tikka varmint in 204

[Rammer223]

tikka t3 varmint 204 also available with 24" barrel special order worth the wait ?

looking at 39 blitz or 40 v-max rifle to be used as dedicated night vision(drone) for fox

looking at some load data see you can use n133 which I already have, but note big jump in speed with n530

any info experiences welcome powder speed etc etc also ideal zero for this cal for best (300 max)

thanks in advance lee

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[gbal]

Lee,here is some data for 204-these are commercial SAAMI loads,so not hot-there is no need and almost no gain in exceeding these-ballistics will only differ by a small fraction on an inch-as a comparison betweeen these two shows:

 

100 200 300 400

 

Federal 40g Sierra Blitz King BC .287 mv 3750 +.8/.8 0/3.3 4.7/7.8 14.1/14.7

 

Hornady 40g V Max BC .275 3900 +.7/.8 0/3.3 4.3/7.8 13.2/14.7

 

These are drop/drift in 10 mph wind,and 200y zero ( 24" barrel,1in 12).

You might consider a 150 zero for night foxing,but that won't improve the 0-200 very flat trajectory as above,and will give more drop at 300,so probably best zero at 200,as above.It doesn't get much better!

You have 785 and 855 ft lb energy for the Fed and Hornady loads respectively at 200y;625 and 675 at 300y.

You should be able to replicate these data near enough with V133 or the hotter v530-but 50/100 fps less is not going to be noticed by shooter or fox

( a Nosler 40g BC .239 @ 3625 fps is still 0/4.2 and 680 ft lb at 200y;5.5/10.2 and512 at 300y). Adequate!!

gbal

[skull hooker]

Isn't the 24" the one that doesn't come factory screwcut either? Further delay if that's the case.

[Rammer223]

Isn't the 24" the one that doesn't come factory screwcut either? Further delay if that's the case.

don't know about that will have to look, but if having the 24" is better I am prepared to go that route

[Big Al]

I can't see any advantage to a 24" barrel as a NV foxing rifle, I would rather than the 20" even with the reduction in MV that shortening a 204 Ruger will bring.

 

Then again if I was going to wait for a factory order I would probably build a 20Tac or Prac from a 595 or T3 donor

[pork chop]

Only you can decide if its worth the wait but for a 300 y nv rig (of which 300y shots are few and far between) 4" of barrel won't make much difference on target.i use a 204 for my nv with a drone and 39 bk at 3600 ish and it does well .mine is a 26 " barrel and to be fair it is to long but it wasn't built as a nv rig rig and it shoots to well to mess with.dont let the 20" barrel put you off it will drop any fox thats hit right that bits down to you

[eldon]

Mine too is a 26" and it is a bit on the long side but it shoots so well I'm leaving as is.

A couple of loads for you;

vit 130 24.6gr 32Bk 3896

vit 140 28.1gr 39BK 3722

 

Both really good loads for me but I prefer the 39 one.

[Rammer223]

what sort velocity could be achieved from the 20" barrel with the 32gr/39gr/40gr note your running 26" barrels

regards lee

[Rammer223]

what sort velocity could be achieved from the 20" barrel with the 32gr/39gr/40gr note your running 26" barrels and other figures provided for 24" as is most lapua etc etc data available

regards lee

[Big Al]

Baldie mentioned something recently about how much the 204 Ruger loses per inch, something in the region of 100fps I think.

 

If velocity and a shorter barrel matters then look at a 20 Tac, mine is running a 20" barrel and Im getting 3700fps from 24gr of N133.

[gbal]

Velocity will be lost with a shorter barrel.Will it matter is a differnt question! (especially if there are compensations in handling-ie getting a shot off at all !!).A velocity drop of 200+fps will not be noticeable in field conditions in the 204/fox-it's a few scope clicks.

 

There is a lot of data on this-and it varies a bit,because the loss is dependent on the absolute velocities (faster loses more),what lengths of barrel are involved (mostly it's mid length-24-20 sort of ),and ultimately individual barrel'loads.

