223 retaining greater versatility imho. 

i've just brought a LW barrel blank in .224. its about 25.6" I was going to cut it down too 22 " but after reading this thread I might leave it at 25.

I want to try the 40's out (mostly shot the 50gers before), hopefully too 3800 if i get lucky. 

the .224 nosler 40 g look interesting. not the BC of the .204 40g ers but close ish @ .221 i believe. 

if shooting the 223 with 53vmax at 3500 with a .27-.29 bc then there really is not much in it.

I guess the 204 might give a slight advantage at longer ranges with 40 g bullets. not so much with the above

another point of view is do you really want your bullets holding there energy for a long way? I shoot an fac airgun with light pellets into trees. I would prefer it run out of energy past 100 yards fast  for improved safety less worry.

maybe its different with centre fire as a backstop is a backstop no matter what distance  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, varmintexpress said:

i've just brought a LW barrel blank in .224. its about 25.6" I was going to cut it down too 22 " but after reading this thread I might leave it at 25.

I want to try the 40's out (mostly shot the 50gers before), hopefully too 3800 if i get lucky. 

the .224 nosler 40 g look interesting. not the BC of the .204 40g ers but close ish @ .221 i believe. 

if shooting the 223 with 53vmax at 3500 with a .27-.29 bc then there really is not much in it.

I guess the 204 might give a slight advantage at longer ranges with 40 g bullets. not so much with the above. in fact i might stick my neck out and say 223 with 53vmax @3500 fps would be the same as a 204 @ 500 y. (not checked strelock so its an estimate on my part)

another point of view is do you really want your bullets holding their energy for a long way? I shoot an fac airgun with light pellets into trees. I would prefer it run out of energy past 100 yards as fast as possible  for improved safety less worry.

maybe its different with centre fire as a backstop is a backstop no matter what distance  

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, varmintexpress said:

 

You need to compare the 39gr Blitz in 204 of if you're comparing it with 53gr V-Max (my favourite in the 223). Forget the 40gr 204 bullets. 

I'm getting 3,740fps using the 39gr Blitz. Consider how good the BC is and the frangability of such a small, light round. It's ideal for varminting and my loads are still very mild. Also, virtually zero recoil. 

You'd struggle to match it with a barrel of similar length in 223 using 53gr V-Max. Also consider the minimum fps requirements for expansion/fragmentation using varmint bullets: Usually 1,600fps. 

22-250 may get you there, but it's a different beast, noisy and has more recoil. 

I'll crunch the numbers and post them up..

- Top one 223 using 53gr V-Max @ 3,500fps.

- Bottom one 204 using 39gr Blitz @ 3,740fps

Wind for both is 10mph 90°

Screenshot_20180516-210441.png

Screenshot_20180516-210405.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

seems like about 60 yard advantage with the 204 for wind and elevation approx at 500 with your charts above.

 

 

just checked my phone/ strelock and 53v max at 3500 fps is approx 37.2 " drop at 500 y with 100 y zero.

so approx 5.2 inch drop advantage with 204 at 500.

and 1.1 inch wind advantage with 204 at 500.

if the 223 is zeroed at 200y drop is about 33.35 " compared too the 204 32"

so if 223 is zeroed at 200 and 204 zeroed at 100 there is 1 inch in it at 500 y for both wind and elevation.

i know the 53 v max BC is not honest at longer ranges as the bullet is slowing. BC is lower.

in theory if one is zeroed at 100 and the other zeroed at 200 1-2 inch at 500 y is very very small.

my only question is what is the real BC of the 39g blitz at 500y not what is advertised but the real BC out to 500y?

As I think the 53v max is about 0.27/8 ish at longer range.

theory is one thing, actual down range performance BC is another, and it would be interesting to know what real BC is for 39 blitz at 500y 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely you would zero for MPBR ? 

I know I do & especially with nightvision, as I get the best out of my ' package' without having to stress over minute distance calculations 

most of my rifles are set up for almost flat shooting with a max arc of 1" 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, varmintexpress said:

i've just brought a LW barrel blank in .224. its about 25.6" I was going to cut it down too 22 " but after reading this thread I might leave it at 25.

I want to try the 40's out (mostly shot the 50gers before), hopefully too 3800 if i get lucky. 

the .224 nosler 40 g look interesting. not the BC of the .204 40g ers but close ish @ .221 i believe. 

if shooting the 223 with 53vmax at 3500 with a .27-.29 bc then there really is not much in it.

I guess the 204 might give a slight advantage at longer ranges with 40 g bullets. not so much with the above

another point of view is do you really want your bullets holding there energy for a long way? I shoot an fac airgun with light pellets into trees. I would prefer it run out of energy past 100 yards fast  for improved safety less worry.

maybe its different with centre fire as a backstop is a backstop no matter what distance  

 

 

You can't have both "flat shooting" and "little energy".  The point about higher velocities besides suffering less wind drift (form factor and BC dependant) and drop, they make for more efficient kills through hydraulic shock,  A safe shot is a safe shot so this whole business about bullets carrying with high energy points towards an assumption of no safe backstop.  So no, there is no argument for limiting velocities other than where a worked up load proves more accurate at lower velocities.  Limiting the carrying of energy is the sort of comment I'd expect from an inexperienced FEO, not a shooter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Elliott said:

You need to compare the 39gr Blitz in 204 of if you're comparing it with 53gr V-Max (my favourite in the 223). Forget the 40gr 204 bullets. 

