.204 Ruger?

[247sniper]

Hi guys,

 

Could any of you guys in the know please advise me, or anyone with a .204 on what conditions they have them for? What do they shoot with them, ie, vermin, rabbits etc etc, what is the .204 Ruger mainly used/intended for?

 

Thanks guys

 

 

Steve.

[terryh]

Steve,

 

The 204 Ruger was the first commecialised '20 cal' cartridge based on the 222Mag case, quite why the 222Mag I don't know? no advantage over a 223 based cartridge, perhaps Hornady had a w'house full of them

 

The 20 cals shoot flat and the original wildcat's (though not too wild) were used by varminters in the US and popular with fur hunters as they did minimal damage and, because of the flat shooting to sensible ranges, meant no hold overs required.

 

At first there were only 32g bullets then a 40 grain came along. Early rifles had (from memory) 1:12 or 1:13 twist barrels so when the latter heavier bullets came out they could not take advantage of these. 1:10 is more common. The later heavy bullets put some real 'legs' on the round.

 

With something like a 20 Tac or 20 Practical (based on a 223 case) you can get 4200fps with the (now) 33g bullets and 3800+ with 40 grainer. Both of these on foxes are effective. On the range a reasonable rifle is a dream to shoot, no recoil, you can see the biullet holes appear in the target.

 

I ran a Cooper 20Tac for a while about 7 years ago before the 204 Ruger existied. Personnaly the only reason to buy a 20 in 204 Ruger is you can buy factory ammo, but if you reload there are better varients. If you're after a 20 I know where there are a couple of good ones with all the reloading kit.

 

Hope this helps?

[247sniper]

Thanks for your reply, Ill have to see if I can get one conditioned first as over on the Isle Of Man we only have vermin upto hare size, mountain hare and the brown common hare. The local police seem to think that a .204 is OTT for the use on vermin and small ground game??

 

What are you views and opinions on this

[eldon]

247 sniper, are you saying you don't have foxes then in IOM? This would be the usual good reason.

Alternatively just tell them you want a long range hare/rabbit gun. Be interesting to ask them what they suggest for this purpose and see what they come up with.

 

I got a 20 cal slot with West Yorkshire stating the above and had no issues whatsoever. The only comment made was that I hadn't specified which one, to which I replied I hadn't decided yet and depends what turns up on the market. I pointed out they were all as lethal as each other really so it made no difference. This was duly accepted.

[Alycidon]

20 cals and 204 are good for long hares, cant think of a smaller caliber that would be better. If you reload the Sierra 39gr Blitz king is the bullet to use.

 

A

[Laurie]

The 204 Ruger was the first commecialised '20 cal' cartridge based on the 222Mag case, quite why the 222Mag I don't know? no advantage over a 223 based cartridge, perhaps Hornady had a w'house full of them :)u [TerryH]

 

Terry,

 

two reasons why .222 Rem Mag and not .223 Rem as the starting point. 1. to get enough powder capacity to achieve 4,200 fps MV with 32gn bullets and claim "The world's fastest production cartridge."

 

Just as important, maybe more so, to ensure that all these new .204 shooters would have to buy expensive new Hornady cartridges or cases to get started, while if they'd based it on the .223R, everybody in the USA would have simply necked down surplus GI brass and lost Hornady thousands (millions?) of dollars worth of sales. No doubt about it, Hornady did very well indeed out of the .204 especially before Remington and Winchester got their versions into production!

[garyw]

Terry,

 

two reasons why .222 Rem Mag and not .223 Rem as the starting point. 1. to get enough powder capacity to achieve 4,200 fps MV with 32gn bullets and claim "The world's fastest production cartridge."

 

Just as important, maybe more so, to ensure that all these new .204 shooters would have to buy expensive new Hornady cartridges or cases to get started, while if they'd based it on the .223R, everybody in the USA would have simply necked down surplus GI brass and lost Hornady thousands (millions?) of dollars worth of sales. No doubt about it, Hornady did very well indeed out of the .204 especially before Remington and Winchester got their versions into production!

AND-a certain TODD KINDLER-did the same with the 222 magnum cartridge a full year before sturm,ruger ,he called it the 20 terminator, this had a 40 degree shoulder,some say TODD had a little tickle from ruger but who knows?as you say laurie hornady would have lost a few bucks! the only down side i see of the 204 is the short neck on the case unless another source of brass is used.i opted for a .20tactical for my dabble in the 20,s this uses less powder,better brass- 223 lapua match for home rolling and ggave the same down range results .

[Si-Snipe]

Hi guys,

 

Could any of you guys in the know please advise me, or anyone with a .204 on what conditions they have them for? What do they shoot with them, ie, vermin, rabbits etc etc, what is the .204 Ruger mainly used/intended for?

 

Thanks guys

 

 

Steve.

 

Designed for use on long range varmints and small predators. Highly explosive with ballistic tip offerings such as V max and Blitz Kings. I found the 32's insanely explosive and the 39's the choice for longer shots and bigger than rabbit sized quarry.

I was given .204 for fox and vermin no probs. But saying that they also gave me 6.5x47 for that reason too.

[riddos204R]

Im in sussex and mine was granted for "vermin/fox" without any queries.

I use mine for any small pests, mainly squirrels and rabbits at longer ranges where my 17HMR runs out of puff. Most people that use it are in america and use it for long range prairie dogs/ground hogs etc but its really starting to catch on over here in the UK now and i know more and more people either buying or becoming interested in the calibre. It has really changed my shooting style from walking closer to rabbits to sitting and waiting anywhere with a good view which has really helped my range estimation.

[Finman]

AND-a certain TODD KINDLER-did the same with the 222 magnum cartridge a full year before sturm,ruger ,he called it the 20 terminator, this had a 40 degree shoulder,some say TODD had a little tickle from ruger but who knows?as you say laurie hornady would have lost a few bucks! the only down side i see of the 204 is the short neck on the case unless another source of brass is used.i opted for a .20tactical for my dabble in the 20,s this uses less powder,better brass- 223 lapua match for home rolling and ggave the same down range results .

 

When I was looking for a varminting round, and the 20's were all the rage, I read all there was available on the net, and the 20TAC was the round to go for. But for a couple of problems:

a) no rifles available chambered for it

no cases or loaded ammo available either. For someone new to reloading (as I was then), the .204Ruger solved all these problems. I was lucky to get one of the few Sako 75 I Varmint rifles chambered for it and have not looked back yet. Yes, it burns more powder than the 20TAC, and the speeds are comparable. But, I was able to buy the rifle, buy 200 loaded rounds of ammo, fit a scope and go shooting. That said a lot...I am still using the same cases from that loaded ammo (Hornady), and if anything, the accuracy has improved. If the 20TAC was embraced by the gun makers a bit sooner, the availability of 20TAC Lapua cases was speeded up a bit, then I am sure there would have been more 20TACs around than .204Rugers, but, I guess, this is business...

 

Finman

[gunnery]

Hi all i have just bought myself a 20tac from dave on this forum remy s/steel 700 action pacnor s/steel 26"barrel jewel trigger 20moa s/steel rail in a h/s presision stock cant tell you much at this stage because still waiting for scope arrive 6-20-50 z varmint reticle conquest but i had a shot 100yrds with a tasco scope the results were brill it can only get better with decent scope mounted on top lovely rifle to shoot cant wait to get going with it

[baldie]

Terry,

 

two reasons why .222 Rem Mag and not .223 Rem as the starting point. 1. to get enough powder capacity to achieve 4,200 fps MV with 32gn bullets and claim "The world's fastest production cartridge."

 

Just as important, maybe more so, to ensure that all these new .204 shooters would have to buy expensive new Hornady cartridges or cases to get started, while if they'd based it on the .223R, everybody in the USA would have simply necked down surplus GI brass and lost Hornady thousands (millions?) of dollars worth of sales. No doubt about it, Hornady did very well indeed out of the .204 especially before Remington and Winchester got their versions into production!

 

Never a truer word written Laurie.

 

I bought one of the first half dozen rifles imported into the country and there wasn,t any factory ammo available, never mind brass. If i remember rightly, it was in the middle of the prairie dog season in the states, and they consumed anything .204 whatsoever.

I ended up getting a couple of hundred .222 mag cases [a feat in itself ] and necking them down.

The scarcity of components lasted 18 months, then winchester brought out brass, and factory ammo started dribbling through.

 

I agree entirely with Finman. Having built rifles in fair numbers now in .20 practical , 20 tac, and .204 ruger, the .204 has taken a little bit of a back seat to the tac, but, as a customer who is coming in this week for a rebarrel told me " i want to be able to buy factory ammo if some components aren,t always available "

 

Aside from the powder saving, which is miniscule, they all shoot very similarly, and i believe nosler make good brass for the .204 now ?

 

If it had a target application, i would have another .20 tomorrow, i absolutely loved it...far superior to the .223 as a hunting round in my opinion.