 

Here's some by Bruce Potts on a 223 @3400 : reducing the barrel from 24 to 20 inches,gave a 150 fps reduction,and to 18 inches a 220 fps reduction.....and that works out to under 40 fps fps per inch from 24 down to 18 inches.

Bruce found that the rifle zeroed at 100 dropped 2.9 inches at 2000 with the 24 barrel,and 3.7 at 200 with the 18 inch barrel. ie only an inch more drop....(easily scope adjustable,of course).

 

Now,the 204 might lose a tad more fps,but has enough anyhow...and you are thinking about 20 inches...

-seems a decent trade off-performance will remain excellent,ballistics only slightly affected (less than an inch!) and useability much enhanced. Accuracy is usually preserved,if recrowned etc.

Someone may have actual real life data on a 204 (better yet,several-but variation will be small).But that seems ball park. Good luck/shooting.

gbal

[camo304]

Mine was a 26" heavy barrel, but had it cut to 20" and re-profiled to a sporter now very usable. My .243 is going the same way as we speak

[pork chop]

have a look on 204ruger.com.loads of info on there

[soother223]

You won't go far wrong with blc2 or what I use in mine.... 25.5 of rl10x rem primer. 3575fps 39sbk. didnt bother pushing for more velocity as it was such an accurate load.

[BuckhurstBen]

Iv got the sako varmit .204 with a 20inch barrel. Great truck gun as it's very pointable, but velocities are slow compared to what you could be getting. Last loads I chronographed were 300fps lower than what the manuals said they should be doing out of a 26inch barrel, not an issue if shots are ranged and clicked but could be if your holding over. That said it is the easiest rifle I have to load for, I load all the rounds to magazine length which seems to work and as soother223 mentioned I also get the best accuracy by staying below maximum charge weights. My favoirate loads are 32gn bt's - 28gn varget & 39gn bk's - 24.5gn n135, both with norma brass and br4 primers.

[Rammer223]

You won't go far wrong with blc2 or what I use in mine.... 25.5 of rl10x rem primer. 3575fps 39sbk. didnt bother pushing for more velocity as it was such an accurate load.

What lenght barrel please bud

Been doing a bit of reading on American sites seem to say 23" is optimum length

[Big Al]

Been doing a bit of reading on American sites seem to say 23" is optimum length

 

Optimum with regard to what?

[gbal]

Optimum with regard to what?

Good question-all these kinds of claims presuppose some criterion-but there is no one criterion ........

 

A 30-32 inch barrel may well be "optimum" for a 308 for 1000y shooting (ie ballistically gets the most out of the cartridge),but I don't see 32 inch barrels on many stalking 308s-or tactical rifles-or indeed on any use other than 1000y target shooting.

 

The emphasis on sheer velocity (actually the last 100fps that can be squeezed out of a cartridge) simply compounds this-the actual

effective "hit %" for shots isn't much improved by such velocity extremes ( less than 5%,often 1%, at 700 yards, and even that assumes no deterioration in accuracy,though dropping .1 moa has a similar small negative effect ie 1%).

In some field shooting scenarios-from a cab is perhaps the most frequent,and obvious) the simple logistics of handling the rifle are trade off enough-even if there were some price to pay,but there really isn't.....but if you must have optimum barrel length,make sure you have the optimum cab to match-maybe US cabs are Texas sized.... ;-) Remember to allow for 12" shorter range,too for optimum firing solutions on your ballistics computor. :-) :-)

gbal

[sussexsteve]

I've just bought a 20" tikka varmint in 204. I should imagine it will shoot nice little groups out to sensible distances. If I wanted to push out farther I'd buy a 6mm

[Rammer223]

Was on 204 ruger site the question was what's the optimal barrel lenght for 204 and a company think was called bullberry did some sort of velocity test were the shorter 23 " had slightly higher velocity with less spread or least I think that's what they were saying don't now how scientific a test it was l simply Googled optimal barrel lenght for 204

Lee