I hunted last week with a 22 hornet for the first time. I loved the performance. I have a 223 but need something smaller for shooting varmints around the house. What do you think 22 Hornet or 204 Ruger?

REJ

Depends upon your needs. The Hornet is great for close shots on the sunny side of 200 yards. Shooting around your house seems like the perfect niche for the Hornet. Check out the CZ 527.

Don't overlook the .221 Fireball either - a great little round that I find myself using more and more.

And anything you would do with the .204 you can do with the .223.

I would not call a .204 something smaller for shooting varmints around the house when compared to a .223. Terminal performance with similar bullets at equal ranges are virtually identical in my experiences and in others. Only terminal performance differences between the two is bullet performance due to the bullet selection, not cartridge.

A Hornet is a great little cartridge and is indeed a step below the two mentioned. If you handload you have a plethora of options. If you don't I'd give a +1 to the little Hornet.

Yup. BIG yup, in fact. I have loaded the Hornet from .22LR level all the way to 3200 fps. Factory Hornet performance is just about double that of the .22 Mag, and the mag is about double that of the LR. So whatever the "around the house" chores are, there's a match for them in either a rimfire or the littlest centerfire.

REJ: I think you should indeed acquire a 22 Hornet.
You have some experience with it now, and some uses for it - obviously.
But the 204 Ruger cartridge in the world of Varminting is NOT a step DOWN in performance from the 223 Remington!
The 204 Ruger is a vastly superior Varminting cartridge in so many respects to the 223 Remington.
The 204 Ruger has less recoil than the 223 Remington, has a much flatter tarjectory, shoots straighter in the wind, I am also convinced it is more lethal than the 223 on a wide variety of Varmints as well.
And I am of the opinion that the 204 Ruger is more fur friendly than the 223 Remington.
The 204 Ruger is also rather slow to heat a barrel - certainly it does not heat a barrel noticeably faster than a 223 Remington in Colony Varmint situations.
I also highly recommend you obtain a 204 Ruger Varminter at some point in the future.
Best of luck with whichever you choose.
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

I shoot gophers with a .22 Hornet in the horse pastures around the house, works great within a couple hundred yards. Some of those little buggers get to where you can't approach within a hundred yards of 'em. I wonder why? The .22 long rifle is no good so out comes the Hornet. Not nearly as loud as a .223 or like calibers. My wife appreciates that. Even though it will kill coyotes, not really the best choice.

Get the .204 Ruger you can always load it down. But the hornet you aren't going to load that up much. It you want something in between go 20 Vartag.

a 17HMR is an ideal vermin smacker for close-around -the-buildings shooting...

Actually what you need is a .17 HMR, a .22 Hornet and a .204 Ruger. Trust me.

I like the way you think.

I have taken a mule deer at a laser range finder measured 240 yards with a TC in 22 hornet with a 14" barrel. It will do the job as long as you do your job. One word of caution, hornet rounds are rather spendy if you do not reload. I have owned several but I like my CZ 527 the best.

I love my micro medallion in the Hornet but lately have been playing around with the 5.7x28...It's fun...Might even catch on one of these days...

Well here is the deal on the Hornet it has a cool name (Hornet) kind of make the round sound like it can really sting. The drawback is with your average hornet you can expect groups at 50 yards are going to look like groups shot with a 223 at 100 yards. The Hornet does has less of a report and that is of some value but you are going to have a rifle that is limited to 200 yards, and even then a 200 yard shot with one is going to be really tough to make. I would suggest you buy a 221 fireball a 22k hornet or even a 218bee. I was once in the same situation you are in. I spent an afternoon shooting a Hornet and just had to have one well, I bought one and it killed alot of things from pigeons to deer But in the end accuracy is whats most Important and the Hornet is lacking in that department because of its shoulderless case design.

killahog, I don't know about "average" .22 Hornets, but I would have to disagree with your blanket statement about their accuracy, at least in my somewhat limited experience. I have a 1936 vintage Winchester Model 70 that will shoot groups as tight as any of my "average" .222s and .223s. Maybe not benchrest accuracy, but well under an inch for five shots. I've seen others that will do the same. I agree with you on the range limitations of the Hornet, but it is after all a "compromise" between a .22 rimfire and the larger .224 centerfires. I think it fills the 200 yard or so small caliber rifle niche well.

I have 200 yard 5 shop groups under 3/8" Maybe your 223 is better but I think those groups aren't bad. Especially if you consider they were shot with a 14" factory contender with a 10X Burris. My CZ in hornet will shoot sub 1/4" five shot groups at a hundred before I reamed it to K-hornet and after.

Nope not buying the hornet won't shoot thing.

My Hornet shoots bugholes...sorry you had trouble with yours...

Sounds to me like your trying to figure out if you wish to drive a VW bug and or a Porsche...

Dober

221 Fireball....or 20 Fireball (20 Vartarg)

Find a 222, you will love it.