Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters educate me on the .204 Ruger....

Then he jumps in the yellow bus and picks up the kids for school.....

.....and yells at them.

I swear my kid yells more during school because that's what Rodney does.

Rodney is related to Bob.....

And when the shooting is fast and furious, the 'one-holer' single shot is a real pain in the azz.......

250? Most of those snow cows are pushing 300 on the hoof.

I think you just received an education on a whole lot more than just the 204!

Could be. I was prolly drunk at the time.......

I remember Andy's Bar in Sceney. Right by the big swamp. He had some gal workin' there that looked like a Playboy model. She was right good for business, given the scarcity of her type up there........

Not with a shotgun pouch on your side with 300 rounds in it ...

My 204 gets more use on PD's than my Hornet, 22-250AI, or 244AI.

I questioned why I needed one, afterall, I already had a 223 Rem, and a 22-250 for coyotes. Now, I pack my 204 all the time for coyotes, and the ground squirrels. Mine is a Thompson Venture, and I can see the hits looking thru the scope.

The ideal P-dog round IMO bucks the wind way better than It should and can see 80% of the hits. Don't need a faucet on the end of the barrel. And compared to a 222mag well there is none!!! It takes a 22-250 to compare, and with one of them without a break YOU see 0% of Your its....... Breaks ae so much fun on Your ears and look so nice.

Ah yes! The magical cartridge - 204 Ruger, the only cartridge to defy the law of physics.

Well it must be the onset of winter already because we are back to old subjects and once again I will bite.

First let me address the �poll� - since 2/3 of the people saying they could see their hits with the 204 better it is a fairly safe assumption that they own 204�s. And since they own 204�s they are more than likely predisposed to believe that they can see their hits better with a 204 and not as well with a 223. After all they have been told for years by the gunwriters that the 204 is easier to see hits with and since they now have one it must be true.

Let me be clear that I like the 204. If the only thing I shot was gophers and PD's I would own another one. What I do not like is the misconception that somehow the law of physics can be repealed for that particular cartridge. There are many factors involved into recoil including stock design and how the shooter holds the rifle, so the only way to look at it objectively is mathematical. Doing so removes any preconceived bias from the equation.

I will qualify myself by saying that I have owned numerous 223�s and 204�s, I have listed a few of them below. The list is only to show that I have experience with both calibers and generally they all weighed the same with the Cooper Varminters being the closest since they were with one ounce of each other. If there is any difference in recoil and the ability to see hits between the 204 or 223 with either of the loads listed I cannot tell it and the JBM ballistics computations would seem to agree.

204 - Cooper Varminter - 8-1/2#
204 - Tikka T-3 sporter - 7# (2 ea.)
204 - Remington LVSF - 8-1/2 #
Recoil energy

223 - Cooper Varminter - 8-1/2#
223 - Cooper sporter - 7#
223 - Remington LVST - 7-1/2#
223 - Stevens - 7-1/2#
223 - Remington 700 SPS BDL - 7-1/2#

All rifle weights were with scope mounted.



If someone can kindly explain how the law of physics has been repealed for the 204 I will be very interested. Take a look at the charts listed below - they were all generated by JBM Ballistics using the on-line Hodgdon reloading data, and only data listed in PSI was used so that it is an "apples to apples� comparison.



204 Hornady
32 gr. avg max load - 28.49 grs
32 gr. avg max pressure - 54110
32 gr. avg max vel - 4016
Recoil energy - 3.1 ft-lbs

Recoil
Input Data
Charge Weight: - 28.5 grs.
Muzzle Velocity: - 4016.0 ft/s
Firearm Weight: - 7.0 lb
Bullet Weight: - 32.0 gr.

Output Data
Recoil Velocity: - 5.4 ft/s
Recoil Energy: - 3.1 ft�lbs
Recoil Impulse: - 1.2 lb�s



204 Hornady
40 gr. avg max load - 27.3 grs.
40 gr. avg max pressure 40 gr. - 55718
40 gr. avg max vel - 3701
Recoil energy - 3.5 lft-lbs

Recoil
Input Data
Charge Weight: - 27.3 grs.
Muzzle Velocity: - 3701.0 ft/s
Firearm Weight: - 7.0 lb
Bullet Weight: - 40.0 gr

Output Data
Recoil Velocity: - 5.6 ft/s
Recoil Energy: - 3.5 ft�lbs
Recoil Impulse: - 1.2 lb�s



223 Remington
40 gr. avg max load - 26.2 grs.
40 gr. avg max pressure - 48550
40 gr. avg max vel - 3553
Recoil energy 3.2 ft-lbs

Recoil
Input Data
Charge Weight: - 26.2 grs.
Muzzle Velocity: - 3553.0 ft/s
Firearm Weight: - 7.0 lb
Bullet Weight: - 40.0 gr.

Output Data
Recoil Velocity: - 5.4 ft/s
Recoil Energy: - 3.2 ft�lbs
Recoil Impulse: - 1.2 lb�s

Snow COW�..
I prefer to think of the warmth provided by the memory of a fine example of the UP bar dweller as Nordic Princess. Sounds better when you retell the story to the guys back home about the great hunt. Could edit to insert Northern Maine or New Hampshire if necessary.

There was absolutely no reason for the .204 Ruger being invented, none, nada. It does nothing that other cartridges can't do better at longer range more accurately and with better bullets, period. Until I tried it.

Now I have so many .204 Rugers that I don't know what to do. I built them on Savage Precision Target Actions with swap barrels, and on the AR-15 platform. I'm in the process of building one on a swap barrel Remington 700 action. They have 1:8" twist barrels to handle the Berger 55 grain HPBT and everything lighter and lead free. They have 1:9" twists for everything else, and they all shoot. My first barrel was a 1:12" twist 24" Shilen that with 25.2 grains of Reloader 10x and a 26 grain Varmint Grenade bullet printed .25" 10 shot groups. It killed ground squirrels like a laser. First time I ever saw an actual hit was with the .204 Ruger, it was awesome when a shock wave of dust and fur emanated from the disintegrating carcase as it flipped into the air. It didn't even miss in high crossing winds, the little bullet with hardly any area for the wind to work against, started off at 4,110 fps didn't seem to drift much to miss out to 100 yards or so - splat! If you don't have a .204 Ruger, you ain't having fun.

Seems like Drover is calling the 204 shooters who claim to be able to see hits as those who can't speak the truth. I happen to also be one of those shooters.

No, what he is saying is that with 40 grain loads in a 223, you can also see hits just as well since it generates the same amount of recoil.

The 204 is awesome, but not magic.

I agree with Drover 100% .

Most of the time I agree with what Mule Deer has to say. And respect his opinions/ experience. Something I cannot say of the vast majority of today's "gunwriters".

I have no more trouble seeing hits from a 223 sporter as from a 204. Surprised to hear that John does, and surprised at the results of the poll, as well.....

I have seen the 75gr. V-Maxes out of a 222 Mag connect....but out of a #4 contour. I may even have some witnesses.....

FWIW a 222 Mag is going to take about the same powder charge as a 204 Ruger on average and have about the same speed on average, per that charge.

I can be honest in saying I have never seen a hit through a scope on a 204 Ruger. I can, however, attest to the fact that I have seen multiple hits through my scope on 4 of my 222 Remington Magnums. This is the honest truth, that is why I have 4 of the 222 mags...

I will send you some 204 Ruger brass.....