I'm getting 3,740fps using the 39gr Blitz. Consider how good the BC is and the frangability of such a small, light round. It's ideal for varminting and my loads are still very mild. Also, virtually zero recoil. 

You'd struggle to match it with a barrel of similar length in 223 using 53gr V-Max. Also consider the minimum fps requirements for expansion/fragmentation using varmint bullets: Usually 1,600fps. 

22-250 may get you there, but it's a different beast, noisy and has more recoil. 

I'll crunch the numbers and post them up..

- Top one 223 using 53gr V-Max @ 3,500fps.

- Bottom one 204 using 39gr Blitz @ 3,740fps

Wind for both is 10mph 90°

Screenshot_20180516-210441.png

Screenshot_20180516-210405.png

All of which goes to demonstrate that the .204 in reality has no significant advantage  over a .223 in terms of scrutinising numbers for realistic shooting distances.  If you want to shoot precision, in the wind at 600, pick a more suitable calibre.  In terms of velocities, it seems pretty widely known that claimed speeds (ie those not chronographed by the shooter) where .204 is concerned are often over-egged or not representative of what to expect with a typcal 20 inch tube.

It's a bit of a well worn and tired argument.   Personally, I think worrying about accuracy and bullet selection is way more important than endless debates over trajectory.  Once out beyond 100 yards on small quarry, nothing is laser-like and you have to hold off or dial for everything so shooters reading this may be better advised to find out with some precision (and that doesn't mean from exclusive use of drop charts derived from ballistic apps) their actual drops and then practice for holding off for wind etc.  Developing accurate drop charts based on your chosen round is frankly more important than agonising over calibre comparisons...all imho of course.  Otherwise pick what you fancy or like shooting.  End result is practice makes perfect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, VarmLR said:

You can't have both "flat shooting" and "little energy".  The point about higher velocities besides suffering less wind drift (form factor and BC dependant) and drop, they make for more efficient kills through hydraulic shock,  A safe shot is a safe shot so this whole business about bullets carrying with high energy points towards an assumption of no safe backstop.  So no, there is no argument for limiting velocities other than where a worked up load proves more accurate at lower velocities.  Limiting the carrying of energy is the sort of comment I'd expect from an inexperienced FEO, not a shooter.

'inexperienced FEO'

there was no need for that comment Varm LR. don't be a cock Varm LR. be polite. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was being polite.  Take your personal comments elsewhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, varmintexpress said:

seems like about 60 yard advantage with the 204 for wind and elevation approx at 500 with your charts above.

 

 

just checked my phone/ strelock and 53v max at 3500 fps is approx 37.2 " drop at 500 y with 100 y zero.

so approx 5.2 inch drop advantage with 204 at 500.

and 1.1 inch wind advantage with 204 at 500.

if the 223 is zeroed at 200y drop is about 33.35 " compared too the 204 32"

so if 223 is zeroed at 200 and 204 zeroed at 100 there is 1 inch in it at 500 y for both wind and elevation.

i know the 53 v max BC is not honest at longer ranges as the bullet is slowing. BC is lower.

in theory if one is zeroed at 100 and the other zeroed at 200 1-2 inch at 500 y is very very small.

my only question is what is the real BC of the 39g blitz at 500y not what is advertised but the real BC out to 500y?

As I think the 53v max is about 0.27/8 ish at longer range.

theory is one thing, actual down range performance BC is another, and it would be interesting to know what real BC is for 39 blitz at 500y 

 

 

 

 

Yeah true BC is interesting. The 204 seems Ok to me. I shot a crow at 490 yards in an 8mph crosswind a few weeks ago and then followed it up with a Rook at 505 yards a few weeks later. 

I don't think the BC of the 53gr V-Max was spot on. Passed 400 yards it seemed to drop off from memory. 

I'm really enjoy the 204 to be honest. As I say, you'd be lucky to get the 223 53gr V-Max to 3,500 fps. 3,740fps seems pretty easy for the 204 :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

RifleMags_200x100.jpg

Northallerton NSAC shooting.jpg

border_ballistics_UKV_ad.jpg

dolphin button4 (200x100).jpg

CASEPREP_FINAL_YELLOW_hi_res__200_.jpg

rovicom200.jpg

BHTargets200.jpg

Lumensmini.png

CALTON MOOR RANGE (2) (200x135).jpg

bradley1 200.jpg

NVstore200.jpg

Danny Trowsdale 200.png

safeshot 200.jpg

tacfire 200.jpg

blackrifle.png

jr_firearms_200.gif

valkyrie 200.jpg

tab 200.jpg

 

 



×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy