maltbuck Posted July 17, 2011 Report Share Posted July 17, 2011 Looking for some advice please. Currently have a Sako 75 Varmint Laminate in 223, and considering a conversion to 20 Tac. The aim a relatively quick handling Fox rifle. Current thoughts are a 22-24" barrel?, 24" is the max as the rifle will be moderated. Profile not sure, thinking would not need as heavier a profile due to the small bore diameter. Stock would either keep the current laminate stock and bed it or a McMillan Sako 75 varmint. So basically adv required on barrel length, twist and profile, - would probably be looking at the 39 grain Sierra Blitz Kings. Whose dies would you recommend? Also looking for advice on rifle smiths who have a "knack" for this smaller calibre. At the back of my mind though is the nagging thought why not simply a 223AI? Many thanks MB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunnery Posted July 17, 2011 Report Share Posted July 17, 2011 .20 tac is all new to me but since i sold .223 remy and purchased .20tac from (dave 6mmbr)on this forum i have been absolutly blown away i must say i loved my .223 it is just so accurate no recoil you see your target go down through the scope which must be a plus the 204 bullet is more ballisticly better than 224 for bucking wind is just as hard hitting say up to 400yrds i have shot rabbits on a regular basis out to 400 yrds wind speeds 15mph no problems i am not saying the .223 wont do this but after shooting both .20tac for me all the time love it mine is a pacnor 26"barrel 1-9 twist shoots 40grn v-max and 50grn bergers both loads very accurate but mild loads better to go for accuracy than mv dead is dead have a word with dasherman on here he is your man i beleive for 20tacs but baldie also gets my vote choice is yours Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baldie Posted July 17, 2011 Report Share Posted July 17, 2011 Gunnery beat me to it Maltbuck. There are enough people on here who can give you real time, real world usage comments on virtually all the .20,s. The .20,s suffer from the same, oft repeated bullsheeite that the .17 rem suffered. You will not find an easier 300 yard lamp calibre going. Its point and shoot, and very, very destructive. I shot into the hundreds of foxes with a .204, on the lamp, and it quickly became my calibre of choice over the .223, 22-250, and .243 [ i owned all of them ] The .20 tac is even more efficient than the .204. Have a ring round, and your first question should be " what reamers do you have ? " [ that you are interested in ] There are an awful lot of people being talked out of what they want, because the builder doesn,t have the reamer these days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garyw Posted July 18, 2011 Report Share Posted July 18, 2011 Gunnery beat me to it Maltbuck. There are enough people on here who can give you real time, real world usage comments on virtually all the .20,s. The .20,s suffer from the same, oft repeated bullsheeite that the .17 rem suffered. You will not find an easier 300 yard lamp calibre going. Its point and shoot, and very, very destructive. I shot into the hundreds of foxes with a .204, on the lamp, and it quickly became my calibre of choice over the .223, 22-250, and .243 [ i owned all of them ] The .20 tac is even more efficient than the .204. Have a ring round, and your first question should be " what reamers do you have ? " [ that you are interested in ] There are an awful lot of people being talked out of what they want, because the builder doesn,t have the reamer these days. OK ILL ASK THEN-DAVE what reamers do you have if someone wanted say a tact20 building? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
achosenman Posted July 18, 2011 Report Share Posted July 18, 2011 Dave, for the sake of discussion, the only comment I would make regarding “point and shoot” is that all the calibres including the 223 you mention are point and shoot with the correct zero. If you zero for max point blank range on a kill zone the same size that is found on a fox, with a 50-55grn 223 Rem, you can just aim in from zero to max lamping range without any hold over/under. Kaleidoscope and I shot 16 foxes in one evening using this method many moons ago, that was before any of the super 20’s were in fashion What you can’t do with a 20 is use a heavy (70-80grn) bullet with a BC that's on a different planet compared to any 20 that I know of and currently available. That crow strutting its stuff way out at 5-600m is now very easily in range despite that variable wind that you can’t quite determine. Also deer are off the menu with anything in a 20. The other point I would make is that supplies of the more exotic rounds etc are still not as widely stocked as say the more mundane 22. However I would say that the explosive effect of the super fast 20’s makes for far easier shooting with regards safety. Not withstanding that, I personally found no definitive reason to stay with the 20 and more reasons to return to the 223 after 4 years with a 204. You pay your money, you make your choice…enjoy. Cheers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonyH Posted July 18, 2011 Report Share Posted July 18, 2011 Hi, perfectly valid post but allow me some comments: ... all the calibres including the 223 you mention are point and shoot with the correct zero. Yes, let's not forget that all these small-calibre high-velocity chamberings shoot nice and flat - some a bit flatter than others, though there's not much in it. What you can't do with a 20 is use a heavy (70-80grn) bullet with a BC that's on a different planet compared to any 20 that I know of and currently available. That crow strutting its stuff way out at 5-600m is now very easily in range despite that variable wind that you can't quite determine. Also deer are off the menu with anything in a 20. True, but people shouldn't expect that of a 20-cal round - though with the right barrel twist and Bergers in 50-55gr, 20BR for example will shoot (it is widely reported) very well at the distances you mention. If I wanted to shoot heavy .22-cal bullets I'd use a large case, 22BR at least or possibly fast-twist 22-250. AFAIC deer are off the menu with any sort of .22! My rifles in .22 and smaller have always been varmint rifles; if I wanted to shoot deer I'd get something in 7mm-08. ...supplies of the more exotic rounds etc are still not as widely stocked as say the more mundane 22. I suggest this isn't a factor we should consider. The great majority of riflemen keen enough, and experienced enough, to want a comparatively unusual 20-cal of any sort will handload. If I had to rely on local suppliers I'd be lost! Of the 2-3 dealers closest to me, two don't stock any 20-cal bullets at all, saying there's "no demand" for them (which could be true since an awful lot of Brit shooters are stupefyingly conservative) and they'll always try to flog you a .223, Hornet or .243 because that's all they ever keep. Just about anyone who uses something developed less than 30-40 years ago learns to rely on mail order or long-distance shopping... However I would say that the explosive effect of the super fast 20's makes for far easier shooting with regards safety. Not withstanding that, I personally found no definitive reason to stay with the 20 and more reasons to return to the 223 after 4 years with a 204. I wouldn't say there's any significant difference here: I've used polymer-tipped bullets for 20 years and have always experienced consistent explosive fragmentation out of .222, 22-250, .223 and (currently) 20Tac. This latter might demonstrate slightly more violent explosiveness on small quarry at closer range than the .22s, but that could be down to the 1:11 twist of my barrel compared with the 1:12 and 1:14 I always had previously. I get the same MV with 40gr bullets from the 20Tac as I did using 40gr bullets in .223; the terminal results are similar, but the .20 shoots slightly flatter from a better BC and is good for greater distances. I'm convinced it's a step up from .223. As you say, a lot of it's personal preference, but the above represents my findings over the years. Tony Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baldie Posted July 18, 2011 Report Share Posted July 18, 2011 OK ILL ASK THEN-DAVE what reamers do you have if someone wanted say a tact20 building? A .20 tac Gary.. Also a .20 practical, a .204 ruger, and a .20Br. The point i was making is that people get talked out of a cartridge, because the builder doesn,t have, or cant be arsed to get the reamer in for them. Achosenman, Agree with you there, but a comparison with the .22 cals is not really fair. The .20,s were designed as hypervelocity cartridges shooting lightweight bullets. A .204 with 32 grain bullets is a lot easier to shoot at night, than a .223 with 55 grain bullets, because its going a lot faster, and with less wind or drop required. Thats the point i was trying to make really. Everyone has their own favourites i guess. I dont shoot live quarry anymore due to lack of time. If i ever go back to it, i will get another .20 cal....probarbly a Br. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
