Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Predators and Varmints 223, 22-250, or 204?

22-250 AI all the way

I really love my .204 Ruger. I would let it sleep in bed with me if the wife would let me. One problem is that I do much of my coyote hunting on the east side of the Sierra Nevada along the Highway 395 corridor from Bridgeport to the Nevada border. Wind can absolutely howl on many days and it blows the little .20 cal bullet all over. From a practical point of view, it's hard to beat a .223. Lots of choices in loaded ammo, surplus ammo for massive blasting desert trips etc.

Well, being in the east, you don't have the high rate of fire, at which the 223 is superior to both the 22250 and the 204.
Also being in the east, you have the issue of noise. There are well-established "reduced" loads for the 223 using 2400 and Blue Dot, which nonetheless clip along at 3200 FPS. Hornet on Steroids, basically, with excellent accuracy. Out west, we use them for gophers which are usually a smaller and shorter range scenario.
I have done reduced loads for my 22BR, so I suspect you could do the same for the 22250.
I have done some work with a 204 and it's on its second barrel with a new custom chamber...the first simply would NOT shoot and the second still doesn't make me too happy. Recoil is minimal, you can spot your hits AND your misses, but it barks pretty good, as well as running pretty hot compared to a 223. It's like having a 223 AI full-house load stuffed in a smaller hole.
Brass availability sucked for a long time, as well. If I ever do a 20 for myself, I'll go either Tactical or on the Fireball case version.
The 22250 doesn't float my boat. I've worked up three rifles for friends, all shoot pretty well. I suppose it feeds better than a BR, it is tractable and accurate, but again, she's loud and she runs warm.
I would heartily recommend going the Savage route in 223. I got a 10 FP a few years ago, bought the Sharp trigger, and basically learned to shoot well with it. Nothing fancy, but a fine, utilitarian rifle. You might have to open the magazine to get your handloads up to the lands, but other than that, you should be good to go. You have bullets from 35 grains all the way up to 68 (for a 1-9) and all of them are good for something. I have good loads at 40, 50, 55, and 60 grains, the 60s are the most accurate for me.
If you wind up hating the 223, you can either go with an aftermarket barrel in one of the other cals, a new bolt head is reasonably priced as well if you go other than the 378 (?) case head size.
So good luck.

Ruger438: Don't let ANYONE tell you there is something a 223 Remington will do that a 204 Ruger won't do better in the Varminting arena!
I know better!
I have shot some huge Rock Chucks with both calibers and the 204 Ruger is every bit as lethal on them as the 223 Remington - in fact for complete cessation of movement I give the edge to the 204 Ruger!
I am the proud owner of 9 Varmint guns in caliber 223 Remington and have been shooting this caliber since "day one"!
I also have 4 Varmint guns in 204 Ruger and have been putting these Rifles through their paces for nye on 4 years now and the 204 Ruger is rated above, to head and shoulders above, the 223 in performance categories like lethality, flatness of trajectory, lack of recoil, wind bucking ability and efficiency! AND, I am leaning towards declaring the 204 Ruger cartridge as also being slightly more "inherently" accurate than the 223 a little more proof is needed here for this item though!
And thats saying something! As the 223 is a splendid round.
There are other issues that have me giving the kudos to the 204 Ruger above the 223 - I better not mention them all as I have no declarative first hand proof yet just strong indications of these things like brass life and barrel life being similar or neck and neck between the two!
The 22-250 is a dandy round and I presently shoot 5 of them - but again for all around usage the 204 is superior to this round as well!
And thats saying something! As the 22-250 is a splendid round.
The correct answer to your inquiry is: go with the 204 Ruger - put PLENTY of scope power on it, hang on and have a performance ball!
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

Not sure I'd go that far VG...

I use 223,22-50,6mm rem in that order.I usually take the 223 but all three work well. I think you should go with the 223 since you already have some loading components, but this is just my opp.I don't have any first hand ex. with the 204 but I worry about it being too light.Like I said only my opp. but I don't think you can go wrong with a good 223.

GMoney: Greg, how so?
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

VG... I gotta say I'm with Gmoney here. The .204 has nothing on the .223 as far as I'm concerned. I bought one, it shot ok... it was loud as hell (24" pipe), it was finicky, and it didn't kill coyotes very well with any projectile I tried (I'm not a big fan of the .223 on coyotes either). I also found that for all practical purposes the .223 shot nearly as flat, and gave a better splat effect on chucks and crows (with the 40 & 50 grainers). I guess when you read ballistics tables it's got the .223 beat up and down the block. But in the field I don't see how it performs better... hey, that's just me. And you've got to wonder about anyone that owns 18 varmint rifles chambered for rounds that get their a$$es kicked by a .243 running 55s all day long. ~josh

I'll get back on this one when I get a chance VG and explain myself...
Later tonight maybe...

VG,

I just disagree with your thoughts regarding .204 performance with the .223 and the .22-250. First, it depends on what "performance" you want. Sure the .204 is flatter and may even be quicker with similar bullet weights (40 vs. 40) but as far as a superior killing round that is hard to determine.

The .223 offers you much better selection of killing bullets from prairie dogs to coyotes to deer. This could mean the .223 could "kill better". So lethality is questionable at best. A 40 grain Vmax at 3850 in .204 vs. a 40 Vmax at 3700 from a .223 pretty much is pretty lethal.