 

I keep casting a sideways look at the .20br reamer in the cabinet.......

[Finman]

Aside from the powder saving, which is miniscule, they all shoot very similarly, and i believe nosler make good brass for the .204 now ?

 

 

Ι bought a supply of Nosler .204Ruger brass and have it sitting there looking at me, still boxed. I am waiting for the Hornady cases to give up the ghost and then I shall use them. According to Nosler, they require no case prep whatsoever, just load and shoot...I feel an experiment coming on!

 

As for the 20Br, great round, but Bruce Potts told me once that it was overbore. I'd go for the 22BR and stick with the 20TAC. But, hey, what do I know?

 

best wishes and Happy Easter everyone,

 

Finman

[Gunsgobang88]

Hi guys,

 

Could any of you guys in the know please advise me, or anyone with a .204 on what conditions they have them for? What do they shoot with them, ie, vermin, rabbits etc etc, what is the .204 Ruger mainly used/intended for?

 

Thanks guys

 

 

Steve.

Hi Steve,

 

I built one of the first custom rifles in the UK chambered for the .204 several years ago. The factory ballistics indicated that for foxes the 32gr bullet would do anything achievable with a .22-250 but with less powder, flash, bang etc. This has been born out in practice over many years, for lamping it is flat shooting out to any practical and safe distance (longest measured night shot - 309 yards). The rifle was featured in 'Shooting Sports' by Jules Whicker, It's built on a SGC SSR-15 receiver with a barrel from a Douglas stainless premium blank and fitted with all the usual match quality components. With Hornady factory ammo the first 'quick and dirty' 3 shot group was .56" at 100 yards, I'm well into 3 figures on foxes here in Surrey and Sussex. Just for fun I sometimes engage in rabbit destruction upto 400 yards. The only downside to the .204 is the fact that it cannot be used on MoD approved ranges such as Bisley due to the muzzle velocity, other than that I consider the .204 to be the finest factory foxing and centrefire vermin round on the market,

 

Alan

[Laurie]

Hi Steve,

 

I built one of the first custom rifles in the UK chambered for the .204 several years ago. The factory ballistics indicated that for foxes the 32gr bullet would do anything achievable with a .22-250 but with less powder, flash, bang etc. This has been born out in practice over many years, for lamping it is flat shooting out to any practical and safe distance (longest measured night shot - 309 yards). The rifle was featured in 'Shooting Sports' by Jules Whicker, It's built on a SGC SSR-15 receiver with a barrel from a Douglas stainless premium blank and fitted with all the usual match quality components. With Hornady factory ammo the first 'quick and dirty' 3 shot group was .56" at 100 yards, I'm well into 3 figures on foxes here in Surrey and Sussex. Just for fun I sometimes engage in rabbit destruction upto 400 yards. The only downside to the .204 is the fact that it cannot be used on MoD approved ranges such as Bisley due to the muzzle velocity, other than that I consider the .204 to be the finest factory foxing and centrefire vermin round on the market,

 

Alan

 

 

Interesting commentary Alan. Although I've done a lot of load development for the .204, I've only ever shot it (Savage 12 LRPV) on ranges. I regularly ask others who use / have used it on foxes and the impression received - admittedly from a small sample - is that many one-time keen users have reverted to the .22s. The claim is 'too much wind movement'. This has puzzled me as it's the opposite of what the ballistics programs, never mind those people who know a lot about shooting small animals at long range in windy environments US PD hunters, say. I can only assume that people still look at those tiny pills and simply can't believe they'll out-shoot a 50gn or 55gn 0.224" that looks more businesslike.

 

Having taken a real shine to the calibre, I'm pleased to hear praise from experienced field shooters such as yourself. I have a multi-stage rifle development project going (if that's not an overblown phrase for rebuilding a cheapo .223 Remington 700SPS Tactical) and the final move will be 'Baldie' (Dave Wylde, Valkyrie Rifles) putting a 1-8" twist .20 Tac barrel on, sometime next winter or maybe 12 months from now. I already have 55gn Berger HPBTs (from Norman Clark) for this project and the dies, and am looking forward to seeing how this cartridge performs. The .204 Ruger version has a bit too long / large capacity case for my liking.

[TonyH]

.... many one-time keen users have reverted to the .22s. The claim is 'too much wind movement'. This has puzzled me as it's the opposite of what the ballistics programs, never mind those people who know a lot about shooting small animals at long range in windy environments US PD hunters, say. I can only assume that people still look at those tiny pills and simply can't believe they'll out-shoot a 50gn or 55gn 0.224" that looks more businesslike...