achosenman Posted July 18, 2011 Report Share Posted July 18, 2011 Tony H, you make some very valid points. I guess it boils down to personal expectations. Deer are very much on my menu. To complicate matters I want as few rifles as I can get away with to do the job. That means to choose a niche calibre like a 20 can get expensive. I too hand load. However getting powders and bullets near me gets very expensive when it’s a special order…as it always seems to be. E.g. getting 140grn .270 Accu Bonds doesn’t appear to be happening for a few more months yet. In the meantime, I’m faced with working up a new load with whatever I can get with no guarantee of a continued supply. Considering the rate at which the 270 eats throats, I’ll wait. However, if I want a box of 22 or 30cal bullets, no problem. The same with powders. If it works in 308 or 223 they all seem to stock it, if it’s off the beaten track (and lets face it, the 270 is not that far off) you’re on your own. As for the explosive effect of the 20 cal. The one I have was set up for 40grn Vmax and Berger’s by Andrew at Rifle Craft. It shoots them very well. At 300m I get the same explosive effect from the 204 on rabbits etc that I used to get at 200m with a 223. Admittedly this is not at all scientific, only observed. Since the 204 runs a 40grn comfortably at 3880fps and the 223 ran a 50grn Ballistic Tip (from memory) at 3384fps it’s probably more “apples and pears” than I imagine, but the terminal result for me favoured to 204. But all that changes when the range stretches out beyond the 204’s comfort zone. The 223 can change up a gear with a heavy bullet. Cheers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bri2506 Posted July 18, 2011 Report Share Posted July 18, 2011 I've just had my 223 rebarrelled to a 204 ruger by dave aka Baldie and I love it. Only reason I went for the ruger was that if loading components became short supply I could always get some factory ammo. I do prefer 204 though. And would highly recommend Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maltbuck Posted July 18, 2011 Author Report Share Posted July 18, 2011 Thanks for all the replies. Will put them to good use. Dave - it would be 20 TAC, what barrel length/twist/ profile would you recommend? Are the reamers for this calibre as bullet specific as some other larger calibres? Many thanks once again MB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baldie Posted July 19, 2011 Report Share Posted July 19, 2011 All standard SAAMI spec reamers are bullet specific to a certain degree MB, although it can vary wildly from cartridge to cartridge. A good extreme example would be 6.5 x 55 swede. The standard reamer has a huge throat. Reamers are set up , throat wise for the percieved general use/weight the cartridge was designed for. In the .20 tac/prac/ruger that means a 32 grain bullet. The use of a 40 grain will always be a tiny compromise on case capacity. In the real world its so small as to be not worth bothering about. The .20Br reamer i believe is set up for a heavier bullet such as the 50 grain. .20 tac is capable of being run on shorter barrels than the .204 ruger, which performs best at 24 - 26". The tac will happily run at 20 - 22" The rem varmint profile, which is pretty much an industry std these days suits the cartridge very well, and is perfectly eavy enough for sustained fire. Twists ? 1 in 10" 0r 1in 11" I use borders which are just over a 1 in 10" [10.5 i think ] and also the excellent truflites, again i think are 1 in 10" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Scotland_Rifles Posted July 19, 2011 Report Share Posted July 19, 2011 As Dave says above, the 20 runs very well with a 20" barrel. I have had one for a while now and would be lost wothout it, it was built by Dasherman on here and apart from being a cracking built rifle it does the job very well. i use it for fox and long range varminting and to put it mildly, i would loose my 22lr and 17 hmr to hold onto it in these hards times of unemployment. get dave to build you one and you will not look back i shot this group just 3 days after finding the load it liked the best, only a 3 shot group into a C and shoot 10p sized sticker at 100 yards. http://img818.imageshack.us/img818/7105/20tac100yards.jpg go for it. bob. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maltbuck Posted July 19, 2011 Author Report Share Posted July 19, 2011 Dave and Bob Thank you both for your replies. Regards MB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(200x135).jpg.0fd0a94f065c6cb243fdff1b40e0819a.jpg)
.jpg.0972b4e2bdf0b5a4109eb96f2b1b62ad.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.