Regarding trajectory the .204 wins.

Recoil arguement is pretty negligable as both are pretty slight.

For all around usage you also say the .204 is better than the .22-250. Regarding lethality there is no question the -250 gets the nod across the board here. I have not run tables on trajectory but I imagine they are pretty close here as well. The .204 has it in the recoil dept.

I am a huge lover of the .204 as it has benefits over both above cartridges that some deem important. That said, the .204 has some qualities that are inferior to the other 2 that some people deem more important.

This is all I was saying...

If I was a betting man, I bet a much better constructed bullet in .20 caliber will be upon us soon...

A 38-42 grain Accubond or TSX or something similar would sell like hotcakes. But then of course that would be advocating using these bullets on game needed for bullets to hold together better (stuff bigger than coyotes I imagine) and ?I'm not sure the bullet companies will want to do this quite yet...

Just some rambling thoughts on this Tuesday evening...

From what I have read and heard from shooters the 204 is a barrel burner.

Cheers

stormbringer - only if the shooter is abusing the barrel with heat - just like any other rifle.

Get one of each and after a year get rid of the ones you don't like. Seriously, any of them will work but the .223 makes the most sense from my perspective. You've already got dies, even with the war going on brass availability for eastern varmint hunting is not a big issue. If you shoot a lot powder adds up as well. There's probably been more load refinement done for the .223 than for any cartridge in history and it's a cartridge for which powders have been specifically developed. I've got .22CF's from the .222 to the Swift, but it's the .223's that make it out of the safe on a regular basis.

X2, Monashee

Go with the 204. You won't regret it. I finally did and have had so much fun with this caliber that I went out and bought another one. I plan on picking up another one this summer. They are just plain and simply more efficient than the 22 cal's. New bullet selections keep coming out and I forsee some of the other bullet manufacturers getting on board.

Gube: I TOTALLY agree with you!
I have been so amazed and have become so enthralled and impressed with the 204 Ruger and its outstanding performance and wonderful qualities that I now have and shoot 4 of them!

Stormbringer: I have 4 Varminters in caliber 204 Ruger and I know MANY shooters who have them (one of my friends has 6 of them now!) and none of them have mentioned any "rapid" barrel wear or sudden and "to soon" losses in accuracy.
Indeed one of the MANY reasons I adore the 204 Ruger cartridge is because in relation to its speed, performance and outstanding trajectory vs. barrel heating - this cartridge produces the least barrel heat of ANY comparable "traditional" caliber (22-250, 220 Swift, 240 Weatherby etc etc etc!) I know of.
Granted ONE of the reasons I own 4 Rifles in caliber 204 Ruger is exactly so I can spread the shooting around and "save" their wonderfully accurate barrels for as long as possible!
In Colony Varmint situations I simply "trade Rifles" when a barrel starts to warm up.
You may have heard this "rumor" as I don't hear everything - but I do read "a lot" and I have not "read" anywhere that the 204 Ruger is a barrel burner - I am sure I would have remembered that.
I can not state for certain that the 204 Ruger is NOT a "barrel burner" because I do not have a large number of rounds down ANY of my barrels as yet.
But I do have a Siebert Bore Inspection Tool and it gives me a good look at the leades of the rifling in my 204 barrels and I see no significant or unusual wear as yet in any of them.
I tend to hesitate to go along with your poting in this regard.
I will get back to you in a couple of years with more definitive first hand observations on the 204 Ruger and barrel wear.
Long live the 204 Ruger!
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

To be honest- I don't like this statment. Yes the 22-250 is faster. But with most "factory" rifles your limited to 1-12 or 1-14 twist. Which in turn limits the bullet weight you have to choose from since most .223s are supplied with 1-9" tubes. So you have a much wider choice of ammo. I'm not putting down the 250. Its one of my fav. rounds. But anything closer than 300-350yrds. You've just got over kill. So in this case- the .223 is the "bigger" hammer and the 22-250 is the faster.

223, or jump up to the real varmint caliber, 243--it spanks them all

You'll never regret owning a faster twist 223; you may very well be selling off any of the other calibers.

ruger438,

I have owned a .22-250, a .220 Swift, and currently have a .223 in TC and a .204 Ruger.

The 250 and the Swift were a whole lot of fun for long-range prairie dog and jackrabbit shooting, but they make a lot of noise. I shot the barrels out of both, finally, and sold the .22-250. I still have the Swift, a Ruger 77V, and am considering rebarrelling it.
My favorite of all of them is definitely the .204. Accurate as can be, less noise, no recoil, and longer barrel life.
I have taken some tough old jackrabbits with it, out to 300 yards. No crawlers!!!!
It's really cool to be able to see the results of your shot, due to lack of recoil.

In the my arsenal of varmint calibers, the list includes 243, 223 AI (two of them!), 223 (two of them), 204 Ruger (two of them), & 17 Remington.

I prefer to shoot the 204's, 223's, & 223 AI's. Due to the cost of reloading, the 223 AI's come out of the safe more often. I can buy 2000 bullets for the 223's for less than $140. Last year, they were $115/2000.

The amount of powder used in the AI's is almost identical to what I use in the 204. Unfortunately, from the sheer cost of metal, the 223 AI's will be on varmint duty this year.

I have also purchased another Savage FV12 with a 1:9 twist barrel, which will soon be an AI as well.