 

Laurie, I've come across some of this, and we've seen examples here too. It's very odd. My immediate personal experience is that 20Tac out-shoots standard-twist rifles in 22-250, not just on paper but proven in the field. The 20-cal 39gr Sierra Blitz King has a higher BC than the 22-cal 55gr V-Max, and my 20Tac load delivers 200fps faster at the muzzle than the 22-250, so ballistically it's no contest: the little 20-calibre shoots flatter and faster. I think it has to be the case, as you imply, that diehard users of .22 centrefires for foxing (especially) simply distrust what they regard as an oddball little round, and ignore the facts. I've always felt that Brit shooters tended toward extreme conservatism in terms of calibres they were prepared to use, and though this has lessened in varminting (years ago I hardly heard of anyone here who was into US-style "varmint hunting") and e.g. benchrest/tactical, it's still a factor with many GP riflemen out in the backwoods - especially perhaps with deer "stalkers".

I've proven to my own satisfaction that the very advantageous Exbal figures for my 20Tac round transfer to "real life" performance in the field: my initial "draft" clickchart has proved practically spot-on and I'm shooting a flatter trajectory than with any other rifle I've owned previously.

Good luck with your own 20Tac project, sounds interesting.

Tony

[Gunsgobang88]

Laurie, I've come across some of this, and we've seen examples here too. It's very odd. My immediate personal experience is that 20Tac out-shoots standard-twist rifles in 22-250, not just on paper but proven in the field. The 20-cal 39gr Sierra Blitz King has a higher BC than the 22-cal 55gr V-Max, and my 20Tac load delivers 200fps faster at the muzzle than the 22-250, so ballistically it's no contest: the little 20-calibre shoots flatter and faster. I think it has to be the case, as you imply, that diehard users of .22 centrefires for foxing (especially) simply distrust what they regard as an oddball little round, and ignore the facts. I've always felt that Brit shooters tended toward extreme conservatism in terms of calibres they were prepared to use, and though this has lessened in varminting (years ago I hardly heard of anyone here who was into US-style "varmint hunting") and e.g. benchrest/tactical, it's still a factor with many GP riflemen out in the backwoods - especially perhaps with deer "stalkers".

I've proven to my own satisfaction that the very advantageous Exbal figures for my 20Tac round transfer to "real life" performance in the field: my initial "draft" clickchart has proved practically spot-on and I'm shooting a flatter trajectory than with any other rifle I've owned previously.

Good luck with your own 20Tac project, sounds interesting.

Tony

Interesting comments by Laurie and TonyH regarding take-up of the .20's in the UK and supposed susceptability to wind drift. As Laurie mentioned, most UK rifleman are conservative in nature and will only contemplate change when something is proven and accepted in the sporting press. How many intelligent articles on the sub calibres have you seen in the mainstream shooting press? Years ago before range energy and velocity limits were published (or even known about) I was shooting my .204 at Bisley. In a very strong crosswind at 300 yards my companion (.223/55gr) needed almost exactly double the wind correction that I needed with 32gr .204's. I feel that the attitude towards sub calibres and subsequent lack of popularity is due to many journalists repeating the old myths about short barrel life and susceptability to wind drift and the inability to use them on ranges due to velocity considerations. A small correction to my previous post, my first 3 shot group measured .44".

 

Alan

[Alycidon]

Well having had 22.250 I would not go back to it having shot my 20BR. For foxes sub 300 yards the 39gr SBK is the way to go and for that then Tac/Prac20 may be a better case for the job than my BR case.

 

A

[TonyH]

... How many intelligent articles on the sub calibres have you seen in the mainstream shooting press?....

 

Alan

I imagine very, very few - I don't read any UK shooting magazines but I doubt the situation has changed since I used to buy the occasional one, years ago. The UK shooting press takes virtually no notice of varmint hunting. I used to subscribe to (USA) Shooting Times published in Peoria (from memory), lots of good stuff in that; Field & Stream is great, been reading that off & on since the 1960s when a school friend used to get it sent by his uncle in the States; as a VHA member I get The Varmint Hunter, loads of great stuff, as much on ballistics, calibres & handloading in one issue as you'd find in 2-3 years of all UK shooting mags combined! And most UK feature articles about any sort of precision rifle shooting are so leaden, plodding, informed by antiquated attitudes, and just plain dull, that they're a waste of time.

So small calibre features? Lots in US magazines and on the 'Net, but not in print here.

Tony